Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RATCLIFFE Lots 1-8 S-10893
Comments on Cases due March 15, 2002 Page 2 March 12, 2002 S - 10890 T12N, R3W, Section 25 / Barrett Estates. No objections. S - 10892 North Woods Phase 2 / Glenn View Estates North. Information to satisfy the requirements specified in AMC 21.15 and AMC 15.65 must be submitted for each lot of this proposed subdivision. This information must include, but may not necessarily be limited to: 1. Groundwater monitoring must be conducted to confirm the suitability for development using on-site wastewater disposal systems. Ground water monitoring must be conducted during high ground water season in either the fall (October) or spring (April-May). 2. Areas designated for the original and replacement wastewater disposal system sites must be identified and must meet all criteria specified in AMC 15.65, including slope and slope setback requirements. 3. Topographical slope information must be submitted. S - 10893 T12N, R4W, Section 9, Parcel 12A / Ratcliffe Subdivision. Information to satisfy the requirements specified in AMC 21.15 and AMC 15.65 must be submitted for each lot of this proposed subdivision. This information must include, but may not necessarily be limited to: 1~ Soils testing, percola~!on testing and groundwater monitoring must be ~onducted to confirm the suitability for development using on-site wastewater disposal systems. Ground water monitoring must be conducted during high -- ground water season in either the fall (October) or spring (April-May). /~ I~ Q/~.. Areas designated for the original and replacement wastewater disposal system ~.,sites must be identified and must meet all criteria specified in AMC 15.65, '"/' including slope and slope setback requirements. ^ i~~ ~}~~~_._~,,iJl,ical slope informatiu, ,nu.~t be :,ubniittcd.' - - '~. 'An aquifer test shall be conducted within the proposed subdivision. This '" aquifer test shall include one pumping well and a minimum of two ol~servation wells. The aquifer test shall show that there is an adequate water supply t.o support the proposed subdivision and the effects of the appropri~ ",,,,,~fwatei- to serve this subdivision on ' ' . No objections. LO'CATION LOT FHA NUMBER CLIENT. SOIL CLASS '~'ISUAL~UNIFIED : .; LABORATOR,_,~ BOX 84~5 FAIRBAN KS ARC' ~ ,.,, ALASKA TESTING 1940 POST ROAD ANCHORAGE PERCOLATION TEST DATA BLOCK SU.D,V,S,ON LOCATION SKETCH .. I TEST HOLE LOG APP. TOiSOG. TEST HOLE NO.- W.O. NO. · DATE,, A'/ TECHN IClA~I. - FROST LEGEND .GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY ORGANIC' CONTENT PEAT READING SATURATE 0 ! 2 5 6 .7 !0 II ~' RATE '~/, 1. ; ..PERCOL,e,T|O I · ' ~'~ '-,.~ "e':-' ~:-.~;... ~:'?. '~ "" .' ": '.".'" GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH TO HzO NET DROP WATER 3'ABLE ADAMS · CORTHELL' LEE & ASSOCIATES." .; · , WINCE CONSULTING ENGINEERs AFFILIATED WITH ACASKA T~'STI. A B 1940 POST ROAD - ANCHORAGE;, ALASKA - 99501 TEL. 272-3428 Mr. Layne R. Ratcliffe 1222 West 23rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska ~roJect: Jul~ 27, 1966 Work Order No. 7132 Percolation Test, ~,x, SW,A, ~H~,, Sec. 9, T 12 N, R4W, S.M. Dear.Mr. Ratcliffe: A percolation test has been performed in the hole excavate~ by you, which is in t~e approximate location indicated as TH ~1 in oU~ May 25, i966 report. , At the time of this test there was no evidence of a Wat~ .table above a depth of eight feet. The most probable, explanation for the water found in the_pr~-ious test hole is that the water was perched on frozen material or a stratum of impervious silt or clay. This water no longer exists either because the frost melted or because the impervious stratum bas been.punctured. This test indicates the percolation rate to be 1 inch per less than 2 .minut .es. The test data are shm,n on the attached sheet. Very truly yours,. M~W/ra ~hcl RICHARD S. Ar'AMS, P.E. ADAMS, CORTH~.T.,LEE,[ENCE AND ASSOCIATES Frank W. Wince, P.E. ALAN N. CORTHELLo P.E HARRY R. L~. P.E. RECEIVED FEB' 0 7 200Z CRW Engine~, Group FRANK W. WINCE. P.E. II Platting ]5oard Summary of Action May 1.2002 Page 2 4. Other OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 1. Public Heatings a. S-10811 Grandvlew Subdivision Postponed to June 5, 2002 Platting Board meeting for review by the Geo-Tee-hnlcal Commission. b. S-10872-2 u:i,~caid Estates Subdivision Postponed to the May 15, 2002 Platting Board meeting duc to an advertising error. c. S-10890 Barrett Estates Subdivision - with Variances / rd: ......... ~10893 l~tclt~e Subdivision - Yaca~ion only~ Returned for rcdesign to resolve a second access to the proposed subdivision with Alaska Department of Transportation and the Municipal Traffic and Fire Departments, The public hearing should not be rescheduled until the information is received in sufficient t/me to route to reviewing agencies and the Scenic Park Community Council for review and ,,:-'App~ .oyaI.' ,of the. request. 'to vacate 30' 'x 602' BLM Road ';Reserve subject to ~llng a su/table replat Within 18 months. : tpOne~~reqfl~st of th~/t~~~olve tl~ need -and I ..I L I I ALASKA WATER & WASTEWATER June 25, 2002 CRW Engineering Group, LLC 3900 Arctic Blvd., Suite #203 Anchorage, Alaska 99503-5781 Attn: Dave Diller, P.E. Subject: Ratcliffe Subdivision Soils Report Dear Mr. Diller, Per the request of Mr. Ratcliffe we performed a site and soils evaluation of the proposed lots for the subject subdivision for the purpose of determining the ability of each lot to support an onsite septic system. In addition, per your request, we performed the necessary soils logs and soils evaluations within the proposed road fight-of-way for the purpose of establishing the road way design requirements. The result of our findings are summarized as follows: SEPTIC SYSTEM SITE AND SOILS EVALUATION: A test hole was excavated on each of the proposed lots. The test hole depths varied from 17 feet to 20 feet deep. No groundwater was encountered in any of the holes and the percolation rates were all less than 1 minute per inch. Due to thc presence of SP, SP-SM and SM soils in the deeper soils underlying the accepting soils, the MOA should be receptive to waiving the need for sand filters below the drainfield. The t6pography is gently rolling, with slopes les's than 15% throughout the entire area. In short, the topography, soil, and groundwater conditions are very good for the installation of onsite septic systems. In order to satisfy the MOA requirements for subdividing the property, it will be necessary to establish the septic reserve area on each lot, or provide designs for the primary, and two secondary drainfields. It is recommended that the reserve area method be used. SOILS CONDITIONS IN THE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY: Two test holes (TH # 117 and # 118) were excavated in the proposed center line of the road right-of-way. Test hole # 117 is approximately 75 feet cast of Jodhpur and TH #118 is at the proposed cul-de-sac. TH # 117 is 16.5 feet and TH # 118 is 17 feet deep. No groundwater was encountered in either test hole. Soils samples were collected at each major change in soil strata and taken to Alaska Test Lab to be evaluated for moisture content, soil classification, and frost classification. Attached is a copy ofthe soils logs and lab reports. The upper 4-5 feet in each test hole consists of a 12 inch organic layer and a F4 soil. Per the MOA Department of Public Works "Design Criteria Manual, Figure 1-30, the minimum structural fill depth for a residential street with an F-4 subgrade is 3.3 feet. If 6901 Debarr Road, Suite 2-B * Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Ph: (907) 337-6179 * Fax: (907) 338-3246 * Website: akwwe.com the F4 subgrade is removed, exposing the F1 and F2 subgrades, then a minimum structural fill of 1.8 feet can be used. In short, the options would be to remove the organics and F-4 layer and import 3.3 feet (minimum) of structural fill, or remove the organics and F4 soils and place 1.8 feet of structural fill. The method used would depend upon whether the area is a cut or fill section. Insulation, or additional structural fill will need to be placed so as to limit the frost penetration so that it does not reach the into the subgrade soil. A series of frost depth calculations where run using the Modberg II program. It appears that in areas