Report C
:, . NA, l �+ 0U,,, ��
ii., 1,2 At- _
.. .6 u P I i -Co 2
i
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING II * •
INVESTIGATION
Future McDonald's Restaurant
Tigard, Oregon r , l
Wohlers Environmental Project No. 96 -0059
McDonald's Corporation L/C No.: 036 -0260 i )
--- f --,/ C c v — ' Y 1 ,\i v v 4 .ti \----14-
Yv r�, ,/ \:.�� 1_, (', ,I,L t--
).)(\ i –\- 4- ,7
1 (‘` ) . 0
\Y . Prepared for:
V "v
tr M cDonald 's Corporat
5000 S.W. Meadows Road
Li 1 1/1 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035
Attn: Ms. Lynn Carey,
V 1 0 Real Estate Coordinator
f i, e,q Prepared by
Wohlers Environmental Services, Inc
1 6- P.O. Box 1 132
o
` Tualatin, Oregon 97062
July 19, 1996
WOHLERS
LNV'I >'.�tt_N1Vf. <kKV'Ift• t,f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wohlers Environmental Services, Inc. ( "Wohlers Environmental ") has completed a -..
geotechnical engineering investigation related to the design and construction of a proposed
new McDonald's Corporation ( "McDonald's ") restaurant located at the intersection of
Highway 99 and S.W. 72nd Avenue in Tigard, Oregon as shown on Figure 1, "Site Vicinity
Map ". Based on the results of our investigation, the site is geotechnically suitable for the
proposed construction. Key design items are summarized below, and are discussed in greater
detail in the body of this report.
Soils: The surface of the site is blanketed with approximately 18 inches of topsoil. Below the
zone of topsoil, clayey silts were encountered to the maximum depths explored, 10 feet. See
Section 3.2.1.
Ground Water: At the time of our site investigation on July 9, 1996, ground water was not
encountered in any of the four test pits excavated on the site. It should be anticipated that
near surface ground water may be present during some times of the year primarily in the form
of a temporary "perched" water table within the low permeability near - surface soils. See
Section 3.2.2.
Site Earthwork Recommendations: We estimate that it will be necessary to strip 12 to 18
inches of undesirable material from most of the site, although variations in depth may occur.
After stripping and excavating to final grades, but before installing any new fills, we
recommend that the site surface be scarified, brought to near optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 92% relative compaction (modified proctor). Recommendations have
been provided that assume most earthwork can be accomplished during dry weather.
Attempting to proceed with site grading activities during wet weather could add
significantly to site preparation costs. See Section 4.1.
Existing Utilities: Two water lines are currently located beneath Villa Ridge Road. One of
these lines is a "feeder" line for the City of Tigard. Conversations with representatives of the
Tualatin Valley Water District indicate it ' not a possible to relocate the two lines,
conduct grading and filling operations, or construct buildings over the lines. The proposed
restaurant building location may therefore need to be adjusted to avoid conflicts with these
water lines.
Structural Fill: The near surface, onsite soils, excluding topsoil and existing fill, are
adequate for use as structural fill material, if properly moisture - conditioned. If fills must be
placed during wet weather, it may be necessary to import clean, granular, well graded
fill material. See Section 4.1.4.
Compaction: We recommend that structural fills be compacted to at least 92% of maximum
density (ASTM T -180 or ASTM D 1557). See Section 4.1.5.
Slopes: We recommend that finished cut or fill slopes up to eight feet in height not exceed
2H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical) unless they are specifically reviewed by a geotechnical engineer.
Excavations that are deeper than four feet should be adequately sloped or shored. See
Section 4.1.6.
Foundations: Conventional shallow isolated or continuous spread footings that are a
minimum of 12 inches wide and 12 inches deep may be designed for a maximum bearing
pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot. See Section 4.2.
Retaining Walls: Conventional cantilever retaining walls with a level backslo and
adequate drainage should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure 35 pcf. See Section
4.3.
Sign Foundations: Pole foundations for signs should be designed in accordance with UBC
procedures, assuming a Class 5 soil. See Section 4.4.
Floor Slabs: We recommend that any slabs on grade be established on a minimum six inch
thick layer of compacted, clean, well graded sand and gravel or crushed rock. If floor
coverings or the glues attaching floor coverings are moisture sensitive, we recommend
the installation of an impervious membrane between the bottom of the floor slab and
the granular layer. See Section 4.5.
Pavement Design: We recommend a pavement section of 2.5 inches of asphalt concrete over
six inches of aggregate base in general parking and traffic areas. In areas of concentrated
traffic and areas used by heavy vehicles, we recommend increasing the section to - inches
of asphalt concrete over eight inches of aggregate base or 3.5 inches of asphalt over six inches
of aggregate base. See Section 4.7.
