Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEP2020-00006 GEO2020-00004 - SEP Determinations - 1/22/2020 SEPA Environmental Checklist Mason County Permit Center Use: ❑ Single Family DNS: $600.00 SEP ❑ Other DNS: 0 to 9.99 acres: $730 Parcel#: Z�a2 21 `i�c�l) 10 to 20 acres: $88 Date Rcvd: RECEIVED Over 20 acres: 00 ❑ DS/EIS: $5000 + $90 per hour JAN 2 2 2020 615 W. Alder Street Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: A This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply"only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. A. BACKGROUND,, 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: l W ,b Verizon-WA4 Speedway 2. Name of applicant: Verizon Wireless 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Josh Roberts/Tilson 520 SW 6th Ave.,Suite 1250,Portland,OR 97204 206-719-6452 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted). 2016 Page 1 of 11 4. Date checklist prepared: 1/21/2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2020 Build Year 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain Yes-there are two levels of future antenna arrays built into the plans 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. [rc I Geotech Engineering Evaluation(dated 10/17/19),Pocket Gopher Survey Report(dated 11/8/19),Soils Resistivity Test Result Report(dated 10/17/19),Drainage Report(Dated 1/14/20) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Mason County Building Permit 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Verizon proposes to construct an unmanned telecommunications facility consisting of(6)panel antennas(2 per sector),(6)RRUs,(1)OVP,(2)MW dishes on a proposed 120'-0"AGL monopole;(4)equipment cabinets mounted on a CPAD,generator on a 4'x8'concrete pad;ice bridge;all within a 40'x 40'fenced compound w/cabling as needed. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. ; q Parcel#(s): 420021000010 Address: W. Public Roads Drive,Shelton,WA 98584 LOT 1 OF SHORT SUBDIVISION NO.3123,RECORDED DECEMBER 4,2018 UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO.2103191 AND BEING A PORTION OF THE WEST Legal Description. HALF OF THE NE QUARTER AND A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 20 NORTH,RANGE 4 WEST W.M.IN Twp/Range/Section and%rNdf�slOCailOn: 47.257590,-123.153979 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 2 of 11 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site m°41 (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? , 30% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. €!=1r>; Grove gravelly sandy loam d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. :: None e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fills Rock,geotextile mix underneath access road f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. , f �,p Civil plans call for structural fill and firm subgrade under and around the 40'lease area to prevent erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? z iu;pi Access road and lease area(approximately 90%)will be covered h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: See construction drawings for erosion control plan 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None(save for potential dust kicked up) b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Lnr�� [ None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any N/A SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted). 2016 Page 3 of 11 3. Water a. Surface Water: neipj 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into No 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Lhekp1 No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Mho N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. L:T1,,ip1 None 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge No b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. �c,LiLp N/A c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe See sheetflow dispersion plan on construction drawings SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 4 of 11 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. r No 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: See construction drawings for stormwater runoff plan 4. Plants .. a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? ! Grading of existing dirt hill for construction of lease area and access road c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site None d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: ct N/A e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. N/A 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include birds: hawk, heron, eagl ongbir , other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 5 of 11 b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. L� -°'g-' 9 L-t oA) IorvE-r G at t4el- jCE A,'MAV,4e0 t1AAkZ- kM A fiCteOCl- GaP�'C SvLJ6 l c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. n/a d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N/A e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. N/A 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar)will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Telco/electric b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. � No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: ., N/A 7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. �� t 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. n/a 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. n/a 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. n/a 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. O Af(6 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 6 of 11 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:NONE ("JL-'X0 b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? N/A 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. !1 -c N/A 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N/A 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Public Works b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. No How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? N/A If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? N/A 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: N/A c. Describe any structures on the site. mist Raw land d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Lgeipi f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? rim; 72 RFnaAFnn;PlePIGL P�� ����..o UE-gA#,) G♦OA^K At11.415-A —.5NEL-1'6^/ SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 7 of 11 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. iLLI�j No i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? ;, None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any N/A L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: i i> N/A m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: N/A 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. ;r N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: it _gyp, N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? [relpl 125'-0"AGL b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: N/A 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occurs b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 8 of 11 c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?