Report (9) RECEIVED BY —_
MULTI TECH ENGINEERING
MAY 2 8 2008
WI , .1 REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
RECEIVED
Geotechnical Investigation CITY OF [IGARD
BUILDING DIVISION
=1
Proposed Dutch Brothers Coffee Site
J
SW Pacific Highway and Highway 99W RECEIVED
Tigard (Washington County), Oregon JAN 0 8 2009
CITY OF TIGARD
9UILDING DIVISION
for
1
J Dutch Brothers Coffee
J
J ZCX)9' - �G
J City of Tigard
rn ed Plans
_. Date I CYO
1
OFFICE COPY
Project No. 1001.005.G
May 23, 2008
L
J
1
ramo
D
REMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 1
May 23, 2008
1
' Mr. Ryan Hawkins
Dutch Brothers Coffee
18216 SW McConnell Court
Sherwood, Oregon 97140
Dear Mr. Hawkins:
RE: Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Dutch Brothers Coffee Site, SW Pacific Highway
and Highway 217, Tigard (Washington County), Oregon.
INTRODUCTION
' In accordance with the request of Mr. Jeff Bolton of Multi/Tech Engineering Services, Inc. and as
authorized by Mr. Ryan Hawkins of Dutch Brothers Coffee on May 8, 2008, we have completed our
t Geotechnical Investigation at the above subject proposed new Dutch Brothers Coffee site. The
proposed new building site is generally sited to the south of SW Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and to
the east of Highway 217 within the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 36, Township 1 South and Range 1
' West of the Willamette Meridian in Tigard (Washington County), Oregon (see Site Vicinity Map, Figure
No. 1).
' PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Based on a review of the proposed site development plan for the project, prepared by Multi/Tech
' Engineering Services, Inc., we understand that present plans for the project are to develop the
approximate 0.46 acre site by constructing a new Dutch Brothers Coffee building. Specifically, we
understand that the project will consist of the construction of one (1) new approximate 400 square feet
' single -story building as well as paved parking and drive areas. The proposed new coffee building will
likely be constructed with wood - framing and with a concrete slab -on -grade floor system. Additionally,
we understand that development of the site will result in the placement of some eight (8) feet or more
' of structural fill in order to bring the existing site grades up to and /or near the elevation of the existing
northerly access road which is at about Elevation 218 feet. Further, the proposed new structural fill
materials will be contained and /or supported by one (1) or more new retaining walls. However, the
specific type of retaining wall is unknown at this time.
PO Box 20547 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97294 • FAX 503/286 -7176 • PHONE 503/285 -0598
I
I
I 1 u " '' .' \\IT lik - - " •- -----.01r-1-- - . i Myr- Sr-4 1,,- __,_i- -.1 • .
N. if - -
K -, '....: \\\ 1r i
cy- , ,,, r t .v - ril
I i ) : k ,,, .1 , '7_7_ ..,,lifnm ..s. .4. ,,
I, • ..„,- ,--., ....„,
,,,,,,,,.... _,..„ _.
„,.. I: .- ,,,. j r__,„ ,,,,L
_ _, liTell ii" 1 ,, %
I � - �� � f�br �� :: I �• ,45,r.: zoo ,r. \ \' I ` g ialW41 ► l � ' :< v ii, , SITES -
O ' ,'' I ;IOW _ X��� \14 10
_ ___ ____ I „:„.„,-,.,,, • ; -,.:•;, - ,,,,...-_. , , i „.„,
) .. ' 1,, /,‘„•-,....,. ..<4104,,,..a - . - \-,...,„,,,-,...„---.m
.1. ' .. • '''''';pywo 1 fit" .-----:;
115 . 1 ) .. -,..,,
..., .. __ , 40 ''',... .... /:;`,.. V s \ / -",..,,! (IL dip ,
I � , y� _N �� 'd- \ Al • f � II
I Mir /4 ' 41 * 142-\
. - 6 1 /( 1 ,vt , 43;\.ix ' -1111 r . N\ \ , A � �w' .---.11 so F� � N 1
I )) 1-1 1i i t a " 1- -- ---7-) : —It k.; *. ...., 1 01r'i, :li : 3 :214--v. r.--;7 1s.'..:. 1 *. ..:: ; :n_ 2 ° s'' '" \- Zo\'' "
•
I BEAVERTON QUADRANGLE
OREGON - WASHINGTON CO.
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
I ' NE /4 BEAVERTON 15' QUADRANGLE
•
SCALE 1:24 000
I 1 0 1 MILE
1----, 1-----1 F----I I
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 • 5000 6000 7000 FEET
I--. I --I I f I I r- -, I
1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER
I- It-- -- - - - I f
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
I SITE VICINITY MAP
I
Project No. 1001.005.G I DUTCH BROTHERS TIGARD• I Figure No. 1
.