This summary is intended for introductory and reference use only. A thorough reading of the
entire report is essential for understanding the total design concepts and limitations.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page No.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 GENERAL 1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 2
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION 2
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING 2
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 4
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS 4
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4
3.2.1 Soils 4
3.2.2 Ground Water 4
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5
4.1 SITE EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS 5
4.1.1 Site Preparation 5
4.1.2 Construction in Dry Weather 5
4.1.3 Proof Rolling 6
4.1.4 Structural Fill Material 6
4.1.5 Compaction Criteria 6
4.1.6 Slopes 7
4.1.7 Fill Settlements 7
4.2 FOUNDATION SUPPORT 7
4.2.1 Foundations 7
4.2.2 Bearing Pressure 8
4.2.3 Settlement 8
4.3 RETAINING WALLS 8
4.3.1 Retaining Wall Design Parameters 8
4.3.2 Non - Restrained Walls 9
4.3.3 Restrained Walls 9
4.3.4 Retaining Wall Backfill 9
4.3.5 Backfill Drainage 9
4.4 SIGN FOUNDATIONS 10
4.5 FLOOR SLABS 10
4.6 ONSITE DRAINAGE 10
4.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN 10
5.0 QUALIFICATIONS 12
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Test Pit Location Map
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: FIELD INVESTIGATION RESULTS
Figure A -1 Legend of Terms and Symbols Used on Test Pit Logs
Figure A -2 to A -5 Test Pit Logs TP -1 to TP -4
iv
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
McDONALD'S CORPORATION/TIGARD, OREGON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Wohlers Environmental Services, Inc. ( "Wohlers Environmental ") has completed a
geotechnical engineering investigation related to design and construction of a proposed new
McDonald's Corporation ( "McDonald's ") restaurant located on the southwestern corner of
the intersection of Highway 99 and S.W. 72nd Avenue in Tigard, Oregon as shown on Figure
1 "Site Vicinity Map ". The purpose of the geotechnical exploration was to explore and
evaluate the surface and subsurface conditions at the site, and based on the conditions
encountered, provide recommendations pertaining to geotechnical aspects of the proposed
restaurant.
Based on the results of our study, the proposed project is considered geotechnically feasible,
provided the recommendations presented in this report are implemented during design and
construction.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed site occupies approximatel 34,442 square feet 0.79 acres) and is located on
the southwestern corner of the intersection : . ' • 9 an. .W. 72nd Avenue in Tigard,
Oregon. The site is currently vacant and was apparently formerly utilized as an orchard and
garden. The former roadbed of S.W. Villa Ridge Road is located on the northern portion of
the site. The recent construction of S.W. 72nd Avenue removed Villa Ridge Road on the
eastern site boundary. Villa Ridge Road is no longer in use. A general site map showing the
location and layout of the site is attached as Figure 2.
Our understanding of the proposed development is that the restaurant will be located on the
eastern portion of the site with parking on the northern and western side of the restaurant
building. Because of the existing ground slope at this site, a retaining wall may be required to
develop a level building site.
The purpose of this report is to provide geotechnical recommendations related to site
preparation and grading, building and sign foundations, and pavements.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 1 WES Project No. 96 -0059
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION
A site reconnaissance and subsurface geotechnical exploration investigation was conducted at
the project site on July 9, 1996. The geotechnical subsurface exploration activities consisted
of the excavation and sampling of four exploratory test pits using a Case 580K backhoe and
conducting a magnetometer scan of the site. The test pits were excavated to approximately
10 feet below surface grade (bsg). Based on our understanding of the planned location of the
proposed restaurant building, test pits TP -1 and TP -2 were excavated outside the site
boundary in the approximate center of a proposed access road. Test pit TP -3 was excavated
in the approximate center of the proposed restaurant building footprint and test pit TP -4 was
excavated in the proposed parking area immediately west of the proposed restaurant building.
The location of two City of Portland water supply lines beneath and adjacent to Villa Ridge
Road prevented the excavation of two additional test pits on the northern portion of the site j
adjacent to the footprint of the proposed restaurant building.
At the completion of excavation and sampling, the test pits were backfilled with the excavated
material. Approximate test pit locations are shown on the Site Map, Figure 2. Test pits were
located in the field by pacing from known site features. As such, the locations of the test pits
should be considered approximate.
Representative soils samples were collected from the four test pits and logged by a Wohlers
Environmental Registered Geologist. Appendix A contains field test pit logs.
A magnetometer survey was also conducted on the site by a utility clearance subcontractor in
conjunction with excavation of the test pits. The magnetometer survey was conducted to
assess for the potential presence of abandoned Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), metal
debris and other subsurface metallic objects that could pose environmental concerns or impact
construction of the proposed restaurant building. Two subsurface anomalies observed during
the magnetometer survey were excavated following completion of the test pits revealing metal
debris. According to the subcontractor, no other apparent magnetic anomalies were identified
which possessed the characteristic signature of buried USTs or metal drums.
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Soil samples that were collected from the test pits were returned to an analytical laboratory
for visual classification and evaluation. Testing included natural soil moisture contents which
are summarized on the following page.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 2 WES Project No. 96 -0059
NATURAL SOIL MOISTURE CONTENT.. TEST; RESULTS
De th feet
p ( ) Moisture Content
1 1 -5 22.4
1 5 -10 23.7
2 2 -10 23.1
3 2 -3 19.8
3 3 -10 22.2
4 2 -3 18.1
4 3 -10 24.4
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 3 WES Project No. 96 -0059
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
The following section describes the general surface and subsurface conditions observed at the
site during our field investigation. Interpretations of the site conditions are based on our site
reconnaissance and subsurface exploration activities.
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS
The site slopes moderately downward to the south, toward the parking lot for the Tigard
Cinemas facility. Steep cut slopes of approximately 3H:1 V (horizontal to vertical) and up to
a maximum of approximately eight feet high, are present along the east property line. These
surface estimates are based on a non - exhaustive visual review and are included for general
information only. No topography data were available at the time of preparation of our report
and survey measurements were not completed during our explorations.
The site apparently was formerly used for agricultural purposes, potentially as an orchard
and/or garden. The site is covered by grass, blackberry vines and small trees.
A detailed account of the known history of the site is included in the Wohlers Environmental
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) dated July 17, 1996.
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
As discussed in Section 2. I, subsurface conditions at the site were explored by means of four
exploratory test pits. The general subsurface soil conditions encountered are discussed below.
3.2.1 Soils
The project site appears to be underlain by native clayey silts to the maximum depths
explored, approximately 10 feet below existing grade. The surface of the site is blanketed
with a fairly thick layer of topsoil (18 inches thick), probably due to historic farming activities.
Although we did not explore conditions beneath the abandoned portion of Villa Ridge Road,
it is probable that fills in that area are associated with road and utility construction.
