HomeMy WebLinkAbout115 E Front St Technical - The Gateway West Parking Garage Geotechnical Report - BuildingTECHNICAL
r
es
Permit O1-1H2-
Address 5 C fro rd S+"
Project description Ce,oie&knt' ?te00V
Date the permit was finaled
Number of technical pages (nct
Geotechnical Report
Port Angeles International Gateway
Transportation Center
Port Angeles, Washington
r
py
Krei Architecture
April 14, 2005
Prepared for
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
950 Pacific Avenue Suite 515
Tacoma, WA 98402
(253) 926 -2493
1 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
4114; J3 1: dIATA\PR03Ef.']11 0f 10.9EDkp:UreraCar_rpli. Coc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing
Analytical Test Results
11
Page
1 -1
2.0 INTRODUCTION 2 -1
2.1 PROMM UNDERSTANDING 2-1
2.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES 2 -2
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 -1
3 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3 -1
3.2 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 3 -1
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 -2
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 1
4 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 4 -1
4.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 4 -2
43 SITE GRADING 4 -3
4.31 Fill Materials 4 -3
4.3.2 Backfill and Compaction Requirements 44
4.3.3 Temporary and Permanent Slopes 4 -5
4 4 FOUNDATIONS 4-5
4 4 1 Pile Foundations 4 -5
4 4.2 Pile Construction Considerations 4-6
4 4.2.1 Driven Piles 4 -6
4 4.2.2 Augercast Piles 4 -8
4 43 Lateral Pile Capacity 4-8
4 4 4 Spread Footing Foundations 4 -9
4.5 SLAB -ON- GRADE FLOORS 4-10
4.6 RETAINING WALLS 4 -11
4 7 SITE DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS 4-13
4.8 PAVEMENT 4 -13
5.0 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS 5 -1
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT 6 -1
7.0 REFERENCES 7 -1
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
i'ah!e Title
1 Results of the N WTPH -HCID Testing
2 Results of the NWTPH- G;BFTX Testing
3 Results of Metal Analyses
Figure Title
I Vicinity Map
2 Site and Exploration Plan
3 Damage Potential from Pile Driving
4 Influence Values for Laterally Loaded Piles
5 Design Retaining Wall Earth Pressures
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
li 4/0 n raWRoIECra9210)0.64uuyt'aranscrar_t LANDAU ASSOCIATES
1ii
1 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following presents a summary of the key geotechnical considerations for the project. The
body and appropriate sections of the report should be consulted for additional details and
recommendations.
This report addresses the geotechnical issues related to developing the east half of the block
bounded by Front Street on the south, Railroad Avenue on the north, Lincoln Street on the
east, and Laurel Street on the west in Port Angeles, Washington as a new transportation
center
Subsurface conditions in the west half of the site (existing asphalt -paved parking area)
generally consist of about 10 to 18 ft of medium dense granular fill over 12 to 25 ft of loose
to dense granular beach deposits over medium dense to very dense glacial outwash.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the east half (below street level) of the site generally
consist of about 10 ft of medium dense granular fill, over about 5 fi: of loose to medium dense
granular beach deposits, over medium dense to dense glacial outwash. Groundwater was
encountered in the borings at the time of drilling, in October 2001. at about elevation 4 to 6 ft.
Groundwater was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling in April 2004, at about
elevation -0.5 to 5 ft.
Petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil was encountered in boring B -1 at a depth of between
4Y2 and 5'Y2 ft. The sample was tested for the presence of gasoline and diesel range
hydrocarbons and priority pollutant metals series. The test results indicated levels below
Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A standards for unrestricted land use.
Liquefaction -prone soil is present at the site between about elevation 5 to —15 ft.
Liquefaction could result in differential settlement and damage to structures supported by
spread footing foundations. Damage to connecting utilities may also occur
The existing subsurface site soil consists of silty gravelly sand: sandy gravel and gravelly
sand with silt; sand with gravel, and sand with silt. Portions of these soils are moisture
sensitive. With proper conditioning and dry weather conditions, these soils could be reused
as structural fill.
Foundation support of the proposed plaza structure can be provided by driven steel pipe or
prestressed, concrete piles, or cast-in-place augercast) piles. Logs/debris may be present in
the fill and beach deposits which may result in installation difficulties for augercast piles.
Allowable axial and uplift pile capacities are provided for an 18 -inch steel pipe pile. 18 -inch
prestressed concrete piles, and for 24 -inch diameter augercast piles.
Foundation support for the transit building can be provided by conventional spread footings
bearing on a zone of compacted structural fill.
Retaining walls can consist of conventional concrete gravity walls or cantilevered soldier pile
walls.
With proper preparation (moisture- conditioning and compaction), the site soil will provide
adequate support of concrete pavement for the bus drive and for light -duty parking areas.
iiMOS i:'nATAAPROJECT I 0'.77 D.o4Urparan,Cna i;AWN:
11
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This report. presents Landau Associates' geotechntcal engineering conclusions and design
recommendations for the proposed Port Angeles International Gateway Transportation Center to be
located in Port Angeles, Washington. The purpose of this investigation was to complete field
explorations to evaluate subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site and develop aeotechnscal
engineering recommendations to support design and construction of the facility
The project location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1 The Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 2, shows the project arca and the approximate location of the borings completed for this study
Appendix A presents a description of the field exploration program.. summary logs of conditions observed
in the explorations, and the results of geotechnical laboratory testing. Appendix B presents the results of
analytical testing completed for this survey
2.1 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Based on review of the November 26, 2004 final design set drawings, provided by Krei
Architecture and discussions with the project design. team, we understand that the project consists of
developing a new transportation center on the eastern portion of the city block bounded by Front Street on
the south, Railroad Avenue on the north, and Lincoln Street on the east. The facility is expected to
consist of a rectangular pedestrian plaza at the northwest corner of the intersection of Front Street and
Lincoln Street with below -grade parking; an at- grade, concrete -paved bus dnve with bus shelters are
along both sides connectmg Front Street and Railroad kvenue along the west side of the plaza, and a
driver's lounge and future building along Front Street between the bus drive and the plaza; and a
rectangular parking structure west of the proposed bus dnve with above -grade and below -grade parking.
The plaza is planned to consist of a rectangular structure about 110 by 125 ft in plan dimensions
and match existing grades along Front Street and Lincoln Avenue. We understand that the plaza will
consist of structural concrete slab supported by post tensioned concrete beams and reinforced concrete
columns. Foundation support is planned to consist of deep foundation bearing in the underlying
competent soil. To maximize parking space beneath the plaza, a new cantilevered retaining wall will be
constructed along the west side of Lincoln Street, extending from Front Street to near chid block. A new
cantilevered wall may he constructed in front of the existing timber retaining wall. Alternatively, the
timber wall may be demolished and replaced with a conventional concrete retaining wall. Foundation
support for concrete cantilevered retaining walls will also be provided by deep foundations. Parking will
also be expanded by excavating a portion of the existing at- grade parking area on the west half of the
project site and building a parking structure for above -grade and below grade parking. The structure will
4J1455 I.", AATATICOJECT11921 G3A.046411.1TrancCra TptIdcc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
21
be about 50 by 165 ft in plan dimensions. The excavation for the lower level will require construction of
retaining walls along all sides of the proposed structure. Temporary excavation support will likely be
required to prevent the excavation from extending into adjacent property or existing facilities. The
Visitor Center/Office Building will be constructed to match existing grades along Front Street, with the
eastern two-thirds of the structure extending onto the plaza structure It is anticipated that the at -grade
portion 'will be supported by conventional spread footing foundations. It is also anticipated that
foundation support of the bus shelters will be provided by conventional spread footing foundations.
2.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES
Landau Associates was contracted by Krei Architecture to provide geotechnical engineering
services to support the project. Our services were provided in accordance with the scope of' services
outlined in our August 10, 2001 proposal, the terms of a May 3, 2000 Agreement between Architect and
Consultant, and the October I2, 2001 Amendment to the Consulting Agreement. Additional services
were provided in accordance with the scope of services outlined in our March 6, 2003 proposal for
supplemental services and the March 19 2004 Amendment to the Consulting Agreement.
Our scope of services included the following tasks:
Reviewed readily available geologic information in the project vicinity
Drilled 5 borings to depths of between and 1 I and 24 ft below existing grades to characterize
subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site, and 4 additional borings to depths of
about 5 P/2 ft to provide supplemental geotechnical characterization.
Completed geotechnical laboratory testing on soil samples obtained from the borings.
Laboratory testing consisted of natural moisture content determinations and grain size
analyses on selected samples.
Completed analytical testing of a soil sample from boring B -1 Analytical testing was
completed by ARI and included Priority Pollutant Metals, •WTPIH -HC1D, and NWTPH-
G/BETX tests.
Developed geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations to support design and
construction of the transit facility including:
site grading considerations (excavation, fill placement and compaction criteria)
recommended seismic design criteria per 2003 IBC
discussion of seismic- related issues, including interactions between existing and new
structures, and site liquefaction potential
foundation support for the proposed plaza, and parking structure, including recommended
pile types, estimated pile penetration depth, allowable pile bearing capacity uplift
capacity and resistance to lateral loads, estimated foundation settlements; and
construction considerations
4!14105 i:1UATATRO EC11i5T2.1i0.040hpnT:ansfm rprl dor.
2 2
4
LANDAU As SOCATES
foundation support criteria for transit building and other small structures
retaining walls, including foundation support and design static and dynamic lateral earth
pressures acting on retaining walls
recoinincndations for subgrade preparation for slabs -on -grade and pavement
recommended pavement design section for the bus drive and light -duty parking areas
site drainage considerations.
Prepared and submitted this geotechnical report summarizing our field investigations and
geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations for the project. The report also
includes a discussion of the results of the analytical testing including a limited evaluation of
the field and analytical data, a preliminary comparison to regulatory criteria, and assessment
of potential environmental liabilities.
4/14;05 ?fA Ai'iWU3ECTu92\O) P4DITICtivICar rpal.dac
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
The following sections describe the existing surface conditions observed during our October 2001
and April 2004 site visits, brief description of the field exploration program, and subsurface conditions
observed in the explorations.
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The site of the proposed International Gateway Transportation Center is located in the eastern
portion of the city block bounded by Front Street on the south, Railroad Avenue on the north, and Lincoln
Street on the east. The western portion of the project site is currently occupied by an asphalt -paved
parking lot at about street grade and two existing buildings are located along Railroad Avenue, erie at the
corner with Lincoln Street, and one to the west of the corner We understand that these buildings will
remain. The southeast portion of the site and the area between the two existing buildings is up to 16 ft
below adjacent street grades and is mostly paved and used for parking. An approximately 14 -ft high
wood retaining wall supported by deadman anchors separates the east and west portions of the site.
Prior to about 1914, Front Street marked the shoreline of Port Angeles harbor Wharves and
docks were present along the north side of the street. Around 1914, a system of parallel retaining walls
was constructed along the north and south sides of the street. and fill, (reportedly from the hillside
immediately east of the project area), was placed between the retaining walls to elevate Front Street to its
present -day grades. In addition, fill was placed in the tidelands north of Front Street to establish an
embankment to carry Railroad Avenue. The area between Front Street and Railroad Avenue generally
remained below the adjacent street grades, though it appears that fill was placed between Front Street and
Railroad Avenue at some time in the past to raise grades above the tidelands, and to establish the existing
grade of the parking lot area that occupies the western half of the site.
3.2 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING
Soil and groundwater conditions at the site were explored-on October 30 2001 and April 21 and
22, 2004 by drilling nine borings, B -1 through 8-5 and B--101 through B -104, to depths between about 11
to 5P4 ft below the existing site grades. The borings were drilled with a truck- mounted drill rig
advancing hollow -stem augers. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site and
Exploration Plan., Figure 2. Appendix A of this report provides a more detailed description of the field
exploration program. Figure A -1 provides a key to the symbols and terms used on the summary logs of
conditions observed in the borings presented on Figures A -2 through A -10 of this report.
/1COS [1 nATAVItOrEIG 702 :0.040
3-1
LANDAU ASSOCAATE5
Geotechnical laboratory testing consisted of natural moisture content determinations and grain
size analyses on selected soil samples obtained from the bonngs. A description of the laboratory test
procedures is summarized in Appendix A of this report. The results of the natural moisture content
determinations are shown on the summary logs and the results of the gram -size analyses are presented in
Appendix A of this report.
Cuttings and soil samples recovered from the borings were visually screened for the presence of
potentially hazardous materials and checked for unusual odors. In addition, the soil samples recovered
from bonngs 13 -1 through B -5 were field screened with a photoionization detector (PID) for the presence
of organic vapors. The results of the PID field screening are summarized on the summary Logs in
Appendix A.
A soil sample from boring B-1 (B1- S2B -S), obtained at a depth of about 4V to 5 ft, appeared to
contain petroleum hydrocarbons. The PID recorded an ionization potential equivalent to 10.8 ppm and
had a petroleum -like odor No other soil samples recovered from the borings appear to have been
Impacted by hydrocarbons. PID results of other samples screened were at or below background levels.