where the organics are stripped and the road is constructed over the existing ML (F4) subgrade, and only 3.3 feet of structural fill is placed, it will be necessary to place 4 inches ofblueboard insulation in order to prevent the frost from reaching the F4 subgrade. If only 2 inches of blueboard is used, the frost penetration into the F4 subgrade is only about 6 inches. In cut areas where the organics and the existing ML (F4) soils are removed, and the road is constructed on an F1 or F2 subgrade, it is assumed that 21 inches of structural fill will be placed. If only 4 inches of blueboard will limit the frost penetration to less than 1 inch, which should be acceptable. These calculations were based on a freezing index of 2866 degree-days. The MOA design manual bases dictates a freezing index of 3200 degree-days. It is important to bear in mind that the Bergren method of calculating frost depth is conservative because it neglects sensible heat. When more specific information is available on the structural fill that will be used (native material?) these calculations can be re-run (based on a F.I of 3200 degree-days) with minimal effort. It is anticipated that the structural fill may have to be slightly thicker than 3.3 feet (with 4 inches ofblueboard) in order to prevent the frost from penetrating into the F4 subgrade. The soil in the vicinity of TH/ti 18 has no frost susceptible soils below 5 feet in depth. In areas where the F4 soil is removed and the road is constructed on top of NFS subgrade, the depth of frost penetration shouldn't be critical. Based upon the other soils logs performed, it is likely that the majority of the soil in the roadway that is below 5.0 feet is NFS material; however, additional borings in the roadway would be required to confirm this. This would only be important if the intent is to remove the upper 4-5 feet of F4 soil prior to placing the structural fill. If the road is constructed on top of the ~/~ subgrade, it is a moot point. l1 If you have an~r q~/s/please contact me at 337-6179. , 6901 Debarr Road, Suite 2-B * Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Ph: (907) 337-6179 * Fax: (907) 338-3246 * Website: akwwc.com · ALASKA WATER & WASTEWATER [ '. ....... CONSULT^NTS, I~C.- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N, R4W, SEC 9; SW4, SW4. NW4, PARCEL 12A PERFORMED FOR: LAYNE & CARODNE RATCUF'FE DATE: 5/7/2002 vo~j'...[ (IR-7955 .."~ I~EPTH ~ "~_ ~iORGAN'CS ITEST HOLE' LOT ~1 2 , ,, SM/ML ' "~'~ '":~: GW ~ O~G 4-[~'...;4i GC GL · ... lc. ~ __1-','*'-', SC 7--'~,.?{:::.:;I DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE I",%-'?_, ~w 15/14/2002' · ,,, ·,- , DRY 10 """' ' ' I'.'~':'.'. CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP . ~ __w..'.'~. ~ DATE READING · . -~,. :.,,. TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) 12~ ...... 15 ---I0, ~.~0~ ,,;.,,', 17 "°'"' 19,~ PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 5 FT. AND 6 FT. 20 - A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: [] YES [] NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY: JASON WOOD COMMENTS: ,. PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. (;ARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WA~; i~ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: -~]"//0 ~ /-- DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ALASKA WATER & WASTEWATER LE~ DESCRIP~ON: T12N, R4W, SEC 9: SW4. ~4. ~4. P~CEL 1~ PERFORMED FOR: ~E ~ ~ROUNE ~TCLI~ DATE:_ 5/7/2~2 ', ORGANICS IrEgT HOLE · LOT 21 ,SOIL C~S$1FIGATION$ GM CL GC , OL ' SP CH SM OH SC DEPTH TO I GROUNDWATER D~TE DRY 5/8/2002 .... DRY ' 5/14/2002 ~P/SM CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP 11 DATE RE~DING TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) 15 1~ ~ , . , ' . , ' .. 17 19~ PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 8 FT. 20 A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: ~ YES 1 NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD ' PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: J~ON WOOD COHHENTS:. PERFORMED BY AK~C, INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ ~AT THIS W~ ~ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE W~ ALL STATE ANO MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE:_ DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ......... - ----'-',---,- CONSULTANTS, INC.-- ...... --": 6g01 D(~U~R ROAD. SUilT. 2B * A/~J4ORA~.. ~X. gg~ ' ~N~ (~7)337-8179 * F~: (~07)~;3246' ' ~M ~.~c.~m ISOIL_~OG - PERCO~TION TESTJ . PERFORMED FOR: ~E · ~ROUNE ~TCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 f" ORGANICS TEST HOLE : LOT 3 12 ~'~'--- SOIL C~SSIFICATIO~S_ ~oc OL ~ ~ I sw HH 5--,~ {~ 1 ~ SP CH ,',', SM ,~///2 OH I sc 7.~]:: I DEPTH TO I DATE !'.;.. I GROUNDWATER ,.,- DRY 5214/2002 · -'. ' 10 '" ~ ' ' ' 11-- ;;~:~:' IlLOOSER W DATE READING CLOCK NET TIHE WATER LEVEL NET DROP SP/SM / TIME (MINUTES) READINO (INCHES) .' " .-. 15~,.,. B.O.H. 19-- PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 6 FT. AND 7 FT. 20~ ~ A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: ~ YES ~ NO SOILS LOGGED BY: J~ON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY:_ JASON WOOD COHHENTS: PERFORMED BY A~C. INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ THAT THIS W~PE~FORMED IN ACCORD~CE W~H ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: , I f DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY ~/8/2002 DRY 5/14~2002 -.,---,--~ CONSULTANTS, lNG.. .... , ............ LEG~ DESCRIP~ON:. ,T12N, R4W. SEC 9; SW4, SW4. NW4. PARCEL 1~ ~_]h~ ~ .." PERFORMED FOR: ~E · ~OUNE ~TCLI~ DATE:. 5/7/2002~n~4- · v ... ........... .. ~[PTHI~oRGANICS ITEST HOLE' LoT { .SOIL C~SSIFICATIONS GM ' ~CL GC OL ~ SW MH .... SP CH ~ s~ OH 7~~ I DEPTH TO o'~o~ot~ GROUNDWATER ~ DATE ~ ~ O~0UO°O° ~ ~ ~ ~o~j ~RY 5/8/2002 ~ Sw 5/~ 4/~002 ~o~oOl DRY ~ -- ~ ~ t o~2j I SEE oo~%Ol~ 1"=100' 10 ~ i,ff%-~t'J NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP '"' "*' TIHE (HINUTES) READING (INCHES) 11- :?~ ~;.~ DATE READING CLOCK 12~ *'" "*' '- """" ........ ' _ '*-~j~:~' ' ~ .... c "' ' . · ·. ·. · ~~~ I?t~l PERCOLATION RATE <1 (HIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) ~;':1224 TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 8 FT. ~ A FOU~ HOU~ P~SOA~ WA~ P~O~D: ~ Y~S ~ NO SOILS LOGGED ~Y: d~ON WOOD P~CO~ATION TE~T P~O~D ~Y: dASOH WOOD CO~HNTB: ..... PE~OR~D ~Y AK~C, INC. I, d~FFR~ A. GAYNESS. CERTI~ THAT THIS W~ ~OR~D IN ACCORDANCE W~ ALL ~A~ AND ~UNICIPA~ GUIDeLINeS IN E~F~CT ON THIS DAT~: DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/2,002 DRY 5/14/2002 ALAS~ WATER & WASTEWATER 4 . '..X ..-,.-~-- --,., : ----- CONSULTANTS, INC.- ................. ISOIL LOG - PERCO~TION TESTI ~GAL DESCRIPnON: T12N. R4W, SEC 9: SW~. SW4, NW4, PARCEL ~[ff'~ JTEST HOLE' LOT 5J '~~ ORGNICS SOIL C~SSIFICATIONS. SP CH SN OH 6~ SC 7-- ~,J~JIsP/SH DEPTH TO I iGEOUNDW~TEE D~TE . ~{:~;~ CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP ~:,o o TIME (HINUTES) READING (INCHES) ~;~ DATE READING ~:~ ,., .~.~1~~:' , ,. , ' · %e PERCOLATION RATE <1 (~IN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) ~ TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 6 FT. 20~ A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: ~ YES l NO SOILS LOGGED BY: J~ON WOOD PERCOLATION T~ST PERFORHED BY: JASON WOOD COHHENTS: PERFORMED BY AK~C, INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ THAT THiS ~A~ ~FORMED IN ACCORDANCE W,H ALL STATE AND UUN~C~PAL CU~D~UN~S ~N ~FF~CT ON TH~S DATE: DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/200~ DRY 5/14/200~ ~,.5,~......:..... ~.~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N, R4W,,,,SEC 9; ,SW4, SW4, NW4, PARCEL 12A PERFORMED FOR; LAYNE & C...,AROUNE RATCLIFFE DATE:~/7//2002 ' ' O EPTH (feet) ~ORGANICS____.____. ITEST HOLE' LOT 61 -~~-~ '"!I,i i SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS. 2-- t ~:."..',fb:"'. GW ~-:~.=~ ORG 3-- "I'. ::..'.,.'.-.':.,:". GP ML ~, GM CE , ,,, GC I OL · ";'~..ti :E~'~-.'.~,!: I.,,, o, SW i MH ';, ..:*:~'~..-' SC !-.-~.,.~:~..':.. 7 _ >~,~..-.-. ,~, ;:! I DEPTH TO , ~;~,:.~..,.:,, iGROUNDW~TER D~TE "' """~;" GW ;' DRY 5/B/~'002 8 -- :',~ :-.". .'"~: :~,o_"::',.:.;~ ~ DRY 15/14/20021 .;. ;.,.-..<.c~'~.~. 1 ,~ o _: ~.L,'.','....;~::: >,:..,...,-,:.~.;':.' DATE RE~DING: CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP 11 -- ,,, .