3.2.2 Ground Water
At the time of our site investigation on July 9, 1996, free water was not encountered in any of
our explorations. Soils were moist to wet, however, at the bottom of several of the test pits.
Based on soil characteristics, it is possible that a layer of near - surface perched water may
develop in the upper soils during prolonged wet weather.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 4 WES Project No. 96 -0059
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is our opinion that the site is geotechnically suitable for the construction of a restaurant as
planned, provided the recommendations of this report are incorporated in project design and
construction.
4.1 SITE EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
At the time that this report was prepared, the extent of earthwork required for this project had
not been fully communicated to us. Because of the slope of the site's surface, it appears
probable that cuts /fills of up to six to e jgbt feet may be required. •
4.1.1 Site Preparation
All areas of the site that will receive compacted fill, pavement or structures should be stripped
to a depth that is sufficient to remove all topsoil, debris, organics, old fill, and any other
deleterious material. This should include the removal of areas of existing pavement to expose
a firm soil subgrade. We estimate that, in general, it will be necessary to strip approximately
12 to 18 inches from most of the site. Although topsoil thicknesses were measured at about
18 inches, there was a gradual transition from organic to no- organic soil. It should not be
necessary to remove all of the material classified as topsoil. After stripping we recommend
that the resulting subgrade be observed by a representative of our firm and that any areas of
soft or undesirable soil should be over - excavated. Stripped materials will not generally be
suitable for re -use as compacted fills and should either be stockpiled for possible later use in
landscaped areas or exported from the site.
We understand that two water lines (both active and partly abandoned) exist beneath the
abandoned portion of Villa Ridge Road. We further understand that the existing water lines
under this road may remain in their present locations and continue in service following
building construction. The proposed building appears to be located above these buried utility
lines. Wohlers Environmental personnel contacted Mr. Stu Davis at the Tualatin Valley
Water District for information regarding these two water lines. Mr. Davis indicated it will not
be possible to either move the water lines or construct the restaurant building over the lines.
According to Mr. Davis, a utility right -of -way seven and one half feet in width must also be
maintained on either side of the water lines where construction or grading is prohibited. The
proposed building location may, therefore, need to be adjusted to avoid conflicts with these
water lines.
�-- -
4.1.2 Construction in Dry Weather
Moisture sensitive silts were encountered at this site to the maximum depths explored. These
soils will be difficult to grade and compact when their water contents differ appreciably from
optimum. We assume that most earthwork will be accomplished during dry weather, when
adequate moisture control can be achieved. If grading is attempted during wet weather, or
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 5 WES Project No. 96 -0059
under other conditions that prevent adequate moisture control, we should be contacted for
additional recommendations. These recommendations will probably include the import of a
clean, granular fill to serve as a working surface to protect the onsite fine grained soils.
Attempting to proceed with construction during wet weather could add significantly to
site preparation costs.
In all areas that will receive fill, base course, or pavement, the site should be stripped as
discussed above. Following stripping, the native silts should be scarified to a depth of at least
six inches, brought to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 92% relative
compaction. Relative compaction should be based on the modified Proctor test method
(AASHTO T -180 or ASTM D1557).
4.1.3 Proof Rolling
Following subgrade preparation, and prior to placement of fill or basecourse, we recommend
that the site be proof rolled with a fully- loaded 10 to 12 yard dump truck. Any areas that
pump, weave, or appear soft or muddy should be scarified, dried and compacted, or else over -
excavated and backfilled with compacted granular fill. If significant time passes between the
completion of subgrade preparation and commencement of other construction activities, or if
significant traffic has been routed across the site, we recommend that the site be similarly
proof rolled before final placement of base rock or paving. A qualified geotechnical engineer
should observe this operation.
4.1.4 Structural Fill Material
Structural fills are defined as any fills that are intended to support pavements, buildings, or
that are placed on slopes exceeding 5H:1 V. Structural fill material should consist of relatively
well graded soil that is free of organic material and debris. The near surface soils at this site,
excluding topsoil and existing fills, are adequate for use as structural fill material if properly
moisture conditioned. Because the near surface soils have a very high fines content, they will
be moisture sensitive and will require close moisture content control if placed as structural fill.
At the time of our explorations these soils had moisture contents in the range of 29% to 35 %.
These would have to be reduced to about 15% for adequate compaction. If these soils
become saturated due to exposure to rain, they will become virtually impossible to
compact until conditions develop that will allow them to dry sufficiently for adequate
compaction to be achieved.
If fills must be placed during wet weather it will probably be necessary to import clean,
granular, well graded fill material (sand or sand and gravel) that has a silt and clay content
(those particles passing a US Standard No. 200 sieve) that is less than about 5% by weight.
4.1.5 Compaction Criteria
Gcotcchnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 6 WES Project No. 96 -0059
We recommend that structural fills that are intended to support pavement or structures be
placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about eight inches in thickness and be compacted to at
least 92% of the maximum dry density as determined by the AASHTO T -180 or ASTM
D1557 method of compaction (modified Proctor). This could be reduced to 85% in
landscaping or planter areas where some surface settlement would be acceptable.
4.1.6 Slopes
Permanent Slopes.
The extent of permanent cut or fill slopes anticipated for this project was not known at the
time that this report was prepared. We recommend that finished cut or fill slopes up to eight
feet in height be no steeper than 2H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical). Steeper slopes and any slopes
over eight feet in height should be reviewed by our firm. All permanent slopes will require
erosion protection.
Temporary Slopes.
Temporary slopes may be required for utility installation or other construction operations.
Although the near surface, fine grained soils encountered on this site will stand on near
vertical slopes for short periods of time, they may collapse suddenly and without warning.
