Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Permit #290 - 1025 OSGOOD STREET 10/12/2006 C , TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER APPLICATION FOR PLAN EXAMINATION o*No oT"Ju qti t, o o41 i p Permit NO: 4�/� Date Received ' e,« Date Issued: 00 9SSACHU`��� IMPORTANT: Applicant must complete all items on this page le®$, 1ro7� ioo9 LOCATION _ oSC 0 U / Sy Print PROPERTY OWNER (9 IR {�i ?L' � I r�G- 4k L Print MAP NO.: 2i PARCEL: J ZONING DISTRICT: (5:6 TYPE AND USE OF BUILDING HISTORIC DISTRICT YES ❑ TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED USE Residential Non- Residential )('New Building ❑ One family ❑ Addition ❑ Two or more family ❑ Industrial ❑ Alteration No. of units: ❑ Repair, replacement ❑ Assessory Bldg ❑ Commercial ❑ Demolition ❑ Moving(relocation) ❑ Other ❑ Others: ❑ Foundation only DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE PREFORMED +� ---A I I A) - S 0/4 L , Identification Please Type or Print Clearly) �) OWNER: Name: C-M&:S: a N y's C J�ZSS/N Cr 1, C Phone: Address: j fl b U L/c;2 g il�Alf��J 5 M l CONTRACTOR Name:_ 5 S C:0 nl,5sa U G T ( b ri Phone: Address: (cj �T�oF'r�,e a5- -:5 1— ,TQ M Supervisor's Construction License:_ Exp. Date: ILI 10 2 Home Improvement License: Exp. Date: Ja -7 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Name: Phone: Address: Reg.No. FEE SCHEDULE:BULDING PERMIT:$12.00 PER$1000.00 OF THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST BASED ON$125.00 PER S.F. Total Project Cost :$ `m 00o— FEE:$ A, P00 Check No.: Receipt No.: Page I of 4 i TYPE OF SEWERAGE DISPOSAL Swimming Pools ❑ Tanning/Massage/Body Art r] Public Sewer Tobacco Sales ❑ Food Packaging/Sales ❑ Well ❑ ❑ Permanent Dumpster on Site Private(septic tank,etc. ❑ Electric Meter location to project NOTE: Persons contracting with unregistered contractors do not have access to the guaranty fund Signature of Agent/Owner Signature of contractor Plans Submitted ❑ Pla s Waived ❑ Certified Plot Plan ❑ Stam ed Plans ❑ THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY INTERDEPARTMENTAL SIGN OFF- U FORM DATE REJECTED DATE APPROVED PLANNING DEVELOP ENT ❑ ��a�/oaf COMMENTS Ju /64 axle-Y4��df.ti,�.���,,, � Pas-A• -ze b,,I ' f ,� ✓4z Go ��r�J�.t - SI,-' �sfP DATE REJECTED DATE APPROVE CONSERVATION ❑ ❑ �` COMMENTS -�,��,�-�t -+� •, �' �S rh c f DATE REJECTED DATE APPROVED HEALTH ❑ ❑ COMMENTS FIRE DEPARTMENT - Temp Dumpster on site yes no Fire Department signature/date COMMENTS Zoning Board of Appeals: Variance, Petition No: Zoning Decision/receipt submitted yes Planning Board Decision: Comments Conservation Decision: Comme is Water&Sewer connection/Si nature& D- -/�'PoDrivewa Permit N n 10-o-�,6 Building Setback (ft.) Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Require LProvided Required Provides Required Provided / / Dimension Number of Stories:Total square feet of floor area, based on Exterior dimensions.` 00 Total land area, sq. ft.: a A NOTES and DATA—(For department use) Page 3 of 4 Doc:INSPECTIONAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT:BPFORM05 Created JMC.Jan.2006 Building Department The following is a list of the required forms to be filled out for the appropriate permit to be obtained. Roofing� Siding, Interior Rehabilitation rtat>on Permits ❑ Building Permit Application ❑ Workers Comp Affidavit ❑ Photo Copy Of H.I.C. And/Or C.S.L. Licenses ❑ Copy of Contract ❑ Floor Plan Or Proposed Interior Work Addition Or Decks ❑ Building Permit Application ❑ Surveyed Plot Plan ❑ Workers Comp Affidavit ❑ Photo Copy of H.I.C. And C.S.L. Licenses ❑ Copy Of Contract ❑ Floor/Crossection/Elevation Plan Of Proposed Work With Sprinkler Plan And Hydraulic Calculations (If Applicable) ❑ Mass check Energy Compliance Report (If Applicable) New Construction (Single and Two Family) ❑ Building Permit Application ❑ Certified Proposed Plot Plan ❑ Photo of H.I.C. And C.S.L. Licenses ❑ Workers Comp Affidavit ❑ Two Sets of Building Plans (One To Be Returned) to Include Sprinkler Plan And Hydraulic Calculations (If Applicable) ❑ Copy of Contract ❑ Mass check Energy Compliance Report in all cases if a variance or special permit was required the Town Clerks office must stamp the decision from the Board of Appeals that the appeal period is over. The applicant must then get this recorded at the Registry of Deeds. One copy and proof of recording must be submitted with the building application Doc:INSPECTIONAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT:BPFORM05 Page 4 of 4 i Location/MC/0,0'4. /1111 t aj5a No. Q ' Datea Y� NORTh TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER to 3O 1 AL A Certificate of Occupancy $ 4- sACNUS t� Building/Frame Permit Fee $ 9 Foundation Permit Fee $ ,✓0 n Other Permit Fee $ TOTAL $ Check # 19683 �''` Building Inspector NORTH Town of19 Andover No. z= = dover, Mass.,/—D,'/­ 2,,-0A C OC HICMEWICK y1. �d AORATED S BOARD OF HEALTH PERMIT T D Food/Kitchen Septic System • BUILDING INSPECTOR 541owr THIS CERTIFIES THAT..... .. ..............atv ...... 0Ji�� .........IX...c................................... Foundation has permission to erect........................................ buildings or lQ �.../..0.iQ��../.Q.Q.,f*.......40-JJ- 4110 �r Rough to be occupied as../V4W......��ir., i./..L......ewlltytu.... ..... ..