The soil sample from boring B -1 was sent to Analytical Resources, Inc. (ART) under chain of custody for
analytical testing. The soil sample was tested for total hydrocarbons (NWTPH -HCID test method) and
metals (priority pollutant series). The sample was found to have both gasoline and diesel range
hydrocarbons. The sample was retested for the presence of gasoline and BETX (NWTPH GIBETX test
method). Copies of the laboratory test results, along with copies of the chain of custody forms are
included in Appendix B. The results of the testing are summarized in Tables 1 through 3
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions encountered in the borings drilled in the existing upper and lower parking
areas, generally consist of a sequence of fill, beach deposits, and glacial outwash deposits. Fill was
observed in all nine borings and generally consists of red brown, gray brown, and gray, loose to medium
dense, fine to coarse and with variable gravel and silt content The fill extends to a depth of about 8 to
18 ft (elevation +11 ft to +0 ft)_ Fill extended to the depth explored in boring B4 At a depth of about
4V2 to 5 ft in boring B -1, a zone of what appears to be petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil (fill) was
observed. In boring B -5, wood with a strong creosote odor was encountered at a depth of about 5 ft.
The fill is underlain by what we interpret to be beach deposits. The beach deposits were observed
in all borings except B-4 which did not penetrate through the fill soils. Beach deposits generally consist
of loose to medium dense, gray, fine to coarse sand with silt to trace silt and silty, fine to medium sand
with variable gravel content. Scattered shell fragments were encountered in the beach deposits. The
beach deposits extend in the borings to about elevation —7 ft in borings B -1, 13 -2. and B-1 01 to about
41. 11DATAIPROJEC1 192`,J10.040 Vp TiscsCmr rri do
1 i
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
elevation -10 ft in boring 13-102, to about elevation 15 ft in boring B -103 and to about elevation 17 ft in
boring 13 -104 The base of the beach deposit layer appears to slope downward to the north. Beach
deposits extended to the depth explored in boring 13 -3, about elevation r ft.
The beach deposits are. underlain by glacial outwash deposits laid down during the last advance of
the continental glaciers (between 25.000 and 14,000 years before the present). These deposits were
observed in borings 13-I, B -2, B -101, B-102, 13-103 and 13-104 The glacial outwash encountered in the
explorations generally consists of tan to brown -gray medium dense to very dense, gravelly, fine to coarse
sand with silt to sandy gravel with silt. The glacial outwash deposits extend to the maximum depth
explored, about elevation -351/2 ft.
Groundwater was encountered at the time of drilling m October 2001 and April 2004 at the
approximate depths and elevations shown below Piezomeiers were not installed to monitor groundwater
APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER DEPTH
AND ELEVATION AT TIME OF DRILLING
Approximate Approximate Groundwater
Location Date Groundwater Denth (ft) Elevation (ft)
B -1 October 30, 2001 5 5 5.5
B -2 October 30 2001 6 4
B -3 October 30, 2001 15 6
13 -101 April21 2004 22.5 -0.5
13 -102 April 21, 2004 18 3
13-103 April21 2004 17 2
13 -104 April 22, 2004 12 S
In the immediate vicinity of the site, average groundwater levels appear to be between about
elevation 2 and 5 ft. The groundwater level recorded in boring B -101 was lower than expect, and likely
unrepresentative. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate seasonally due to precipitation. Ito
groundwater samples were collected during this study
4'1 -1D5 1 U]ATA'PROJECP1Si'.91Q Daub pNTremc'Iflr LANDAU ASSOCIATES
33
4 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on conditions observed in the explorations, construction of the project appears feasible
using standard construction equipment and methods. Geotechnical and environmental conclusions and
recommendations are presented in the following sections, including environmental considerations;
seismic design considerations: site grading (fill placement and compaction criteria, and subgrade
preparation for pavement areas); foundation support of the plaza, parking structure and transit building;
resistance to lateral loads; retaining walls, foundation drainage considerations; and design pavement
section for the bus drive and automobile parking areas.
4 I ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Our scope of services included a limited evaluation of site environmental conditions. All soil
samples were visually examined and field screened with a PID for indications of contamination.
The results of our field investigation and analytical testing indicates that some petroleum
hydrocarbon impacted soil is present at and near boring B -1 at a depth of between 4% and 5 ft (Sample
B1- S2B -S). At this time, there is insufficient data to identify the extent and source of the petroleum
hydrocarbons; thus, it is unknown if the sample represents the maximum concentration on -site or an
intermediate concentration.
The analytical results (NWTPH -HCID) indicate that the impacted soil at boring B -1 contains both
gasoline and diesel range hydrocarbons at concentrations of 96 ppm and 330 ppm, respectively The
sample was also analyzed for the presence of benzene, ethylbeneze, toluene and xylenes (BETX), but
none were detected above the method detection limits.
The concentrations of gasoline and diesel hydrocarbons in sample Dl -S1B -S are below the Model
Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A cleanup levels for unrestricted land use (WAC 173 340). The
cleanup level for gasoline range hydrocarbons is 100 ppm (no benzene present) and 2,000 ppm for diesel
range hydrocarbons. Therefore, it is our opinion that the soil conditions represented by this sample do not
require clean up under MTCA.
The soil sample from boring B -I was also tested for the presence of metals. As summarized in
Table 3 above, the reported metal concentrations are either not detected above the method detection
limits, or if detected, are -below typical background soil levels for Western Washington. The metal
concentrations are well below the MTCA Method A cleanup levels for unrestricted land use.
The data from field explorations completed in the parking area (west portion of the site), implies
that the upper 11 to 19 ft of fill at the site likely does not contain significant amounts of construction
4' 14105 eDATAVRo EcnJ 42 I0 k^OuplIlensCrur rD1J.doc
4-1
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
rubble or debris. A piece of creosoted wood was the only deleterious material observed in the nine
exploratory borings.
We understand that current site development plans do not require any substantial excavation or
dewatering activities in the western portion of the site where the petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil
was encountered, and that driven piling will likely be utilized for deeper foundation support. Therefore,
the risk that construction activities will be impacted by the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons is low
However, if concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons (or other contaminants) in excess of 1v1TCA
cleanup levels are discovered either on. the site or adjacent to the site either during construction or m the
future, there may be a need for additional characterization and/or cleanup actions.
4.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
The Pacific Northwest is seismically active. and the site could be subject to ground shaking from
a moderate to major earthquake during its design life_ Consequently, moderate levels of earthquake
shaking should be anticipated during the design life of the project, and the plaza support structure. transit
buildings, and parking structure should be designed to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design
methodology
In borings B -1 B -2, B -101, B -103, and B -104 clean, loose to medium dense sand was
encountered below the water table. The loose to medium dense soil extends to about elevation —5 to —15
ft and is expected to underlie the entire site. These soils are generally prone to liquefaction during a
moderate to severe seismic event The liquefaction prone soil is underlain by denser soil, which is
generally not as susceptible to liquefaction. Given the thickness of the potentially Iiquefiable soil (5 to 15
ft), we expect that post- liquefaction induced settlement during a major seismic event will be about 2 to 3
inches. with differential settlement about 1 to 2 inches. If liquefaction were to occur the consequences to
the existing structures and possible new structures at the site would likely be some post- liquefaction
subsidence of paved parking areas, differential settlement of existing buildings supported by spread
footings, and differential settlement and lateral translation of retaining walls (if supported by shallow
spread footings).
Appropriate methods to reduce the impact of liquefaction is to support structures on deep
foundations deriving support below the zone of liquefaction, structurally tie together spread footing
foundations of existing structures and new structures to limit damage as a result of differential settlement
or lateral spreading, and the use of flexible utility connections to accommodate differential settlement
Also, reinforced -mat foundations allow a building to settle as a unit, making the structure less susceptible
to damage as a result of differential settlement. Properly designed soldier pile retaining walls, deriving
support below the zone of potential liquefaction would be less susceptible to damage than a conventional
�1 4105 DATA `?R03ECi\t92.310.04r rpi.dnc
4 -2
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
retaining wall supported by spread footings. Subsidence to pavement areas could be reduced by means of
ground modification such as vibro compaction and vibro- flotation, though these methods are generally
cost prohibitive for such a small area
We understand that design of structural elements to accommodate seismic forces will be in
accordance with the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) (International Code Council 2003). Lose to
medium dense till and beach deposit underlies the site to a depth of about -12 to -17 ft. Glacially
consolidated soil underlies the fill and beach deposits and extends to great depths below the site. Per
Table 1615 1 1, in the 2003 IBC. the Site Class is I) stiff soil profile. The following spectral
accelerations for a 2 percent probability of exceedance should be used to determine the design response
spectrum per Figure 1615.1 4
Spectral Acceleration for short periods (Ss): 125% of gravity (1.25g)
Spectral Acceleration for a 1- second pertod (S 50% of gravity (0.50g)
A value of 1 0 should be used for site coefficient l and 1 5 for site coefficient F.
4.3 SITE GRADING
Site grading activities are expected to consist of demolishing the existing paved areas, excavation
to construct the retaining wall along Lincoln Avenue, excavation of the proposed below -grade parking,
and subgrade preparation for paved parking areas and bus drive areas.
Site preparation activities are expected to consist of removing existing pavement and sidewalks
and relocating/removing existing utilities. Asphalt and concrete rubble is not considered reusable as fill
and should be wasted at an approved location. All incidental excavations associated with site preparation
activities should be backfilled in accordance with Sections 4.3 1 and 4.32 of this report.
4.3.1 FlL1. MATERIALS
Structural fill is defined as fill placed to support foundations, floors slabs and pavement areas.
The existing subsurface soil in the area of the proposed bus drive area consists of silt) gravelly sand and
very gravelly, sand with silt. In the lower parking area, the existing subsurface soil consists of sand and
sand with silt. Site preparation activities, as well as other earthwork- related construction, will be
influenced by weather conditions. Portions of the existing sail at the site are expected to contain a
significant amount of fine sand and silt which will make those soils sensitive to moisture. Site grading
activities utilizing moisture sensitive soil should normally occur during the relatively warmer and drier
4 /14/i I:tnATNPRAIECf11921010.t41J ptlirauCntr ipl.
4 -3
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
period between about mid- summer to early fall Completing these activities outside of this normal
construction window could lead to a significant increase in construction costs due to weather- related
delays, overexcavation and replacement of disturbed soil, and the increased use of "all- weather' import
materials to replace disturbed soil.
The onsite soil could be reused as structural fill during periods of dry weather provided the soil
can be moisture- conditioned to near optimum moisture content (as determined by the ASTM DI557 test
procedure). and compacted to the required density We recommend that onsite soil not be used for
retaining wall backfill. Natural moisture content determinations on site granular soil samples recovered
from the borings indicate that the moisture content is generally at or above the typical range of optimum
moisture content required to achieve compaction. Therefore. moisture conditioning (drying) of portions
of the existing site soil should be expected to achieve the required compaction levels.
If the onsite soil cannot be properly moisture conditioned or the quantity of onsite soil is
insufficient, import structural fill will be required. 'For warm, dry weather conditions (generally July
through late September). import structural fill could consist of a well graded, granular material with less
than 15 percent fizzes (material passing a U.S. No 200 sieve) with a maximum particle size of 4 inches.
The moisture content should be within minus 2 percent to plus 1 percent of the optimum moisture
content. If wet weather construction is anticipated, the amount of fines should not exceed 5 percent based
on the minus' /4 -inch fraction.
In our opinion, structural fill could also consist of recycled Portland cement concrete rubble,
provided it is processed to meet the gradation requirements for Gravel Borrow (Section 9-03 14(1))
and/or Bank Run Sand and Gravel (Section 9-03 19) and the requirements of Section 9 03.21 of the 2004
Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (WSDOT 2004). Prior to use of
recycled Portland cement concrete rubble, the contractor should provide certification that the recycled
material is not a Washington State Dangerous Waste per the Dangerous Waste Regulations WAC 173-
303 Sampling and testing for toxicity shall be one per 10,000 tons of material.
4.3.2 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
In improved areas, such as beneath foundations, floor slabs, and pavements, structural fill should
be placed in relatively uniform horizontal lifts, not exceeding 10 inches thick, loose measure, and each lift
compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D1557 test
procedure. In unimproved areas, such as landscape areas, fill should be placed in relatively uniform
horizontal lifts not exceeding 18 inches thick, loose measure, and compacted to between 85 and 90
percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557).
4 UDATNPRO;PC'I\ Of0.840'v t' msCntt ptl.dor
4-4
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4.3.3 TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SLOPES
Based on soil conditions encountered in our explorations, appropriate configurations for
temporary excavations less than 20 vertical feet in height, in the absence of groundwater seepage, would
be I '6H.1V (horizontal to vertical) if groundwater is present, it should be expected to cause an unstable
condition in the temporary excavation, necessitating flatter slopes.
Temporary excavation slopes should be protected by covering with plastic sheets, straw, or other
means to prevent erosion. Also, temporary excavation slopes should be the sole responsibility of the
contractor, since the contractor is responsible for the means and methods of compaction and is on site to
regularly observe the slope conditions. All local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed.