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 2
1 -
Support for the new coffee building and /or retaining wall structures is anticipated to consist of
' conventional shallow continuous (strip) footings. Structural loading information is presently not
available for the project. However, based on our past experience with similar projects, we anticipate
that the structural loads for the coffee building structure will be fairly typical and light for this type of
single -story, wood -frame construction and should produce maximum dead plus live continuous (strip)
footing loads on the order of about 1.0 to 2.0 kips per lineal foot (kpf). Structural loading for the
proposed new retaining walls is unknown at this time.
' As noted above, other associated site improvements for the project will include the construction of new
paved parking and /or access drive as well as new underground utility services.
' SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed new Dutch Brothers Coffee site is located within the SW 1/4 of Section 36, Township 1
South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian. The project site is generally sited to the south of SW
Pacific Highway (Highway 99W) and to the east of Highway 217 in the city of Tigard (Washington
County), Oregon. The subject property proposed for development at this time is roughly irregular to
triangular in shape and encompasses approximately 0.46 total acres. The proposed new coffee
development site is generally unimproved and consists primarily of open land. However, an existing cell
' tower facility is located directly to the south of the proposed new coffee development. Additionally, we
understand that the subject property may have previously been developed as part of a residential home
site as evidenced by the presence of old asphaltic concrete pavements across the central portion of the
site.
Topographically, the northerly and easterly portions of the site are generally characterized as
' moderately sloping terrain (ie., 50 to 100 percent) descending downward to the south and east while
the central portion of the site is generally characterized as flat - lying. Further, the southerly portion of
the site is somewhat elevated (mounded). Overall topographic relief across the site is estimated at
' about fifteen (15) feet and with site elevations ranging from a low of about Elevation 205 feet to a high
of about Elevation 220 feet.
' Vegetation across most of the site generally consists of a moderate to dense growth of grass, weeds and
brush as well as occasional small to medium sized trees.
SCOPE OF WORK
The purpose of our Geotechnical studies is to evaluate the overall site subsurface soil and ground water
' characteristics as well as any associated impacts or concerns with regard to the planned new
construction and /or development of the site. Specifically, our Geotechnical Investigation included the
following scope of work items:
' 1. A site reconnaissance of the subject property and /or surrounding area as well as a review of
available and relevant geologic reports and /or maps of the area.
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 3
2. Site exploration by means of one (1) exploratory drilled test boring. The exploratory test boring
was drilled near the center of the proposed development area at the site to a depth of about
29.0 feet beneath existing site grades with truck - mounted auger drilling equipment.
Representative (disturbed and undisturbed) samples of the subsurface soils encountered at
' the site were collected and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing.
The results of the exploratory test boring performed at the site is shown graphically in the
Appendix on the Boring Log, Figure No. 5.
3. A laboratory testing program performed on representative samples of the subsurface soils
encountered at the site to aid in classification of the soils and to help identify their engineering
' and strength characteristics. The laboratory testing program included natural (field) moisture
content and dry density determinations, Atterberg Limits, hydrometer (gradation)as well as
consolidation and direct shear strength tests. Results of the various laboratory tests performed
for this project are presented in the appendix, Figure No's. 6 through 9.
4. Recommendations and our final written report presenting the results of our investigation. Our
' report includes recommendations for site preparation and grading including any over
excavation of unsuitable materials revealed by the explorations, placement and compaction of
• any required structural fill(s), suitability of the on -site soils for use as structural fill as well as
criteria for import fill materials, and preparation of pavement and foundation areas.
' 5. Recommendations for foundation support and design including allowable contact bearing
pressures for proportioning footings, minimum footing width and embedment depths,
estimates of foundation settlement as well as lateral earth pressures for any below grade
' and /or retaining walls. Additionally, we have developed recommended asphaltic concrete
pavement section(s) for the proposed new automobile access drive and parking areas for the
proposed new coffee development.
REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING
' The subject site is located within the Columbia River /Puget Sound lowland which is a broad structural
depression situated between the Coast Range to the west and the Cascade Range to the east. A series of
discontinuous faults subdivide the Columbia River basin into a mosaic of fault- bounded, structural
' blocks (Yeats et al., 1996). Uplifted structural blocks form bedrock highlands while down - warped
structural blocks form the sedimentary basins.
' The significant geologic units in the area include the Pleistocene aged Willamette Silt lacustrine and
fluvial sedimentary rocks and the Pliocene to Pleistocene age Boring Lavas. In general, the fine- grained
facies (Off) consist of course sand to silt deposited by catastrophic floods. The finer sediments are
' predominantly quartz and feldspar and also contain white mica. The coarser sediments are
predominantly Columbia River Basalt fragments. Poorly defined beds of 1- to 3 -feet in thickness are
observed in outcrops in the area and complex layering is recorded in boreholes. Soil development
' commonly introduces significant clay into the upper 6- to 15 -feet of the deposits.
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
' Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 4 •
The fine sediments are locally thick in the lower portions of the area and extend upslope as a mantle to
an elevation between 300 and 350 feet.
The Boring Lavas (QTb) generally consist of light -gray to gray, diktytaxtic, olivine- (less commonly
' plagioclase -) phyric basalt and basaltic andesite flows which erupted from a series of local vents.