�Iw' None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: jheep,j N/A 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ! << None b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any N/A 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. i�:1'1>" No b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. : No c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc ��GQAAT Me N Y O F AU44k W d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. COAItAc,-v' p A.R Q I V:- Ant 'FA cT5 Aar -faJ'd O 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. See attached construction drawings SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 9 of 11 b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No-nearest transit stop is next to Walmart Supercenter,100 E.Wallace Kneeland Blvd. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? �1:k3p N/A d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). p,�l No-save for the creation of an access road leading up to the proposed lease area and site location(see construction drawings for further details) e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe i �ei� No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? p,�ipi Approximately 1-2 per day(in early morning and mid-afternoon)using commercial cranes and trucks to haul equipment to site g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. The proposal will require grading and clearance of an existing hilltop h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: N/A-transport of equipment to site will not impact public transporta}ion 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. tiioip The proposed telecommunications facility will improve communications for first responders who use frequencies for its communications solutions b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: he r electricit natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 10 of 11 4 b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. iil� Power and telecommuncations are utilities that will be brought to the site location via a proposed utility easement(see construction drawings for further details) C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: -/�a�'��- � � Date Signed: 1/22/2020 Print Name of Signee: Josh Roberts If applicable, Position and Agency/Organization: Site Acquisition,Tilson(on behalf of Verizon Wireless) Date Submitted: 1i22)2020 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960)(MC version-non project portion omitted): 2016 Page 11 of 11 Parcel Number.420022190010 Mazama Pocket G her Survey�/ v ED WEST FORK JAN 2 2 2020 .�� ENVIRONMENTAL 615W. AlderStre®t Subject: Results of 2019 Mazama Pocket Gopher Survey requested by Tilson (on behalf of Verizon) Report Date: November 8, 2019 Landowner: Mason County (Verizon tower proposed north of facilities building on hill) Address: 100 W. Public Works Drive, Shelton, WA(Section 2, T20N R4W) Survey Conducted by: West Fork Environmental (Heidy Barnett) Study Purpose A Mazama pocket gopher (MPG) survey was requested to support permitting requirements for a proposed Verizon tower located on a hillside northwest of the Mason County Public Works facility. On November 6, 2019, West Fork Environmental conducted a survey within the proposed project development area to detect activity of MPG on parcel 420022190010 (48.61 acres) in Shelton, Washington. Methods and Site Conditions The proposed Verizon tower location is located at an elevation of 358 feet on the hill northwest of the Mason County Public Works facilities (Figure 1). An access road immediately behind the facility's fence at the back of the parking lot will be used by construction vehicles to access the site. The access road will lead vehicles from the gravel parking lot up the hill and is currently overgrown with Scots broom (see photos).The road is bordered on either side by forest wit a fern and shrub understory. It extends approximately 350 feet to the top of the hill where a small clearing is located.The predominant vegetation in the clearing is Scots broom. The soil types present within the project areas were Grove gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5%slopes and Shelton gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15%slopes based on the data obtained from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Services soils map'. The WDFW PHS database shows MPG detections in 2012 and 2013 less than 1,000 feet from the base of the hill sloping up to the proposed tower location (Figure 2). MPG Survey Methods Survey methods followed those recommended by USFWS (April 2018) and Thurston County MPG detection protocols. Survey transects were conducted through the proposed project area to detect any mounding activity (Figure 1). West Fork Environmental surveyed the access road and the clearing at the proposed tower location for any mounds that would be indicative of Mazama pocket gopher activity. ' https://websoilsurvey.sc.esov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx 1 Parcel Number:420022190010 Mozama Pocket Gopher Survey Results and Conclusions No MPG mounds or clusters of mounds that would be indicators of possible MPG presence were observed within the proposed project area (tower location or access road). Habitat conditions on the access road and in the clearing differ from those that we observed where previous pocket gopher detections were made according to the WDFW PHS database. The proposed site is upslope from the flat open habitat where previous detections were recorded and was likely forested in the past. The coverage of Scots broom is extensive within the project area. The results of this survey are based on standardized methodologies and follow guidance provided by the USFWS and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provided during June 2018 training. All findings presented within this report are subject to the final review and approval of Mason County. If you have any questions regarding the information provided within this document, please contact our office at (360) 753-0485. Sincerely, Heidy Barnett Biologist Attachments: Representative site photos, survey transects 2 Parcel Number:420022190010 Mazama Pocket Gopher Survey Site Photos East end of the access road near the fence bordering the Mason County Public Works facility.The access road is currently overgrown with Scots broom and bordered by mature forest. AWL- a Proposed Verizon tower location at elevation 358 feet.The proposed location is at the end of the access road. 3 Parcel Number:420022190010 Mazama Pocket Gopher Survey Figure 1. Northwest corner of parcel 420022190010 in Shelton, WA. The proposed Verizon tower site is located within the clearing on the hillside. Yellow tracks indicate area surveyed for pocket gopher activity. Mazama Pocket Gopher Survey Map :r L � I tlgl tl 8 it's i ar @�" 4 '4 a } a.. Elevation tumours.40 Feet Map created:Nov 06 2019 Map datum:NAD 83 NARN Coordinate system.WA State Plane,South Zone DNR hydro layers: Revised Feb.2015 Roberts—11.6.19 N Map Scale. 