Any excavations that are deeper than four feet in depth should be adequately sloped or
shored. In the absence of ground water, unshored temporary cuts may be sloped at 1H: 1 V for
cuts not exceeding eight feet in depth. If water is encountered or if excavations are deeper
than eight feet, they should be braced or a geotechnical engineer contacted for additional
recommendations.
With time and the presence of precipitation, the stability of temporary, unsupported cut slopes
can be significantly reduced. Consequently, the contractor should monitor the stability of the
temporary cut slopes and adjust the construction schedule and slope inclination accordingly.
State and local regulations may require the use of flatter slopes than those recommended
above. It should be made the contractor's responsibility to fully comply with all pertinent
laws concerning worker health and safety.
4.1.7 Fill Settlements
For fills that are less than five to six feet thick, fill settlements are estimated to be less than 3/4
inch. The majority of fill settlement should occur during or shortly after fill construction.
4.2 FOUNDATION SUPPORT
4.2.1 Foundations
Shallow, conventional isolated or continuous spread footings may be used to support the
relatively light loads of the proposed structure. All footing excavations should be trimmed
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 7 WES Project No. 96 -0059
neat and footing subgrades should be carefully prepared. Any loose or softened material
should be removed from the footing excavation prior to placing rebar. It is recommended th
the footing excavations be observed by a representative from our firm prior to placing steel
and concrete to verify that the recommendations of this report have been followed, and that an
appropriate bearing stratum is exposed and prepared.
4.2.2 Bearing Pressure
Footings that are installed in accordance with the preceding recommendations, and that are a
minimum of 12 inches wide and 12 inche s - :w the lowest adjacent exterior grade, may be
designed for bearing pressures u. :di a1 • unds per square foot. This applies to dead plus
frequently applied live loads and a - T - increased by up to one -third for the inclusion of wind
or seismic forces.
4.2.3 Settlement
For foundations that are designed and installed as described above, we estimate that
settlements will not exceed one inch. Differential settlements are not expected to exceed 50
percent of the total. These estimates assume that wall loads do not exceed three kips per foot
and column loads do not exceed 60 kips.
4.3 RETAINING WALLS
We understand that a low retaining wall (less than eight feet high) may be required on
portions of the site. Details and location of this wall are not known.
4.3.1 Retaining Wall Design Parameters
Lateral soil pressures on retaining walls depend on several factors including retained soil type,
amount of wall movement (rotation) that is allowed, and drainage provisions. Our
recommendations are based on the following assumptions:
• Retaining walls will be installed by sloping excavation sides and backfilling with clean
granular backfill.
• All backfill that is installed within three feet, measured horizontally, from the wall will
consist of crushed rock, in accordance with section 4.3.4 of this report.
• Adequate subsurface drainage will be provided, by means of either weep holes or a
perforated subdrain system.
• Walls will be less than eight feet high.
If shoring will be used in lieu of sloped excavations, or if any other of the above assumptions
are not correct we should be contacted for additional recommendations.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 8 WES Project No. 96 -0059
4.3.2 Non - Restrained Walls
Non - restrained walls have no restraint at the top and are free to rotate about their base.
Lateral movement at the top of the wall can be up to 0.005 times the wall height. Most -
gravity and cantilever retaining walls fall into this category. The following table summarizes
estimated equivalent fluid pressures for use with non - restrained walls. These coefficients are
based on a Rankine analysis, which assumes zero wall friction. This is a conservative
assumption that we consider to be appropriate for preliminary designs. Once a final wall type
is selected it may be possible to incorporate an allowance for wall friction, depending upon the
wall type, water proofing materials and backfill conditions. The tabulated coefficients do not
contain a factor of safety. Selection of a design factor of safety will depend on the design
method used, and on the assumptions made regarding wall friction.
Slope Adjacent to Wail;. Acttve'Equivalent Fluid Passive Equivalent Fluid
,.Pressure lb /cu: fft ` Pressure lb. /cu f
Level 35 350
2H:1 V (towards wall) 75 N/A
2H:1 V (away from wall) N/A 40
4.3.3 Restrained Walls
Restrained walls are any walls that are prevented from rotation during backfilling. Basement
walls that are restrained at the top by a building floor normally fall into the category of
restrained walls. At the present time we understand that no basement or other restrained walls
are proposed for this site.
4.3.4 Retaining Wall Backfill
Backfill behind retaining walls should consist of free draining granular material (sand or sand
and gravel with no more than 5% by weight passing a number 200 sieve). We recommend
that this fill be compacted to between 90% and 92% relative compaction (AASHTO T -180).
In addition, we recommend that any backfill that is placed within three feet (measured
horizontally) of the wall be compacted with light - weight, hand - operated compaction
equipment. Overcompaction of this fill can greatly increase wall pressures. If any
foundations, or other major loads, are supported on the backfill this can also increase wall
pressures and we should be contacted for additional recommendations.
4.3.5 Backfill Drainage
Retaining wall backfill should be adequately drained to prevent the build up of hydrostatic
pressures against the wall. We recommend that all walls be provided with a perforated pipe
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 9 WES Project No. 96 -0059
subdrain that is embedded in free draining crushed rock and wrapped in a suitable filter fabric,
or else weep holes should be installed at no more than four feet on center. After a wall type
and location has been selected we would be happy to provide typical drainage details.
4.4 SIGN FOUNDATIONS
Sign and light pole foundations constructed as post or pol- e • s - ... . ' I earth or
concrete footings should be designed in accordance with the 1991 Unified :.' s ing Code
(UBC), Section 2907(g). For sign and light pole foundat' • n deli a . ; . rposes, the near surface
soils encountered in the southeastern corner of this site, the assumed location of the restaurant
sign, are consistent with Material Class 5 in Table No. 29 B of the UBC.