Eruptive activity associated with Boring Lavas built cones (e.g., Mount Sylvania and Cooks Butte)
composed of interstratified cinders and lava. Boring Lava flows are poorly exposed due to variable
' degrees of deep weathering and /or mantling by loess. Exceptions occur where catastrophic flood waters
have eroded away overlying deposits or in excavations. Boring Lava flows typically display blocky to
columnar jointing and, if preserved, vesicular flow tops. Thickness of unit QTb is highly variable, ranging
from greater than 600 feet at a vent to less than 50 feet for individual flows away from the vent. Age of
unit QTb within the map area (based on portable fluxgate magnetometer determinations) indicate an
age of greater than 700,000 years. Boring Lava flows can be distinguished from older basalt units on the
basis of physical appearance, stratigraphic position, litology, and major oxide composition.
The geologic mapping performed in the area includes slope stability, earthquake susceptibility, and
' landslide studies. For the most part this site is mapped as stable except for the steeper slopes located
along portions of Highway 217.
We did not observe any evidence of active and /or inactive landsliding of undisturbed native soils during
our site investigation and it appears that any hazard designation in the area has been made strictly on a
slope stability basis. Most slope stability problems occur as a result of encountering groundwater or
' springs and seeps during construction. Our report notes that grading should only take place during the
drier summer months and that springs and /or seeps encountered during construction should be
properly captured and controlled.
' Based on the results of our observations and test boring exploration, it is our opinion that the site is
presently stable and developable using the standard of care in construction techniques outlined in this
' report. Provided that the construction practices adhere to our recommendations, we foresee no
problems outside of normal variations in conditions on most construction projects of this size and
magnitude.
' SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
' Our understanding of the subsurface soil and /or ground water conditions which underlie the site was
developed by means of one (1) exploratory test boring drilled on May 15, 2008 with truck - mounted,
solid - flight, hollow -stem auger drilling equipment at the approximate location shown on the Site
' Exploration Plan, Figure No. 2.
The exploratory test boring revealed that the site is generally underlain by native soil deposits
' comprised of fine grained sedimentary soil deposits of Pleistocene age. Specifically, the site was
generally found to be underlain by native soil deposits comprised of a surficial layer of about 12 to 14
inches or more of dark brown, moist to very moist, soft, organic to highly organic, low to medium
' plasticity, sandy, clayey silt topsoil materials.
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
I
I
\
1 NW G d1 \�
PA
GR. /--- \ N r �ss�
\ , \ \ ,��
�� wW .'
�; - / . x. .770- - r ›)."
1 i ems`,'
; . �. .
1 (' S S: .., ��
\:: \ •\ .- , •
I- i
C ; I i
N S:
Z I �I�
�&; . \ I, „0 11 / JI. SCALE: r so
I j
I z ' ,b
7os j; 17j0.
'4 1 E[ CTtf2a biOG
I 7O � N , 1 I 1 I I -
V � � 1g • � YCR o �
1 K • • �' i
L e k
9
I
I I
LEGEND, I
I B Indicates approximate location
of exploratory drilled test boring
I
SITE EXPLORATION MAP
I Project No. 1001.005.G I DUTCH BROTHERS TIGARD I Figure No. 2
I
' Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 5
' These surficial topsoil materials are heavily root laden and are loosely structured and friable. The
surficial topsoil materials were inturn underlain by "Residual" soils comprised of an upper unit of
medium brown to olive- brown, very moist, medium stiff to stiff, sandy, clayey silt to a depth of about 17
feet beneath existing site grades inturn underlain by gray- brown, very moist, stiff to hard, clayey, sandy
' silt to the maximum depth explored of about 29.0 feet beneath existing site grades. These sandy, clayey
silt to clayey, sandy silt subgrade soil materials are best characterized by relatively low to moderate
strength and compressibility and have low to moderate plasticity and expansion characteristics.
' Additionally, although not specifically encountered within the exploratory test boring associated with
this investigation, localized fill materials may also be present at the site and are believed to be located
within the slightly elevated (mounded) southerly portion of the site as well as across the central portion
of the site as evidenced by the presence of existing asphaltic concrete pavement materials.
Ground water was generally not encountered at the site during our field exploration work although
' seasonal fluctuations of the ground water table in the area and /or across the subject site should be
expected. In general, we anticipate that seasonal ground water elevations should be expected to
fluctuate in the area and /or during periods of heavy and /or prolonged rainfall but are not expected to
I rise to within about fifteen (15) feet of the existing surface elevations. All soils encountered at the site
were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) which is outlined on
Figure No. 4.
' GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING
A seismic site - specific hazard study was not part of the scope of work for this project. However, we have
provided IBC 2006 design parameters in the recommendations section (Table 1) of this report in the
event this information is required by others. The liquefaction potential of the foundation soils is
considered negligible due to the apparent and /or relatively low groundwater elevation beneath the site,
the relative stiffness and cohesive characteristics of the sandy, clayey sit to clayey, sandy silt subgrade
soils as well as the medium stiff to hard characteristics of the subgrade soils which underlie the site.