1.3,600 0 Mason—Parcels WEST FORK 4`Mason—Contours_20—foot WE ' ENVIRONMENTAL " 0 50 100 200 300 400 500 600 Feet 4 Parcel Number:420022190010 • Mazoma Pocket Gopher Survey Figure 2. Location of Shelton pocket gopher near the proposed Verizon tower site (map accessed on 11/6/19). ©PHS-the Web x + f C'. A I Layers Tao Base Maps Aerial Hybrid o.a vet I Bouaeefle9 Parcel —street TapopraPby .. Toggle PHS Tum PHS Dabs O(1 PHS View Source— PHs Plus Public View( e r 5 K' Shelton p cket gopher ietecil, a. s e - 5 VVE..../D Adapt Consulting �� 615 81h Avenue South J Seattle,Washington 98104 t� Tel(206)654-7045 815 • air Street Fax(206)654-7048 www.adaptengr.com A October 17,2019 ByIN Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Verizon Wireless NO N c/o Tilson PLAN "" BI & EG 520 SW 6th Avenue, Suite 1250 Portland,OR 97204 Attention: Scott Emerson Sr. Project Manager Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation WA5 Speedway 100 W Public Works D ive Shelton, Washington 9i 584 Dear Mr.Emerson: Adapt Consulting (Adapt) is pleased to submit this report escribing our recent geotechnical engineering evaluation for the above referenced tower site. The purpose of this study was to interpret general surface and subsurface site conditions, from which we could evaluate the feasibility of the project and formulate design recommendations concerni g site preparation, tower foundations, access road, structural fill, and other considerations. Our scope of services consisted of a surface reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration, geotechnical analyses, and report preparation. Authorization to proceed with our study was given in the form of a Verizon Wireless purchase order(Nu ber:NNWR408079). This report has been prepared in aclordance with general accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of Verizon Wireless, and their agents, ffir specific application to this project. Use or reliance upon this report by a third party is at their own risk. Adapt does not make any representation or warranty, express or implied, to such other parties as to the accuracy or completeness of this report or the suitability of its use by such other parties for any purpose w atever,known or unknown,to Adapt. Adapt Consulting We appreciate the opportunity to b of service to you. If ou have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance to you,please cont ct us at(206)654-7045 Respectfully Submitted, Adapt Consulting, ..'To�(h i�11' John Frazier,G.I.T. K.V,Lew,P. Eng Staff Geologist Sen or Geotechnical Engineer o - a 48620i' ®, �—is P Ss�orrA�.�' Timothy J.North,P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Senior Reviewer Attachments: Figure 1 Location/Topographic Map Figure 2 Site&Exploration Plan Boring Log B-1 Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Consulting Verizon Wireless Geotechn'cal Engineering Evaluation WAS Speedway Shelton, Washington A19-2175 -GEO October, 2019 Adapt Consulting PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand that current development plans call for construction of a new self-supported telecommunications tower, equipment shelter, access road, and associated utilities. The site is located atop a steep ridge, just outside the public works equipment yard, addressed at 100 West Public Works Drive in Shelton, Washington; ass own on the attached L 9cationlTopographic Map (Figure 1). Within the lease area, topographic relief was expressed in a steep 7-foot berm, with the staked tower location situated about 3-feet from the ups ope edge of the berm. The site may be accessed from the existing driveway into the yard, then utiliz'ng an overgrown unimproved road. The existing and proposed site features, in relation to our exploration, are shown on the att ched Site &Exploration Plan(Figure 2). It should be emphasized that the c nclusions and recommeridations contained in this report are based on our understanding of the currently proposed utilization of the project site, as derived from written and verbal information supplied to us by Verizon. Consequent y, if any changes are made to the project, we recommend that we review the changes and modify our recommendations, if appropriate, to reflect those changes. DOCUMENT REVIEW As a part of our study, we reviewed the following maps and documents pertaining to the subject property and vicinity: United States. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Mason County Area, Washington. 1960. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Geologic Information Portal, Retrieved October 2, 2019, htt�s:Hgeologyportal.dnr.w .gov/. Our conclusions and recommendations are based in part or wholly on the information contained in these documents. Our geotechnical recommendations are based in part on the accuracy of these documents; Adapt assumes no responsibility f or errors or omissions i esulting from possible inaccuracies on these documents prepared by others. EXPLORATORY METHODS We explored surface and subsurface conditions at the p oject site on October 9, 2019. Our surface exploration consisted of a visual site reconnaissance. Our 3ubsurface exploration consisted of advancing one test boring (designated B-1) to a maximum depth of approximately 40-feet below existing ground surface(bgs)near the center of the lease area. The procedures used for subsurface exploration during our site visit are presented in the subsequent sections of this rep Drt. The location of the exploration advanced for this study is shown on the attached Figure 2. The specific location and depth of the exploration performed was sele ted in relation to the proposed site features, under the constraints of budget and site access. The boring location and other features shown on Figure 2 Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 1 Adapt Consulting were obtained by hand taping from existing site features; as such, the exploration location shown should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the me suring methods used. It should be noted that the explorat on performed for this evaluation revealed subsurface conditions