4.5 FLOOR SLABS
We understand that floor slabs will be constructed at or above adjacent site grades and that
there will be no below grade spaces. In preparation for the construction of the floor slabs, we
recommend that, after subgrade preparation in accordance with Section 4.1 of this report, a
minimum six inch thick layer of compacted, well graded sand and gravel or crushed rock be
installed between the floor slab and the prepared subgrade. Gradation requirements of this
material should be similar to those specified for one inch minus base in Table 02630 -1,
Grading Requirements -Base Aggregates, of the 1991 Oregon Department of Transportation
Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, with the added requirement that no more
than 5% by weight shall pass a US Standard No. 200 sieve. We recommend the granular layer
be compacted to at least 92% of the maximum dry density as determined by the AASHTO T-
180 or ASTM D1557 methods (modified Proctor).
Because there is a potential for shallow, perched ground water, some floor moisture could
develop even with the use of a crushed rock base course. If floor coverings or the glues
attaching floor coverings are moisture sensitive, we recommend the installation of an
impervious membrane between the bottom of the floor slab and the granular layer.
Normally a thin sand layer is placed above the membrane to assist in the curing of the concrete
slab.
4.6 ONSITE DRAINAGE
The site grading plan should allow for surface flow away from the building per UBC
requirements, and roof downspouts should be connected to the storm water system.
4.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN
Areas that are to receive pavement should be stripped and prepared in accordance with the
recommendations in Section 4.1. We recommend that the top eight inches of subgrade be
compacted to 95% relative compaction (AASHTO T -180 or ASTM D1557).
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 10 WES Project No. 96 - 0059
F - ( u - V r i t- ‘ )
For general parking and traffic areas, we recommend a pavement section of 2.5 inches of
asphalt concrete over six inches of aggregate base. In areas of concentrated traffic such as
entrance and exit bays, and main drive lanes, and areas used by heavy vehicles such as delivery
and garbage trucks, we recommend that the section be increased tot a inches of asphalt
over eight inches of aggregate base or 3.5 inches of asphalt over six inches of aggregate .base. r� , V
�'v ,O
We recommend that Class C asphalt cement be used that conforms to Section 00745 of the cd, 4 e
r•
1991 Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway e 1 K—
Construction. The aggregate base material should conform to Section 02630 of the Standard
Specifications for 1.5 inch minus material.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 11 WES Project No. 96 -0059
5.0 QUALIFICATIONS
We have prepared this report for use in design of a portion of the proposed new McDonald's
restaurant in Tigard, Oregon. The data and report should be provided to prospective
contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes; however, the conclusions and
interpretations presented in this report should not be construed as a warranty of the
subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that subsurface soil and ground/water
conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur
between explorations and not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site
operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those
described herein, we should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and
revision of such if necessary.
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or the
owner's representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein
are brought to the attention of the appropriate design team personnel and are incorporated
into the project plans and specifications, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the
contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.
We recommend that we be retained to review the plans and specifications to verify that our
recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Sufficient geotechnical
monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided during construction to confirm that
the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by explorations, to provide
recommendations for design changes should conditions revealed during construction differ
from those anticipated, and to verify that the geotechnical aspects of construction comply with
the contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, we attempted to execute these services
in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of
geotechnical engineering and engineering geology in the area at the time the report was
prepared. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The scope of the work performed as
part of this report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the
presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil, surface water, or
groundwater at this site.
We do not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the
contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than
our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor
should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein
unsafe.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's Corporation/Tigard, Oregon 12 WES Project No. 96 -0059
r
WOHLERS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Report Prepared By: Report Reviewed By:
PROF
��V, PRpc
r 0 Fs s /O .49--' ,,, ... ` 87 4,.,, S ,,
R E GON ¢ IN B. KELTY r AM
G 1063 �' ,' -_ _
� � ✓G � f 30,' e e ,
OEO C �F�C c p ` P-
j EXPIRES 12/31/ y ?___ ar
1 1/t-e:(.,i41,/q .
Kevin Kelty, RG Terry N. Craven, PE
Senior Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Report Reviewed By:
Th_ i
_-_,k_C(__i L_______
Christopher . Wohlers
Project Coordinator
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation July 19, 1996
McDonald's CorporationPTigard, Oregon 13 WES Project No. 96 -0059
• `_-- .Jet..! ` \ \`,,� :1 .. `. :ii - :� '7y J =- ),:.:\_ J• !��\ \` \�` t
w'�A> /
•
-+1� _ h'k ,',,, r' d ,t
` :•�':I. � 1 'I `` ^' 1 1 �.' �S. `°�•• 7 \: \ . ^1 , ,_ L ,` \� 1 � .� ,:
v / y Zi r ;� � . 1, � —
.'1.:. . I, `r ••' . i J..{.� =� � , - ,;!C,' -1,.,,,
pro, . r . ' II' 6r' — � J � _., ` ,_ --c � - j
._ �„�r "\ -
— = -b _ %J / !( — — .,1 ..�. ( • : , -i rte-'
. _ . vb- " __ .t•_ :• � 7-I-1 ; � \ f i s / c - - -- t - 1 • � • 1: i ylt.y , i ~ . �i: - : ' _ -f — ai
-- - � • �. • . - ~`i f s II J .,6r i 1 � c t_ -F• ; _ ' - . - : • J j � I' 1 ' .. / .. — � r. : t .! ' * . : • . i i ` � - iB ^F �r i I / „ \ ,71-' I' i 1 �I / , •- � � i I _ I ) I I I , `c _ � ti
�',� r -- '= � - � -I. � { r � - ' I 1; ' �: i l -... ` \ 7 J � ' L , 1 4-7,.-111--•i: • -) . ! _. •
�,. . • a , \�,` - ^ -- - .� , -: • � - _ _ ; - '. -1- _ F- Td - a .\ j 'Viah.r
–�� L . ' _. . , ,,, , t s ; ; ` ' I - ^'.