�.1 ....AWId�. Chimn y eprovided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respecor the terms of the applicatioa/o in Final this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of Buildings in the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. Rough Final 900 qo� PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR UNLESS CONSTRUCTION STARTS Rough .... ... Service ,00 B G INSPECTOR Final Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building GAS INSPECTOR Rough Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Final No Lathing or Dry Wall To BeDone FIRE DEPARTMENT Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. Burner Street No. SEE REVERSE SIDE Smoke Det. Maugel Architects Inc. Construction Control Affidavit October 3, 2006 Project Location: Retail Building 1025 Osgood Street North Andover, MA 01845 In accordance with section 116.0 of the Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR, I, Brent A. Maugel, Registration No. 5554, being a registered professional architect hereby certify that I have directly supervised the preparation of all design plans, and construction documents for the above named project and that, to the best of my knowledge, such plans meet the applicable provisions of the Massachusetts State Building Code and the Americans with Disabilities Act. All acceptable engineering practices and all applicable laws and ordinances for the proposed use and occupancy will be adhered to. I further certify that Maugel Architects, Inc. will perform the necessary professional services on the construction site to determine that the work will be done in accordance with the documents approved for the building permit. 0--, - ?A, - eqWilt 5 rent A. Maug I A.I.A. Date Maugel Architects, 200 Ayer Road, Harvard, MA 01451 Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Worcester On this 13 rJ day of, O�l((— V O Le� 20 O6 ,before me,the undersigned Notary Public,personally appeared Brent A. Maugel A.I.A.,proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification,which wasAmere personal knowledge,to be the person(s)whose name(s)isA-re signed on the preceding or attached document in my presence,and who swore or affirmed to me that the contents of the document are truthful and wa a to the best of his/her knowledge and belief. Signature of Notary My commission expires 3 1 Zs y: J. HOFM.a...G� p.9y PU6 . 0140464640 Maugel Architects Inc. 200 Ayer Road Harvard,MA 01451 t:978-456-2800 f:978-456-2801 www.maugel.com Uct 1 1 UE; 02: 1'/p R i vermoor Lng 1 neer i ng 'All -•b44-'/'?23 p . 1 I E RIVERMOOR ENGINEERING, 1.l.0 PROFE55IONAL ENGINEERS niyEnMOORJ STRUCTURAL DESIGN AFFIDAVIT Name of Building: Osgood Retail Building Project Location: 1025 Osgood Street North Andover,MA Scope of Project: New Building To the Building Inspector of the Town of North Andover,MA; in accordance with 80 CMR—sixth edition,I,Peter J Falk,being a registered structural engineer,certi that in accordance with Section 116,Y have supervised the preparation of the Structure design drawings,details and specifications issued on October 3rd of this year 2006. To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, such design,details and specifications meet the applicable provisions of the Massachusetts State Building C de, acceptable engineering practices and applicable laws and ordinances for the propos d use and occupancy_ Authorized representatives of Rivermeo3r Engineering;will be present on the construction site periodically to determine that the work proceeds in accordance widi the construction documents. Copies of our site observation reports will be submitted to the Architect of Record for forwarding to the office of the Building Inspector. ►�♦ IH OF s= PETER J. 4®r) U STRUCTURAL y NO.43315 Q � �SSlONAtE�'��4 i,��✓ •�'"�- rte• Signature Seal: On this If _qday,"of •1—b&r before me, 6�..ry . .a NotaryPubli duly appeared' ' being duly sworn,deposes and#dys that the above statements by him/her are true. ; -'P�flglilllglt//� I otary Public) s My Commission expires: ,C C '•: . �IN`PLACE SCITUATE, mA 02066 TEL. (781)545-2848 • FAX(781)544-77.29 CONTRACTOR: Soli Exploration Lcominstor, MA UTS of Massachusetts, Inc. BORING N0: B-5 5 Richardson Lane SHEET: 1 OF FOREMAN: Eric Pope Stoneham, MA 02180 DATE: START: Sept 18, 2006 FINISH: Sept 18, 2006 TEST BORING LOG PREPARED BY: RIG: Mobile B57 PROJECT: PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING CHECKED BY: Kevin Martin, P.E. LOCATION: 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS CORE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS 0 FIELD TESTING EQUIPMENT AUGER CASING SAMPLER BAR DATE 09/18 0 LABORATORY TYPE HSA SS ___- DEPTH (FT) 3' TESTING SIZE ID (IN) 4;1 2.0 CASING AT (FT) n a 0 MONITORING WELL HAMMER WT (LB) 140 BIT TIME (HR) 0.1 INSTALLED HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 0 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 0 0 LIQUID INTRODUCED DURING DRILLING LOCATION OF BORING: See Sketch GROUND SURFACE ELEV.: -124 f ti FT SAMPLE DATA SOIL AND ROCK CLASSIFICATION-DESCRIPTION STRA2IM NOTES B=%== SYSTEM (SOIL) CHANGE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SYSTEM (ROCK) NO. DEPTH REC. BLOWS (IN) 6 IN. Sl -2 6 5-5Brn, f-m SAND, little Gravel, little Silt (FILL) 2 -4 6 5-6Brn, f-m SAND, some/little Gravel 6 Silt, damp/wet (FILL) r 6-5 5 S3 5-7 Brn, f-m SAND, some Silt, little Gravel, Cobbles, wet 4 I jor � 10 EEt(s„t)tt t))s s SA 10-11 4 73 Grey, weathered, shaley Bedrock (Weathered Ledge) Auger Refusal at 12 ft - BEDROCK 15 20 25 RELATIVE DENSITY NOTES: GRAmmM SOI).S(Blows/ft) O to 4 vary IAOga 4 to 10 Loose 10 to 30 N.adiu..n Danse BORING NO. B-5 30 to 5o Dense Over 50 Very Donna RELATIVE CONSISTENCY Standard Penetration Test (SPT) = 140# hammer falling 30" (ASTM D1586) coNrs"r Soil (slows/ft) Blows are per 6" taken with an 24" long x 2" O.D. x 1 3/8" Z.D. split spoon sampler unless noted. o to 2 very soft S = Split-Spoon Sample; C = Rock Core Sample; U = Undisturbed Shelby Tube Sample 2 to 4 Soft 4 to 8 Nadi= stiff 8 to 15 stiff REMARKS: The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil types and the ito30 Nara stiff transition may be gradual. Water level readings have been made in the test borings at times and Overunder conditions stated on the test boring logs. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to other factors than those present at the time measurements were made. Proportions used: trace (0-10%), little (10-20%), some (20-35-%) and (35-508) / CONTRACTOR: Soli Exploration Corp �—� BORN^ N Leominster, MA UTS of Massachusetts, Inc. � o: B-< 5 Richardson Lane SHEET: 1 OF 1 FOREMAN: Eric Pope Stoneham, MA 02180 DATE: START; Sept 18, 2006 I FINISH; Sept 18, 2006 TEST ,BORING LOG PREPARED BY: RIG: Mobile B57 PROJECT: PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING CHECKED BY: Kevin Martin, P.E, LOCATION: 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS CORE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS ❑ FIELD TESTING EOUIPMENT AUGER CASING SAMPLER BAR DATE 09/18 ❑ LABORATORY TYPE HSA SS DEPTH (FT) 3' TESTING SIZE ID (IN) 414 2.0 CASING AT (FT) n a 0 MONITORING WELL HAM!-MR WT (LB) 140 BIT TIME (HR) 3 INSTALLED HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 D NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED p D LIQUID INTRODUCED DURING DRILLING LOCATION OF BORING: Seo Sketch GROUND SURFACE ELEV.: -124 ft3 FT SAMPLE DATA SOIL AND ROCK CLASSIFICATION-DESCRIPTION SrPATM4 NOTES BVRMISTER SYSTEM (SOIL) c)u�cs U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SYSTEM (ROCK) NO. DEPTH REC. BLOWS (IN) 6 IN, Sl -2 7 5-5 Brn, f-m SAND, little Gravel, little Silt (FILL) , -1 S2 2-4 7- Brn, f-m SAND, some Gravel, little Silt, damp/wet 19-24 5 S3 5-7 1-8, 13-14 Brn, f-m SAND, some Silt, little Gravel, Cobbles, wet Q S/ 4 Grey, weathered, shaley Bedrock (Weathered Ledge) q ' 100111, 10 VO/lit Auger Refusal at 9 ft - BEDROCK 15 20 25 RELATIVE DENSITY NOTES: GRANULAR SOILS(Slous/ft) O to 4 Very Looso 4 to 10 L0000 10 to 30 Modiva Denso BORING NO. B-4 30 to 50 Dons* ovar 50 Vary Dons* RELATIVE CONSISTENCY Standard Penetration Teat (SPT) = 140# hammer failing 30" (ASTM D1586) COKSSIVs SOILS (Blows/ft) Blows are per 6" taken with an 24" long x 2" O.A. x 1 3/8" I.D. split spoon sampler unless noted, o to 2 Vary Soft S = Split-Spoon Sample; C = Rock Core Sample; U = Undisturbed Shelby Tube Sample 2 to 4 Soft 4 to 8 Medium Stiff e to 15 Stiff REMARKS: The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil types and the 15 to 30 very Stiff transition may be gradual, water level readings have been made in the test borings at times and Ovar 3o Itard under conditions stated on the test boring logs. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to other factors than those present at the time measurements were made. Proportions used, trace (0-10%), little (10-20*o), some (20-35%) and (3S-508) CONTRACTOR: So:`_ Exploration COXA 1 'T C ()f i`'t1$S1CLl1)SCtts, TSO.. BORIVG NO: P-3 Leominster, 2-n, 1 1 :7 1 1 5 Richardson Lane SHEET: 1 OF / FOREMAN: Eric Pope Stoneham, MA 02180 DATE: START: Sept 18, 2006 FINISH: Sept 18, 2006 TEST BORING LOG PREPARED BY: RIG: Mobile B57 PROJECT: PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING CHECKED BY: Kevin Martin, P.E. LOCATION: 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS CORE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS 0 FIELD TESTING EOUIPMEN�T AUGER CASING SAMPLER BAR DATE 09/18 0 LABORATORY TYPE HSA SS DEPTH (FT) 2' TESTING SIZE ID (IN) 44 2.0 CASING AT (FT) n a 0 MONITORING WELL HAMMER SA'T (LB) 140 BIT TIME (HR) 3 INSTALLED HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 0 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 0 0 LIQUID INTRODUCED DURING DRILLING LOCATION OF BORING: See Sketch GROUND SURFACE ELEV.: 4124 ftt FT SAMPLE DATA SOIL AND ROCK CLASSIFICATION-DESCRIPTION STNATDY NOTES BURMISTER SYSTEM (SOIL) CK"GE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SYSTEM (ROCK) NO. DEPTH REC. BLOWS/ (IN) 6 IN. Dark Brn, f-m SAND, little Gravel, little Silt (FILL) _ 9-10 -4 16 8-17 Brn, f-m SAND & GRAVEL, little Silt, wet 31-28 5 S3 5-7 Brn, f-m SAND, some Silt, little Gravel, Cobbles, wet 10 4 - -02 Grey, weathered, shaley Bedrock (Weathered Ledge) 7171fM-1 1"1)(X111 100/21, W Auger Refusal at 12 Pt - BEDROCK 15 20 25 RELATIVE DENSITY NOTES: CRAItULNi SOILS(Dloes/ft) O to 4 Very Loose 4 to 10 Loose 10 to 30 YNdi%=Dense BORING NO. B-3 30 to 50 Dense Over 50 Vary Donso RELATIVE CONSISTENCY Standard Penetration Test (SPT) = 1401 hammer falling 30" (ASTM D1586) CoasslVL; SOILS (Blows/ft) Blows are per 6" taken with an 24" long x 2" O.D. x 1 3/8" I.D. split spoon sampler unless noted. 