only at a discrete location across the project site and that actual conditions in other areas could vary. Furthermore, the nature and eaten of any such variation would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities have commenced. If significant variations are observed at the time of construct' n, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations contained in this report to reflect th actual site conditions. Auger Boring Procedures The boring was advanced using atrack-mounted, hollow-stem auger drill rig operated by an independent company working under subcontract to Adapt. A geotechiiical representative from Adapt was on-site to observe the boring, obtain represen ative soil samples, and I og the subsurface conditions. After the boring was completed,the borehole was b ckfilled with bentonite hips. During drilling, soil samples were btained on 5-foot depth intervals using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure (ASTM: D 1586) This test and sampling method consists of driving a standard 2-inch outside diameter(OD) split-barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches into the soil with a 140-pound hammer, free-falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through each of the three, 6-inch intervals is noted. The total number of blows struck during the final 12 inches of penetration is considered the Standard Penetration Resistar ce, or "blow count". If 50 or more blows are struck within one 6-inch interval,the driving is ceased and the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the actual number of inches of penetration. The resulting Standard Penetration Resistance values provide a measure of the relative density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils. The Boring Log attached to this report describes the various types of soils encountered in the boring, based primarily on visual interpretations made in the field and supported by our subsequent laboratory examination and testing. The log indicates the approxima e depth of the contacts between different soil layers, although these contacts ma 1 be gradational or undulating. Where a change in soil type occurred between sampling intervals, we in rred the depth of conta t. Our log also graphically indicates the blow count, sample type, sample number, and approximate dept of each soil sample obtained from the boring, along with any laboratory tests performed on the soil samples. If any groundwater was encountered in the boreholes, the approximate groundwater depths are depicted on the boring log. Groundwater depth estimates are typically based on the moisture content of it samples, the wetted height on the drilling rods, and the water level measu�:ed in the borehole after the auger has been extracted. Subsurface materials encountered were 'Ogg d and classified in general accordance with the Manual Visual Classification Method(ASTM D 2 88)by the geotechnical representative. SITE CONDITIONS The following sections describe o r observations, measurements, and interpretations concerning surface, soil, groundwater, and seismic con itions at the project site Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 2 Adapt Consulting Surface Conditions Our surface exploration consisted of a visual site reconnaissance. The site is located at the top of a ridge just outside the public works facili . The lease area was clearly marked at the time of our site visit. The ground was covered with low lyingvines and shrubs. The staked lease area includes at least 7 feet of topographic relief, in the form of a near vertical berm. The location of the tower, marked with a stake labeled "TOWER", was located about 3 feet from the upsl pe edge of the berm. Beyond the lease area, topography generally slopes down to the north and to the south. Subsurface Conditions At the exploration location design ted B-1, the near surfa e soil conditions beneath a foot of surficial gravelly topsoil consists of approxi ately 8.5-feet of medium stiff silt with gravel and organic material, overlying very dense gravel with silt.The gravel with silt e tended to about 15 feet bgs and was underlain III by very dense silty sand with gravel from approximately 15 feet bgs to 41 feet bgs,the maximum depth of our boring. We interpret the silty sarid soils to be glacial till deposits. Groundwater was not encountered in the test boring at the time of drilling, however moist soils were observed in soils from the ground surface to 9.5-feet bgs indicating variable ground water levels and possible seasonal perched groundwater in the near surface soils above the till. Please note,throughout the year groundwater levels may likely fluctuate in response to changing precipitation patterns, off-site construction activities,and changes in site utilization. Seismic Conditions Based on our analysis of subsurf ce exploration logs an I a review of published geologic maps, we interpret the on-site soil condition to correspond to Site Class C, as defined by Table 20.3-1 within Chapter 20 of ASCE 7 in accordan e with the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). The soil profile type for this site classification is characterized by dense soils with an average blow count greater than 50 blows-per-foot within the upper 100 feet bgs. Our recommended seismic design parameters are summarized in the table below. Table 1 Sekmir T)pQian Para—PfArQ Short Period 1 Second Maximum Credible Spectral Acceleration Ss=1.547 SI=0.587 Site Class C Site Coefficient Fa=1.2 F,=1.413 Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters SDs=1.238 SDI=0.553 For purposes of seismic site characterization, we extrapolated the soil conditions below the exploration termination depths,based on our knpwledge of the regional geology. Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 3 Adapt Consulting CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The current development plans call for construction of a n w telecommunications tower and compound. Based on the site and subsurface conditions revealed by our field exploration, the proposed tower may be supported on either a drilled pier o concrete mat foundation. A drilled pier can provide a cost-effective foundation for communication tower structures, provided that adequate embedment depths can be achieved with the drilled pier auger ng equipment that the s to is accessible to the drill rig, and that drilled pier contractors are available within a reasonable distance from the site. Alternatively, a reinforced concrete mat foundation may be sel cted if difficult drilling conditions are anticipated due to the presence of bedrock or boulders, provided hat the proposed lease area can accommodate the generally larger excavation plan area required for mat foundation. As the site is feasible for both