: : - « , , i- 3 ' 1 , c • -� •. •' w : ”"
B .. ' •-- =-i_: ' _-- '". : - - ' � ' �Lta.Bir}Q�I:'if � 1 � �3;. � -- = ,1
` V. ' 1. ''L ' 4 L III . —'
1 \ : ' ` V t.,, I I : I . ..I i :' / • ., W 1 J t -' y 1,J 11.\•1• I � v •
= .\ •ft I. � . . : yr� 11 'i�i i if ��if a `; .it:i' ;\ .':3'✓ - - =� •
F %p —),•�: • ;:; .) ;.• ,1. - -- � l
' i• iii P_ra. � '33`_ o' \�i��I iLT_ \. A I:1FI •
� � '.., --- r - '� r - , ;O,.,�F. � dr,:.. ! '� '! _ � �� '- r� • - - .- = J r -•U: � 7, l' .i;' ri '
■ t
a .
; •i--;. /j•••-•,•••. .\<,•:, .....-:.• Eli d / kz.:-'-z4L`.-!--:-;_,-.--fsilt....- --..-; .! l' 11 !I. 1 '' ____!.',- • :I '' • :. ._
S t :1 n.. l w u > s . • - +C ` • .: -- Ask - i a . • ' ' J t
:� n � ` \ �� •.. ' ♦ SITE LOCATION , � ; � .– =- Ih •
C:�i I _ -� I \ •
i . �i • ` r \ )1 ' , \ , ■ r �s r 1 I� i6 r r n 6 _ - - - -!! / – \
^ t -i `... I , . Q �' r
S - A` ,,,,/ ' , / '�:' . `! � , � `=; z c ; c:,-.t % . . • II --
••.. -- ti .. \ -- .=1'. •Ii' ,1 �T\ \"� y N • - _ - 1p _ __ -
j �' •c,, F.O.:E BCD . §•' L -c O i• ; c r • - .\
= ty_ : 0:1C.2) )r1.t'1; • ' s r ( _ - 1 ` _ ` •'\ 1 - GI- ' a: � 411 �' ' 1 ✓ _
:� . -. °• am � -- '- � - - ✓ "� -' - � - .:77Z;1• I � • �
^1. � - � • i - • r� 111.• - _• y �'\��' ' 1 - •� -ill b. :== f - ::,` ' =_-_ --_._ _ ..
i : � ' � � _r -- = j..v - . Cam RD 1: �*Y -r — •- __ --_ - r�.o • y • ._ :.;- p • - � -_ - _ - - - .p - •-• - -l. -.ter � ir l ., l�� _. C � . 1J - •• .•�.
0 1MILE
N , SOURCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY MAP OF THE
sl
LAKE OSWEGO. OREGON & BEAVERTON, OREGON QUADRANGLES 1961.
PHOTOREVISED 1984.
FIGURE 1 PROJECT NO.: 96 -0059
SITE VICINITY MAP DATE: 07/16/96
W (1)1-1 LERS FUTURE McDONALD'S RESTAURANT SCALE t 24,000
S.W. CORNER OF S.W. 72nd AVENUE
& S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY FILE: SV0059
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. I TIGARD, OREGON DRAWN BY: JT
i
FRED MEYER SHOPPING CENTER
HIGHWAY 99W
FORMER VILLA RIDGE ROAD
CITY OF PORTLAND WATER
SUPPLY LINES
FORMER RESIDENCE
TPA T� P-3
J
W
Q
N
APPROXIMATE SUBJECT SITE
BOUNDARY
� 0
TP -2 TP -1
APPROXIMATE SCALE
le MIMI =MI
50'
FIGURE 2 PROJECT NO.: 96-0059
TEST PIT LOCATION MAP DATE: 07/11/96
FUTURE McDONALD'S RESTAURANT SCALE: 1" = 50'
WOHLERS SOUTHWEST CORNER OF S.W. GH 72nd AVENUE &
S.W. PACIFIC H AY FILE: F30059
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. TIGARD, OREGON DRAWN BY CH
i ts , } - 't i.i i \;� s. a+ r • . .
• l y Y_11
• t v • ' ti
i r ✓ . S.' I n ,7 Y y
✓ r - ,
_ t '^a. J 2`• ' •'i r, ry T ' K; ' t-_ Syr. r
t t .
i l � S o f `
Q r r .� L t p * • � S ,' 4 44 t ' • �' ? r o
_ - -r s d ' •
t t �L Y'L� ` E -�,L -. ' F�•11 b} L S 1. — r. �. - , r '.
• i, } F t y , r ,crf r •• t s
r''2 rr R F ,A� S ••.3 ♦. 1 •.! f . ' i .ri _ `= 1 1 r h ' .