' There is no indication of faulting beneath the site. However, hidden and /or deep- seated active faults
could remain undetected. In addition, recent crustal seismic activity cannot always be tied to observed
I faults. In the event of a catastrophic earthquake with a large seismic moment, inactive faults could
potentially be reactivated.
' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From a Geotechnical Engineering and constructability standpoint, we are of the opinion that the site is
' generally suitable for the planned new coffee development provided that the recommendations
contained within this report are properly incorporated into the design and construction of the project.
Additionally, the following recommendations assume that the proposed new coffee building and /or
' retaining wall structure(s) planned for the project will be constructed with a conventional shallow
foundation system and with a concrete slab -on -grade floor. However, if structures are planned with
basements, Redmond Geotechnical Services, LLC should be contacted for additional recommendations.
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 6
The primary features of concern at the site are 1) the existing moderately steep slopes located near the
' northerly and easterly boundaries of the site, 2) the possible presence of existing localized fill materials
and /or old foundation remnants at the site, 3) the presence of the existing topsoil materials, and 4) the
moisture sensitivity of the residual sandy, clayey silt subgrade soil materials located across the site.
' With regards to the existing moderately steep slopes located along the northerly and /or easterly
boundaries of the site, we are generally of the opinion that the placement of the planned structural fill
' materials in order to raise the existing site grades will not impact the northerly existing slope. However,
adequate embedment and /or setback of the retaining wall footing along the easterly property boundary
will be required in order to develop adequate long term protection against possible slope movement
and /or soil erosion.
In regards to the possible presence of existing localized fill materials and /or old foundation remnants,
we are generally of the opinion that some additional site preparation and /or clearing may be required in
the planned structural improvement areas of the site to properly remove any and /or all of the
unsuitable and /or deleterious materials encountered during construction. As such, close monitoring by
the geotechnical engineer during all site preparation and grading work will be required to ensure that
any existing unsuitable fill materials and /or old foundation remnants are properly removed prior to the
placement of any required structural fills and /or structural improvements.
' With regard to the presence of the existing topsoil materials located across the site, the topsoil
materials were found to be highly root laden and /or organic. Additionally, it is our opinion that the
' overall composition of the existing topsoil zone presently possess low strength and moderate to high
compressibility characteristics. In this regard, we are of the opinion that in areas proposed for any of
the new site and /or structural improvements (ie., retaining walls and structural fill areas) all of the
' existing topsoil materials should be removed in their entirety down to approved residual (native)
subgrade soil materials. As such, due to the anticipated final grades (elevations) selected for the
proposed project, we are of the opinion that all of existing topsoil materials will need to be removed
prior to the placement of any required structural fill materials.
In regards to the moisture sensitivity of the residual sandy, clayey silt subgrade soils across the site, we
' are of the opinion that all site grading and /or construction activities across the subject site be
performed and /or completed during the drier summer months which is typically June through
September. Additionally, depending on the type of structural fill materials selected for use a the site, we
' are of the opinion that construction activity and /or heavy construction equipment traffic should be
limited across the new building pad and /or pavement areas following the grading work and /or during
wet or inclement weather conditions.
' The following sections of this report present specific recommendations for site preparation and grading
as well as foundation and pavement design and construction for the proposed new Dutch Brothers
Coffee project.
1
REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
' Project No. 1001.005.G
' Page No. 7
' SITE PREPARATION
In general, we recommend that all planned structural improvement areas for the new coffee building
and /or retaining wall structures as well as all new paved access drives and /or parking areas be stripped
' and cleared of any existing surface vegetation, topsoil materials, and any deleterious materials present
at the time of construction. In general, we envision that about 12 to 14 inches of stripping will be
' required to remove existing surface vegetation and /or topsoil materials. Holes resulting from the
removal of any buried obstructions, such as old foundation remnants and /or abandoned utility services,
should be backfilled and compacted with structural fill materials. Areas resulting in deeper stripping
' and /or removals, such as any existing fill materials, should be evaluated at the time of construction by
the Geotechnical Engineer. The stripped and cleared materials should be properly disposed of as they
are generally not considered suitable for use /reuse as structural fill.
' Following the stripping and clearing operations, and prior to the placement of any required structural
fills and /or structural improvements, all loose and /or soft subgrade soils exposed within the planned
building and /or pavement areas should be scarified to a depth of about 8 to 12 inches, moisture
' conditioned to near optimum moisture content (plus or minus 3 percent) and recompacted to the
requirements of structural fill. Following the scarification and recompaction work, we recommend that
the exposed subgrade soils be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer and proof - rolled with a fully-
loaded dump truck. Areas found to be soft or otherwise unsuitable for support of structural loads or
improvements should be re- scarified and recompacted again and /or over - excavated and replaced with
other structural fill.