foundation options from a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend foundation. selection evaluate the economic cost for the foundation alternatives considering mobilization costs and contractor availability. For planning purposes, we have t ierefore provided design criteria for compressive, uplift and lateral support of both a mat foundation and a drilled pier foundation option below. Our specific recommendations concerning site preparation, equipment building or cabinet foundations, tower foundations,access driveway, and structural fill are present d in the subsequent sections. Based on the marking stakes at the site during our exploration,the tower is to be located about 3-feet from the upslope edge of a steep berm. t may be prudent to consider regrading the portion of the lease area indicated to be the proposed tower location or alternatively moving the tower location to the portion of the lease area on the downslope side of the steep berm. Site Preparation Preparation of the lease area for co struction should involy clearing, grubbing, stripping, cutting, filling, dewatering, and subgrade preparation. We provide the following comments and recommendations relative to site preparation. Temporary Drainage: We recommend intercepting and diverting any potential sources of surface or near-surface water within the construction zones before stripping begins. Because the selection of an annrcnriate drainage system will d nend can the water quantity, season; weather conditions,construction sequence, and contractor's methods final decisions regarding drainage systems are best made in the field at the time of construction. Nonetheless, we anticipate that curbs, berms, or ditches placed along the uphill side of the work areas will adequately intercept surface water runoff. Clearing and Stripping: After �urface and near-surface water sources have been controlled, the construction areas should be cleared and stripped of all vegetation,topsoil, and debris. Any miscellaneous materials stored in this area should be relocated. Our site exploration indicated surface soil conditions below our exploration below the topsoil consists of soft to medium stiff silt with gravel and organic Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 4 Adapt Consulting material, but significant variations could exist. It should also be realized that if the stripping operation proceeds during wet weather, a ger�erally greater stripping depth might be necessary to remove disturbed, surficial, moisture-sensitive soils; therefore, stripping is best performed during a period of dry weather. Backfill materials, where required should be placed and compacted according to the recommendations presented in the Structural Fill sect on of this report. Excavations: Based on our explora ion, we anticipate that E hallow excavations will encounter consists of soft to medium stiff silt with gra�el and organics below a surficial topsoil layer. We anticipate these surficial soils can be cut with conv ntional earth working equipment such as small dozers and trackhoes. Backfill materials, where required, should be placed and compacted according to recommendations presented in the Structural Fill section of this report. Temporary Cut Slopes: All temporary soil cuts (greater than 4-feet in height) associated with site excavations or regrading activities should be adequately sloped back to prevent sloughing and collapse, unless a shoring box or other suitable excavation side wall bracing is provided. We tentatively recommend a maximum cut slope inclination of 1.5H:1V ( orizontal:Vertical) within the soft to medium stiff surficial soils that will likely be exposed within the upper 4-feet below the ground surface across the site. If groundwater seepage is encountered within the excavation slopes, the cut slope inclination may need to be on the order of 2H:1V, �r flatter. However, appropriate inclinations will ultimately depend on the actual soil,rock and groundwater seepage conditions exposed in the cuts at the time of construction. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the excavation is properly sloped or braced for worker safety protection, in accordance with OSHA safety guidelines. In addition to proper sloping, the excavation cuts should be draped with plastic sheeting for the duration of the excavation to minimize surface erosion and ravelling. Dewatering: Based on our site reconnaissance investigation,we do not anticipate significant groundwater seepage. However, perched groundwater may be encountered depending on the actual excavation depth and the time of year that construction proceeds. If groundwater is encountered, we anticipate that an internal system of ditches, sump holes, and pumps w 11 be adequate to temporarily dewater the excavations. Subgrade Preparation: Exposed s bgrades for shallow footings, slabs-on-grade, roadway sections and other structures should be compacted to a firm, unyielding state, if required to achieve adequate density and warranted by soil moisture conditions. Any localized zones of loose, granular soils observed within a subgrade area should be compacted to a density commens rate with the surrounding soils. In contrast, any uncontrolled fill material or o�ganic, soft, or pumping soils observed within a subgrade should be overexcavated and replaced with a$uitable structural fill material. Frozen Sub grades: If earthwork to es place during freezin i, conditions, we recommend that all exposed subgrades be allowed to thaw and be re-compacted prior to placing foundations or subsequent lifts of structural fill. Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 5 Adapt Consulting Tower Mat Foundation If chosen, the base of a mat foundation should be located a a minimum depth of about 4 feet bgs, on the medium stiff silt with gravel. After excavation to design grade,the subgrade should be cleaned of material loosened by excavation. Irregular ies resulting from the excavation should be filled with sand, lean concrete, or other suitable material o produce a level bearing surface for the foundation. We recommend using an ultimate static bearing capacity of 6,000 pounds per square foot (psf). In accordance with the provisions of the EIA/TIA 222-G code, this static bearing pressure does not incorporate a factor of safety. We estimate post construction settlements will be less than one inch. We estimate that the differential settl ment will be approxi ately half of the total settlement. Somewhat higher bearing pressure would be p ssible if the mat is extc nded to bear on the very dense soils disclosed below 9.5 feet. This alternative wot Id entail significantly g eater excavation, both laterally and vertically. Lateral loads acting on the found tions can be resisted by passive earth pressure