Permanent cut or fill slopes should be no steeper than 21 and should be provided with
erosion protection, as recommended above, and be re- seeded or re- vegetated as soon as practical.
4 4 FOUNDATIONS
The following sections provide geotechnical recommendations for design of pile foundations to
support the plaza and spread footing foundations for the proposed transit building.
4.4.1 PILE FOUNDATIONS
Because of the liquefaction potential and the presence of generally low strength soil underlying
the structures, we recommend that foundation support of the proposed plaza and parking structure be
provided deep foundations extending into advance outwash deposits that underlie the site. Appropriate
pile types include driven steel pipe and prestressed concrete piles, and cast -in -place (augercast piles).
For driven piles (18-inch diameter steel pipe or prestressed concrete pile) penetrating at Ieast 5 ft
into advance outwash deposits, we recommend using an allowable downward axial capacity of 140
kips for design. Based on conditions observed in the borings, we expect minimum tip elevations will vary
from about elevation -12 ft in the southern portion of the project site to about elevation -22 ft in the north
part of the project site. For design purposes, we recommend assuming a tip elevation of elevation -18 ft
for the south half of the project site and a design tip elevation of -22 ft for the north half of the project
site. Because of possible variations in subsurface conditions, actual tip elevations may differ from those
estimated. We recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist be present
during installation of deep foundations to interpret the driving conditions for driven pile foundations to
confirm that adequate penetration has been achieved.
The recommended allowable uplift capacity for driven piles penetrating to elevation -1 R ft is 45
kips, and 67 kips for piles penetrating to elevation 22 ft If additional uplift resistance is required. piles
414/05 I:1DAT PROJECT\ 192'010.040Ni nnTrensCorr_[J I i do
4 -5
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
may be driven deeper than elevation -22 ft. For concrete or steel piles penetrating below -18 ft in the
south half and -22 ft in the north half, uplift resistance may be increased at 4.25 kips per ft depth. A
factor of safety of 3 0 is included in the recommended allowable downward and uplift pile capacities.
To achieve the 140 lup allowable capacity 24 -inch diameter augercast piles will need to penetrate
at least an additional 4 ft. For design purposes, we recommend assuming a tip elevation of elevation -22
ft for the south half of the project site and a design tip elevation of -26 ft for the north half of the project
site. We recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist be present during
installation of augercast piles to confirm that adequate penetration has been achieved.
The recommended allowable uplift capacity for augercast piles penetrating to elevation -22 ft is
72 kips, and 95 lops for piles penetrating to elevation -26 ft. If additional uplift resistance is required,
piles may need to extend deeper than elevation -26 ft. For 24 -inch diameter augercast piles penetrating
below tip elevations of -22 ft in the south half and -26 ft in the north halt; uplift resistance may be
increased at 5.6 kips per ft depth. A factor of safety of 3 0 is included in the recommended allowable
downward and uplift augercast pile capacities
Pile foundations constructed as recommended in this report are expected to settle less than I inch.
Differential settlements between individual piles should be less than 'h inch. The majority of the
settlement will occur during construction as the piles are loaded.
4.4.2 PILE CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
The following provides a discussion of construction considerations for driven and augercast piles.
4.4.2.1 Driven Piles
The glacially consolidated deposits were observed in the borings to be generally dense to very
dense. Moderate to hard driving resistance should be expected in the advance outwash deposits. Though
not encountered in the borings, logs and other woody debris may be present in the fill and/or beach
deposits. Also, boulders are sometimes encountered in glacial soils. Logs, woody debris, and boulders (if
encountered) could obstruct pile driving and possibly result in damage to the piles. Steel pipe piles, fitted
with a "conical- shaped driving point, may offer the best chance for driving through logs and past
boulders. Concrete piles may also be fitted with steel driving shoes to assist in driving past obstructions
and protect the pile tip from damage. If an obstruction is encountered and the pile cannot be advanced, or
the pile becomes damaged, the pile may need to be abandoned and relocated if the pile is obstructed and
has penetrated into the glacially consolidated deposits, and is undamaged, it could possibly be
incorporated into the structure at a reduced capacity Abandoned piles should either be extracted or cut
4114ro5 i.\D AT., 1PR{1rECTtop0t6.0:01rp1Trensentr jn;.doc
4 -6
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
off at least 2 ft below the bottom of the pile cap. Abandoned steel pipe piles should be tilled with
concrete.
Pile driving is a dynamic process, and it is not uncommon for pile tip depths, as determined by
driving resistance, to differ from the pile tip depths estimated from static methods of analysis. Therefore,
we recommend driving several test piles at the site to evaluate the driving criteria and required pile length
prior to ordering and installing production piles. Test piles should he sized at least 10 to 20 ft longer than
estimated. Test piles may be incorporated into the final structure if they meet the required driving
resistance. Once the driving criteria and tip elevation is established, production piles may be driven to the
minimum up elevation established by the test pile program.
Pile driving should be accomplished in accordance with Section 6-05 of the 2004 WSDOT
Standard Specifications. The hammer chosen to drive the pile should have a rated energy meeting the
requirements in Section 6- 05.3(9)B of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Because of the
expected small number of piles, the required driving criteria may be determined in accordance with
Section 6- 053(12) of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Alternatively, a WEAPT"' analysis
could be completed to provide a better evaluation of pile driving criteria. With a WEAPT°' analysis. the
allowable pile capacity is assumed to be one -half the ultimate pile capacity This would allow a reduction
of the factor of safety from 3 0 to 2.0 Completion of a WEAPT analysis is outside of Landau
Associates authorized scope of services.
Existing structures in the immediate project vicinity are likely of unremforced masonry
construction, and in general, are expected to be the sensitive to vibration. Buildings constructed of
reinforced masonry, wood, and even steel framed structures can also be sensitive to vibration, depending
on the overall condition of the structure. The effects of vibration generally diminish with distance from
the source, and the attenuation of the vibration is generally a function of soil type, density and depth to
groundwater The types of soil underlying the project area are generally considered to be moderate to
poor attenuators of vibration. Figure 3 shows the general relationship of peak particle velocity as a
function of distance from the vibration source based on case histories (Dowding 1994). Figure 3 also
shows the general relationship between peak particle velocity and potential damage It should be noted
that significantly higher vibration levels could occur if obstructions are encountered during driving of
piles.
Pile driving within 50 ft of vibration sensitive structures is expected to result in cosmetic
cracking. Pile driving within 10 ft of vibration sensitive structures may result in minor structural damage
Prior to the start of pile driving, we recommend that the contractor complete a preconstruction survey in
the presence of the building owner /representative to document existing conditions. Existing conditions
should be documented by photographs, video, sketches and /or notes. During pile driving, vibration levels
4:14105 nDATAVPRO]'L•CP.142 J1 o04044.9,?uuc cprt tnc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4-7
at nearby structures should be monitored by the contractor Significant cracks in walls/floors should be
instrumented with crack cages and monitored during pile driving. If the measured peak particle level at
anv structure exceeds 0.5 inches per second, the contractor should stop driving, and verify that damage is
not occurring. One method to reduce vibration impacts would be to predrill a 12 inch hole to the top of
the hearing layer, insert the pile into the hole and drivethe pile the last 5 ft to obtain bearing.
4.4.2.2 Augercast Piles
Augercast piles are installed by drilling a hole to the required depth using a continuous flight,
hollow-stem auger, typically mounted on a small- to medium -sized crane. After reaching the target depth,
cement grout is pumped down through the hollow stem to the tip of the auger The auger is slowly
withdrawn as the grout is pumped out through the tip. The rate of withdrawal is such that a positive head
of concrete is constantly maintained on the outside of the auger
Since the pile is completely cast below the ground surface and cannot be directly observed,
judgment and experience must be used in determining the acceptability of the pile. This includes the
observer's experience and the experience of the augercast piling contractor The observer and contractor
should work together to use past experience with normal operating procedures, as well as procedures
established by the contractor for the current job, including installation sequence, auger withdrawal rate,
grouting pressure, and the quantity of grout used per pile. Variations from the established pattern, such as
low grout pressure, excessive settlement of the grout in a completed pile, etc. makes the pile susceptible
to rejection. In order to provide an evaluation of the augercast pile installations, we recommend that the
contractor provide a pressure gauge in the grout line between the pump and the auger, and a means for
determining the quantity of grout used per pile (such as a stoke counter on the pump.) In addition, the
quantity of grout pumped per stroke should be verified before the start of pile installation.
Obstruction, such as logs(wood, cobbles, and boulders. may be present within the soil underlying
the proposed building which may obstruct advancement of the auger to the target depth. If an obstruction
is encountered, it will be necessary to shift the pile location. The design should allow some flexibility for
relocating piles.
4.4.3 LATERAL PILE CAPACITY
The pile top deflection and maximum pile bending moment under lateral loading is a function of
pile head conditions (fixed or unrestrained), the pile flexural stiffness (El), and the rate of increase of
horizontal subgrade reaction. f of the soil. The rate of Increase of horizontal subgrade reaction is related
to the stiffness and density of the soil resisting the lateral load applied to the pile. From past experience,
4.44145 BDATATROFEC.71197191Q N0e-snTran3Cmr_rpadoc
4 -8
LANDAU ASSOC LATES
it has been found that the upper 5 to 10 ft of soil tends to control the behavior of laterally loaded piles of
the expected diameter For fixed head conditions, Figure 4 can be used to determine the lateral deflection
and bending moment as a function of depth and pile relative stiffness. Figure 4 can also be used to
determine the point of which is a function of the relative stiffness factor T The relative stiffness factor T
(in inches) can be computed using the relationship
TE1, f]
oso
where f is the coefficient of variation of lateral subgrade reaction. For the soil conditions at the site. we
recommend using a value of 11 poundslcubic inch for the coefficient of variation of lateral subgrade
reaction.
For analyses of rigid piles (UT values of less than 3 to 4). a vertical coefficient of subgrade
reaction can be used to calculate the deflection under lateral loading. The table below provides the
recommended vertical coefficient of subgrade reaction as a function of depth
4/ is AA3 Ali 'kOJkti1Un1010.04akpf,Tcutsenec Opel -doe
RECOMMENDED VALUES FOR VERTICAL
COEFFICIENT OF SUBGRADE REACTION
Depth
Elevation 10 to 4 ft
Elevation 0 to —1 5 ft
Below Elevation —15 ft
4 4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS
Vertical Coefficient
of Subgrade
Reaction
50 pci
100 pci
175 pci
Boring B -3, drilled near the proposed location of the transit building, encountered medium dense
granular fill to a depth of about 10 ft, and medium dense to dense beach deposits to the bottom of the
boring at a depth of about 19 ft. We understand that the proposed transit building will be a relatively
light weight structure. The existing fill appears competent enough to provide suitable foundation support
for the proposed structure. though local variations in the fill quality could be present which may result in
potential post construction differential settlement of the structure. Slab -on -grade floors could experience
differential settlement and cracking. The potential for post construction differential settlement could be
reduced by overexcavation to a limited depth beneath foundations and the floor slab and replacement with
compacted structural fill. The building could be constructed with a reinforced mat foundation to further
limit the potential of floor slab cracking. If the risk of differential settlement is intolerable, the structure
could he pile supported as is the proposed pedestrian phiza.
4 -9
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
To limit the potential for differential settlement, the fill could be overexcavated to a minimum
depth of 2 ft below the bottom of the footing and floor slab The overexcavation should extend laterally
at least 2 ft beyond the edge of the footing. A qualified geotechnical engineer should observe the over
excavation. If soft and/or disturbed soil is present at the planned overexcavation depth, the
overexcavation should be carried deeper to remove the soil and/or disturbed material. An excavator with
a smooth -blade bucket should be used to excavate the material. The overexcavation should be backfilled
with structural fill, placed and compacted as recommended in Section 43 of this report.
Foundations may be proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Continuous
footings should have a minimum width of at least 18 inches, and isolated column footings should be at
least 24 inches in width. The maximum allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one third for
transient loads such as from wind or seismic loadings. We recommend that the footings be at least 18
inches below the lowest adjacent finished exterior grade for frost protection.
For foundations constructed as recommended above, total settlement of spread footing
foundations will likely not exceed about I inch, but differential settlements between individual foundation
members may exceed 1/2 inch, depending on post construction loading conditions within the building.
Resistance to lateral loads may be assumed to be provided by friction acting on the base of
footings and by passive lateral earth pressures acting against the sides of footings. An ultimate coefficient
of sliding resistance of 0 45, applied to the vertical dead loads only, may be used to compute frictional
resistance. An allowable static passive lateral earth pressure of 250 pcf may be used for the sides of
footings poured against undisturbed natural or recompacted soil where the soil surface is level for a
horizontal distance of a least twice the embedment depth. The upper 1 ft of passive resistance should be
neglected in design if not covered by pavement or floor slabs. The value for coefficient of sliding
resistance does not include a tactor of safety, and the value for the foundation passive earth pressure has
been reduced by a factor of 2.0 to limit deflections to less than 1 percent of the embedded depth.