r ••r �� r ,ti j .� r � t �, -lam � a � ,ij y, � � _ "' _ � � „ ' � u r
� E t fi , - ' •
5 1 - 4 i l L `_ • _ a r of y . r . 4 1 ;
RELATNE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N —VALUE TEST SYMBOLS
COHESONeESS SOILS 1 COHESIVE SO4S CS Groin Size Distribution
Approximate Approximate :F Percent fines
Density N (blows /ft) Relative Density(%) Consistency I H (blows /ft) Una:ained Shear CN Consolidation
Strenctb (psi) TX Triaxiol Compression
Very Loose 0 to 4 0 - 15 Very Soft I 0 to 2 <250 UC Unconfined Compression
Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 Soft 1 2 to 4 250 - 500 DS Direct Shear
uedium Dense 10 to 30 35 - 65 Medium Stiff 1 4 to 8 500 - 1000 K Permeability
Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Stiff I 8 to 15 1000 - 2000 PP Pocket Penetrometer
Very Dense over 50 85 - 100 Very Stiff I 15 to .30 2000 - 4000 Approximate Compressive Strength (tsf)
J Hord over 30 >4000 TV Torvane
ASTM SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Approximate Shear Strength (tsf)
CBR California Bearing Ratio
ltg7OR OMSIONS , GROUP OfSCtIFTpt(5 MD Moisture /Density - Relations io
PID Pholoionization Device Reading
Coarse
Gravel and Clean Gravel t o od GW W el - - graded CRAVE A L Atterberg Limits: PL Plastic omit
Grained Gravely Sails or no fines) E .•:GPI Poorly graded GRAVE
laid limit
Sots - :
More than I. t • .; SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS
50:- of Coarse Gravel with 11 , 1 ; i1 GM saty
Fraction Retained Fines (appreciable GRAVEL
.�. - 2.0 OD Split Spoon (SPT)
On No. 4 Sieve 0rn°unt of fines) I/ /GC Clayey GRA Y. ® (140 Ib. hammer with 30 in. drop)
Sand and Ckron Sand
L : : : : : - . .1 SW I wea - graded SAND) I Shelby Tube
More than Sandy Sods (little o no fines) 1 - 3.0' 00 Split Spoon with E'zss Rims
50% Retained t::::::.:.:] JP I Poorly - graded SAND
on No. 5= or More -till SM SAND O Small Bog Sampk
of Coarse Sand wild,
200 Sieve Fries Fraction P
See a (a pp ecia �/��•
on No. 4 Sieve mount of fines),SC Clayey SAND ® Loge Bog (Bulk) Sample
I I I M L Sal m Core Run
Fine Sifts Line • 0 Non- standard Penetration Test
rained and s a Len than 50% ` � CL Lean 1X&Y (with split spoon sampler)
r , ti OL Organic saT /or> r,
• "` AY COMPONENT PROPORTIONS
I MH Elastic SILT.
50% or Moe ' tigrrid Rim R OE3 PTIVE TERMS RAN6� w PROPORTION
and Po ing Steve goy 50% or More ,! C i I Fat CLAY Trace 0 - 5:-
Sae A A - , t ^• OH I Organic SRt/Ocgnmic Day. tale 15 - 25%
• highly Organic Sods rttl PT I PEAT Some 30 - <s%
Mashy 50 - 100%
. COMPONENT DEFlNITIONS GROUNDWATER WELL COMPLETIONS
COMPONENT SZE RANCE- Locking wen security Casing
Boulders Urger than 12 in w Cap
Coa,txete Seal
Cabbies 3 in to 12 in n ::
Gravel 3 in to No 4 (4Smm) N \ W ed Casing
Coarse gravel 3 in to 3/4 in Bentonite Seal
Fax grovel 3/4 in to No 4 (4Smm) t :; ; , . V Groundwater Level (mecsured of time
Sand No. 4 (4.5 n ) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) — ' 7 j: of drilling)
Coarse send No. 4 (4S mm) to No 10 (2.0 mm) — i'' '•' T Groundwater Level (mecsured in well
14euaum sand Nis. 10 (2.0 mm) to No 40 (0. 42 rum) _ after water level stabilized)
Fine sand No. 40 0.42 mm to No. 200 0.074 mm) = - '- • e ...'
( ) ( ) . - Slatted Well Casing
Sit and Clay i ;; .. .
Smatter than No. 200 (0.074mm) Sand Backfill
NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration loos are bused on visual and laboratory MOISTURE CONTENT
observation in general occordance with ASTM D 2487 and ASTAA 0 2488. Sal desciptions
are presented in the following general order: DRY Absence of moisture. aunty,
Orr sihr/eniridenev. cola., "edifier (if env) CROUP NAME additions to croup naive (If aatr), rweistve content dry to the touCl.
Prvpartia . figidatias rand angularity of osrastitvnlz additional comments. (CL17LoCK' tfrrERP°1TLITOX) 1401ST Damp but no vile wcter.
sually
Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more
WET vusble free water. tr 'able
complete description of subsurface conditions. sal is below "c c table.
•
LEGEND OF TERMS AND
NEW McDONALD'S RESTAURANT SYMBOLS USED ON
TIGARD, OREGON • EXPLORATION LOGS
Of: nnctl . .
w wE E §
�t a w m
• w a m 0 m 0 DESCRIPTION J CO
o - a Q 0 W - ± MOIST. CONT. ( %)
U O 0 re
fn 0 20 40 60 80
0 _ 1; I 1 1
_ - ii 1 !,
1 i
TOPSOIL & ROOTS
I
1 — I
-
- ii -
2 — ML ! -- 2
— i
I I _
— CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6), ! I j ; j • -
slightly clayey, mottled coloration, medium stiff, damp, 1 LLD 1
3 — — no apparent odor j
• i
it i
i
—
4— \ ' i 4 -
I i 1 i I _
—
— j 1! i
i � '
- '
5 I�! 5 -
1
!