on one side of the foundation and by friction along th soil-concrete interface at the base of the foundation. We recommend using an ultimate foundation base 1 friction coefficient of .60 for the medium stiff silt with gravel. An ultimate passive earth pressure of�50 pounds per-cubic-foot (pcf), expressed as an equivalent fluid unit weight, may be used for that port�on of the foundation embedded more than two foot below finished exterior subgrade elevation. In Order to develop this capacity, concrete must be poured neat in excavations, the adjacent grade m�st be level, and the static ground water level must remain below the base of the footing throughout the' year. The passive pres ure within the upper two feet of embedment should be neglected. Eccentric loads and moments acting on the foundation produce a skewed bearing pressure distribution to the ground. The mat foundation sh uld be sized so that the resultant load acts within the middle third of the foundation for one-way andtwo-way eccentric loading to maintain a compressive contact pressure along the base of the foundation. Me maximum bearing pressure from the eccentric loading must be less than the ultimate bearing pressure iven above. Tower Drilled Pier Foundations The subsurface soil and groundw ter conditions observed in our site exploration are considered to be _generally suitable for the use of a drilled pier foundation to support the proposed tower. The following_ recommendations and comments are provided for purposes f drilled pier design and construction. End Bearing Capacities: We recoml end that the drilled pier be founded on soils disclosed below 9.5-feet bgs. For vertical compressive soil bearing capacity, we recommend using the unit end bearing capacity presented in Table 2 below,where B is the diameter of the pier in feet and D is the depth into the bearing layer in feet, in accordance with the EIA/TIA G-code. This ultimate end bearing capacity does not include a safety factor. i Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 6 Adapt Consulting Table 2 Ultimate End Bearing Capacity Depth(feet) Ultimate Bearing Capacity(ts Limiting Point Resistance(tsf) 9.5-15 10.0 D/B 10 15-41 15.0 D/B 20 Frictional Capacities: For frictional resistance along the shaft of the drilled piers, acting both downward and in uplift, we recommend using the ultimate skin friction value listed in Table 3. We recommend that frictional resistance be neglected in the uppermost 2-feet below the ground surface. The ultimate skin friction values presented do not inc ude a safety factor, in a cordance with the provisions of the EIA/TIA 222-G code. Table 3 Ultimate Skin Friction Capacities Depth (feet) Ultimate Skin Friction(tsf) 0-2 0.00 2-9.5 0.12 9.5-15 0.85 15-40 0.90 Lateral Capacities: Drilled pier foundations for communication monopole towers are typically rigid and act as a pole, which rotates around a fixed point at depth. Although more complex and detailed analyses are available, either the simplified passive earth pressure method or the subgrade reaction method is typically used to determine the pier diameter and depth required to resist groundline reaction forces and moments. These methods are desc ibed below. • Passive Earth Pre$sure Method: The passive earth pressure method is a simplified approach that is generally used to estimate an allowable lateral load capacity based on soil wedge failure theory. Although the lateral deflection associated with the soil wedge failure may be estimated, design lateral deflections using the passive earth pressure method should be considered approximate, due to the simplified nature of the method. According to the AVFAC Design Manual 7.02 (1986), a lateral deflection equal to about 0.001 times the pier length would tie required to mobilize the allowable passive pressure presented below; higher deflections would mobilize higher passive pressures. The ultimate passi�e pressure may be taken as the product of the allowable pressure and factor of safety. O�r recommended passive earth pressures for the soil layers encountered at this site are presented in Table 4 and dc not incorporate a safety factor. These values are expressed as equivalent fluid unit weights, which are to be multiplied by the depth (bgs) to reflect the linear increase within the depth interval of the corresponding soil Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 7 Adapt Consulting layer. The passive earth pressures may be as sumed to act over an area measuring two pier diameters wide by t p to eight pier diameters,deep. Table 4 Ultimate Passive Pressures Depth(feet) Ultimate Passive Pressure(pcf) 0_2 0 2_ .5 350 9.5 15 500 15- 0 750 • Sub grade Reaction Method: The subgrade reaction method is typically used to compute lateral design loads based on allowable la eral deflections. Using this method, the soil reaction pressure( ) on the face of the pier is related to the lateral displacement(y) of the pier by the horizontal subgrade modulus kh); this relationship is expressed as p=khy. Because soil modulus values are based on small scale, beam load test data, and are usually reported 4s a vertical subgrade modulus (k,,), they must be converted to horizontal subgrade modulus values repres ntative for larger scale applications (such as large pier diameters by means of various waling factors, as discussed below. In addition to the scaling and loading orientation, the soil-pier interaction governing kh is also affected by the soil type, as follows: • SAND and Soft CLAY: For coke ion-less soils (sand, non-plastic silt) and soft cohesive soils (clay, cohesive silt), the horizontal subgrade modulus (kh) increases linearly with depth (z). This relationship is expressed as kh =nhz(1B), where nh is the coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction and (1/13) is the scaling factor. • Stiff or Hard CLAY: For stiff or hard cohesive soils (clay, cohesive silts), the horizontal subgrade modulus (kh) is essentially the same as the vertical subgrade modulus ( „) and is considered constant with depth. This relationship is expressed as kh=k,[1(ft)/l.5B], Ahere [1(ft)/1.5B] is the scaling factor (B is expressed in feet). Our recommended values for the coefficient of horizontalsubgrade reaction(nh)and the vertical subgrade modulus (kv) for the soil layers encountered at this site are presented in Table 5 below. These values do not include a factor of safety since 1hey model the relationship between contact pressure and displacement and are ultimate values. Therefore, the structural engineer or monopole manufacturer should select an appropriate allowable displacemeni for design, based on th specific requirements of the communication equipment mounted on the tower. Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Page 8 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Adapt Consulting Table 5 Recommended Horizontal Sub rade Reaction Values Depth Interval nh k,, (feet) (Pei) (pci) 0-2 0 N/A 2-9.5 15 N/A 9.5-15 50 N/A 15-40 90 N/A Coefficient of Horizontal kh=nh( ) kh=k,,/(1.5B) Subgrade Reaction(pci) (Sand &Sof Clay) (Stiff Clay) Construction Considerations: Our explorations disclosed oil conditions beneath the surficial gravelly topsoil consists of approximately 8 5-feet of medium stiff silt with gravel and organic material, overlying very dense gravel with silt. The gravel with silt extended to about 15 feet bgs. We encountered very dense silty sand with gravel from approximately 15 feet bgs to 41 feet bgs,the maximum depth of our boring. Based the subsurface conditions disclosed in our exploration, knowledge of regional geology and reviewed geologic maps,the lease ea is underlain by glacial deposits. Glacially derived soils commonly contain oversized soil particles, such as cobbles or "e atic" boulders. Drilling action indicated the presence of oversized particles, and difficult drilling cond tions should be anticipated during operations through a glacial till deposit. It may be necessary to drill a small diameter pilot hole to initially penetrate the soils and reaming operations may prove difficult. Groundwater was not encountere at the time of drilling. Regardless, dewatering may be required depending on the actual depth and time of year of drilled pier construction. The foundation-drilling contractor should be prepared to case the excavation to prevent caving and raveling of the pier shaft sidewall, if necessary due to unexpected soil or excessive groundwater seepage conditions. Should heavy groundwater inflow be encountered in the drilled pier excavation, it may be necessary to pump out the accumulated groundwater prior to oncrete placement, or t use a tremie tube to place the concrete from the bottom of the drilled pier ex avation, thereby displacing the accumulated water during concrete placement. Alternatively, the us of bentonite slurry c uld be utilized to stabilize the drilled pier excavation. Drilled Pier Excavation Conditions: The drilling contractor should be prepared to clean out the bottom of the pier excavation if loose soil is observed or suspected, with or without the presence of slurry or groundwater. As a minimum,we r commend that the drilling contractor have a cleanout bucket on site to remove loose soils and/or mud fro n the bottom of the pier. It may be necessary to drill a small diameter pilot hole to initially penetrate the soils and reaming operations may prove difficult. If groundwater is present and abundant within the pier hole, we recommend that the foundation concrete be tremied from the bottom of the hole to displace the water and minimize the risk of contaminating the concrete mix. The Drilled Shaft Manual published by the Federal Highway Administration recommends that concrete be Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 9 Adapt Consulting placed by tremie methods if more than 3 inches of water h s accumulated in the excavation. Dewatering may be required depending on the aotual depth and time of year of drilled pier construction. The foundation-drilling contractor should be prepared to case the excavation to prevent caving and raveling of the pier shaft sidew ll, if necessary due to unexpected soil conditions or excessive groundwater seepage. As the site s ils were very dense at depth, and research indicates potential for the presence of oversized particles, tie drilled pier contractor should be prepared for difficult drilling conditions. Foundation Construction Considerations A geotechnical engineer from Adapt (or their representative) should confirm suitable bearing conditions and evaluate the foundation subgr des. Localized deepening of footing excavations may be required to penetrate any deleterious materials. Because foundation stresses are transferred outward as well as downward into the bearing soils, all footing over-excavati ns should extend horizontally outward from the footing edge a distance equal to the one half the over-ex avation depth for the structural backfill. Access Driveway Based on available site plans and our site reconnaissance visit, it may be necessary to construct a new access road. Should it be necessary to provide an extension to the existing roadways or to improve the existing access roads, we recommend that the subgrad be prepared in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report. For planning purposes we anticipate that 6 to 12-inches of"clean" sand and gravel subbase material and a minimum 3-inches of crushed rock surfacing will be required to create a stable gravel roadway surf ice at this site. Adapt can provide additional subgrade stabilization or gravel road section recommendati ns based on observed field conditions at the time of construction. Where cuts and fills are required, t ey should be accompli hed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Site Preparation and Structural Fill sections of this report. Structural Fill The following comments, recommendations, and conclusions regarding structural fill are provided for design and construction purposes. Materials: Structural fill includes any fill materials placed under footings, pavements, driveways, and other-such structures. Typical materials used for structural fill include- clean;well-graded sand and gravel (pit-run); clean sand; crushed rock; controlled-density fill (CDF); lean-mix concrete; and various soil mixtures of silt, sand, and gravel. Recycled concrete, asphalt, and glass, derived from pulverized parent materials may also be used as structural fill. Placement and Compaction: Generally, CDF, and lean-mix concrete do not require special placement and . compaction procedures. In contra t, pit-run, sand, crushed rock, soil mixtures, and recycled materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inch s in loose thickness, and each lift should be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor. Using the modified Proctor maximum dry density Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 10 Adapt Consulting (ASTM: D-1557) as a standard,we recommend that structural fill used for various on-site applications be compacted to the following minimum densities: Fill Application Minimum Compaction Slab/Footing subgrade 90 percent Gravel drive subgrade(upp r 1 foot) 95 percent Gravel drive subgrade(bel6w 1 foot) 90 percent Subgrades and Testing: Regardless of location or material all structural fill should be placed over firm, unyielding subgrade soils. We recommend that a representative from Adapt be retained to observe the condition of subgrade soils before fill placement begins, and to perform a series of in-place density tests during soil