4.5 SLAB ON GRADE FLOORS
Provided the subgrade is prepared as recommended in Section 1.3 and 4 4 of this report, the floor
slab for the proposed transit building and bus shelters may be constructed as slabs -on -grade Prior to slab
construction, the supporting subgrade surface should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture
content and thoroughly recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by
the ASTM D1557 procedure. The filial surface should be firm and non- yielding. The prepared surface
should be checked by a qualified geotechnical engineer for any loose and /or disturbed areas. If detected,
these areas should be further compacted as recommended above.
1fl4i0: lAn A' F' hAPROTF .CT,14210'0.OG04817raoaCau Tptldoc
4 -10
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4
A minimum of 4 inches of clean, free draining material, such as nominal 5/8 -inch minus washed
gravel should be placed beneath slab -on -grade floors to act as a capillary break layer Since water max be
infiltrated into the ground adjacent to the west side of the building, a condensation barrier, such as
visqueen or a membrane, should be placed beneath the slab -on -grade floor to prevent condensation of—,
water vapor on the bottom of the floor slab and wicking up through the floor slab The condensation
barrier should consist of a 10-mil membrane with tape scaled joints. The American Concrete Institute
(ACI) guidelines recommend that 4 inches of compacted granular fill, such as 5/8 -inch minus crushed
rock be placed over the barrier to facilitate curing of the concrete floor slab and to protect the vapor
barrier The ACI no longer recommends sand for the protection layer If moisture control within the
building is critical, we recommend an inspection of the condensation barrier to verify that all openings
have been properly sealed.
4.6 RETALNING WALLS
With the removal of the existing slope along the west side of Lincoln Avenue, a retaining wall
will be required to support the sidewalk. A new retaining wall will be constructed in front of the existing
wood retaining wall along the west side of the lower parking lot. In addition, we understand that retaining
walls will be required to construct the below -grade portion of the parking structure on the west side of the
site. Appropriate wall types. for these locations include a conventional concrete retaining wall with a
spread footing foundation or a soldier pile wall. The soldier pile wall could be constructed as a
cantilevered wall, or with a single row of permanent tieback anchors to provide additional lateral
resistance and to reduce the embedment depth of the soldier piles. Wood lagging, with an architectural
covering, or concrete lagging/panels could be used to support the soil Though typically more expensive,
a concrete cylinder pile wall could also be utilized.
The advantage of a cantilevered soldier pile retaining wall is that no temporary excavation would
be necessary to construct the wall. The soldier piles would be installed along the back edge of the
proposed excavation and lagging placed between the soldier piles as the soil is removed from in front of
the wall. If tiebacks are necessary, they can be installed as the soil is removed. If tiebacks are necessary,
Landau Associates can provide appropriate recommendations for design. A cantilevered soldier pile wall
may be designed using the lateral earth pressures distribution shown on Figure 5
A sloped. temporary excavation would be required to construct a conventional concrete retaining
wall with spread footing foundations. Temporary excavations would need to be sloped no steeper than
11/41-1.1V Given the expected heights of the wall (10 to 15 ft in height), the temporary excavation along
Lincoln Avenue would require removal of the sidewalk and a portion of the street. Temporary
4!14itU tWATAWROIECTO9Z1116 04001',TransCz: rytl.dac
4 -I
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
excavations along the north, south and west sides of the site may not be feasible depending on available
right-of-way
Retaining walls unrestrained against rotating or yielding at least 0.2 percent of the wall height
during placement and compaction of backfill should be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 43
pcf for active soil conditions, assuming level backfill and drained conditions. if the wall is restrained
from rotation during backfilling, an equivalent fluid density of 60 pcf should be used for design assuming
level backfill and drained conditions. Design of the wall should include appropriate lateral pressures
caused by any adjacent surcharge loads. For uniform surcharge pressures. uniformly distributed lateral
pressures of 0.33 and 0 46 times the surcharge pressure should be added for yielding and non yielding
walls, respectively Retaining wall foundations supported by deep foundations should be designed in
accordance with the recommendations in Section 4 4 1 of this report. Retaining wall foundations
supported by spread footing foundations should be designed in accordance with the recommendations in
Section 4 4 4 of this report.
Dynamic lateral earth pressures due to a 1-in-100-year seismic event (40 percent probability of
exceedance in a 50 -year period) should be included in the design of all grade retaining walls. Below
grade walls incorporated into structures should be designed for dynamic lateral earth pressures due to a t-
in -500 -year seismic event (10 percent probability of exceedance in a 50 -year period). A peak horizontal
;round acceleration of 15 percent of gravity (0 15g) was assumed a I -in -100 -year seismic event and peak
horizontal ground acceleration of 29 percent of gravity (0.29g) was assumed a 1 -in -500 -year seismic
event. For retaining walls with level backfill able to translate laterally at. least 2 inches during a seismic
event should be designed to withstand a dynamic uniform lateral pressure of 3H psf (H is the vertical
height of the wall in feet) for the 1-in-100 year event and 614 for the 1 -in -500 year event. Walls unable to
translate laterally should be designed to withstand a dynamic uniform lateral pressure of 3H psf for the 1
in -100 year event and 13H for the 1 -in -500 year event. The resultant can be assumed to act at a point
0.6H above the base of the wall. The dynamic lateral pressure should be added to the static lateral earth
pressures.
To provide drainage behind the conventional concrete walls, backfill should be free draining,
well- graded sand and gravel material with less than 5 percent fines and a maximum particle size of less
than 2 inches. Additional recommendations for wail drainage are provided in Section 4 7 of this report.
Wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with Section 4.3 of this report.
Typically, drainage measures are incorporated into the cantilevered wall to drain the soil and
ensure that hydrostatic pressures do not develop Drainage can be provided by geocompostte drainage
material placed vertically against the soil face (behind the lagging) between each pile and connected to
weep holes at the base of the wall or to a drainage collection pipe.
4/1f05 I. OMA' PKOJECTV .92\.71034.1.7ATrr_sCntt tp¢l.co:
4 -12
LANDAU AssoelA e Es
4 7 SITE DRALNAGE CONSIDERATIONS
Foundation drainage should be provided for all below -grade walls and floor slabs lower than
adjacent exterior grade. The foundation drainage system should consist of a minimum 4 -inch diameter.
smooth walled, heavy -duty minimum Schedule 40 PVC perforated pipe (with the perforations placed
downward) in a minimum 12 -inch thick envelope of dram gravel meeting the requirements in Section 9-
03 12(4) of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. The drain gravel should completely surround the
perforated drain pipe and be completely surrounded by a non -woven geotextile material such as Mirafi
140N, Supac 4NP or equivalent. The top of the perforated pipe should be no higher than the top of the
adjacent footing. Foundation/wall drains should discharge mto the storm drainage system, or an approved
location. Roof downspouts and the plaza stormwater drainage system should not be introduced into the
footing drain, but discharged directly into the site stormwater system or other appropriate outlet by means
of a tightline -type system. To reduce the possibility of water ponding and infiltrating into the subsurface
near the foundations. exterior grades should slope to promote runoff away from structures.
We understand that there are no drainage provisions for the existing concrete wall along the south
side of Lincoln Street. As a minimum, we recommend drilling 2 -inch diameter weep holes along the base
of the wall at 5 -ft centers. If additional drain is desired, gravel columns at 10 -fl centers could be
constructed along the backside of the wall. The gavel columns would be constructed by augering a 30--
inch diameter hole behind the wall and filling with drain gravel meeting the requirements in Section 9-
03 12(4) of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. A weep hole would be driledl through the base of
the wall at the location of each gravel column.
4.8 PAVEMENT
Subgrade preparation for new paved light -duty parking areas should consist of scarifying the
surface to a depth of about 9 to 12 inches, moisture- conditioning the soil to near optimum moisture
content (as determined by the ASTM D1557 test procedure), and recompactang the surface to at least 95
percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM 01557 test procedure. The resulting
subgrade surface should be firm and unyielding. To provide adequate support of pavement in the bus
drive, the subgrade should be prepared by overexcavating to a depth of at least 1 ft, and replacing with
compacted structural fill meeting the requirements in Section 4.3.2 of this report. The final surface
should be firm and non yielding. The prepared surface should he checked by a qualified geotechnrcal
engineer for any loose and/or disturbed areas. If detected, these areas should further compacted as
recommended above.
4/14!05 1.1 DATA 'PROJEC.hi''\0J1.040 rptidoc LANDAU ASSOCIATES
4 -13
For light -duty areas, an appropriate pavement section would be 3 inches of Class B asphalt
pavement over 4 inches of crushed surfacing material, assuming the subgrade has been prepared in
accordance with this report. Crushed surfacing material should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the
maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) and meet the requirements for Crushed Surfacing Base Course
(CSBC) in Section 9- 03.9(3) of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. The upper 2 inches of
crushed surfacing should consist of Crushed Surfacing Top Course (CS TC).
We understand that the bus drive will be paved with Portland cement concrete (PCC). The
existing soil underlying the area of the proposed bus drive will provide adequate support of the PCC
pavement, provided the subgrade has been prepared in accordance with this report. Prior to paving, a
minimum six-inch layer of CSBC, meeting the requirements in Section 9- 03.9(3) of the 2002 WSDOT
Standard Specifications, should be placed over subgrade and compacted to at 95 percent of the maximum
dry density to provide a uniform surface on which to pave. The upper 2 inches of crushed surfacing
should consist of CSTC
Assuming the subgrade has been 'prepared as recommended in this report, we recommend a
minimum 6 -inch thick PCC pavement section for the bus drive. The pavement edges should be fully
supported with either a thickened edge or integral curb. The joint spacing should be no more than 15 ft.
To provide load transfer across the joints between panels, the panels should be fully doweled. Dowels
should be placed at a depth of one -half the slab thickness and spaced 12 inches on center The dowel bar
diameter should be 3J inches and have a minimum embedment of 6 inches on each side of the joint. In
developing the design PCC pavement section, we assumed an average daily traffic of 100 buses.
4/14.05 ):1DATA1 1WiJCT\152'J1DA4UkpeararrCmr rptl d e
4 -14
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5.0 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS
We recommend that Landau Associates be retained to review the geotechnical- related portions of
the plans and specifications for the proposed structure to determine if they are consistent with the
recommendations presented in this report. We recommend that monitoring, testing, and .consultation be
provided during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those
indicated by our explorations, to provide expedient recommendations should conditions be revealed
during construction that differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether geotechnical-related
construction activities comply with project plans and specifications, and the recommendations contained
in this report. Such geotechnical- related activities include installation of pile foundations, observation of
prepared foundation subgrade for the transit building and parking structure, compaction testing of wall
subgrade soils, observation of prepared pavement subgrade, and other geotechnical- related earthwork
activities.
4I14iC5 f ?,(7Pi!'A'PRO.IE[T.19Z010_04111 rptrfranCtu rp:l.dot LANDAU ASSOCIATES
5 t
LANDAU ASSOCIA'T'ES, INC
Edward 3 Heavey,
Associate
E.11-Ujas
4114.% !'DATA1PRUIECi,1'.2\O OCLiOrpc1T,'ansC:Gr 01 dm
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Krei Architecture and the City of Port Angeles
for specific application to the proposed International Gateway Transportation Center The use by others,
or for purposes other than intended, is at the users sole risk. The findings, conclusions, and
recommendations presented herein are based on our understanding of the project and on subsurface
conditions observed during our site visits in October 2001 and April 2004 Within the limitations of
scope, schedule, and budget, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report were prepared
in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in the area at the
time the report was prepared. We make no other warranty either express or implied.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward
to assisting you during final design and the construction phases. If you have any questions or comments
regarding the information contained in this report, or if we may be of further service, please call.
6-1
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
414105 IALIATATR03EC1 IST:014.D4tAr fsTransentr rpt.doc
7 0 REFERENCES
Dowding, C H 1994 Vibration Induced Settlement from Blast Dens f cation and Pile Driving
Proceedings of Settlement `94 Vertical and Horizontal Deformations of Foundations and Embankments.
Vol. 2. Geotechnical Special Publication No 40 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Ecology 1994 Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation Chapter 173 -340 WAC Amended
Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program, Publication No 94 -06. Febmary 12,
2001
Ecology 1994 Natural Background Soil Metals Concentrations in Washington State. Toxics Cleanup
Program. Department of Ecology Publication 1i94 -115 October
International Code Council (ICC) 2003. 2003 International Building Code.
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 2004 Standard Specifications for Road
Bridge, and Miaeicipal Construction.