0 to 2 VQ 2 to 4 Soft Soft S = Sp1it-Spoon Sample; C = Rock Core Sample; U = Undisturbed Shelby Tube Sample 4 to a badium stiff e to 15 Stiff REMARKS: The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil types and the IOverto30o VVaory Stiff transition may be gradual. Water level readings have boon made in the test borings at times and under conditions stated on the test boring logs. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to other factors than those present at the time measurements were made. Proportions used: trace (0-109), little (10-209), some (20-354) and (35-509) CONTRAC:t'OR: Soil Exploration Corp li'SS of Massachusetts, �IZC. BORING NO: 5-2 Leominster, MIAUrs Richardson Lane SHEET: 1 OF FOREMAN: Eric Pope Stoneham, MA 02180 DATE: START: Sept 18, 2006 FINISH: Sept 18. 2006 TEST BORING LOG PREPARED BY: RIG: Mobile 857 PROJECT: PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING CHECKED BY: Kevin Martin, P.E. LOCATION: 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS CORE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS 0 FIELD TESTING EOUIPMENT AUGER CASING SAMPLER BAR DATE 09/1 0 LABORATORY TYPE HSA SS DEPTH (FT) 3' TESTING SIZE ID (IN) 414 2.0 CASING AT (PT) n a 0 N.ONITORING WELL HAMMER WT (LB) 140 BIT TIME (HR) 5 INSTALLED HAMMER FALL (IN) 30 0 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED q D LIQUID INTRODUCED DURING DRILLING LOCATION OF BORING: See Sketch GROUND SURFACE ELEv.: 1124 fti FT SAMPLE DATA SOIL AND ROCK CLASSIFICATION-DESCRIPTION S +k• NOTES BURMISTER SYSTEM (SOIL) ClutcE U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SYSTEM (ROCK) NO. DEPTH REC. BLOWS (IN) 6 IN. Brn, f-m SAND, little Gravol, little Silt (FILL) 0-10 -4 is 12-18 Rust Brn, f-m SAND, some Gravel, little Silt, Cobbles, damp 5 S3 5-7 28 22-21Brn, f-m SAND, some Gravel, little Silt, Cobbles, wet 22-25 10 Grey, weathered, shaley Bedrock (Weathered Ledge) Auger Refusal at 12 ft - BEDROCKF1 '`( WG 15 20 25 RELATIVE DENSITY NOTES: GRA.N'UI.AR SOILS(810w8/ft) O to 4 vary Loon* 4 to 10 Loose to to 30 I:adiva.Dons* BORING NO. B-2 30 to 50 Donsa Over 50 vary Donne RELATIVE CONSISTENCY Standard Penetration Test (SPT) = 140N hammer falling 30" (ASTM D1586) coyrsrvr. soils (Dlovs/ft) Blows are per 6" taken with an 24" long x 2" O.D. x 1 3/8" I.D. split spoon sampler unless noted. o to 2 vary Soft S = Split-Spoon Sample; C = Rock Core Sample; U = Undisturbed Shelby Tube Sample 2 to 4 soft t0 8 madiwft Stiff a to 15 Stiff REMARKS: The stratification lines represent the apVary proximate pproximate boundary between soil types and the 15to330 Hn d Stiff transition may be gradual. Water level readings have been made in the test borings at times and O�arunder conditions stated On the test boring logs. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur duo to other factors than those present at the time measurements were made. Proportions used: trace (0-106), little (10-206), some (20-35%) and (35-506) I/ + �VTI 1� CT A OB2 Ix 3 2 .90 ......... OB4 err 1RE MY-128.0 126.50 O vD\ C126.61) B5 OSE DOG j 9B3 m8l. cr S 739.90 1. St. 136AO 1.35 BI 3.27 44Y n 135. 135.5o F 136.00 EL.- PwF '.3+' n :38.00 / 73g /..,> ' -• - 't3J.15 P OF POLE CV,-172.6 ,it TEST BORING LOCATION-PLAN PROPOSED RETAIL BUILDING 1025 OSGOOD STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MASS Table 1 Proposed Building 1025 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Recommended Soil Gradation & Com,paetion Specifications Common Fill SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT 6-8 inch 100 3/4 inch 60-100 No. 4 20-85 No. 200 0-25 NOTE: For use as roadway embankment fill is deep pavement areas. Maximum stone size should be 2/3 the maximum lift thickness Compact to at least 92%relative compaction per ASTM D1557 Granular Fill & Structural Fill placed beneath the foundation should include the Footing Zone of Influence which is defined as that area extending laterally one foot from the edge of the footing then outward and downward ata 1 H:1 V splay. Structural Fill&Common Fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches for heavy vibratory rollers and 8 inches for vibratory plate compactors. All the fill on the project should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Test(ASTM-D1557). The fill shall be compacted within t2 of the optimum moisture content. The adequacy of the compaction efforts should be verified by field density testing which is also a requirement of the State Building Code. Table 1 Proposed Building 1025 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Recommended Soil Gradation & Compaction Specifications I Ir�� 111 Y I 1��II I I Clean Granular Fill (Select Gravel Fill) SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT 3 inch 100 3/4 inch 60-90 No. 4 20-70 No. 200 2-8 NOTE: For minimum 8-inch base below Concrete Floor Slab-on-Grade For minimum 12-inch base for exterior concrete slabs exposed to frost For 18-inch gravel drainage base behind unbalanced foundation walls Compact to at least 95%relative compaction per ASTM D 1557 Structural Fill Gravel Borrow SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT 5 inch 100 3/4 inch 60-100 No. 4 20-75 No. 200 0-12 NOTE: For use as structural load support below the foundations For use as backfill behind unbalanced foundation/retaining walls A3/4-inch crushed stone may be used in wet conditions Compact to at least 95%relative compaction per ASTM D1557 LIMITATIONS Explorations 1. The analyses,recommendations and designs submitted in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from preliminary subsurface explorations. The nature and extent of variations between these explorations may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. 