~' z,,.:...:: TIME (MINUTES) READING (,INCHES) ;.'-.~,~..:<~ ;}: ,. 12 ,' ..:' .~ ~,~' <~..'.,. ~...,~ :~.~,;<.~',-:~] 13 ,,, ~.,, .... ,,,-,,,::,,?, ..... 14-- '%'""' ~,~ ' :.-,'.::..?, ~ 5-- ~.......:...; sP . . ,~ ~ ~ s-- :..~:::?, B.OiH. - .... ' .- I PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) 19- TEST RUN BETWEEN 6 FT. AND 7 FT. 20 A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: D YES [] NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY: .. JASON WOOD COMMENTS: PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. !, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS I~ER~'ORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: , __=:==__-;== :- · .,;,~. ,!~, :~/-~..',~,?: i ,, ..,;. ~.,.!~ ;, · 7..- .o;...' k >~......+,.:,O.;.:: ~..-.,.,~ ... , ---- ,, ..,-..; ~,.~- -:~;.,. / ~,:.. ~;-~. o. ~;., ::3::;,, ,,.-,..::..?, :.';.::;;, B.O.H. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE II DRY 5/8/~00~ DRY 5/14/20021 ALASKA WATER & ~VASTEWATER PERFORMED FOR:. ~E & ~ROUN, E ~TCU~ ..... DATE: 5/7~2002 . 55 ..'" ]ocs ~ESI HOLE · LOT SOIL C~SSIFIOATION~ .~ ....... ., SH ~ GP ~ HE I ' 'GM~' / CL 6C , , OL SW NH ~ SP CH OH DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/200~ DRY 5/14/2002 DATE READING CLOCK NET TINE WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIHE (HINUTES) READING (INCHES) ...... ':' , .' ',' , ~~ " PERCOLATION RATE <1 (~IN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCH~S) TEST RUN BETWEEN 6.5 FT. AND 7.5 FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: ~ YES ~ NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY:, dASON WOOD COHHENTS: ......... PERFORMED BY AK~C, INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ THAT THIS WA~ ~RFORMED IN ACCORDANCE Wl~ ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: ~]~]0~ - I I ,, DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002. DRY 5/14/2002 Letter of Transmittal From: ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC Phone: {907) 646-5637 Robert Baffrey CRW Engineering Group 3900 Arctic Bird, Suite 203 Anchorage, AK 99503 Fax:(907) 561-2273 E-mail: rbaffre¥~,crwen,q.com Attention Jim Cross Company Municipality of Anchorage To: Project Management and Engineering P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage AK 99519 CRW No40101 Date: 10/9/2002 Project: Layne Ratcliffe Ratcliffe Subdivision (Previously 2002C) Subject: On-site Septic Reserve Areas We Are Sending You the Following Items: Copies Date No. Description I 10/10/02 Full-sized On-site Septic Reserve Area Drawing I 06/25/02 Ratcliffe Subdivision Soils Report These are Transmitted as Indicated Below: © For approval © For your use (~As requested © For review and comment © Returned Remarks: Dear Jim, Attached is the full-sized drawing of the Ratcliffe Subdivision indicating the proposed septic reserve areas. Also included is the soils report for the project. We hope that you will find everything you need with these items. Please give Dave Diller a call should you require anything else. Thanks! Sincerely, Robert CC: Signed:--~b~~B re~ ALASI WATER & WASTEWATER June 25, 2002 CRW Engineering Group, LLC 3900 Arctic Blvd., Suite #203 Anchorage, Alaska 99503-5781 Attn: Dave Diller, P.E. Subject: Ratcliffe Subdivision Soils Report Dear Mr. Diller, Per the request of Mr. Ratcliffe we performed a site and soils evaluation of the proposed lots for the subject subdivision for the purpose of determining the ability of each lot to support an onsite septic system. In addition, per your request, we performed the necessary soils logs and soils evaluations within the proposed road right-of-way for the purpose of establishing the road way design requirements. The result of our findings are summarized as follows: SEPTIC SYSTEM SITE AND SOILS EVALUATION:, A test hole was excavated on each of the proposed lots. The test hole depths varied from 17 feet to 20 feet deep. No groundwater was encountered in any of the holes and the percolation rates were all less than 1 minute per inch. Due to the presence of SP, SP-SM and SM soils in the deeper soils underlying the accepting soils, the MOA should be receptive to waiving the need for sand filters below the drainfield. The topography is gently rolling, with slopes les's than 15% throughout the entire area. In short, the topography, soil, and groundwater conditions are very good for the installation of onsite septic systems. In order to satisfy the MOA requirements for subdividing the property, it will be necessary to establish the septic reserve area on each lot, or provide designs for the primary, and two secondary drainfields. It is recommended that the reserve area method be used. SOILS CONDITIONS IN THE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY: Two test holes (TH # 117 and # 118) were excavated in the proposed center line of the road right-of-way. Test hole # 117 is approximately 75 feet east of Jodhpur and TH #118 is at the proposed cul-de-sac. TH # 117 is 16.5 feet and TH # 118 is 17 feet deep. No groundwater was encountered in either test hole. Soils samples were collected at each major change in soil strata and taken to Alaska Test Lab to be evaluated for moisture content, soil classification, and frost classification. Attached is a copy of the soils logs and lab reports. The upper 4-5 feet in each test hole consists of a 12 inch organic layer and a F4 soil. Per the MOA Department of Public Works "Design Criteria Manual, Figure 1-30, the minimum structural fill depth for a residential street with an F-4 subgrade is 3.3 feet. If 6901 Debarr Road, Suite 2-B * Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Ph: (907) 337-6179 * Fax: (907) 338-3246 * Website: akwwc.com the F4 subgrade is removed, exposing the F1 and F2 subgrades, then a minimum structural fill of 1.8 feet can be used. In short, the options would be to remove the organics and F-4 layer and import 3.3 feet (minimum) of structural fill, or remove the organics and F4 soils and place 1.8 feet of structural fill. The method used would depend upon whether the area is a cut or fill section. Insulation, or additional structural fill will need to be placed so as to limit the frost penetration so that it does not reach the into the subgrade soil. A series of frost depth calculations where mn using the Modberg II program. It appears that in areas where the organics are stripped and the road is constructed over the existing ML (F4) subgrade, and only 3.3 feet of structural fill is placed, it will be necessary to place 4 inches of blueboard insulation in order to prevent the frost from reaching the F4 subgrade. If only 2 inches ofblueboard is used, the frost penetration into the F4 subgrade is only about 6 inches. In cut areas where the organics and the existing ML (F4) soils are removed, and the road is constructed on an F1 or F2 subgrade, it is assumed that 21 inches of structural fill will be placed. If only 4 inches of blueboard will limit the frost penetration to less than 1 inch, which should be acceptable. These calculations were based on a freezing index of 2866 degree-days. The MOA design manual bases dictates a freezing index of 3200 degree-days. It is important to bear in mind that the Bergren method of calculating frost depth is conservative because it neglects sensible heat. When more specific information is available on the structural fill that will be used (native material?) these calculations can be re-mn (based on a F.I of 3200 degree-days) with minimal effort. It is anticipated that the structural fill may have to be slightly thicker than 3.3 feet (with 4 inches of blueboard) in order to prevent the frost from penetrating into the F4 subgrade. The soil in the vicinity of TH #118 has no frost susceptible soils below 5 feet in depth. In areas where the F4 soil is removed and the road is constructed on top of NFS subgrade, the depth of frost penetration shouldn't be critical. Based upon the other soils logs performed, it is likely that the majority of the soil in the roadway that is below 5.0 feet is NFS material; however, additional borings in the roadway would be required to confirm this. This would only be important if the intent is to remove the upper 4-5 feet ofF4 soil prior to placing the structural fill. Ifthe road is constructed on top of the F$ subgrade, it is a moot point. / If you have an), q~ ~lease contact me at 33%6179. M.S. 6901 Debarr Road, Suite 2-B * Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Ph: (907) 337-6179 * Fax: (907) 338-3246 * Website: akwwc.com I AI SKA WATER & WASTEWA_T,E_R ............. CONSULTANTS, INC. ~ .... 