71
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
41;4/0: l :1UATAWKOZCiI.l93 Cmr •01.lce
TABLE 1 RESULTS OF THE NWTPII-HCJ D TESTING
SAMPLE B1 -S2B -S
Concentration
mg/kg (ppm) Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons 96
Diesel Range Hydrocarbons 530
TABLE 2 RESULTS OF TEE NWTPH- G/BETX. TESTING
SAMPLE B1-S2B -S
Concentration
N WTPH -G nn lkg (ppm)
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons 66
BETX
Concentration
(Ppb)
l3enzene 50 U
Toluene 50 U
Ethylbeneze 50 U
m,p,-Xylene 50 U
o-Xy lene 50 U
U undetected at given reporting limit
72
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
Reporting
Analysis Limits
Metal Method mg /kg (ppm)
Antimony 601013 5 0
Arsenic 6010B 5 0
Beryllium 601013 01
Cadmium 60108 0.2
Chromium 6010E 0.5
Copper 6010B 0.2
Lead 6010E 2.0
Mercury 7471A 0.05
Nickel 6010B 1.0
Selenium 6010B 5.0
Silver 6010E 03
Thallium 60103 5 0
Zinc 601013 0 7 55 7
U undetected at given reporting limit
ND No Data
NA =Not Applicable
Washington State Department of Ecology 1994
Model Toxics Control Act Cha }ter 173-340 WAC
4/14!05 IS DATA .WitOJ6C11.192{010.010Lpi'.A=5C r Tpd doe
TABLE 3 RESULTS OF METAL ANALYSES
SAMPLE Bl- S213 -S
Typical MTCA
Concentration Background Method A"
mglkg (ppm) Concentration* Cleanup
mg/kg (ppm) Standards
5 U ND NA
5 0 1 20
0.3 06 NA
0.2U 1 2
25.9 48 2,000
33.3 36 NA
3.0 24 25
0 05 U 0 07 2
32.0 48 NA
5.0 U ND NA
0.3 U ND 'CIA
5.0 U ND NA
7 3
85 NA
LANDAU Associi r s
4/1:, t:SDAIATROJECT1192k010.040TVV uroldot.
14
12
0.8
0.2
14 LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
4.
4
Lower Limit
Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) vs. Distance from Pile Driving
Upper Limit
Distance from Pile Driving (ft)
'or
Probable Cosmetic Cracking
.4
possible Cosmetic Cracking
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Port Angeles Transit Center
Port Angeles, Washington Damage Potential from Pile Driving
60
Figure
I-
0
A.
2
z
ssssssssssss• ssss1E4MIN
F OR APPLIED LATERAL LOAD sa111FI MI
1111•1111111111 ■PSM 1s•sss
1111111111111111 E>; na issssss�
ssss•si1'sssss•ssss
.,.wM �ir�/sssssssssssss
�il/.�iss
�ai1)�1P� ss
a
Ilsssss
v'sssss
11sssss
s Mass
■L Mass
ss
L r
8Q- Fa, PT3
ap
DEFLECTION COEFFICIENT (Fa)
I-
0
0,
W
2
7
N
E 3
0
-02
4
IA LANDAU ASSOCIATES
Aiwa. FM (PT)
_I t
-1.0 Q
After NAVFAC OM 7.2 1982
Port Angeles Transit Center Port Angeles, Washington
DEFINmONs
P LATERAL FORCE APFLUED ON PILE
K VERTICAL DISTANCE BETWEEN PAND GROUND SURFACE
M PH MOMENT ON PILE APPLE AT GROUND SURFACE
Z= DEPTH BELOW GROUND (TO POINT' FORE CHEOCED)
E¢ f (Z) SOIL MODUUIS OF EL.AZTICTrY
t COEFFICIENT CF VARIATION OF LATERAL SUBGRACE
REACTION IEEE FIGURE 9
La. LENGTH OF PILE SEWN/ GROUND SURFACE
T RELATIVE STIFFNESS FACTOR
E MODULUS OF ELASTICITY OF PILE
MOMENT OF INERTIA OF PILE CROSS SECTION
ap,M Q,VF= DEFLEGTIOH,MOAAENT, a SHEAR AT ANY DEPTH
Z DUE TO FORCE P
m ,Mm,V m =DEFLECTION
Z DUE TO MOMENT IL I
0.2 0.4 0.6
DEFLECTION COEFFICIENT Fa
,a SHEAR ATNNY DEPTH
0.6
���usssssssssssssssssss
sss111111g =5�111ssssssssssssss
■sssssar111�
66-•1sssssssssss
s•ssss■ ■ssss10MEM!tsssssss
11111111111111111111111111111111111 INIEsS.ss•ss
11•11111E11 MOMENT COEFFICIENT (FM, 111•1111111012111111 ss sass FOR APPLIED LATERAL FORCE (P)
■ssssssssssss s 111111131111111111113111110111
111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111 sssssssssaauausrAsarJ a
Mp ■sssssssssssssaRmssE2■
L ■ssssssssssssaMIIMPZi■
ssssssssssssss sw,lMss
11111111111111111111111111111111•1•1111111•21M111111
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111•5021111M
s•ssssasusssss15..ssss
■ssssssssssss MUM
ss■ssssssssss 5 IO M
0.6 -04 -0.2 0 0.2
MOMENT COEFFICIENT FM
FIGURE 12
Influence Values for Laterally Loaded Pile
(Case II. Fixed Against Rotation at Ground Surface)
7.2 -239
Lo
Figure
Influence Values for Laterally
Loaded Piles
Soil sample's obtained from the exploi ations will be stored in our laboratory for 30 days after the
date of our final report. After that date, the samples will be disposed of unless arrangements are made to
retain them.
GEOTECHNICA.L LABORATORY TEST NG
Natural moisture content determinations and grain size determinations were performed on
representative samples recovered from the borings for the purpose of classification. Geotechnical
laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with the American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) standard test procedures which are described below The samples were checked
against the field log descriptions, which were updated where appropriate in general accordance with
ASTM D2487, Standard That Method for Classification of So ils for Engineering Purposes.
Natural Moisture Content
Natural moisture content determinations were performed on selected soil samples recovered from
the borings in general accordance with ASTM D2216 The natural moisture contents are shown at the
respective sample depths in the column labeler Test Data on the summary boring logs in Appendix A.
Sieve Analysis
Sieve analyses were performed on representative soil samples obtained from the borings in
accordance with ASTM D422, to provide an i. idication of their grain size distribution. The results of the
sieve analyses are shown on Figure A -11 thror gh A -13 in this appendix.
4114105 TADATA+PROI C'i' _YtWT0.04T.RFT.TTLA,,�TSCNTR RPTLSh)C
A-2
LANDAU ASSOCIA''ES
re
ivelitecture j92\0 v 1 6 1'010%0.
0
10
r
z-...
a
l
7 1,1:
4, 16 1,■..
Q
Keel Afctideclur*,'Pol Mgt es .ransisCenter I X: 192'010 oNschnical ReporfiFig.v.vg (A) Tim. ra 24/13/2005
N
s,
L....0.
1 /sc !.i IN
L ,P.:
1\ c t N ,1 I
't
‘1,
Co
f
s 's
Ns
Os. S..
V'
1.
r:
0 4
4
••S
CO Ts
o m m
z E
0
CI'
o
z
tom c
J m
to cis a
0
n
zir:
CC g
m
III mes
Z o E
MAJOR
DIVISIONS
GRAVEL AND
GRAVELLY SOIL
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction retained
on No. 4 sieve)
SAND AND
SANDY SOIL
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction passed
through Na 4 sieve)
SAMPLE NUMBER INTERVAL
Sample Identification Number
i Roc very Depth Interval
I
1 4--- Sample Depth Interval
Portion of Sample Retained
for Archive or Analysis
Groundwater
CLEAN GRAVEL
(Little or no fines)
GRAVEL WITH FINES
(Appreciable amount of
SILT AND CLAY
(Liquid limit fess than 50)
CLEAN SAND
(Lite or no lines)
SAND WITH FINES
(Appreciable amount of
fines)
SILT AND CLAY
(Liquid knit greater than 50)
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL
OTHER MATERIALS
PAVEMENT
ROCK
WOOD
DEBRIS
Drilling and Sampling Key
Code
e
c
d
e
1
2
3
4
Soil Classification System
uses
GRAPHIC LETTER
SYMBOL SYMBOL
I'll"
<C
p
1.4 Port Angeles Transit Center
LAtsIDAU Port Angeles Washington
ASSOCIATES
GRAPHIC LETTER
SYMBOL SYMBOL
AC or Pot
RK I
WD I
Z DB
SAMPLER TYPE
Description
3.25•inch O.D. 2.42 -inch I.D. Spit Spoon
2.00 -inch O.D. 1.50 -inch LD, Spit Spoon
Shelby Tube
Grab Sample
Other See text if applicable
300-lb Hammer 30 -inch Drop
140-lb Hammer, 2D Drop
Pushed
Other See text if applicable
Approximate water elevation at time of drilling (ATD) or on date note}. Groundwater
ATD levels can fluctuate due to preopitation, seasonal conditions, end other factors.
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM Silty sand: sandlsiit mixtures)
SC I Clayey sand; sarelk ay mbiture(s)
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
PT
Wet- graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s): little or no Tines
Pocrty graded graver gravellsand mixture(s): little or no fines
Silty gravel: gravellsandislt mxture(s)
Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/day mixtures)
Well sand; gravelly sand; fie or no lines
Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; Stile or no fines
kiorgantc silt and very fine sand; rock flour sly or clayey fine
sand or dayey silt with slight plasticity
Inorganic clay of tow to medium plasticity gravelly day; sandy
cay; silty day; lean day
Organic sit organic. silty day of low plasticity
inorganic sr:5 mi a .ts or diat.e.a..a,us fine sand
Inorganic day of high plasticity; fat day
Organic clay of medum to high plasticity: organic silt
Peal humus; swamp soil with high organicoonterd
TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS
Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement
Rock (See RacicClassiflcaton)
Wood. lumber, wood chips
Construction debris, garbage
Notes: 1- USCS letter symbols correspond to the symbols used by the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM classification methods. Dual letter symbols (e9,
SP-SM) for a sand or gravel indicate a sal with an estimated 5 fines. Multiple letter symbols (e.g. MiJCL) indicate borderline or muHlpl soil classifications.
2. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and ldenth catkon of Soils (Visual Manual Procedural,
as outlined hi ASTM 0 2489. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, sol classifications are based on the Standard Test Method tor Cressecation
of Soils for Engfneering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487
3. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates s (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soft type and is defined as follow
Primary Constituent 50% "GRAVEL, "SAND, "SILT "CLAY etc.
Constituents: 30% and 50% 'very gravelly. "very sandy, 'very silty, etc.
a 15% and 5. 30% "gravelly, "sandy," "SUty," etc.
Addifional Constituents: 5% and 15% "with gravel, 'kith sand, 'wish silt," etc.
5% "trace gravel, "'irate sand. 'trace silt. etc.. on not noted.
Code
PP= 1.0
TV= 0.5
PIO =100
W =10
D 120
-200 60
GS
AL
GT
CA
Field and Lab Test Data
Description
Pocket Penetrometer tsf
Tarane, tat
Photoionization Detector \IOC screening, ppm
Moisture Content, 9'"
Dry Density, pct
Material smaller Than No. 200 sieve.
Grain Size See separate figure for data
Atterbetg Limits See separate figure for data
Other Geotecimical Testlng
Chemical Analysis
Figure
Soil Classification System and Key A I
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Soil and groundwater conditions were explored on October 30 2001 by drilling five borings, B -1
through 13-5 to depths of about 11 to 24 ft below the existing ground surface. Four supplemental borings,
13-101 through B -104 were conducted on April 21 and 22, 2004 to depths of about 51Y2 ft below existing
ground surface. The approximate ground surface elevations at the locations of borings were estimated to
the nearest foot from a 1999 topographic survey of the downtown area of Port Angeles by NTI, Inc of
Port Angeles. Washington. Drilling was performed under a subcontract by 1-1olocene Drilling, Inc. of
Pacific, Washington using a truck-mounted, Mobile 13-61 drill rig advancing hollow -stem augers. The
approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. Exploration locations shown on Figure 2
were located by pacing and taping from known site features.
All soil encountered in the explorations was described using the Soil Classification System
presented on Figure A -1, and in general accordance with ASTM D2488 Standard Recommended Practice
for Description of Soil (Visual Manual Procedures). Figure A -1 also contains a key of soil classification
methodology exploration and sampling descriptions, and fiieldilab codes. Summary logs of conditions
observed in the borings are presented on Figures A -2 through A -10 in this appendix. Information
presented on the summary logs depicts subsurface conditions only at the specified location and date
designated on the log. Soil and groundwater conditions at other locations may differ and changes may
also result with the passage of time.