2. The generalized soil profile described in the text is intended to convey trends in subsurface conditions. The boundaries between strata are approximate and idealized and have been developed by interpretation of widely spaced explorations and samples;actual soil transitions are probably more gradual. For specific information,refer to the individual test pit and/or boring logs. 3. Water level readings have been made in the test pits and/or test borings under conditions stated on the logs. These data have been reviewed and interpretations have been made in the text of this report. However,it must be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall,temperature,and other factors differing from the time the measurements were made. Review 4. It is recommended that this firm be given the opportunity to review final design drawings and specifications to evaluate the appropriate implementation of the recommendations provided herein. 5. In the event that any changes in the nature,design,or location of the proposed areas are planned,the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of the report modified or verified in writing by UTS of Massachusetts, Inc. Construction 6. It is recommended that this firm be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork phases of the work. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts,specifications, and recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. Use of Report 7. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Maugel Architects, Inc. in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 8. This report has been prepared for this project by UTS of Massachusetts, Inc. This report was completed for preliminary design purposes and may be limited in its scope to complete an accurate bid. Contractors wishing a copy of the report may secure it with the understanding that its scope is limited to geotechnical design considerations. Proposed Building September 20,2006 North Andover, MA Page 6 of 6 For frost and drainage concerns,it is recommended that a 18-inch vertical lift of Clean Granular Pill (Table 1) be placed directly behind the retaining walls and/or foundation basement walls. A prefabricated wall drain such as MiraDrain may also be used for this purpose against the basement walls. Furthennore,retaining walls should be constructed with weeps installed at 8 ft on-center or be provided with other means of drainage relief. The weeps should be minimum 2-inch diameter holes protected with a filter fabric such as Mirafi 180N or equal to reduce the migration of soil particles. Foundation basement walls should have footing drains to control groundwater. The drains should consist of minimum six inch diameter, schedule 40, perforated PVC drain pipe encased within six inches of 3/n-inch stone and wrapped with a filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N or equal. If the unbalanced foundation walls can not be drained to alleviate hydrostatic forces, then the lateral earth pressure equivalent fluid weight should be increased to 90 pcf. Such earth pressures should be used for design of the elevator pits or mechanical pits, if necessary. The recommended friction factors to be used for retaining wall design are as follows: Recommended Friction Factor(fl f tan(&), where b is the interface friction angle • Mass concrete against the following soils Structural Fill (Table 1) 0.50 Glacial Soils 0.50 Ground FIoor Slab It is recommended that a minimum 8-inch base of(:lean Granular Pill(Table 1) be placed below the concrete floor slab for moisture and frost control. A subgrade modulus of 150 pei may be used for design of the floor slab. CONSTRUCTION MONITORING It is recommended that a qualified engineer or representative be retained to review earthwork activities such as the preparation of the foundation bearing subgrade and the placement/compaction of Structural Fill. It is recommended that UTS be retained to provide construction monitoring services. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts presented herein. We trust the contents of this memorandum report are responsive to your needs at this time. Should you have any questions or require additional assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. kmm39/uts06/oorthandover.inem Proposed Building September 20, 2006 North Andover, MA Page 5 of 6 Seismic Concerns The subsurface conditions were reviewed with respect to seismic criteria set forth in the Massachusetts State Buifdiug Code(Sixth Edit). Based on the relative density of the site soils and the depth to groundwater, the site docs not appear susceptible to liquefaction in the event of an earthquake. The site subsurface soils should be considered a soil type S, with a corresponding Site Coefficient(S) of 1.0 (Section 1612.4.2). Lateral Earth Pressures Lateral earth pressures for the structural design and stability analysis of unbalanced foundation walls (basement walls,retaining walls,elevator pit, etc.)are provided herein. The following table outlines the recommended lateral earth pressure coefficients and equivalent fluid weights: WALL LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE EQUIVALENT CONDITION TRANSLATION COEFFICIENT (K) FLUID WEIGHT D/H , restrained 0 Ka=0.5 65 pcf no restraint 0.002 Ka=0.3 40 pcf no restraint 0.02 KF,= 1.5 (I'S=2) 150 pcf seismic n/a K, =0.09 12 of where: A=movement at top of wall by tilting or lateral translation H = height of wall The above lateral earth pressures are based upon: 1. Rankine earth pressure theory; 2. Retaining wall backfilled with Structural fill(Table 1); 3. Unit weight of backfill less than 135 pcf 4.No hydrostatic pressures(weeps/perimeter drains); 5.No surcharge loading; 6. A level backfill in front and behind of wall; 7. Seismic loads distributed as an inverse triangle over the height of wall (MSBC) 8. Dynamic/compaction stresses accounted for with seismic pressures; 9.Top 2 ft should not be considered .for passive resistance. The lateral resistance of retaining walls should also accommodate surcharge loads and a sloping backfill,if necessary. Uniformly distributed loads should be superimposed along the face of the wall at a magnitude equal to the surcharge pressure multiplied by the appropriate earth pressure coefficient. Surcharge loads should be considered where they are located within a horizontal distance equivalent to 0.5 times the height of the wall. Anticipated point or Iine loads situated behind the wall should be evaluated in accordance with linear elastic theory. i I Proposed Building September 20,2006 North Andover, MA Page 4 of 6 Foundation Drainage Foundation drainage appears necessary for the front foundation wall which will act as an unbalanced retaining wall. The purpose of the drainage system is to prevent uplift (buoyant) and lateral hydrostatic forces against the foundation walls and protect the basement level from groundwater intrusion. An underslab drainage system does not appear warranted given the elevation(=2-4 ft) in site grades. The perimeter foundation drain(where the foundation is unbalanced) should be located at least 4 inches above the bottom of footing elevation and six inches outward from the edge of footing. The drains should not encroach within the Fooling Zane of Influence defined as that area extending laterally one foot from the edge of footing then outward and downward at a lH:IV splay. Furthermore,the invert elevation of the drain should be at least 18 inches below the underside of the adjacent floor slab. The drains should consist of minimum 6 inch diameter,schedule 40,perforated PVC drain pipe encased within six inches of/4-inch stone and wrapped with a filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N or equal. To provide drainage along the basement wall,a 18 inch vertical lift of Clean Granular bill(Table 1)should be placed directly behind the foundation wall to within 18 inches of finish grade. A prefabricated.wall drain such as MiraDrain(Mirafi G100N drainage composite)may also be used for this purpose. The ground surface immediately adjacent to the foundation should be sloped away from the building to allow for positive drainage. It is also recommended that the surficial materials adjacent to the building be relatively impermeable to reduce the volume of precipitation infiltrating into the subsurface. Such impermeable materials include cement concrete, bituminous concrete,or a vegetated silty topsoil. The foundation drain should be connected to the storm drain system not subject to surcharge or daylight if the site grading permits. The Site Engineer should review possible gravity drainage is this respect. It is recommended that a backflow preventer be installed at the outlet of the drain to reduce the impact of surcharges and to impede rodent activity that may clog the drain.The drains should be provided with permanent clean-outs at convenient locations to facilitate access to all sections of the system. Clean-outs should be located at all bends and no greater than 100 ft on-center. The basement slab and walls should be waterproofed or, at a minimum, damproofed to protect against moisture damage. The basement floor should be damproofed with minimum eight-mil polyethylene with joints lapped 8 inches below the floor slab or with application of bituminous or other approved material to the surface. Damproofing of below grade foundation walls should include the application of a bituminous or other approved material from the top of footing to above ground level. Below slab foundations (such as elevator pits) should be fitted with continuous waterstops in all construction joints and should be waterproofed as well as structurally designed to protect against groundwater intrusion. An equivalent fluid weight of 90 pef should be used for the design of the elevator pit unless the groundwater can be controlled in this depressed area. Proposed Building September 20, 2006 North