6901 DEBARR ROAD, SUf1'E 28 ' ANCHOP. AGE. AK. 99504 ' PHONE: (907)337-6179 · FAX: (907)338-3246 WT~S~E: oktm'c.c~m ISOlL LOG IN ROAD CENTER LINE NEAR JODPHURI LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N. R4W. SE~C 9; SW~4, SW4, NW4. PARCEL 12A ~ PERFORMED FOR: CRW ENGINEERING GROUP. LLC DATE: 5/8/2002 ORGANICS ITEST HOLE #1171 SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS ML ( F/-O GW ~ ORG 17.1% H20 GP ~ ML GM CL GC OL SW MH SP CH SM OH GP (NFS) SC 1,5% H20 SM (FZ) ~.7~ H20 DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ~L (FA), 8.5%H20 & SP-SM (NFS) 1.8% H20 GP/SP (NFS) 0.8% H20 SITE PLAN 1"=100' DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE - (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA, - (INCHES) SOILS LOGGED BY: COMMENTS: TEST RUN BETWEEN - FT. AND - FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: E--lYES E]NO JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY: N/A PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS_. --WAS DERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: ..... CONSULTANTS, INC., ...... ....... PERFORMED FOR: cRw ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC DATE: 5/8/2002 ,~,~.< ............ I~EPTH ~ feet) ORGANICS ITEST HOLE #1 1 81 i SOIL OI~$$1FIOATION$ ~.'.-..'.~!., GW :=--.=-'~-~ ORG ML (F~) ~ GP ~, ME GM CL 12.9Y. H20 GC~ OL 2o o, SW MH ' · SP CH SM OH SC SP (NFS) 0.9% H20 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE I DRY 5/8/2002 I DRY 5/14/2002 SP-SM (NFS) ISITE PLANI I 1~=100' 10 5.3% H20 11 DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) sP (NFS) 13 0.8% H20 sM (NPS) 16 5.3% H20 17 19 PERCOLATION RATE -- (MIN./INC.) PERC. HOLE DIA. - (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN - FT. AND - FT. 20 A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: [] YES [] NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: - COMMENTS: PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS I~ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDEUNES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: ~[ZS~/~ DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL CHAPTER I SECTION 1.070 ROAD STRUCTURAL FILL DESIGN 1.070 A. Objective In arctic environments such as Anchorage, the primary consideration in the structural design of a road is the potential impacts of freezing and thawing on the road surface. The material in the subgrade (the existing ground below the road surface) is considered frost susceptible when it is likely to develop detrimental ice segregation. The adverse impacts associated with ice development can be significant. The degree of impact is also influenced by the amdunt of moisture in the subgrade. The primary .goal in the structural design of a road is to reduce freezing and thawing impacts to a level which allows for. the desired roadway life. This is best accomplished by providing an adequate non- frost susceptible structural fill above the subgrade as well as adequate drainage facilities'in order to minimize these impacts. In general, finer soils contain larger amounts of unfrozen water at subfreezing temperatures than coarser soils. Because of this, the higher the content of fine soils the greater the likelihood of adverse ice development and the higher the frost susceptibility. Materials con- sisting, by weight, of more than three percent finer than 0.02 millime- ters in diameter are .cjenerally considered frost susceptible. The degree .of ice development is also related to the size range of the soil voids. For example, some uniform sanely, soils may contain as much as ten .percent fines without being adversely frost susceptible. The classified fill types described in MASS and the classified fill uses identified in Section 1.070 B have been developed to address these con- cerns. The designe~' should also consider the following des!gn objec- · tires when frost-susceptible material is encountered in the subgrade: 1. To minimize capillary action, which is the upward movement, or drawing, of moisture into the structural fill. This can be caused Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-61 DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL CHAPTER 1 by thee generation of negative pore pressures in the freezing zone. To abate the upward movement, or pumping, of finer soils from a frost-susceptible subgrade into the classified fill. .To minimize differential frost heaving by_providing_long trans.itions .between varying structural fill depths. 1,070 B. Classified Fill Usage In MASS, construction specifications for various types of classified fill are established for work within municipal rights-of-way, in this sec- tion, general guidelines are provided for use 'of each cl'assified fill type. .Leve'ling Course is intended for use as a base course at the top of a structural fill just below the A.C. pavement. Its function is to provide a more uniform surface for pavement placement by eliminating material one inch in diameter or larger. Type I is a rural road surface base course to be placed on top of the structural fill. This is generally used as the driving surface for the top four inches of a gravel road. This material has significantly tighter gradation limits than other classified fills. It normally has higher shear strengths and i's also less' subject to segregation than other classified fill types. . Type il is the primary structural fill or "subbase" material for deve- loping road structure values. This material is generally used in the minimum structural fill depths provided in Figure 1-30. Type II-a is the top six'inches of structural fill directly under the leveling course. It was designed to reduce irregularities in the top of Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-62 DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL CHAPTER I the structural fill and;to'~reduc~' the 'potential upward movement of large rocks into the leveling course and pavement. 'Type Iil provides flexibility in the use of native material as usable excavation in the subbaseo However, this mater, iai allows for higher contents of fines and can be frost susceptible. Therefore, it is pri- marily used in the lower regions of a fill such as in utility and storm drain trenches. Type III classified fill may be approved as a primary structural material if the data clearly demonstrates that structural and frost action concerns are not significant.- Type IV is f~r use in areas outside the structural fill of a. road. When moisture levels in the Type IV material are above the optimum moisture content, compaction to MASS specifications is difficult. Furthermore, when Type IV is placed in an area where the subgrade moisture content is above optimum, the ability of the material to maintain structural pro- perties is. also reduced. However, when moisture content can be ade- quately controlled and adequate compaction can be obtained, Type IV may be used in the lower regions of a structural fill. . 1.070 C. Design in Organic Soils Ali organics shall be removed from the road subgrade unless otherwise approved by the municipal engineer. 1.070 D'. Road Base Design Methods There are three primary design methods for determining road base depths. Each method and its use is briefly described below. The Complete Protection Method involves the removal and replace- ment of all frost-susceptible materials in the subgrade down to the estimated frost depth. In most cases, this is not cost effective and shall not be used without approval by the municipal engineer. Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-63 DESIGN CRITERIA I~kNUAI. CHAPTER I The Reduced Sub~lrade Strength Method is generally for structural fill design above F-l, F-2, and F-3 materials when the subgrade is horizontally .uniform and significant differential heaving and resultant cracking is not expected. The minimum road base depths provided in Section 1.070 E were obtained using this method. 