The on -site existing native sandy, clayey silt subgrade soils are considered suitable for use /reuse as
structural fill provided that they are free of organic materials, debris, and rock fragments in excess of 6
' inches in dimension. If grading is conducted during wet and /or inclement weather conditions, the use of
the on -site native subgrade soils will be difficult at best and the use of an import granular fill material
will likely be required. In general, we recommend that a free - draining (clean) granular fill (sand &
' gravel) containing no more than about 5 percent fines be used during wet weather grading.
Representative samples of the material(s) to be used as structural fill should be submitted to our
laboratory for approval and to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for
' compaction.
In general, we do not recommend that site grading and earthwork construction be performed during
' wet or inclement weather conditions due to the moisture sensitivity of the near surface slightly clayey,
sandy silt subgrade soils at the site. However, should wet weather grading and construction be planned
or required, the use of a granular working surface of at least 12 inches as well as possibly a.geotextile
' fabric such as Mirafi 600nx may be needed to protect the sensitive subgrade soils from disturbance due
to repetitive wheel loading from construction equipment.
All required structural fill materials placed within any of the building and pavement (structural) areas
should be moistened or dried as necessary to near (within 3 percent) optimum moisture conditions and
compacted by mechanical means to a minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by the ASTM D -1557 (AASHTO T -180) test procedures.
REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Project No. 1001.005.G
' Page No. 8
' Fill materials should be placed in lifts (layers) such that when compacted do not exceed about 8 inches.
Additionally, fill materials placed on slopes and /or sloping ground steeper than about 5H:1V (20%)
should be properly benched and keyed into the native subgrade soils. A typical key and benching detail
can be provided if required. Further, due to the moisture sensitivity of the existing silty subgrade soils
' across the site as well as the need to properly monitor and document the grading contractors
operations, we recommend that a representative of Redmond Geotechnical Services, LLC be present at
the site during all site grading activities and /or foundation preparation work.
' EXPANSIVE SOILS
The results of our site exploration and laboratory testing program for the project indicates that the
native residual sandy, clayey silt subgrade soils are classified as ML soils and possess low plasticity and
expansion index characteristics (ie., liquid limit and expansion index less than 50). As such, the native
sandy, clayey silt subgrade soils are not expected to shrink and /or swell significantly with seasonal
fluctuations (changes) in moisture (water) content. Additionally, present plans call for the placement of
some eight (8) feet or more of structural fill materials at the site in order to raise the existing site grades.
' In this regard, we do not envision the need for any special subgrade preparation of building foundations,
pavements, sidewalks, and /or any deformation sensitive structures. However, a re- evaluation may be
required following the site grading work for the project.
' FOUNDATION SUPPORT
Based on the results of our investigation as well as our understanding that the proposed site
development will result in the construction of a new coffee buildings and /or various retaining wall
structures, it is our opinion that the proposed new coffee building and /or retaining wall structures may
' be supported directly on the existing medium stiff to stiff, residual sandy, clayey silt subgrade soil
materials or by properly compacted structural fill materials with conventional continuous (strip) and /or
individual spread (column) footings.
As such, were foundations are supported by approved medium stiff to stiff, native subgrade soil
materials and /or properly compacted structural fill materials, an allowable contact bearing pressure on
the order of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design. However, where higher
allowable contact bearing pressures are desired and /or required, and allowable contact bearing
pressure of approximately 2,500 psf may be used for design purposes where foundations are supported
by a minimum of 12 inches of properly compacted import granular fill material. These allowable contact
bearing pressures are intended for dead loads and sustained live loads and may be increased by one -
third for the total of all loads including short-term wind or seismic loads.
In general, continuous (strip) footings should have a minimum width of at least 16 inches and be
embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish grade (includes frost protection).
' Individual spread (column) footings (if required) should be embedded at least 16 inches below grade
and have a minimum width of about 24 inches. Additionally and as previously noted, the easterly
proposed retaining wall footing(s) are presently planned to be located adjacent to an existing
moderately steep slope area.
REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
' Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 9
In this regard, we recommend that the planned retaining wall footings be sufficiently embedded such
that a minimum of at least eight (8) feet of lateral (horizontal) separation is developed between the face
of the existing slope and the outer (down slope) bearing edge of the retaining wall footing element(s).
Total and differential settlements of building and retaining wall foundations constructed as .
recommended above and supported directly by approved native subgrade soils and /or on properly
placed and /or compacted structural fill materials are expected to be within tolerable limits for these
types of lightly loaded structures and should generally be less than about -1 -inch and 1/2 -inch,
respectively.
' Allowable lateral frictional resistance between the base of the footings and the sandy, clayey silt and /or
a granular subgrade soil can be expressed as the applied vertical load multiplied by a coefficient of
friction of 0.30 and 0.45, respectively. In addition, lateral loads may be resisted by passive pressures on
' footings poured "neat" against in -situ native soils or properly compacted structural fill materials. For
passive earth pressure resistance we recommend that an equivalent fluid density of 300 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf) be used for design.
' FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT
In order to provide uniform sub grade reaction beneath any concrete slab -on -grade floors, we
recommend that the floor slabs (if required) be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of free - draining
(less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve), well - graded, crushed rock. The crushed rock should
' provide a capillary break to prevent migration of moisture through the slab. Additional moisture
protection can be provided by using a 6 -mil visqueen vapor barrier covered with a 1 inch protective
layer of sand on the top and bottom. However, during wet and /or inclement weather conditions, the
' use of sand on top of the visqueen may tend to trap water if it becomes wet. The base course materials
should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM D -1557
(AASHTO T -180) test procedures.
' BELOW GRADE/RETAINING WALLS
' Below grade and /or retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by .
native soils and /or granular backfill materials as well as any adjacent surcharge loads. For walls which
are restrained from rotation at the top and supporting level backfill, we recommend that at -rest earth
' pressures be computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid density of 60 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and
55 pcf for clayey silt or granular backfill materials, respectively. For walls which are free to rotate at the
top and retaining level backfill, we recommend that active earth pressures be computed on the basis of
' an equivalent fluid density of 35 pcf and 30 pcf for clayey silt or granular backfill materials, respectively.
The above recommended lateral earth pressure values assume that the walls will be adequately drained
' to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures. Where wall drainage will not be present and /or if
adjacent surcharge loading is present, the above recommended values will be significantly higher.
Backfill materials behind below grade and /or retaining walls should be compacted to 90 percent of the
' maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D -1557 (AASHTO T -180) test procedures.
REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
' Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 10
' Special care should be taken to avoid overcompaction near the walls which could result in higher lateral
earth pressures than those indicated herein. In areas within about three (3) to five (5) feet behind walls,
we recommend the use of hand - operated compaction equipment.
' PAVEMENTS
Flexible pavement design for the project was determined on the basis of projected (anticipated) traffic
' volume and loading conditions relative to assumed laboratory subgrade soil strength ( "R "- value)
characteristics. Based on an assumed laboratory subgrade "R" -value of 30 (CBR = 3.5) and utilizing an
Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Design Standard for automobile parking and /or access drive areas as well
as heavy access areas, we recommend that the asphaltic concrete pavement section(s) for the new
Dutch Brothers Coffee development areas at the site consist of the following:
Asphaltic Concrete Crushed Base Rock
Thickness (inches) Thickness (inches)
' Automobile Parking Areas 2.0 8.0
Automobile Access Drives 3.0 8.0
Heavy Access Areas 3.0 12.0
' Note: The above asphaltic concrete pavement section(s) assumes a reliability factor of 90
percent and a subgrade soil classification of fair (MR = 5,000 to 10,000 psi). However,
should an import granular structural fill materials be selected for the project, we are of
' the opinion that the above recommended crushed base rock thickness may be reduced
by 2 inches.
' The above recommended pavement section(s) assume that the subgrade will be prepared as
recommended herein, that the exposed subgrade soils will be properly protected from rain and
construction traffic, and that the subgrade is firm and unyielding at the time of paving. Additionally, it
' assumes that the subgrade is graded to prevent any ponding of water which may tend to accumulate in
the base course. Further, the above recommended flexible pavement section(s) assumes a design life of
about 20 years. Where wet weather construction is anticipated and /or required, an additional 10 to 12
' inches of granular subbase is generally anticipated.
Pavement base course materials should consist of well - graded 1 and /or 3/4 -inch minus crushed
' base rock having less than 5 percent fine materials passing the No. 200 sieve. The base course and
asphaltic concrete materials should conform to the requirements set forth in the latest edition of the
Oregon Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. The base
' course materials should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined
by the ASTM D -1557 (AASHTO T -180) test procedures. The asphaltic concrete materials should be
compacted to at least 90 percent of the theoretical maximum density as determined by the ASTM
' D -2041 (Rice Gravity) test method.
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
'. Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. it
EXCAVATIONS
' Temporary excavations within the native (residual) clayey and sandy silt subgrade soils of up to four (4)
feet in depth are expected to remain fairly stable at near vertical inclinations. Excavations to depths of
between four (4) feet to ten (10) feet should be properly braced and shored or back cut to inclinations
of about 1 to 1 (horizontal to Vertical). Where excavations are planned to exceed ten (10) feet, this
office should be consulted. Additionally, at present levels, we do not anticipate that ground water will
' be a factor during construction except perhaps during periods of extreme heavy and /or prolonged
rainfall.