II i I _
i I I
6 i - 'Y,- - 6 -
-
=
-r- -
lii ii:
7 — ML CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6), ! I I i 1
-a--; - 7 -
slightly clayey, trace fine sand, iron oxide staining, j ' 1 !
medium stiff, moist, no apparent odor i j -
- 7 .1 -
— 1 1 1
8 I 1 ` — ' 8 -
— I1
LE L_ -
9 ! - 9 -
10 -_
-- BOTTOM OF TEST PIT ca 10.0' bsg ' � ! 1 10 _
FIELD LOCATION: Near SE comer of subject site SAMPLING METHOD: NA EXCAVATION COMPANY: Western States
TEST PIT COMPLETION DEPTH: 10.0' bsg DEPTH TO GROUND WATER: NA EXCAVATION METHOD: Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION: i
PROJECT NO.: 96 - 0059 IDENT. TP-1
114161.1di FIGURE A -2
T EST PIT LOG TP -1 CLIENT: McDONALD'S DATE: 07/11/96
\/VOFI L
FUTURE McDONALD'S RESTAURANT
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF S.W. 72nd LOCATION: ncARO DRILLER: WES
AVENUE 8� S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY LOGGED BY: K KELTY PAGE: 1 of 1
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. TIGARD, OREGON
W W 8
x r, C KF ...1 N
w ° tL w I 42 a3 = DESCRIPTION MOIST. CONT. ( %)
a o o K
cn
0 20 40 60 80
f i 0 —
i 111111
i
TOPSOIL & ROOTS � ' ~
I i i
1 I i '
1 - - 1
' _
I
II i1
Mill
i I ■ 1 1
2 - trill- 2 -
i
3 � -- -4--- 3 -
i HIP
it i 1 1
CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6), very j j i
4 ML clayey, slightly stratified, minor iron oxide stains and - -H 4 -
weathered basalt clasts, medium stiff, moist, no I 1 1 1 1 -
apparent odor H i i i
WI
1 , ; ; i
;Iii i
5 ; 5 -
' i I
I ce.. 1 i i
j ' i i -
6 @ 5 - 10' bsg; trace fine sand, moist ; I i j I 6
7 - - 7 -
• ii i _
8 i 8
Li 1 1
i i 1 j
9 ; i 9 -
1'
i i
10 - BOTTOM OF TEST PIT (cD 10.0' bsq i I i ' ! I 10 _
FIELD LOCATION: 120' WEST OFTP -1 SAMPLING METHOD: NA EXCAVATION COMPANY: Western States
TEST PIT COMPLETION DEPTH: 10.0' bsg DEPTH TO GROUND WATER: NA EXCAVATION METHOD: Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION:
agilliblira
FIGURE A -3 PROJECT NO.: 96 -0059 IDENT. TP -2
T EST PIT LOG TP -2 CLIENT: McDONALD'S DATE: 07/11/96
4/OH LERS FUTURE LD'S RESTAURANT LOCATION: TIGARD DRILLER: WES
SOUTHWEST EST CORNER OF S.W. 72nd
AVENUE & S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY LOGGED BY: K. Kerr PAGE: 1 of 1
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. TIGARD, OREGON
/
N
w W _ N
F d w K F- W JO 0 w w 1 co w z = DESCRIPTION MOIST. CONT. (%)
W Nz 2 0 N a G.
N U O 0
0
0 20 40 60 80 0 -
TOPSOIL & ROOTS 1
••••••••••••••••••••
-
:
2 ML CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6), very -�--. - -= - - 2 -
clayey, root holes and minor iron oxide stains, stiff, I _
—
damp, no apparent odor
-
3 — •__-; _�_..;._:._...:.. 3 -
-
l
CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6),
— 4 moderately clayey, trace fine sand and mica, soft, T __- 4
i
moist, no apparent odor
I :
_ i _
6 1 — - 6 -
i
: , i
—
- i ii -
8 -- -- 8 -
10 -
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT p 10.0' bsq I 1 10
FIELD LOCATION: 120' WEST OFTP -1 SAMPLING METHOD: NA EXCAVATION COMPANY: Western States
TEST PIT COMPLETION DEPTH: 10.0' bsg DEPTH TO GROUND WATER: NA EXCAVATION METHOD: Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION:
FIGURE A-4 PROJECT NO.: 96 -0059 IDENT. TP -3
TEST PIT LOG TP -3 CLIENT: McDONALD'S DATE: 07/11/96
W (1)1-1 LER,S FUTURE McDONALD'S RESTAURANT
SOUTHWEST EST CORNER OF S.W. 72nd LOCATION: ncARD DRILLER: WES
AVENUE & S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. TIGARD, OREGON LOGGED BY: K. KELTV PAGE: 1 of 1 d
r
1
E t-- a w �1
d ° o a m Z O U
o a Q? w 2 a DESCRIPTION MOIST. CONT. (%)
a
en z f v F- to z
V) O 0
0 0 20 40 60 80 0
i i i
TOPSOIL & ROOTS •
1 � . -- -- -- 1 -
_ jiii
2 ML CLAYEY SILT (ML); yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6), - - = - = -- 2 _
moderately clayey, roots, root holes and minor iron
oxide stains common, stiff, damp, no apparent odor
—
1 . -
3 - - -- 3
CLAYEY SILT ML ; I ,
( ) yellowish brown (10YR, 5/6),
, I
4 — T . 4 -
ML slightly clayey, 5% fine sand, medium stiff, moist, no i l j ! ; !
apparent odor ! 1 � j
5 — T- 77-7----7 5 -
1
I j
6 - __ -_. • - 6 _
— i -
' 1 I
7 ' 7 _
-
I
—
Ii
— it -
li
� 10 - - - , BOTTOM OF TEST PIT A10 0' bsg - 1 j j ! i : 10
FIELD LOCATION: Approx. so west ofTP3 SAMPLING METHOD: NA EXCAVATION COMPANY: Westem States
TEST PIT COMPLETION DEPTH: 10.0• bsg DEPTH TO GROUND WATER: NA EXCAVATION METHOD: Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION:
FIGURE A -5 PROJECT NO.: 96 -0059 !DENT. TP -4
TEST PIT LOG TP-4 CLIENT: McooNALO'S DATE: 07/11/96
W OHLE TU McD FURE ONALD'S SUTURE McDONALD'S
CORNER OF S.W. 72nd LOCATION: TIGARD DRILLER: WES
AVENUE & S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC TIGARD, OREGON LOGGED BY: K KELTV PAGE: 1 of 1