1.070 E. The Limited Sub,fade Frost Penetration Method is the usual method of structural fill design for control of surface deformation. It attempts to restrict surface movements to levels which will not adversely impact road surface life, or-quality, it is generally for structural fill design over F-~I materials and over F-3 materials where the subgrade is variable and significant differen, tial heaving and resultant cracking is likely to occur. This design method is described in Section 1.070 F. Minimum Depths of Structural Fill Minimum structural fill depths are primarily a function of the frost classification of the underlying ground. Descriptions of these classifi- cations are provided in Figure 1-29, The Reduced Sub'fade Strength Method was used to determine the minimum structural fill depths pro- vided in Figure 1-30. A 0.zl-foot safety margin has been included in these figures. However, it is the responsibility of the designer to insure that these minimum depths are .adequate in each structural fill design. Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-6~1 DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL CHAPTER I Group F1 F2 F3 Fq am Kind of' $'o'U Gravelly Soils Gravelly soils Sands Gravelly soils Sands, except very fine silty sands Clays, PI 12 All silts Very fine silty sands c. Clays, PI 12 d. Varved clays and other fine-grained, banded sediments Percentage Finer than by Weight 3to0 10 to 20 3 to 15 Ore r 20 Over 15 Over 15 Typical Soil Types Under Unified Soil ~ I'a's'~ i'f'i ~:'~ :t 15 I~' ~¥stem GW, GP, GW-GM, GP-GM GM, GW-GM, GP-GM SW, SP, SM, SW-SM, SP GM, .GC SM, SC ' Ct., CH ML, MH SM CL, CL-ML. CL and ML; CL, ML, and SM; Ct., CH, AND ML; CL, CH, ML, and SM FROST DESIGN SOIL CLASSIFICATION FIGURE 1-29 Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-65 Figure 1-30 Minimum Structural Fill Depths Residential Street Collector Street DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL CHAPTER I Arterial Street F-1 1.5 feet F-1 1.5 feet F-1 1.7 feet F-2 1.7 feet F-2 1.8 feet F-2 1.9 feet F-3 2.3 feet F-3 2.6 feet F-3 2.8 feet F-q 3.3 feet* F-q 3.6 feet* F-q 3.8 feet* * For all F-q subgrades and non-uniform F-3 .subgrades, the designer shall cross check the adequacy of the minimum subgrade depths shown in Figure 1-30 depths using the Limi'ted'Subgrade Frost Penetration Method described in Section 1.070 F. The calculations shall be sub- mitted with the preliminary design plans. Additional depth may also be required if there is a high.water table or near saturated soil conditions unless methods are proposed to alleviate the water problem. If near saturated conditions are to remain, the designer Should cross check the minimum subbase depth with the subgrade design method found in Section 1.070 F and submit these calcu- lations with the preliminary design plans. ' 1.070 Fo The Limited Frost Penetration Method The preferred procedure to determine the structural fill design thickness in all F-q and non-u, niform F-3 .subgrades is the Limited Sub- grade Frost Penetration Method. Other design methods may be used if approved by the DPW. The Limited Subgrade Frost Penetration Method is described below.: Estimate the average moisture contents in the base (Wb} and subgrade (Ws} and the dry weight of the base (Yd) at the start of the freezing period. Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-66 DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL , CHAPTER I Usin~ Yd and Ws, determine the frost penetration (a) which will occur in the base material of unlimited depth beneath a bituminous pavement kept free of snow and ice (Figure 1-31). The Air Freezing Index for Anchorage, based on average daily temperatures for the three coldest winters in 30 years, is 3,200 degree days. Calculate the base thickness (c) required, for zero frost Penetra- tion into the subgrade using the formula c = a - p, where p is the pavement thickness. Calcul'ate r by dividing the water content for ,the subgrade by the water content of the base. For design purposes, the maximum value for r is 2. After determining c and r, use Figure 1-32 to determine the design base thickness (b) and the allowable frost penetration (s). For design purposes, b should not exceed 72 inches. 1o070 Go Geotextile Fabrics Where a high water table or a high soil moisture content occur with F-3 and F-q soils, a filtration fabric shall be considered at the bottom of the excavation to keep the structural fill from being contaminated by the frost susceptible material. END OF 'SECTION 070 Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-67 0 0 5O 100 150 so 100 150 2OO 25O 1000 2000 AIR FREEZING INDEX - Degree- Days DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL 3000 4~00 5000 1000 2000 3000 0 0 50 100 150 CHAPTER 1 4000 5000 Yd = dry weight of the base 0o ;0 3¢ 1000 3000 )00 5000 NOTE: W = Ws = water conten, t of the subgrade GRAPHS ASSUME GRANULAR, NONFROST-SUSCEPTIBLE SOIL BENEATH PAVEMENTS KEPT FREE OF SNOW AND ICE, FROST' PENETRATION FIGURE 1-31 DEPTHS Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-68 Pavement, p I C 140 Design depth ¢ of base · Wb & Subgrade frost S ~, penetration Ws r DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL , CHAPTER 1 Combined thickness of pavement and nonfrost - susceptible bas~ for zero frost penetr~on into =a-p = Water content of base. = Water content of subgrade. Ws -' Wb', Not to exceed 2.0 Example: If c = 60" and r = 2.0, then b=40" ands = 10" LU · o 12o ~ 60 ~/~ ~ ~ ' 15 ~ ~ 10 ~ 20 ~ / ~ 5 0~ ~ t ~ · ~ ~ ~ I ! 0 r- 0.6 r- 0.8 r- 1.0' r- 1.2 r- 1.4 r- 1.6 r.1.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150 BASE THICKNESS FOR ZERO FROST PENETRATION INTO SUBGRADE, c - Inches NOTE: DESIGN THICKNESS ASSUMES THE USE OF N F S MATERIAL FOR BACKFILL DESIGN BASE THICKNESS FIGURE 1-32 Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Public Works 1-69 Project Location: ~chora~e Wfc~o Birpor%, B~afka ~Lr Deoig~ ~reeztng X~d~x m 2*1~ N-~tor ~ $.~0 ~n ~ut~.~ Temperature m 36.1 d~g ~ Desig~ Length of ~reez:Lng Se~eon ~ 183 d~ Layer #: T~e ~ w~ d Cf CM Jif ][u L · -~t 2.0 .'1 ~.20. O 28 28 .~ .~ 0 2-Co~ae ~.0 2.0 ~25.e 3-~at~ 4.0 .2 2.0 O 4~o~pe 3~.6 2.0 225.0 23 24 ~ B ~imt~e content, t~ ~erceat~ d m Dr~ ~it~, in ~m/~ic Cum ~at C~tty of t~d p~e, tn ~V/(C~iC ~t ~ee ~). ~f m ~ co~Ktt~t~ tn frozen phi, h )Tg/(ft ~ ~ee). Project Location: ~hor~e ~c~o ~Lr~ort, il~ La. er J~: T~pe t W~ d Cf Cu Kf ~u L 4 ~o~se ~2.0 ~25.0 23 24 ................. ~ ................................... ~t~e content, hat Cq~it~ o~ frozen Latent hat of / ...................... · -~t 2.0 .~.o., ,, ,, -' -' o 2~oarse 8.0 2.0 ~25.0 23 3~o~se 2~.0 2.0 ~25.8 23 24 .~ .9 3(0 ~ / - . 4-I.~at~M 2.0 .2 ......................................................... ~ m ~t~e content, in ~ercent~ of ~F De~l~ ~Fee~ X~x m 28~6 N-~tor m 0.T0 ~ ~ T~Fat~e m 3g.I De~l~ ~h o~ ~Feegt~ Se~on Lair ~:T~e t ~ d CE CM ~E ~u L 1-~t 2.0 .1 120.0 28 28 .9 .9 2-Co~se 8.0 2.0 125.0 23 24 3-Co~se 21.0 2.0 125.0 23 24 .~ .9 4-I~at1~ 4.0 .1 2.0 0 0 .0 .0 5-Co~se 30.0 2.0 125.0 23 24 ;-FA~ .8 12.0 ~5.0 22 Laver tk/cknme~, tn J~otsture content, in ~ercent~ Dry ~tty, tw ~e[~1c gr. T~ co~tt~ty Tb~ co~tt~t~ Latent hat of fulow, tn ~V I ~tc ~t. Tot~ D~t~ o~ ~ro~t ~eMtratton m 5.4~ Et m ~5.~ tn. -'ml:~,~li~i1 I ~roJect Location: BAchorage ~r Dest~ ~ree~ l~x m 2~g ~-~ N-~tor = O.~O S~E~e Dest~ Nreezi~ ~ ~ T~rat~e ......................................................... 1-~t 2.0 .1 120.0 28 28 2-Co~se 1X3.~ 2.0 125.0 23 24 .( .~ 3~0 ...................... . .................................. ~ = ~lstm content, i~ ~r~t~ oE ~ ~ity. CE -- ~at C~tty oE frozen p~e, tn ~/(c~tc ~t ~ee ~). Cu = hat C~it~ o~ t~d L m Latent ~at o~ f~i~, ============================= 8t2 Weights of Materials ' "~ s ~*RICK AND BLOCK MASONRY PSF 4" brickwork 40 4" concrete block, stone or gravel 34 4" concrete block, lightweight 22 4" concrete brlck, stone or Ora~ral 46 4" co~:mte brick, lightweight 33 6" concrete block, atone or gravel 50 S' concrete block, lightweight 31 8" concrete block, stone or gravel 55 8" concrete block, lightweight 35 12" concrete block, stone or gravel 85 55 ACOuStical tile unsupported 0.8 Building board, 1/~- 0.8 Cement finish, 1" 12 Fiberboard. s/2" 0.75 Gypsum wallboard, I/3" 2 Marble and letting bed 25-.30 PlaSter, I/a" 4.5 Plaster on WOOd lath 8 Plastm' suspended with lath 10 Plywood, "/z" 1.5 Tile, glazed wall a/a' 3 Tile, ceramic mosaic, I/4" 2.5 Ouar~y tile, I/~', 5.8 Ouerr/tile. 3/4" 8.6 Tasrazzo 1~, 2" in stone concrete 25 Vinyl tile, I/8" I`33 Hardwood flooring, ;S/3z" 4 Wood block flooring. 