fill placement. In thi way, the adequacy of soil compaction efforts may be evaluated as earthwork progresses. Fines Content: Soils used for str Aural fill should not co tain individual particles greater than about 6 inches in diameter and should be ftee of organics, debris, and other deleterious materials. Given these prerequisites,the suitability of soil used for structural fill d epends primarily on the grain-size distribution and moisture content of the soils when they are placed. When the "fines" content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) ncreases, soils become more sensitive to small changes in moisture content. Soils containing more th n about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than about 2 percentage points above , optimum. The sites near surface si4y soils should be consi ered extremely moisture sensitive. The use of "clean" soil is necessary for fill placement during wet-weat her site work, or if the in-situ moisture content of the sandy site soils is too high to allow adequate compaction. Clean soils are defined as granular soils that have a fines content of less than 5 percent(by weight) ased on the soil fraction passing the U.S. 3/4- inch Sieve. CLOSURE We have prepared this report for use by the owner/devc Loper, and other members of the design and construction team for the propos d WA5 Speedway tower site. The opinions and recommendations contained within this report are not intended to be, nor should they be, construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions, but are forwarded to assist in the pl ning and design process. We have made observations based on our explorations diat indicate the soil conditions at only those specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. Thee observations do not necessarily reflect soil types, strata thickness, or water level variations that may exist in other locations. If subsurface conditions vary from those encountered in ou site exploration, Adap should be alerted to the change in conditions so that we may provide additional geotechnical recommendations, if necessary. The future performance and integrity of the improvementE will depend largely or. proper initial site preparation, drainage, and construction procedures. Observation by experienced ge technical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 11 Adapt Consulting The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on our understanding of the currently proposed project, as derived from written and v rbal information supplied to us by Verizon. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that we review the design and specifications to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. If design changes are made, we request that we be retai ed to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written modification or verification The scope of our services does not include services relat d to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contr ctor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specificall described in our report for consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with the generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. Verizon Wireless October 17,2019 Adapt Project No.WA19-21757-GEO Page 12 I sh , \ J! s -317 Brockd4 - I is- 2 _ 2a r )C P;I ,. r957 '�/� �g61273 A 32By� ilKEntLake Mc Wo_lfel Lake 4 3E w tt �t rti 3JJ` Cleor tS.1131F 136 30 Jo ns L ke 0 -1 I O k 91 fi o o 304 x -- i 'fly'—' 1 297 n 249n; / .3 wsh suw. y 21 kS4'7� 21�'- �1E7 ..al .c�" TurtK Lake I�� �. Wan Islund u �! 2 fm%_.. -. _ JaM em .�• II SY gaa 0 R TO N' rp 1 _ I CRE ONS'CENTER $ANDERSON 1' I ;I TI FIELD 82 J sdr, 400 O .ram. / -w 1 ••`.. lop ,/" J 1v 1•ta, t v Sh 5 I MILE 0 10:0 FEET 0 500 1000 METEOS Printed from TOM C2000 National Geogal hk Holdings(wwwl po.com) Adapt Inc. FIGURE 1 - Location &Topographic Map 615 8th Avenue South Location :WA5 Speedway Seattle, Washington 100 W Public Works Drive To/ (206) 654-7045 Shelton, Washington 98584 Fax(206) 654-7048 Client :Verizon Date :10/17/19 Job : WA19-21757-GEO . i \j fi r B-1 V. ,- LEGEND: -0�1-B-1 - BORING NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION NOTES: DRAWINGS BASED ON IMAGES PROVIDED BY VERIZON NOT TO SCALE Adapt Inc. FIGURE 2 - Site & Exploration Plan 615 8th Avenue South Location :WA5 Speedway Seattle, Washington 100 W Public Works Drive Shelton, Washington 98584 Tel(206) 654-7045 Fax (206) 654-7048 Client :Verizon Date :10117/19 Job# : WA19-21757-GEO Adapt Inc. BORINBORING LOG Se 8thtle Avenue South G �✓ Seattle,Washington 98104 TEL:206.654.7045 FAX:206.654.7048 PROJECT :WA5 Speedway 100 W Public Works Drive Job Number: WA1 9-2 1 757-GEO Boring No.: B-1 Shelton,Washington 98584 151—t on Rer.r.nc.: W.O o.mpbt.d: TESTING GI...d 5umde ri—th.n. r OBSERVATIONS c.�na eievad.n: _ W G Zdi 7W W ® � z .Jeu ii a o3 Soft, black, gravelly organic soils (OL/OH) Medium stiff, black, SILT (ML)with gravel and organic soil; fine to coarse gravel; moist - --- 5 S-1 5 0.5 -- 4 5 3 S-2 3 1.0 3 3 S-3 3 1.0 3 10 Very dense, grey, poorly graded GRAVEL (GP= - 11 GM)with silt; fine to coarse gravel; dry to moist S-4 50/2 15 — — — — — — — — — — — — Very dense, light grey, silty SAND with gravel S-5 48 -- (SM); fine to coarse gravel; fine to coarse sand; - 42 dry to moist(glacial till) 2 U S-6 30 50/4 25 s 21 32 45 LEGEND: 2-inch O.D.Spli-Spoon Sample —V— Static Water Level at Dr£Ong Grob Sample DATE T 2-inch O.D.Geoprebe V Static,Water Level Type of Analytical Testing Used DATE rq Page: X Sample not Recovered V Perched Groundwater NR No Recovery 1 Of 2 —_ ATD At Time d Driiing Drilling Company:Boretec Drilling Start Date:10/09/19 Logged By:JBF Drilling Method:HSA Drilling Completion Date:10/09/19 Adapt Inc. BORING LOG Avenue South Se _ Seattletle, Washington 98104 TEL:206.654.7045 FAX:206.654.7048 PROJECT :WA5 Speedway 100 W Public Works Drive Job Number: WA19-21757-GEO Boring No.: B-1 Shelton,Washington 98584 Eovanon Ranranea: well Completsa: TESTING Groupa Surtacr Elavatton- C.,rg El...flan: OBSERVATIONS m o =ac 0 O Z Y .zyy 30 � Z r� n� 23 Very dense, light grey, silty SAND with gravel S-$ 50 5 (SM); fine to coarse gravel; fine to coarse sand; dry to moist(glacial till) 35 8-9 50/6 40- 21 S-10 50/4 Boring terminated at approximately 41 ft bgs. Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling. 45 Boring was backfilled with bentonite clay. -- - 50 LEGEND: 2-inch O.D,Spld-Spoon Sample V Sta6c Water Level at Drilling VA Sample DATE 2-inch O.D.Geoprabe _V_ Stafic Wale:Level Type cf Analytical Testing Used DATE Page: X Sample not Recoveredd .,� Par h d Groundwater NR No Recovery 2 of 2 Ti ATD At me of Drilling Drilling Company:Boretec Drilling Start Date:10/09/19 Logged By:JBF Drilling Method:HSA Drilling Completion Date:10/09/19