Andover, MA Page 3 of 6 FOUNDATION SUBGRADE RECOMMENDATIONS The site subsurface conditions appear suitable to support the new building on a conventional spread footing foundation with a concrete floor slab. The existing fill should be compacted with vibratory densification to at least 95%relative compaction per ASTM D 1557. Field density tests should be scheduled in this respect. The additional fill required to achieve finish grade should also be placed in controlled lifts with adequate compaction as summarized on Table 1. The foundation excavations are expected to encroach the groundwater table especially for the rear footing line which is expected to be deeper for frost protection. It is therefore recommended that the site work be completed in"dry"conditions. Construction dewatering employing conventional sumps and pumps will likely be required for these temporary excavations. The sumps should extend at least two(2) feet below construction grade and be protected with a filter of crushed stone and geotextile fabric.The groundwater table should be continuously maintained at least one foot below construction grade until the backfilling is complete. It is also recommended that a minimum one foot base of '/fl- inch minus crushed stone be used as structural fill where wet conditions are present. The purpose of the stone base is to protect the sensitive site soils,facilitate construction dewatering and to provide a dry/stable subgrade upon which to progress the building pad preparation. The stone base should be tamped with a plate compactor and exhibit stable and compact conditions. The subgrade soils should ultimately be stable,dewatered and compact to be rendered adequate for structural support. Proper groundwater management is critical for maintaining the competency of the moisture sensitive glacial soils. An Engineer from UTS should review the subgrade conditions and preparation. GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Bearing Capacity The footings bearing the undisturbed glacial soils and/or compacted structural fill may be designed using a net allowable bearing capacity of 5 ksf. Total vertical settlement is estimated to be less than I inch with differential settlement less than %z inch. The settlement should be elastic and occur during construction. The allowable bearing pressure is subject to footing geometry and embedment depth considerations. With regards to footing geometry, the minimum footing width of column and strip footings should be.3 ft and 2 ft respectively. The minimum soil embedment depth for bearing support is 24 inches in heated areas. For footings less than 3 ft in lateral dimension, the net allowable bearing capacity should be reduced to one-third and multiplied by the least lateral footing dimension in feet. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one third when considering transient loads such as seismic and wind. The footings should be provided with at least 4 ft of earthen embedment for frost protection. Proposed Building September 20, 2006 North Andover, MA Page 2 of 6 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS Test Borings The subsurface exploration program for the project included the completion of five (5) test borings. The test borings, identified as Bl to B5, were advanced to refusal depths of 9-12 ft using 4'/ inch, continuous flight,hollow stem augers. Soil samples were retrieved at no greater than 5 ft intervals with a 2-inch diameter split-spoon sampler. Standard Penetration Tests(SPTs)were performed at the sampling intervals in general accordance with ASTM-D 1586(Standard MethocI for•Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Snils). Field descriptions and penetration resistance of the soils encountered,observed depth to groundwater,depth to apparent bedrock refusal and other pertinent data are contained on the attached Test Boring Logs. The test borings were located by others as shown on the attached Test Boring Location Plan. SUBGRADE CONDITIONS The subgrade conditions generally include(1) some shallow fill underlain by(2) stable glacial soils then(3)shallow bedrock. The subgrade conditions were consistent around the site. Shallow fill (less than =2-3 ft) was encountered in ALL the test borings. The recently placed fill consists of a brown, fine to medium Sand, little Silt, little Gravel. The contractor noted that some broken rock was also used as fill given the wet subgrade. The fill was generated on-site and appeared stable this date. It is recommended that the rill be compacted with a vibratory compactor and be field density tested given its location in the building area. There was no organic matter below the fill suggesting adequate stripping of the topsoil. The parent subgrade soils vary somewhat in composition but generally include a brown to grey,fine to medium SAND,some Silt,little Gravel,occasional Cobbles. There are also layers of silty sand with limited ;ravel. The parent subgrade can be characterized as a sandy till (ablation till). The glacial soils are stable and compact based on the SPTs. Bedrock refusal was encountered at ALL the test locations at depths of z8-11 ft below grade. The bedrock was weathered and able to be sampled and penetrated the initial -1-2 ft. The sampled rock consists of a