3" on mastic 15 Insulating glass 6/e" plate with air~oace Glass block IN~:ULATION AND WATERPROOFING Bart. blankets per 1" thicknesa Corkboard per 1" thickness Foamed board Insulation per 1" thickness Fi~e-ply membrane Rigid insulation LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE Concrete, eerocrate Concrete, cinder fill Concrete, expanded clay Concrete, expanded ibafe-~nd Concrete. perlite Concrete, pumice ~.25 3.5 0.1-0.4 0.58 2.6 oz 5 0.75 6O 85-100 (05-120 35-50 60-90 Aluminum, CaSt 155 Brass, cast, rolled 534 Bronze, commercial 552 Bronze, statuary 509 Copper, CaSt or rolled 55S Gold, cast, sofid 1205 Gold coin in bags 509 Iron, cast gray, pig 450 Iron, wrought 480 Lead 710 Nickel 565 Silver, cast, solid 656 Silver coin In bags 5~0 Tin 459 Stainless Steel. rolled 492-510 Steel, rolled, cold drawn 490 Zinc. rolled, caSt or Iheat 449 Mortar, masonry 116 Plaster. gypsum, ~ 104-120 2 x 4 wood stud, GWB, two sidesS 4" metal Stud. GWB. two Sides S 4" concrete block, lightweight. GWB 26 6" concrete block, lightweight. GWa 35 2" solid plaster 20 4" solid plaster 32 Built Up Concrete roof tile g.5 Copper 1.5-2.5 Corrugated iron 2 Deck, Steel without roofing or insulation 2.2-3.6 Fiberglass panels (2tls" con'ugated) 5--8 oz Galvanized iron 1`2-1o7 Lead. I/i' 6-8 PIQstiC ~andwich panel, 21/z" thick :2.6 ~hingles, a~ohalt 1.7-2.8 Shingles, wOod 2-3 Slate, 3/~1 ' to i/4 - 7-g.B Slate, a/i" to ~/2 °' 14-18 Stainless Steel 2.5 Tile, eament flat 13 Tile, cement ribbed 16 Tile, clay ~hingle type B-16 Tile, clay flat with letting bed 15-20 FLOOR AND ROOF (CONCRETE) Plank, cinder concrete, 2" I Plank, gypsum. 2" Concrete, reinforced. I°' Slone I Slag I Lk?lhtweight Cooorate. plain, 1" I Stone I Slag I Lightweight FUELS AND LIQUIDS 12.5 1 I.S 6-10 12 I1 3-8 PcP Coal. piled anthracite 47-58 Coal. piled bituminous 40-54 Ice 57,2 Gasoline 75 Snow 8 Water, fresh 62.4 Water. ~es 64 GLASS PSF Polarized plate, I/i' 3.28 Polished plate, 1/a" 6.56 Double strength, a/a' 26 oz Sheet A, S, ¥3s" 45 OZ ShMt A, 6, 1/4" S2OZ Wood ~heathing per inch ~E'OIL, SAND, AND GRAVe'L Clay, damp end plastic Clay, dry Clay end gravel, dry Earth. dry end loose Earth, d~ and packed Earth. moist end loose Earth. moist and packed Each, mud. packed .Sand or gravel, dry Ind loose Sand or gravel, dry and packed Sand or gravel, dry and wet S~It, moist, loose Silt, moist, pecked ~ETON E (ASHLARI Granite, limesrone, crystallinc Limestone, oolitic Marble Sandstone. bluestone Slate 2" granite. I/s" parging 4" granite, '~/~" parging 6" limestone lacing, 1/2" parging 4" lendstooe or bluestone, t/s" parging I" slate STRUCTURAL CLAY TILE 4" hollow 6" hollow 8" hollow STRUCTURAL FACING TILE 2" facing tde 4" facing tile 6" facing tile 8" facino' tile Mineral flbas tile =/a'. 12" x Mineral fiberboard e/a-, 24'x 24" Acoustic plaster on gypsum lath base Cedar, northern white Cypress. ~them Douglas fir Icoast region) Fir, commercial white; Idaho white pine Hemlock Maple, he'd (black and sugar) Oak, white and red Pine, northern white sugar Pine° southern yellow Poplar, yellow Redwood Walnut, black NOTE 100-120 ' / 78 ' !165 135 173 ;144 172 59 55 49 13 14 23 38 45 PSF 14 24 34 44 1.4 10-11 . 40.5 44 22.2 24.2 33.5 32.7 27 28-29 44.5 47.3 25 37,3 28.6 29.4 26 38 To establish uniform practice among dasignert, it ;' desirable to present a list of materials generally used in building construction, together with their prcpet weights. Many building codes prescribe the minimum weight~ of only a few building materials. It eould be noted that there is I difference of more than 25% in f, L & ir I0,( ~1_,000,1 WEIGHTS OF MATERIALS TERMINOLOGY' '2.1 Basic characterization of soil 2.1.1 Density. {¥d~ /-~Soil _ ' / Gravel and _sand ~ Silts and clays Typical densities for commonly -Yd (lb/ft3) ~ '~ 126- 13o ' 90- lOO : 20_~ . Normally, dry densities are used. in most calculations (¥d); howeveF, the total density of a soil.(i, ncluding moisture) can be calculated as follows: W Ytotal = Yd (1 + Ol-O-~) where w = moisture content of soil expressed as a percentage If a gravel, has a Yd = 130 lb/ft3 and w = 5%, then Yt = 130(1 + 5/100) = 136.5 lb/ft3.' 2.1.2 Moisture content (w). Soil moisture content can be calculated as follows: wt. of H~O in soil w(%) : wt. of soi.1 solids (100) , ~wt. of original sample) - (wt. dried sample) = (wt. of dried sample) (lO0) Typical Moisture Contents Material Gravel Sand Silts Clays Organic (peat) 2.2 'Thermal conductivity {k). .a thermal gradient. 'Units: 5-15 5-40 10-50 (or more) >50 Rate of heat flow through a unit area under BTU/hr · ft~ · °F/ft or BTU/hr · ft · °F. Refer to p. 4-2 for typical values. Futher, ksnow (loose) = 0.06, ksnow {compact) = 0.20. In ~he range of water contents {5-10%) and dry densities {125-135 lb/ft~} commonly encountered in embankments and pavement base courses, thermal conductivity is very sensitive to moisture content and soil type. ~ 2.3 Volumetric heat (C). Expresses the change in thermal energy in unit volume of soil per unit, change in temperature. Units: BTU/ft~ ~ °F. R.O.W. VARIES ' r-6 TYPE: ]Z- o ~ I \ t---2"/LC. PAVEMENT (CLASS C) I_'. ~~ ~~ _ _,~ ~~2" LEVELING COURSE [E) I .~~ ~ EXCAVATION- (S) (C) (D) (E) PAVEMENT PAVEMENT LIP E L. SACK WIDTH · C~G C~G C~G 20' I O' -0.~ -0.28 - 0.03 24' .I 2' - 0.24 - 0.32 - 0.07 ~' 18' -056 -0.~ -0.19 ' NOTES ~ I. A~ DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS ~ SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE TYPICAL BUT MAY VARY IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES AS SHOWN ON PLAN-PROFILE ~WINGS OR AS DETERMINED BY ~E ENGIN~R. ~ MATERIAL TO BE PLACED OR REMOVED AND GRADED IN A NEAT ~NNER FROM EX~VATION LIMITS TO ~ISTING ELEVATION AT P~PERTY LINE AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. (MAXIMUM- CUT AND FILL S~PES) ~ DEPTH OE ~VATION TO BE DE~ERMINED BY THE ENGINEER. 4. WHERE'SIDEWA~S ARE NOT CONSTRUCTED, SEE STANDARD D~AIL 20-3 FOR S~PING BE~EEN CURS AND P~PER~ LINE. [ ~N~SS OTHERWISE APPROVED, THE [ OF STRE~ WILL 8E THE % OF ~O.W. MUNICIPALLY 8C~ SE~ NTS · AND 3_6' STREETS ~~ 11/87 ' 20-2 ....................................... ALAS~ WATER' ' & WASTEWATER' .......................... 6901 ~R ~. SU~ 2B ~ ~ ~ 99~ ~ P~NE: (907)~7-6t79 ~ Y~: (~7}~-~246 * ~ ~wwc.~,,, ISOIL LOG - PERCO~TION TEST~ ..:... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N, R4W. SEC 9; SW4. SW4, NW4. P~CEL 1~ PERFORMED FOR: ~YNE · CAROUNE ~TCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 h~. "-. C~-~955 ..'" ........ DEPTH , _ _ __~ ~ Pro f e s ~o~ (~et),----.'~;=~; ORO~NICS ~TEST HOLE · LOT , SOIL C~SSIFICATIONS .-, .--, .-.~ GW ',~: ORG , ,, ;~ ~ GP~iHL ~-~ ' , ~ G~ ICL ~"-=~ ;:' ' GC ~OL s-~' ~ s~ ~1o, -', ~%'~ DEPTH TO DATE 7 -- ,, t'"' I GROUNDWATER 8- ;~)~ DRY 5/8/2002 · ?t-~~;~)~ OW DRY 5/14/2002; ,o- ',~)~ DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP 11 -- ~,:~ TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES). lB ~ B'O.H. PERCOLATION R~TE <~ (~IN./INCH) PERC. HOL~ DI~. ~ (INCHES) 19~ TEST RUN BETWEEN 5 FT. AND 6 FT. 20 A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: ~ YES ~ NO SOILS LOGGED BY: J~ON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY: JASON WOOD COHHENTS: I ' DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ALASKA WATER & ' 'ASTEWATER . it. i?..7.*.i' .... · ............ - CONSULTANTS, lNG.-"' ...................... '" .. ISOIL LOG - PERCO~TION TESTI ~l...~ V.. z~ ......... ,, LEG~ DESCRIPTION: T12N, R4W, SEC 9; SW4. SW4, NW4, PARCEL 1~ PERFORMED FOR: ~E · C~OUNE ~TCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 ~e '-.~~r/__ __ .'' EPTH ~ fee .... ORgANiCS ITEST HOLE ' LOT 2I ~~w '- 'o~ SM ~IGP ~ ML iGM CL ~ ~IGC OL I SW ~ MH ~1 SP CH sM OH DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ~ [SEE P~N ;~ 1 "= 100' 10 SP/SH DATE READING CLOCK NET TIHE WATER LEVEL NET DROP 11 TIHE (HINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE <1 (HIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) 19~~ TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 8 FT. 20~ A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: ~ YES ~ NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: JASON WOOD COHHENTS: PERFORMED BY AK~C, INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ THAT THIS WAS ~ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ALASKA WATER & ' VAS '-...w. ........ CONSULTANTS. INC.-- .... · ~- ~j.q.:..... '"'"~", LEG& DESCRIPTION: T12~,~4W. SEC~; SW4. S~4, NW4. PARCEL 1~ ORGANICS ITEST HOLE ' LOT 3 SH SP/SP1 LOOSER w/ DEPTH SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SW ~ ORG 3P HL GM CL GC OL SW HH SP CH SM OH SC DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIHE (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) SOILS LOGGED BY: COHHENTS: TEST RUN BETWEEN 6 FT. AND 7 FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: r--lYES JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: · NO JASON WOOD PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS,PErFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: ............................................................~.--- ...... -.. ,.. ~¢S f"l" ~ ~. ALASKA WATER & '~VAS"I'E'~ATER 4 8~01 DI~,t~R RO~)o SUIT[ 118 * /O~;HOR/~[, /~. ~¢$0~ * PHON~' (~01)337-$1~ * Ir~: (¢07)335--324~ · ~ ok~¢.¢om ISOIL LOG - PERCOLATION TESTI ~.., . PERFORMED FOR: LAYNE & CAROLINE RATCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 DEPTH ~ ===== (feet)!~E~ ORGANICS ITEST HOLE · LOT 4~ i,~, :i,: so~b CLASS~nCAT~0SS .~ , ,' ,.' :~..'::'.~/o'/., OW =--- OR(; _ , ,i'Ls~ ~ , , I', .::...',:.~. -:. rap I HI 3 ~, , '~ ,I ~' Ii:: GM i CL '...,' ~ SW MH 'o.. ', SP CH '1 .SC; 7--:00~o~o~ DEPTH TO ~o 0%° ~ GROUNDWATER DATE 30%0~00 3°~ °°°~ * 5/8/2002 8-- ~o%o*001 DRY ~°o ~"o° ~ SW ~o%o°0~ DRY 5/14/2002 ~o%oOoOi 1"=100'I 10 ~°o 0%° ~ i~::i:i::i DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP 11 -- TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) ::):::.', IsP 19-- "'~"'~'~' PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) ','*~":~'~, TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 8 FT. 20 B.O.ll. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: [] YES · NO SOILS LOGGED BY: JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: JASON WOOD COHHENTS: PERFORMED BY AFDC, INC. I, JEFFR~ A. GARNESS, CERTI~ THAT THIS WAS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 ALASKA WATER & · -0,~--~---,~-----~' -~,~=-~ CONSULTANTS, IN~C,.- 6901 ~R ~. SU~ 2B * ~ ~ 99~4 * P~N~ (g07)~7-6179 F~: (007)~8-~246 ~: ok~c.~m ~SOIL LOG - PERCO~TION TESTJ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12~,~4W, SE~9; SW4, S~4, NW4, PARCEL PERFORMED FOR: ~E · CAROLINE ~TCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 ORGANICS [TEST HOLE · LOT 5] SM SP/SM GW/SW SP SOILS LOGGED BY: COMMENTS: SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS GW ~ ORG GP ML GM CL GC OL SW MH SP CH SM OH SC DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 SITE PLAN 1"=100' DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE <1 (HIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 7 FT. AND 8 FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: r-lYES I NO JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY: JASON WOOD PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS _WA~; I~ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE:~1'~. I. OZ- 6901 DEJ~J~R RO.~. SUIT~ 28 * ANCHORAGE. ~K. 99~O4 * PHONr: (907)337-6179 * FA,K: (907),.~.~-3246 * 'WI~SITE: ola~wc.~m JSOIL LOG; - PERCOLATION TESTJ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N, R4W, SEC 9; SW4, SW4, NW4, PARCEL PERFORMED FOR: LAYNE & CAROUNE RATCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 , ORGANICS SM GW SP TEST HOLE · LOT 6J SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SOILS LOGGED BY: GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ORG ML CL OL MH CH OH DEPTH TO DATE GROUNDWATER DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/20g~ OF, ,~,,~_~..~..' ...... ~" .~I~ / ~0~".~ ~9s~ .." JSITE PLAN 1"=100' DATE READING CLOCK NET TIME WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIME (MINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE <1 (HIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 6 FT. AND 7 FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORHED: r-lYES J~NO JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORHED BY: JASON WOOD COMMENTS: PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS ~ERJ'ORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: SKA WATER & ' VAS'I E"6 ATER ............ ~. .... CON~S.U LTAN TS, IN,(;..' ............ ~'.~ ............. 6901 I3F..BA~R ROAD, SUi'~ 2B ANCHORAGE., .NC. 99504 PHON~ (907).~57-6179 FAX: (907)3.58-.3246 W[~SI'~: ok~wc.com JSOIL LOG - PERCOLATION TESTI LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T12N_R4W, SEC 9; SW4, SW4, NW4, PARCEL 12A ~ PERFORMED FOR: LAYNE & CAROLINE RATCLIFFE DATE: 5/7/2002 ORGANICS [TEST HOLE · LOT SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SH GW SP SOILS LOGGED BY: COHHENTS: GW ~ ORG GP HL GH CL GC OL SW HH SP CH SH OH SC DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DATE DRY 5/8/2002 DRY 5/14/2002 IsrrEPb~I 1 "= lOO' I DATE READING CLOCK NET TIHE WATER LEVEL NET DROP TIHE (HINUTES) READING (INCHES) PERCOLATION RATE <1 (MIN./INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES) TEST RUN BETWEEN 6.5 FT. AND 7.5 FT. A FOUR HOUR PRESOAK WAS PERFORMED: DYES I NO JASON WOOD PERCOLATION TEST PERFORMED BY' JASON WOOD PERFORMED BY AKWWC, INC. I, JEFFREY A. GARNESS, CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS F/ERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE AND MUNICIPAL GUIDELINES IN EFFECT ON THIS DATE: 06/..10/2002 10:21 FAX 5614862 · II ~1 ~1~1 Alaska 'l'estlab I1~ I.- 012/012 06/10/2002 10:21 FAX 5614862 Alaska T(;stlab ¢. ~ ~ o.. ~ ~ .o_ c o g E.~._. o ,.o o o o c o o o ol ~1 I::1 z z z z z z z z z z Zl~-IOl CD 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 CZ) [~011/012 06/10/2002 10:20 FAX 5614862 A I a s ka T('. s t I ab 010/012 c~ ~ O~ ~ F' ~,.. ! I£ 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 CD CD 0 CD CZ:) O) OD ~ LO LO '~' r9 ~ CZ} CZ} _.m @ 0 0 I 0 I.,. 0 r' ,4-1 I. 0 0 06910/2002 10:20 FAX 5614862 Alaska T(:stlab ~009/012 ~4o .... I ................ 06(.10/2002 10:19 FAX 5614862 o i l,,i Alaska Testlab -#20{ ................ ttlOOd i ~-: .-.-~U.Z ..~.._7. 7. S 0 0 < 1~008/012 06/10/2002 10:19 FAX 5614562 Alaska Testlab ,, t ............ ~ ..........;:~--.-~' _._,,,. ~ ~ _-7.__-:.1 ~7_- ', _..~_..: 2 ........ i ............................................ ~007/012 06(.10/2002 10:19 FAX 50148(~2 A I aska T(.'s t 1 ab ~/ o '~ o o o o o o o° ° P-IZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ o #100 #60 /140 #20 #10 #4 ~qg!gA'~ Xq ~u!s~d lua,a~d <~ @ ~]006/012 ! 0 · 0 <r L- o O L_ ~ rn 06/.,10/2002 10:18 FAX 5614~(~2 A 1 n s k a '1'~; s t I a b I 1/2 0 0 C) C) 0 C) 0 0 C) 0 0 ltlgPA% Aq gu!ssed luo~aOd 005/012 0 · 0 ! C) 0 L- r- 06/1072002 10:18 FAX 5614562 Alaska 'l'(;st lab d ~ d d d d d d d d d #4 ..... -' #20 , ~ .............................. : #10 I '"~, #4 .................................... 3/8" - ................. - ..... 1/2 ............ 3/4" I ~,._~ .......................... .... ~_-"--_' 2._-~: CD CD C) CD CD C~ CZ) C) CD C:~ C) CD CD CO I'-- Cf) tr) ,~' CO C'q CD C~ CD <( ~]004/012 o I · O m r'- 06/,10/2002 10:18 FAX 561486'2 ~ /~1,,i ~ ~ ~ /~1~1 Alaska Testlab E C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C:) 0 0 003/012 0 .C r~ r-.. r- 06/10/2002 10:17 FAX 5614862 0 n Alaska Testlal) 002/012 ! I/ 2 iLI~!OM, ,(q '~u!sscd lUaa.Ja8 Municipality of Anchorage Development Services Department Building Safety Di~qsion MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 1, 2002 Jerry T. Weaver, Jr., Platting Officer, CPD ., es Cross, PE, Program Manager, On-Site Water & Wastewater Comments on Cases due April 12, 2002 0893:-2 S- 10914 The On-Site Water & Wastewater Program has reviewed the following cases and has these comments: T12N, R4W, SEC 9, Parcel 12A / Ratcliffe Subdivision2 il' NO additional comments.~ Third Addition Subdivision (With Vacations). No objections. ¸%. Mum 'ci.p ty '-,Anchorage P;Oi Box'.1966~0 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650' Telephone: (907) 343-4309 Fax:' (907) 343-4220' hffp://www, ci.anchorage.ak.us 'George P.' Wuerch, Mayor DEPARTME~IT OF PLANNING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON. PRELIMINARY PLATSUBDIVISIONS March 27, 2002 The Municipality of Anchorage has received application relating to the following prelimina~ plat activity. The headng date is WedneSday, May 01,2002 and : comments must reach our office by Fdday, Apdl 12, 2002 in order to be included in the staff=conditions of approval. ' .. S10893-2 T12N, R4W, Section 9, Parcel 12A/RatCliffe Subdivision · .