Field logging of subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations was carried out by a
geotechnical engineer from Landau Associates, who continuously observed the explorations and
coordinated the field work. Representative soil samples from the borings were placed in plastic bags.
sealed and transported to our laboratory for further classification and testing. Soil samples from the
borings were obtained at about a 2'/2 or 5 foot depth interval to the bottom of the borings. Samples were
obtained with a 2 -inch outside diameter (0.17 split -spoon sampler driven 18 inches (or a portion
thereof) with a 140 -pound automatic release hammer, falling froma height of 30 inches. The number of
blows for each 6 inches of penetration (or portion thereof) was recorded on the field loss. The number of
hammer blows to drive the 2 -inch O.D split -spoon sampler the last 12 inches (or portion thereof) of the
18 -inch drive is termed the Standard Penetration Resistance and is shown on the summary logs in this
appendix. This resistance, or blow count, provides a qualitative measure of the relative density of
cohesionless soils and the consistency of a cohesive soil.
ij14 /05 3:'. DATAIFRO JECP.192N010.04011FP.TRANSCNTR IZPTL.Dcc
A
LANDAU ASSOCIATES
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
m a E Drilling Method* Hollow -stem Auger
E z ,-T o o co r y. Ground Elevation (ft}• 11
m t m 0 an
D. c m o Q m 0 Drilled By Holocene Drilling co
a rnQd m m X 1 6 n
AC I `,Asnhglt (3" thickl
SP Gray, fine to medium SAND with trace
gravel to medium to coarse SAND with fine
gravel (loose to dense, mast) (fill)
5
--10
-15
—20
3o
U
Ltr
0
a
S-1 b2 11 PIP =0.0
S-2A P11710.11
5.26 b2 19 W =6
S -3 A1E 5-313
b2 42
PID=3.0
b2 7 P10=0.0
8-6 b2 44 PID.0.0
•i SP
CI_
z
Tc S-61 b2 44 P10=0.0
J
O
01 —25 Boring Completed 10130101
SP Gray, fine to mean SAND Wth gravel
(base,) (beach deposits)
SP-
SM
Total Depth of Boring t 240 R
ri
a
j
N
T
B -1
Tao, fine to medium SAND with gravel
(medium dense to dense, moist to wet) Ifih)
Petroleum Hydrocarbon odor noted at 4.5 to
5.5 ft
Tan, fine to medium SAND with silt and
tr gravel (dense. wet) (glacial
Stole Tan, silty, fine SAND to fine sandy, SILT
ML (dense/hard, wet) (glacial outwesh)
c3"
3b
Notes: 1 Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
14k Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics arts symbols.
ci
AM
Log of Boring B -1
Figure
A-2
6
Q.
10
—15
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
6 6
MI al
E a- j g. a
Z Tv 0 V u)
le tk et
II a i To s r! C 1E co
EE E Tri i O
as
u]..6 co Co D 1— r.0
6-2 b2 8
II
P11)--1).0
W=19
5-3 J b2 4 PtD=0.0
S41: b2 14 1
S-5]! b2 20 P10=0.0
—20
o
S-6 11;1 b2 25 Pi0=0.0
—25 Doting Completed 10/30101
Total Depth of Boring 24.0 tt.
c
6-2
Drilling Method: Hollow-stern Auger
Ground Elevation (fw 10
Drilled By: Holocene Drilling
4 11 1 1 1. ,Agi----,A.spttatt g` thick)
Red-brown, gravelly. fine to coarse SAND
SA4
vat silt (medium dense, moist) (fill)
-7. 51 Gray tan-gray, -gray, fine to medium SAND to
S-1 j b2 9 (loose lo medium dense, moist to wet) (fil0 «suse SAND ith line gravel
SR Gray, medium to coarse SAND with gravel
0 wet) OR
SP- Gray, fine to medium SAND with silt
SM (medium dense, weteach deposits)
SP- Gray brown, fine to medium SAND web
SA,1 (medium dense, wet) (facial cuevastg
Tan, fine to medium SAND with silt and fine
o SM gravel (medium dense, wet) (Vadat
Si
outwasti)
Port Angeles Transit Center
14 LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
30
0
9
35
Notes: 1 Stratigraphi: contacts are based on field interpretations end are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
a Refer to 'Sod Ctassificalion System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
V. Ant
Log of Boring B-2
Figure
A-3
E -r*
T
Z f3 C as
W i d m 0 0)
ng c ti+ fl i 0)
fll 3 rz. 0
0
Cs v 43 v m I— C? n
—5
10
-15 a AID
—20
SAMPLE DATA
E Q 0
T
S-1 lT b2 28
Y
P{D =3.0
w =s
wrxau
b2 18 W =11
GS
S-3 b2 12 13113.0
itY =5
b2 32 PI
Boring Completed 10!30!01
Total Depth of Boring =19-Oft.
B-3
SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
Grilling Method: Ho(la'W -stem Auger
Ground Elevation (ft) 21
Drilled 6 Holocene Drilling
LAC Asohaft !3" th 1
Gray to red brown, silty. gravelly, fine to
SM coarse SAND to gravely, fine to coarse
SAND velh silt medium cense, moist) (fill
Small piece of woad in cuttings et ft
Herder dritin°.
Gray, silty, gravely, fine to coarse SAND
(medium dense. moist) (GS)
SP Tan-gray, gravely fine to coarse SAND
(medium dense to dense, moist to wet)
(beady deposits)
t9_
O
Z
C
0
m
0
25
a.
cs
O
es
es
OI
V
a
rt
2
Notes: 1. Stratigraphio contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Heierence to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface condit ions
cs
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for exptanation of graphics and symtvis.
w
IA Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Log of Boring B -3
Figure
A -4
II. m a a Drilling Method' Hollow -stem Auger
T F' i as to Ground Elevation (ft)' 22
3 G. U Drilled By- Holocene Drilling
o to
p N ea to t!l H 0
f 0 AC ,r----- Asnhat(4'ttpck1
SP- Gray -brown, velY gamely fine to coarse
SM SAND with silt (loose to dense, moist) (50
PiEY-0.0
S 1 b2 33 VJ =8
GS
5 S b2 i 15 PID =0.2
i W =8
PID =0.0 Grades trace eft
S-31!) b2 10
GS
5
S
10 -4 b2 17 i PID�2
i W =8
O
F
9
15
20
30
0
S
St
SAMPLE DATA
35
Boring Completed 10130,01
Total Depth of Boring =11.0 ft.
B-4
SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
Note& 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on feed interpretations and are approximate
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary fora proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to 'Sail Ctessifcarion System and Key' figure for explanatscn of graphics and symbols
Port Angeles Transit Center
14 LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Log of Boring B-4
Groundwater not encountered.
Figure
A -5
t m 47
Jo Tti Drilling Method' Hollow-stem Auger
E a. e .0
Z To 1•••>'
0 E
A i) Ground Elevation (ft)i8
es a ca
g Ti 6 Ti. Q 2 cr)
E E
a. (.1 Drill B Holocene Drillin
14 le g
a. 'L-' 1 m
81.1 0
0 V) 0 3 1./3 an 1— 1 0 D
—o i
1.11111 AC Asohatt (3" end()
I SM Red-brown, titty, gravelly, tine coarse
I SAND (medium dense, moist) (51)
—5
S
it
a
...J
t2
—10
Boring Completed 10130101
Total Depth of Boring 1 .0ft.
—16
a
4 :30
20
—25
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
PID=0.0
S-1 jU b2 15 W 13
GS
Pirr-43.0
S-2 b2 12 W=
S-3 b2 22 P11)
S-4 i b2 11
Wood with strong odor at 5 ft no
odor from adjacent soL
Sift/ Gray. very sity, fine SAND to fina, sandy
P1D=0.0 ML SILT with 1" tense of medium SAND
W 28 (medium dansefstiff, moist) (native)
—35
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contact are based on field Interpretations and are approximate.
2. Referer= to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface °auditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics E nd symbols.
Port Angeles Transit Center
1 LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
B-5
C
Log of Boring B-5
Groundwater not encountered.
Figure
A-6
E°
F
15
m
0
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
S-1! b2 24
10
S-2� b2 18
20
ra
i-
s I b2 45 W =7
AL P f3" tnicfd
GP- Brow very sandy. GRAVEL with silt
GM (medium dense, moist) (fill)
SF Brown -gray, tine to coarse SAND with gravel
(dense, moist) (fill)
Gray gravely, fine to coarse SAND, trade
silt (loose to medium dense, moist) (beam
deposits)
S-4 b2 51
W =18 (Driving on gravel)
0
z ATD
rC
o
m
—25
S.51T b2 8 becomes loose, wet
Rio k 3 -8 1 b2 29 SP- Brown-g
nnun9rsY• very ra '+elY, fine to coarse
SSA SAND with silt (medium dense to very
dense, wet) (glacial outwash)
9
h
L 35
Notes: 1 Stratigraphic coat cis are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report la nevessary for a proper understaedng of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Sol Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphic and symbols_
IA Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
B -1101
a Drilling Method Hollow -stem Auger
T3
i Ground Elevation (ft)' 22 i m
i -1
to
Drilled By. Holocene Drilling Uri t
to
Log of Boring B--101
Figure
A-7
(1 of
B-101
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE
m i E a Drilling Methorl• Hollow -stem Auper
CL
z l' o co I. Ground Elevation (ft)' 22 a
In roc EE m 0
D rilled By: Holocene drilling
a to P S CO fi7 I- V' 0 7
35 SP- Brawn -gray, very gravely, fine to coarse
S 7 I b2 44 STA SAND with silt (medium dense to very
1 dense, wet) (glacal outwash)
S-B] bZ 76
40
55
S-9
b2
701
11"
S-101 b2 59
r 4$
S-11 h2 55
50
S-12 h2 85
W =1t
08
SW-
w SM
Boring Completed 04121104'
Total Depth of Boring 51.611.
Brown -gray, very gravely, fine to coarse
SAND wo'th silt (vary dense, wet) (glacial
outwash)
Motes: 1. SlraVgraphrc contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
c 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of suhwrface conditions.
3. Refer to 'Soil Classification System and Key' Sguretor explanation of eaptvc and syrols.
m
14 Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Log of Boring B -101
GROUNDWATER
Figure
A-7
(2 of 2)
B -102
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
f n Drifting Methort- Hollow -stem Auger
z o N Ground Elevation (ft) 20
e it, a`r ig A o to
a. E c E. o m m N Drilled By; Holocene Drilling
ro aK co co t l (7 D cis
Pr, an --,Aserhatt (r filial
arc n -gray, vary gravelly, fine to coarse
a
—5
0
1 10
C9
15
20
30
S-11 b2 21
S-2J b2 26 W =15
N1
S-4! b2 19
b2 19 W =12
s
25
S-5M b2 19 W=18 S
S 8 b2 44
W =s
SM SAND with silt (medium dense, damp) (a)
SR Gray, fine to coarse SANE/with trace gravel
(medium dense, moist) (beach deposits)
SM Cray, gravelly. very silty, fine SAND
(medium dense, damp) (beach deposits)
SP- Brown -gray fine to medium SANDwittl slit
SPA and graver (medumdense, wet) (beach
deposits)
becomes dense
SP Brown -gray fine to coarse SAND with gravel
1 (very dense, wet) (glacial outeash)
Notes 1. Stratigraphlc contacts are based on fiekt interpretations and are approximate.
a 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to 'Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
ro
Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
ATD
Log of Boring B -102
Figure
A -8
(1 of 2)
SAMPLE DATA
0) i
A m
E
3 T
z f' O its
m g to
0,1 a u.2 0
o c Eta m
0 0) 06 to m h-
-35
4Q
45
50
S-12 b2 62
—55
S-8 i)2
5W
6"
&9� b2 76
S-10 b2 81 1M- 11
S-11 b2 49
sw-
Bering Completed 04121104
Total Depth of Baring 51.5 ft.
0
to
8
SP
B -102
SOIL PROFILE
DriNfng Method Hollow -stem Auger
Ground Elevation (ft). 20
Drilled By: Holocene Drilling
Brown -gray fine to coarse SAND with gravel
(very dense, wet) (glade' outwash)
Brown -gray, gravely, line to coarse SAND
with silt (very dense, wet) (glacial outwash)
GROUNDWATER
o. GP dense, wet)) (glacial outwash)
GRAVEL Nary
Notes: Stratigraphic =Marts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to 'Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols_
IA Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Log of Boring B -102
J
Figure
A -8
(2 of 2)
0 Dnfling Method- Hollow -stem Auger
O
cn
n 7, Ground Elevation (ft) i a
a) E
B. E E m n 0 QR ed By; Hoto4ene Dt}iling
0
Ct rn a3 co co 1— CD
F —o
-5
ca
10
—15
—20
SAMPLE DATA
S-1 b2 is
S-2 b2 11
s-s11 b2 9
v
b2 4
a
a
J
a
Z
(C
O
m
J
a
—25
S b2 9
a
W
GS
W 10
W 15
W =21
GS
‘pC_i Asnhaf r3 ttnrxl
sr fly, very gravelly, fine to coarse
St 7 SAND with silt (medium dense, denlp) {fir
B -103
SOIL PROFILE
SP- Brown-gray, fine to medium SAND with silt
SM (loose b medium dense, we (beach
deposits)
IA Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
v
2
SP- Gray, fins in coarse SAND wan silt and
SM gravel, trace stlets (loose to medium dense,
moisttowet) (beach deposits)
9 SP- Brown -gray, very gamely fine to coarse
a SM SAND with silt (very dense, wet) (glacial
.i i outwash)
v�1 -35
1
S Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
a 2. Refers to the text of this repot is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
i Sy
3. Refer to "Soil Clasatficatton stem and Key+' figure for explanation of graphics and symbol.
ATD
Log of Boring B -103
GROUNDWATER
SAMPLE DATA
B-103
..Ct 0 Drilling Method' Hollow-stem Auger
E gt". E
D••• E
1- O
c
0 P. 4 rzi d Ground Elevation
es o 0)
01- 18
.1c 'a 0
a_ E "E E 17; a m Drilled By Holocene Piling
w to vs 2 co 2 co
0 ca as co co i 0
m-
—777 S- Brown-gray. very gravelly, fine to coarse
8-71 b2 80
SM SAND with sit (very dense, wet) (glacial
outwash)
F
—45
40
--so
—55
S-9 b2
S-1071 b2
b2 90
S-1111] b2 6E4
S-12_1 b2 80
GP I Brown-gray, vary sandy, GRAVEL (very
dense. wet) (glacial oubNash)
0 ..0:
CI
50!