dark grey to brown,platey,shaley ledge. Bedrock is not expected to impact the project. Groundwater was encountered in ALL the test borings at shallow depths of 2-3 ft. Soil samples below these depths were saturated and wet. The test holes were left open several hours to allow for groundwater stabilization. This study was completed in late summer and likely represents seasonally low groundwater conditions. It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature, and other factors differing from the time of the measurements. f• (H Massachusetts Inc. ""The Construction Tasting People" MEMORANDUM TO: Jonathan Cocker Maugel Architects, Inc. 200 Ayer Road 1-1arvard, MA 01451 KEVIN M. MARTIN u' FROM: Kevin Martin, P.E. 0 CIVIL Geotechnical Engineer No..38206 y a�'o �F�ISTER�� ewe DATE: September 20, 2006 SSS/QNAV RE: GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY REPORT PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS Project No. 10629 "Phis mernorandurn report presents the findings of a subsurface exploration program and a geotechnical engineering evaluation of the conditions encountered as they relate to foundation design and construction. The contents of this report are subject to the attached Limitations. SITE& PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located at 1025 Osgood Street (Route 125) at the intersection with Great Pond Road in North Andover,MA. The site consists of grassed lot with a steep embankment ,lope:. Site grades are shown to vary from about elevation 138-134 ft(near the top of the embankment) down to elevation 120-122 ft (near the base of the embankment slope). The embankment consists of a filled slope. Site construction has been progressing around the project. The surface topsoil has been strapped and stockpiled. The embankment has been rough cut(where it intersects the proposed foundation). The rear portions of the site have been filled about =24 ft in depth with on-site soils. The site grades (within the building pad) are understood to be roughly near elevation z 124 ft. It is proposed to construct a new retail and office building. The building will consist of a one-story structure approximately 7,600 ft' in footprint area. It is designed to support the building on a basement foundation Which is fully embedded to the front with full height exposure to the rear. The foundation is designed to bear on conventional spread footings with a concrete floor slab. The basement floor elevation is noted to be 126.50 ft. The majority of the basement area will require shallow fill about =24 ft to achieve grade. The purpose of this geotechnical study was to review the subgrade conditions for support of the foundation. 5 Richankon Lane, Stoneham, Massachusetts 02180 - (781) 438-7755 Fax (781) 438-6216 Website: http://www.utsofmass.com - Email address: 9eneralo1fico@utso1mas2.c9m CONTRACTOR: Soil Exploration Corp Leominster, MA Urs of Massachuseas, Ilic, BORING NO: B-1 5 Richardson Lane SHEET: 1 OF 1 FOREMAN: Eric Pope Stoneham, MA 02180 DATE: START: Sept 18, 2006 TEST BORING LOG FINISH: Sept 18, 2006 PREPARED BY: RIG: Mobilo BS? PROJECT: PROPOSED RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING CHECKED BY: Kevin Martin, p.E. LOCATION: 1025 OSGOOD STREET (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS CORE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS ❑ FIELD TESTING S�UIPMENT AUGER CASING SAMPLER BAR DATE 09/18 LABORATORY TYPE HSA SS DEPTH (FT) 2' TESTING ❑ TESTING WELL SIZE ID (IN) 4 2.0 - CASING AT (FT) n a HAMMER WT (LB) 140 BIT TIME (HR) 5 HAMMER INSTALLED R FALL (IN) 30 O NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED ❑ ❑ LIQUID INTRODUCED DURING DRILLING LOCATION OF BORING: See Sketch GROUND SURFACE ELEV,: -124 ftt FT SAMPLE DATA SOIL AND ROCK CLASSIFICATION-DESCRIPTION STwM.Al. NOTES BURMISTER SYSTEM (SOIL) CHANGE REC. BLOWS U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SYSTEM (ROCK) NO. DEPTH (IN) 6 IN. "2 is -` Ern, f-m SAND, little Gravel, little Silt (FILL) 2 ' "4 12 38-41Rust Brn, f-m SAND, some Gravel, little Silt, Cobbles, damp/wet 37-39tL+Z 5 S3 5-7 __1L-_U_ Grey, f-m SAND, little(+) Silt, wet 12-13 10 4 10-12 16 11-13Grey, f-m SAND, some Silt, trace Gravel, wet � r�2 weathered rock Auger Rofusal at 13 ft - BEDROCK 15 20 25 RELATIVE DENSITY NOTES: �RA1.'ULAF SOT,�(L)lowe/f t) O to < very Loose G to 10 Loose 10 to 30 N,odiwa Donee BORING NO. B-i 30 to 50 pons* Over 50 Very Donee RELATIVE CONSISTENCY Standard Penetration Test (SPT) - 140# hammer falling 30" (ASTM D1586) C04E8IVQ BOLLS (Slow/ft) Blows are per 6" taken with an 24" long x 2" O,D. x 1 3/8" I.D, 0 to 2 Very soft S = Split-Spoon split spoon sampler unless noted. 2 to 4 soft P poon Sample; C = Rock Coro Sample; U - Undisturbed Shelby Tube Sample < to 8 JA odiun Stiff 1 to 15 stiff RE1 The stratification lines represent the a , 15 to 3o very Stiff p approximate bounds between soil typos and the over 30 Hard transition may be gradual. Water level readings have been made in the Lost borings at times and under conditions stated on the test boring logo. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to other factors than those present at the time measurements were made. Proportions used: trace (0-104), little (10-204), some (20-35%) and (35-504)