' SURFACE DRAINAGE /GROUND WATER
We recommend that positive measures be taken to properly finish grade the site so that drainage
' waters from the new coffee building and retaining wall structures and /or landscaping areas as well as
the adjacent properties and /or pavement areas are directed away from the new structures. All roof
drainage should be directed into conduits that carry runoff water away from the structures to a suitable
' outfall. Roof downspouts should not be connected to any foundation drains. A minimum ground slope
of about 2 percent away from the structures is generally recommended in landscaping areas around the
structures. Specific recommendations for the use of footing drains should be made at the completion of
the mass grading for the project based on observations made during site grading and construction and
the type of structural fill selected for the project. However, due to the anticipated use of a concrete
slab -on -grade floor beneath the proposed new coffee building structure, we recommend that the new
' coffee building include a perimeter footing drain system. In general, the uphill side of any retaining walls
and footings as well as the planned new coffee building structures should be provided with a drainage
system consisting of a 4 -inch diameter, perforated plastic pipe embedded in a minimum of 1.0 cubic
foot per lineal foot of clean, free - draining sand and gravel or 11/2 " -1/4" drain rock. The drain pipe and
surrounding drain rock should be wrapped in a non -woven geotextile (Mirafi 140N) or approved
equivalent to help minimize the potential for clogging and /or ground loss due to piping. A suitable below
' grade retaining wall and /or foundation drain detail is shown on Figure No. 3.
Design and construction should include typical measures for controlling subsurface water beneath all
' structures, including positive crawlspace drainage to an adequate low -point drain exiting the residential
foundations, visqueen covering the exposed ground surface within the crawlspace, and crawlspace
ventilation (foundation vents). Future buyers should be informed and educated that some slow flowing
' water in the crawlspaces is considered normal and not necessarily detrimental to the structure given
these other design elements incorporated into its construction. Appropriate design professionals should
•
be consulted regarding crawlspace ventilation, building material selection and mold prevention issues,
' which are outside the scope of services of this report.
1
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
I
I
I ; • Asphalt or landscaping soil as required
V (slope surface to drain) — see Note 3
I .vim 6' seal of compacted native soil
e . (la • — ... areas only)
1 .
• General Baddill
• 12° min.
• � . A • Chimney Drainage Zone
• 1r minimum cover over pipe,
6' minimum cover over footing
- 0 --- . F.::-..:.::-. /.4•-
•0,..";r,00. . - O 0 oCc
s-- Filter Fabric
I G r,•' a r ;
t v Drain Gravel
z' ' ° e ` Preferred Perforated
. Drain Pipe Location
1
I SCHEMATIC - NOT TO SCALE
I NOTES:
Fitter Fabric to be non -woven geotedile (Amoco 4545, Mirafi 140N, or equivalent)
I 1.
2. Lay perforated drain pipe on minimum 0.5% gradient, widening excavation as required.
Maintain pipe above 21 slope, as shown.
I 3. All-granular backfill is recommended for support of slabs, pavements, etc. (see text for
structural fill).
4. Drain gravel to be clean, washed W to 1W gravel.
I 5. General backfill to be on-ste gravels, or %"-0 or 1W-0 crushed rock compacted to 92%
Modified Proctor (AASHTO T -180).
I 8. Chimney drainage zone to be 1Y wide (minimum) zone of dean washed, medium to coarse
sand or drain gravel if protected with filter fabric. Alternatively, prefabricated drainage structures
(Miradrain 6000 or similar) may be used.
I
BELOW GRADE/RETAINING WALL FOOTING DRAIN
I Project No. 1001.005.G I DUTCH BROTHERS TIGARD I Figure No. 3
1
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 12
u
SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
' Structures at the site should be designed to resist earthquake loading in accordance with the
methodology described in the State of Oregon 2007 Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) and /or
' Amendments to the 2006 International Building Code (IBC). The maximum considered earthquake
ground motion for short period and 1.0 second period spectral response may be determined from the
State of Oregon 2007 Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) or Figures 1613 (1) and 1613 (2) of the 2006
' National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) "Recommended Provisions for Seismic
•
Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures" published by the Building Seismic Safety Council.
We recommend Site Class "D" be used for design per the OSSC, Table 1613.5.2. Using this information,
' the structural engineer can select the appropriate site coefficient values (Fa and Fv) from Tables 1613.5.3
(1) and 1613.5.3 (2) of the 2006 IBC to determine the maximum considered earthquake spectral
response acceleration for design of the project. However, we have assumed the following response
' spectrum for the project:
Table 1. IBC 2006 Seismic Design Parameters
' Site
Class Ss Si Fa Fv Sms Smi Sps Spi
' D 0.75 0.35 1.20 1.71 0.90 0.59 0.60 0.39
' Notes: 1. Ss and Si were established based on the USGS 2002 mapped maximum considered
earthquake spectral acceleration maps for 2% probability of exceedence in 50 years.
2. Fa and Fv were established based on IBC 2006 tables 1613.5.3(1) and 1613.5.3(2) using the
selected Ss and Si values.
' Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, granular soils and some silty soils located below the water
table develop high pore water pressures and loose strength. Soils located above the ground water table
will not liquefy.
1 Our review of exploratory test boring data for the site indicates that the site is underlain at depth by
medium stiff to hard, sandy and clayey silt of low to moderate plasticity. Additionally, ground water was
' generally not encountered at the site to depths of at least 29 feet. As such, we are of the opinion that
the potential for seismic - induced liquefaction to occur at the site is very low.