4" (4,
I y. e:
a•P'
6n/ D O.
b-
6" o'
o
girr.,
SP Brown-gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND
with sift (very (iense, wet) (glacial oufwash)
Boling Completed 04121/04
Total Depth of Boring 51.5 ft.
0
g —65
o
Ui
9
V-70
Notes: 1. Uri:digraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate_
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
cri
3. Refer to "Sod Classification System and Key' Doure for explanation of graphics and symbot.
Port Angeles Transit Center
K. LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
Log of Boring 8-103
I
Figure
A-9
(2 of 2)
B -104
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
m .m To I Drilling Method• Hollow -stem Auper
z oo co 5, Ground Elevation (ft )�is
E m
m y m O to)
a E _c E 3 O co Drilled By. Holocene Drillnq
a
O coed m m F- U' n
Q AC p —Mphall (3" thick)
Broom -gray. gravelly, fine to coarse SAND
SM with sift and trace wood debris (medium
dense, damp) (fill)
—10
—15
W =a
S-1 I b2 10
S 2� b2 8
S-3 b2 8
20
S-4 b2 15
W =18
S Gray, gravely, silty. fine SAND v.811 sheds
(loose. moist) (beach deposits)
SP Gray, fine to coarse SAND with at and
SM shells Bowe to medium dense, wet) (beach
deposits)
o�
c 7
m
o
w
25 Grades to fine to medium SAND oath sift
c S-511 b2 a GS
t3
a
0
ci
F_30
S$ b2 17 SP- Brown -gray, fine to medium SAND with silt
SM (medium dense, wet) (beach deposits)
a_
Q i SP Brown -gray, gravelly, Face to coarse SAND
p SM with sift (very dense, wet) (glacial ouiwash)
Ilk Part Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
.ASSOCIATES
Notes: 1. Sfraligraphiocontacts are based on field interpretations and are aaproamate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3- Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
m
ATA
Log of Boring B -104
Figure
A10
(1 of 2)
B -104
SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE
a o I i Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
C g D
r z rs o r° Ground Elevation (ft' 16
IT) or 0 to
Q E R Z co
Drilled By Holocene Drilling
a to •35 r m i— a M o
I_ 35 T SP Brown-gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND
S-7 t1. b2 66 SM wilt' ott (very dense, wet) (Pleas! cutvoash)
--40
d5 S.11 b2 X'
50 j'i
S- 121�i.: b2
Boring Completed 04!22/04
Total Depth of Boring 51.4 ft.
—55
O
O
a
2
0
07
—60
G
N
O
pl
O1
—65
a
O
K
9
V 70
SP/ Brown-gray, very gra y fine to coarse
S-8 82 SM Eh silt (very dense, wet) (glarsal
S b2 50'1 W 9
ffi' GS
S.10T2 b2
50.1
5
IA Port Angeles Transit Center
LANDAU Port Angeles, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and am approximate.
a Reference to the text of this repeat is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3 Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanafon of graph and •ymbol;.
a
Log of Boring B -104
GROUNDWATER
192010.01 5126104 1: 1UATAIPROJEGT11921010 .03011920111CJI+J GRAIN SIZE FIGURE
U.S. Sieve Opening in Inches
6 4 3 2 1.5
100
90
14 LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
Cobbles
100
'Symbol Exploration Sample
Number Number
I 5-101 I S -1
S I B -101 5 -10
A I B -102 S-5
I B -102 S-10
O 1 B -103 S -1
Gravel
Coarse f Fine
1129!8 3 4 8 B10
10
J Coarse
U.S. Sieve Numbers
14 18 20 20 40 50 80
1
Grain Size In Millimeters
Sand
Medium
Fine
Port Angeles Transit Center
Port Angeles, Washington
0,1
Soil Description
10) 140 20)
Depth Natural
(ft) Moisture
5.0 6 I Brown, very sandy, GRAVEL with silt
1 42.5 1 11 1 Brown -gray, very gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with silt
1 25.0 1 18 I Brown -gray, fine to medium SAND with silt and gravel
42.5 1 11 1 Brown -gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with silt
5,0 1 5 1 Brown -gray, very gravelly fine to coarse SAND with silt
Hydrometer
;III n
Slit or Clay
Grain Size Distribution
Unified Soil
Classification
I GP -GM
I SW -SM
I SP -SM
I SW -SM
l
SP-SM
0.001
Figure
A -11
192010.01 l26/D4 t: 1DATAIPROJECT11921010 .0301102010.GPJ GRAIN 61ZE FIGURE
70
60
50
IA LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
1.
A
O
Cobbles
Symbol Exploration
Number
11.3. Steve Opening In Inches
ti 4 3 2 1.5 4 112 3 4 0 610
■111111u11N1►
'111311
11110
B-103
8 -104
B -104
B -3
B-4
Gravel
Coarse 1 Fine
U.S. Sieve Numbers
t4 16 20 3D 40 6060
NI
I
1
100 10 1
Grain Size in Millimeters
Sand
Coarse I Medium I Fine
Sample Depth Natural
Number (ft) Moisture I
S-4 I 20.0 I 21 Gray, line to coarse SAND with silt and gravel
S-6 i 25.0 22 Gray, fine to coarse SAND with silt and shells
f S -9 I 40.0 9 Brown -gray, very gravelly fine to coarse SAND with silt
S-2 I 7.5 I 11 Silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND
S -1 I 2.5 8 Very gravelly, line to coarse SAND with silt
Port Angeles Transit Center
Port Angeles, Washington
100 140 200
0.1
Sail Description
Hydrometer
0. 01
Silt or Clay
T
L
Grain Size Distribution
Unified Soil
Classification
SW-SM
SP -SM
I SW-SM
SM
SP -SM
0.001
Figure
A -12
192010.01 5126J04 I: 10ATA WROJECT11921010,0301192010.GPJ GRAIN SIZE FIGURE
100
70
60
50
j JL 20
10
0
I4 LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
Cobbles
U.S. Sieve Opening In Inches
0 4 3 2 1.5 4 112 918 3 4 B 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 8080 100 140 200
IiI ice►
100
U.S. Sieve Numbers
10 1
Grain Size in Millimeters
Gravel J Sand
Coarse Fine I Coarse I Medium Fine
Port Angeles Transit Center
Port Angeles, Washington
01
Hydrometer
I_I
r_l I
0.01
Silt or Clay
Symbol Exploration Sample
um Depth Moisture Natural Unified Soil
{+5�) Soil Description Classification
S 4 I 8 7.5 5 I Very gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with trace sift I SP
I B-5 I S -1 J 2.5 I 13 I Silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND I SM
Grain Size Distribution
0.001
Figure
A -13
Analytical Resources, Incorporated
Analytical Chemists and Consultants
November 9, 2001
Mr Sean Cool
Landau Associates, Inc.
130 Second Avenue S.
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE Project. 192010.0101 Port Angeles Transit Center
AR! Job No- DT89
Dear Sean.
Please find enclosed the original chain of custody (COC) and analytical results for the
above referenced project. Analytical Resources, Inc. (ARI) accepted one soil sample and
one water sample on October 31, 2001 AR1 received the samples in good condition and
there were no discrepancies between the COC and sample containers' labels.
The soil sample was analyzed for NWTPYH -IICID and the pnonty pollutant metals, as
requested on the COC and by telephone. Quality control analyses are included for your
review
No analytical complications were noted. A copy of this report and all associated raw data
will remain on file with ARI. If you have any questions or require additional
information, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.
ay 06-H 62c
Mary Lou Fox
Proj Manager
(206) 389 -6155
iriarylouaart1abs.com
MLF/rrtlf
Enclosure
c l'elc DTR9
r g
NOV 1 2 2401
LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC
333 Ninth Avenue North Seattle WA 98109 51137 206 -621 -6490 206 -621 7523 fax
fly Analytical Resources, incorporated
Analytical Chemists and Consultants
November 20, 2001
Mr Ed Heavy
Landau Associates, Inc
Wapato Creek Place
4210 20 Street East, Suite F
Tacoma, WA 98424 --1823
RE Client Project: 192010.010 Port Angeles Transit Center
ART Job No DT89 H
Dear Mr Heavy
RECEIVED
2 1 Lt2i
t.At T E$,
Please find enclosed original Chain of Custody documentation (COC) and analytical
results for the project referenced above. Analytical Resources, Inc. (ARI) accepted one
soil sample and one water sample on October 31, 2001 in good condition. The soil
sample was analyzed for NWTPH -HCID and total metals as requested. Data for these
analyses was sent previously under a separate cover letter On November 13, 2001, ARI
was requested to analyze the soil samples for NWTPUI- G/BTEX by telephone (Sean
Cool, Landau Assoc. Edmonds). This data package contains the results for this
analysis.
The sample was analyzed for NWTPH G/BTEX (8021Am) as requested Quality control
analyses are included for your review
No analytical complications were noted. A copy of this report and the supporting data
will remain on file with ARI. If you have any questions or require additional
information, please contact me at your convenience.
Respectfully,
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.
Mary Lou Fox
Project Manager
(206) 389 -6155
marvlou @arilabs.com
MLF /mlf
Enclosures
cc. File DT89 H
333 Ninth Avenue North Seattle WA 98109 -5187 206 621 -6490 206 -621-7523 fax
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
NWTPH HCID Method by GC /FID
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized G(C
Reported. 11/05/01 cd5tei
Lab ID
01- 19221- 1102MB
01 -19221 FJT89A
Client
Sample ID
Method Blank
B1 S2B -5
QC Report No
Project
Date Received
Values reported in ppm (mg /kg) on a dry weight basis
DT89- Landau Associates
Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
10/31/01
Date Dilution Gas Diesel Oil Surrogate
Analyzed Factor Range Range Range Recovery
11/02/01 1 1 20 U
11/02/01 1 1 96 530
Surrogate is O- Terphenyl
Gas value based on total peaks in the range from Toluene to C12
Diesel value based on the total peaks in the range from C12 to C24
Oil value based on the tctal peaks in the range from C24 to C38
Data Qualifiers
b Compound not detected at the given detection limit
X Value detected above linear range of instrument Dilution required
J Indicates an estimated value below the calculated detection limit
S No value reported due to saturation of the detector Dilution required
F. Indicates a value above the linear range of-the detector Dilution required
D Indicates the surrogate was not detected because of dilution of the extract
C Indicates a probable value which cannot be confirmed due to matrix interference
NR Indicates no recovery due to matrix interference and /or dilution.
FORM -1 HCID
50 U
ANALYTICAL
R ESOURCES
INCORPORATED
100 U 1081
100 U 80 0k
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
NWTPH-HCID Method by GC /YID
Lab sample ID DT891,c_
LIMS ID 01 -19221
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized Or
Reported 11/05/01
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE RECOVERY REPORT
Date extracted_ 11/02/01
Date analyzed 11/02/01
S21U SPIKE
CONSTITUENT VALUE ADDED RECOVERY
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE
Diesel Range 563 500 113%
HC1I) SPIKE CONTROL LIMITS
Percent Recovery 50 -150%
Duplicate RPD <50%
Advisory QA Limits
QC Report No DT89- Landau Associates
Project Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
HCID Surrogate Recovery
LCS o-Terphenyl 79 0%
Values reported in parts per million (mg /kg)
ANALYTICAL 0
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
RCID TOTAL DIESEL HYDROCARBONS COMPOUND SUMMARY
Matrix Soil QC Report No DTS9
LINS ID Lab ID Client ID 0 -Ter TOT OUT
01 -19221 1102MB Method Blank 1081 0
01 -19221 1102S3 Lab Control 79 0% 0
01 -19221 DT89A 81 -S2B -5 80 0% 0
Page 1 for DT89
(0 -Ter) 0- Terphenyl
Control Sample
QC LIMITS QC LIMITS
(30 -160) (30 160)
Column to be used to flag recovery values
Values outside of required QC limits
D System Monitoring Compound diluted out
FORM -II TPH -RCID
ANALYTICAL CO
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
TOTAL METALS
Lab Sample ID DT89A QC Report No
LIMS ID 01 19221 Project
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized.