- *SPECIAL ROUTING*~ S-10893 HEARD ~-3-02 PLATTING BOARD S~10893-2 IS FOR VACATION. ONLy Attacnea are cop~es or me proposecl plats. Please suumity°ur comments in writing,' specifying any easements or other requirements that you department or agency, may need. 'If no easements are required at this time, please provide a list of those Plats to which there is "no comment" or '.'.no objection". Sincerely,. Jerry T. Weaver, Jr Platting Officer Enclosures .. VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT APPLICATION Municipality of Anchorage DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING P.O. Box 6650 Anchorage, Alaska 99502-0650 A. Please fill in the information requested below. Print one letter or number per block. Do not write in the shaded blocks. 0. Case Number (IF KNOWN). 1. Vacation Code Tax I.D. Number Isl~ Iol'~l'~bl- ~-- I,.1: I :1 I:1:'1 ~ Iol~l~J:ly:l~il 1~1'-/! Abbreviated Description of Vacation (EAST 200 FEET SOME STREET). I,',,I,:.1~1'~1,-'1 I~1ol I-I~l~kl Isl~l','.l 1~,4~'~1 I,..,l~l'~',J I~hl t-rl,lzl~l~gl~ Existing Abbreviated legal description (T12N R2W SEC 2 LOT 45 OR SHORT SUB BLK 3 LOT 34). I II!/|"'1 'i ! I:~1 ..I~ I~11 ~1 ~1 I'1 I.'1~ ~1' 1'~1 III '1 I~t~1 I t:~ I~1~1 Petitioner's Name (Last- First). I '1 I-'./~ I' II I~ I'1 ~1~'~1:1 '! I I~'!'1 '1 I Address: city: A,~-~ Zip Code: Petitioner's Representative. I~l~'l~l-~l~d I,l~dlllllllllllll I :1 I I:1:1 I~! I:.1. I.I ~.1 I .I I-:1: I/.i~ I"1 ::1:' I State: Phone No. ~c"/ Address: ~..[0"~. (--\'~-.'~-~.~G~, ~-~--~, City: A ~ c.~,~c',." ~ ~-~ State: Zip Code:C~c~ ~' 1,'""/ Phone No. ~-,--~ '~ o Petition Area Acreage. IIII I~- I( Iol 7. Proposed Number Lots. 8. Existing Number Lots. II I:1 9. Wdtten Justification. 10. Gdd Number. 11. Zone. 12. Fees i;;~j~,,bc:' 13. Community Council ---~,:x,.~o~, L~ B. I hereby certify that (I am) (I have been authorized to act for) the owner of the property described above and that I desire to vacate it in conformance with Chapter 21 of the Anchbrage Municipal Code of Ordinances. I understand that payment of the basic vacation fee is nonrefundable and is to cover the costs associated with processing this application, that it does not assure approval of the vacation. I also understand that additional fees may be assessed if the Municipality's cost to process this application exceed the basic fee. I further understand that assigned headng dates are tentative and may have to be postponed by Planning Staff, Platting Board, Planning Commission, or the Assembly due to administrative reasons. Date: 20-019 (Rev. 4,/92)" Front *Agents must provide written proof or authoriza ~nt~.~ Please check or fill in the following: 1. Comprehensive Plan - Land Use Classification ~' Residential [] Marginal Land [] Commemial [] Commercial/Industrial [] Parks/Open Space [] Public Lands/Institutions [] Transportation Related 2. comprehensive Plan - Land Use Intensity: Dwelling Units per Acre: [] Special Study [3 Alpine/Slope Affected [] Alpine/Slope Affected [] Industrial [] Special Study 3. Environmental Factors (if any): a. Wetland 1:3 ~ 1. Developable .,~ 2. Conserva~erf [] 3. Preservation 1:3 · b. Avalanche El c. Floodplain O d. Seismic Zone (Harding/Lawson) D. Please indicate below if any of these events have occurred in the last three years on the property. 0 [] 0 Rezoning ' Case Nu/~r: Subdivision ~,~Number: ,,..~"- \l~<~bC~...~ Lf I_~ - '~ - O ~,.._~ Conditional UseJ Case Number: Zoning Va,~e Case Number: Enfo,~ent Action FOL__ BLUing/Land Use Permit For E. Legal Description for Advertising, F. Checklist [] 30 Copies of Plat [] Reduced Copy of Plat (8 1/2 x 11) [3 Certificate of Plat [] Fee El Topo Map 3 Copies El Soils Report 4 Copies El Aerial Photo [] Housing Stock Map O Zoning Map [:3 Water: 1:3 Private Wells El Sewer: [] Private Septic 20-019 (Rev. 4/92)* Back Waiver El Community Well El Community Systems [] Public Utility [] Public Utility 04/.11/02 11:37 FAX 907 343 4220 Community Planning CROSS ~013/022 Platting Board Summary of Act/on April 3, 2OO2 Page 7 Approval of thc plat subject to: 1, Resolving utility easements. 2. Entering into a subdivision agreement for the following: Construction of the interior unnamed cul-de-sac to Municipal standards. Construct/on of the interior trail to Municipal standards. Street name signs, street lighting and traffic control devises. d. Drainage. e. Mainlinc water extension. Providing a site grading and drainage plan for the development to Project Management and Engin~ for approval. Resolving the need for drainage improvements and drainage easements with Project Management and Engineering. Providing an erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to Project Management and Engineering for approval. 6. Showing the radius of cul-de-sac bulb. Providing a trail cascment from Jodhpur Street to the east property line, width and location to be within the 7O-foot right-of-way. Providing a trail casement along the west boundary of thc subdivision, exact width and location to be resolved with Parks and Beatification. 04/11/02 11:37 FAX 90? 343 4220 Co~u~unltF Plannlng ~ CROSS ~014/022 Platting Board Sumwmry of Action April 3.2002 Page 8 e 10. Resolving the following with Development services: ao Street Names: While the street name 'Proposed" is technically acceptable according to Municipal Code. the type "Street" is incorrect. This cul-de- sac shall be designated a Circle. Please provide an actual, proposed streetmamc for this Circle! be Map Information: The subdivision east of' thc proposed platted area is Skyhills Phase I {plat 99-54), Lots 3-6, Block 1. Also. please label the subdivision name of Campbell Point (plat 66-78), south of the proposed platted area. Providing Development Services, On Site Division, the foUowing information: Softs testing, percolation testing and /;round water monitoring must be conducted to confirm thc suitability for development using on-site wastewater disposal systems. Ground water monitoring must be conducted during high water season in either the fall (October) or spring (April- May). Areas dcsignated for thc original and replacement wastewater disposal system site must be identified and must meet all criteria specified in AMC 15.65, including slope and slope setback requirements. c. Topographical informaUon must be submitted. 11. Placing thc following notes on'the plat: "Thc subject property is located within the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport's 60-65 LDN noise contour and is subject to present and future airport noise which may be bothersome to users of the property. These noisc contours are based on average annual aircraft noise levels; during times when aircraft are overflying this area the actual noise exposure may exceed these levels. These noise impacts may change over 04/11/02 11:38 FAX 907 343 4220 Community Plannlng ~ CROSS ~015/022 Platting Board Summary of Action Ap~l s, 2002 Page 9 be time by virtue off greater numbers of aircraft departures and arrivals; louder aircraft; seasonal and time-of-day operational var/ations; changes in airport, aircraft and air traffic control operating procedures; airport layout changes; and changes in the property owners personal perceptions of the noise exposure and his/her sensitivity to aircraft noise." Direct vehicular access to Jodhpur Street is prohibited from Lot 1 and Lot 8 shall be limited to its current driveway location onto Jodhpur Street. Direct vehicular access to Heather Circle and Walker Circle Street is prohibited from any lot within this subdivision. 8-10890 Barrett Estates Sulgli~ion - with Variances Postponed to the May 1, 2002 Platting Board meeting. S-10894 The Foothills Subdivision -- ~wlth ValS_~ee Approval of the variance from AMC 21.85.070.B.2 (Table A) to not dedicate five additional feet of right-of-way along Casner Court (Giddeon Circle) and State Street. Approval of the plat subject to: 1, Resolving utility easements. Showing the five foot storage easement along thc east side of Lot 6B and along the south sides of Lots 6A and 6B. Correcting the street name of Casner Court to Giddeon Circle on the plat and In plat note # 1. Correcting the subdiv/sion name to the north to read Carolyn ~cres Subdivision.