Reported 11/08/01
Prep Pep
Meth Date
30500 11 /01 /01
30500 1_/01/01
30508 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
3050B 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
30508 11 /01 /01
CLP 11/01/01
3050B 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
3050B 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
RL
6010E
60103
60108
60103
60108
60108
60108
7471A
60108
60108
60108
6010B
6010B
Analysis Analysis
Method Date
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/02/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11/07/01
11 /07/01
Reporting Limit
Sample No 81 -828 -5
Date Sampled
Date Received
CAS Number
7440 -36 -0
7440 -38 -2
7440 -41 -7
7440 -43 -9
7440 -47 -3
7440 -50 -8
7439 -92 -1
7439 -97 -6
7440 -02 -0
7782 -49 -2
7440 -22 -4
7440 -28 -0
7440 -66 -6
U Analyte undetected at given RL
FORM I
DT89- Landau Associates
Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
10/30/01
10/31/01
Percent Total Solids 87 5%
Analyte RI. mg /kg -dry
Antimony 5 5 U
Arsenic 5 5
Beryllium 0 1 0 3
Cadmium 0 2 0 2 U
Chromium 0 5 25 9
Copper 0 2 33 3
Lead 2 3
Mercury 0 05 0 05 U
Nickel 1 32
Selenium 5 5 U
Silver 0 3 0 3 13
Thallium 5 5 U
Zinc 0 7 55 7
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES 0
INCORPORATED
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
TOTAL METALS
Lab Sample ID DT89MB
LIMS ID 01 -19221
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized L-�
Reported 11/08/01 i `J
Prep
Meth
3050B 11/01/01
3050B 11/01/01
30508 11 /01 /01
3050B 11/01/01
30503 11/01/01
10503 11/01/01
Prep Analysis Analysis
Date Method Date CAS Number Analyte RL mg /kg -drTr
3050B 11/01/01
CLP 11/01/01
30505 11/01/01.
3050B 11/01/01
30508 11/01/01
3050E 11/01/01
3050B 11/01/01
6010B 11/07/01
6010B 11/07/01
6010B 11/07/01
60100 11/07/01
60108 11/07/01
60103 11/07/01
60108 11/07/01
7471A 11/02/01
6010B 11/07/01
6010E 11/07/01
6010E 11/07/01
6010B 11/07/01
60103 11/07/01
U Analyte undetected at given RL
RI, Report,ng Liir�t
Sample No Method Blank
QC Report No
Project
Date Sampled
Date Received
7440 -36 -0
7440 -38 2
7440 -41 -7
7440 -43 -9
7440 -47 -3
7440 -50 -8
7439 -92 -1
7439 97 -6
7440 -02 -0
7782 -49-2
7440 -22 -4
7440 -28 -0
7440 -66 -6
FORM I
DT89- Landau Associates
Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
NA
NA
Percent Total Solids NA
Antimony 5 5 U
Arsenic 5 5 U
Beryllium 0 1 0 1 U
Cadmium 0 2 0 2 U
Chromium 0 5 0 5 U
Copper 0 2 0 2 U
Lead 2 2 U
Mercury 0 05 0 05 U
Nickel 1 1 U
Selenium 5 5 U
Silver 0 3 0 3 U
Thallium 5 5 U
Zinc 0 6 0 6 U
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
TOTAL METALS
Lab Sample ID DT89LCS
L1MS ID 01 19221
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized
Reported 1/08/01
Analyte
0' codes
Control Limits
BLANK SPIKE QUALITY CO1TROL RTsPORT
N control limit not met
80 120%
QC Report No DT89 Landau Associates
Project Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 0 0
Analysis Spike Spike Is
Method mg /kg -dry Added Recovery Q
Antimony 60108 195 200 97 5%
Arsenic 6010B 183 200 91 5%
Beryllium 6010B 48 2 50 0 96 4%
Cadmium 6010B 49 2 SO 0 98 4%
Chromium 60108 50 0 50 0 100%
Copper 6010E 48 1 50 0 96 2%
Lead 6010B 187 200 93 5%
Mercury 7471A 1 12 1 00 112%
Nickel 60108 49 50 98 0%
Selenium 6010}3 177 200 88 5%
Silver 60108 48 5 5O 0 97 0%
Thallium 60108 191 200 95 5%
Zinc 6010B 48 4 50 0 96 8%
FORM -VII
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
w tcr °is; ia: 'i-Uyt. 'W._' Co
„to A Tacoma (253) 926 -2493 --E' M Luau
U Spokane (509) 327 -9737 rr�
Landau U Portland (Lake Oswego) (503) 443 -6010 V
Associates Chain -of- custody Record
Project Name' r.-►4 t'7 7 L Project No. 19 O.O 0
Project Location/ Event P, r ylr
Sample's Name
Project Contact f= f-1 rq�.'y �S; n.� C Irs�•..
Send Results
Sample ID
S -2.12) L 0 Zt71 1 L... r Ir
7.- Cs!` 3a 12 3b fr-c.h i aa,
Special Shipment/Handling
or Storage Requirements
Resin shed
Ignatu e
Printed Name
Company
Date t 0/'arj') c
Data
Printed Name
'SSt�1A� Ls,
Company
Time -i9- t- Date
A
Received by 1 l
Signature
WHITE COPY Project File
No. of
Time Matrix Containers
Time I
Testing Parameters
/II
Zl
Relinquished by
Signature
Printed Name
Company
Method of
Shipment
Date Time Date
YELLOW COPY Laboratory PINK COPY- Client Representative
Date to l3, Jc' 1 Page o f
Turnaround Time
ri Standard
A' Acceierated(.�'
0_.
Observations /Comments
P-
Received by
Signature
Printed Name
Company
Time
R 00 I
TOTAL GASOLINE RANGE HYDROCARBONS
BONS
NWTPHg Toluene to Naphthalene
QC Report No DT89- Landau Associates
Matrix Soil Project Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
Data Release Authorized.(// Date Received 10 /31/01
Reported 11/15/01 41(1/
Client Date Gas Range Gasol.ne Surr A Surr B
Lab ID Sample ID Analyzed Hydrocarbons ID Rec Rec
DT99- 1113MB Method Blank 11/13/01 5 0 U NO 110% 97 2%
01- 20178 -DT89A 3l -52B -5 11/13/01 66 NO 97 2% 99 1%
Surrogate A is Trifluorotoluene
Surrogate B is Eromobenzene
Values reported in ppm (mg /kg) on a dry Weight basis
Quantitation on total peaks in the gasoline range from Toluene to Naphthalene
Data Qualifiers
U Compound not detected at the given detection limit
X Value detected above linear range of instrument Dilution required
3 Indicates an estimated value below the calculated detection limit
S No value reported due to saturation of the detector Dilution required
D Indicates the surrogate was not detected because of dilution of the extract
NR Indicates no recovery due to matrix interference
FORM -1 TPH -g
ANALYTICAL 0
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
TOTAL GASOLINE RANGE HYDROCARBONS
NWTPHg Toluene to Naphthalene
Lab Sample ID DT89LC
LIMS ID 01 -20178
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized Cif
Reported. 11/15/01 (45/
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE RECOVERY REPORT
Analyzed 11/13/01
SPIKE SPIKE
CONSTITUENT POUND ADDED RECOVERY RPD
LABORATORY CONTROL
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons 250 250 100%
LABORATORY CONTROL DUPLICATE
Gasoline Range Hydrocarbons
QC Report No DT89 Landau Associates
Project Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
TPHo Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene
Bromobenzene
Values reported in parts per million (mg /kg)
TPHg SPIRE CONTROL LIMITS
Percent Recovery 78 0-124%
Advisory OA Limits
FORM -III
270 250 108% 7 7%
LCS LCSD
103% 101%
106% 106%
ANALYTICAL
RESOURGES
INCORPORATED
Matrix. Soil
LIMS ID Lab ID
01- 20178MB 111301MB
01- 20178LC 111301LC
Ol -2017 aLCDDTS 9 -LCD
01 -20178 DT89A
SOIL TPHg SYSTEM MONITORING COMPOUND SUMMARY
Client ID
Method Blank
Lab Control
LCDuplicate
B1-S2B -5
TPT BB
110% 97 2%
103% 106%
101% 106%
97 2% 89 1%
MBILCS SAMPLE
OC LIMITS QC LIMITS
(66 -134) (S4 -145)
(6S-135) (50 -156)
(T^T)= Trifluorotoluene
;BB) Bromobenzene
Limits Updated 01 /01/01
Column to be used to flag recovery values
D System Monitoring Compound diluted out
Page 1 for DT89
FORM -II TPFIg
QC Report No DT89
TOT OUT
0
0
0
0
ANALYTICAL 0
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
*ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
DRTX by Method SW8021HMod
Lab Sample ID DTB9MB
LIMS ID 01 -20178
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized 0
Reported 11/15/01
rrl�s j
QC Report No DTB9 Landau Associates
Project Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
Date Sampled NA
Date Received NA
Date analyzed 11/13/01 Sample Amount 0 050 g Equiv
Percent Moisture NA
Reported in Total ug /kg Dry Weight
CAS Number Analyte Value
71 -43 -2 Benzene 0 50 U
108 -88 -3 Toluene 50 U
100 -41 -4 Ethylbenzene 50 U
m,p- Xylene 50 U
95 -47 -6 o- Xylene 50 U
SETX Surrogate Recovery
Trifluorotoluene 99 B%
Dromobenzene 91 0%
Sample No Method Blank
Data Qualifiers
U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected at the
given detection limit
3 Indicates an estimated value when that result is less than the
calculated detection limit
E Indicates a value above the linear range of the detector
Dilution Required
S Indicates no value reported due to saturation of the detector
D Indicates the surrogate was diluted out
B Pound in associated method blank
Y Indicates a raised reporting limit due to matrix interferences
The analyte may be present at or below the listed concentration,
but in the opinion of the analyst confirmation was inadequate
NA Indicates compound was not analyzed
NH Indicates no recovery due to interferences
ram -1 HETX
ANALYTICAL 0
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
BETX by Method SW8021BMod
Lab Sample ID DT89A QC Report No
LIMS ID 01 -20178 Project
Matrix Soil
Data Release Authorized L
Reported 11/15/01 u!l i j't
Date analyzed 11/13/01
Percent Moisture 10 7%
71 -43 -2
108 -88 -3
100 -41 -4
95 -47 -6
Date Sampled
Date Received
Sample No BI -S2B -5
Reported in Total ug /kg Dry weight
CAS Number
Analyte
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
m,p- Xylene
o- Xylene
BETX Surrocrate Recovery
Trifluarotoluene 90 4%
Bromobenzene 06 7%
Data Qualifiers
U
Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected at the
given detection limit
J Indicates an estimated value when that result is less than the
calculated detection limit
E Indicates a value above the linear range of the detector
Dilution Required
S Indicates no value reported due to saturation of the detector
D Indicates the surrogate was diluted out
a Found in associated method blank
Y Indicates a raised reporting limit due to matrix interferences
The analyte may be present at or below the listed concentration,
but in the opinion of the analyst confirmation was inadequate
NA Indicates compound was not analyzed
NR Indicates no recovery due to interferences
FORM -1 EETX
DT89- Landau Associates
Port Angeles Transit Center
192010 010
10/30/01
10/31/01
Sample Amount 0 045 g
value
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
4
a
SOIL BETX SYSTEM MONITORING COMPOUND SUMMARY
Matrix Soil QC Report No DT89
LIMS ID Lab ID Client ID TFT BB TOT OUT
01-20178MB 11130LMB Method Blank 100% 91% 0
01 -20178 DMA B1 -S2B -5 90% 87% 0
MB /LCS SAMPLE
QC LIMITS QC LIMITS
(TFT) Trifluorotoluene (54 -144) (42 -157)
(BB) Bromobenzene (69 124) (51 154)
Limits Updated 12/01/99
values outside of advisory QC limits
D System Monitoring Compound diluted cut
Page 1 for DT89
FORM -II BBTX
ANALYTICAL
RESOURCES
INCORPORATED
p.c or (42; 0907 L•. ..C.X
Tacoma (2531926.2493 N 54°-' y
Spokane (50$) 327 -9737
11 Portland (Lake Oswego) (503) 443.6010
Associates E
Rij
Landau
Project Name '.i-R:t1 T c1.44" 'rtJZ. Project No 779 U
P -oject Location /Event P0 0-'r
Sa pler's Name �L'4rJ c--UQC
Projec, Contact 1-1 C ::1`--" s r" /561 J C, SJ ZxL•,�
Send Results To
Sample ID,
M. --s z-B
Special Shipment/Handling
or Storage Requirements
Relirurtitshed b
Signature
/Ls.)
Printed Name
nu>3�tar
Company
Date 0/ t I7))
Time f DO
No. of
Date Time Matrix Containers
1/0/34 41 2- I����z.. 1 l
lr 4•i:3e>c iZ 3c, !4, I
Received by
Signature
Company
Chain -of- Custody Record
Testing Parameters
/////77722//
Printd Name
Date J� f3Z1 Time 1 1
WHITE COPY Proect File YLLOW COPY
ev
At./
2
Relinquished by
Signature
Printed NamCompany
Date
Time
Method of
Shipment
Labortory PINK COPY Client R opresenttive
Turnaround T ime
Standard
1 AcceleraledE.. w 'y
Observations /Comments
Received by
Signature
Printed Name
Company
Date
Date (O (3I /0
Page I ct
Time
RN 4