1
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
' Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 13
EROSION CONTROL
During our field exploration program, we observed some soil types that would generally be considered
susceptible to erosion. In our opinion, the primary concern regarding erosion potential will occur during
' construction, in areas that have recently been stripped and cleared of surface vegetation. Erosion at the
site during construction can be minimized by implementing a project erosion control plan which should
include the judicious use of straw bales and silt fences. If used, these erosion control devices should be
in place and remain in place throughout all of the site grading and construction operations.
Erosion and sedimentation of exposed subgrade soils can also be minimized by quickly re- vegetating
exposed areas of soil and by staging construction such that large areas of the subject site are not
denuded and exposed at the same time. Areas of exposed soil requiring immediate and /or temporary
protection against exposure should be covered with either mulch or erosion control netting /blankets.
Areas of exposed soil requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved grass seed
mixture or hydroseeded with an approved seed - mulch - fertilizer mixture.
USE OF REPORT
This report is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee and /or their representative(s) to use to
design and construct the proposed new coffee building structure and the associated site improvements
described herein as well as to prepare any related construction documents. The conclusions and
recommendations contained in this report are based on the site conditions as they presently exist and
assume that the exploration performed as part of this investigation is representative of the subsurface
conditions at other areas across the site and /or study area. The data, analyses, and recommendations
herein may not be appropriate for other structures or purposes. We recommend that parties
contemplating other structures and /or purposes contact our office. In the absence of our written
approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this
report.
' It is the owners /developers responsibility for insuring that the project designers and /or contractors
involved with this project implement our recommendations into the final design plans, specifications
and /or construction activities for the project. Further, in order to avoid delays during construction, we
recommend that the final design plans and specifications for the project be reviewed by our office to
evaluate as to whether our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the
' project.
If during any future site grading and construction, subsurface conditions different from those
I encountered in the exploration are observed or appear to be present beneath excavations, we should
be advised immediately so that we may review these conditions and evaluate whether modifications of
the design criteria are required. We should also be advised if significant modifications of the proposed
' site development are planned so that we may review our conclusions and recommendations.
1
' REDMOND. GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
I
Project No. 1001.005.G
I Page No. 14
LEVEL OF CARE '
I Services erformed by the Geotechnical Engineer for this project have been conducted with that level of
p Y g P 1
care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the area under
I similar budget and time restraints. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made.
I CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND TESTING
We recommend that REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES. LLC be retained to provide construction
monitoring and testing services during all earthwork operations. The purpose of our monitoring services
I would be to confirm that the site conditions which are encountered are as anticipated, provide field
recommendations as necessary based on the actual conditions encountered, and document the
I activities of the contractor and assess his /her compliance with the project specifications and
recommendations.
It is important that we meet with the grading contractor prior to any site grading work to establish a
I plan that will minimize costly over - excavation and site preparation work. Of primary importance will be
observations made during the site preparation, structural fill placement, footing preparation and
• construction and retaining wall backfilling.
We will be pleased to provide such additional assistance or information as you may require in the
balance of the design phase of this project and to aid in construction control or solution of unforeseen
I conditions which may arise during the construction period.
I Sincerely,
1 iv 1
ktf
;,,
Daniel M. Redmond P.E. / ',
I President /Principal Geotechnical Engineer 411.
OREGON
O ✓ O
"7 °1 r 15. l9 O-
' Cc: Mr. Jeff Bolton M. M. RE0
Multi/Tech Engineering Services, Inc. ( '61
I
I
I
I REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 15
REFERENCES
' Atwater, B.F., 1992, Geologic evidence for earthquakes during the past 2,000 years along the Copalis
River, southern coastal Washington: Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 97, p. 1901 -1919.
' Balsillie, J.J. and Benson, G.T., 1971, Evidence for the Portland Hills fault: The Ore Bin, Oregon Dept. of
Geology and Minerals Industries, v. 33, p. 109 -118.
Beeson, M.H., Tolan, T.L., and Anderson, J.L., 1989, The Columbia River Basalt Group in western Oregon;
Geologic structures and other factors that controlled flow emplacement patterns: Geological Society
of America Special Paper 239, in Volcanism and tectonicism in the Columbia River flood - basalt
' province published by the Geological Society of America, p. 223 -246.
Carver, G.A., 1992, Late Cenozoic tectonics of coastal northern California: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists -SEPM Field Trip Guidebook, May 1992.
Cornforth and Geomatrix Consultants, 1992, Seismic hazard evaluation, Bull run dam sites near Sandy,
Oregon: unpublished report to the City of Portland Bureau of Water Works.
Geologic Map of Mount St. Helens Quadrangle, Washington and Oregon. W.M. Phillips, Washington
' Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources (DGER), OFR 87 -4, 1987.
Geologic Map of Washington — Southwest Quadrant. Timothy Walsh et al., Washington Department of
Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources (DGER), GM -34, 1984.
Geology Map of Vancouver Quadrangle, Washington and Oregon. W.M. Phillips, Washington
' Department of Natural Resources, Division of geology and Earth Resources (DGER), OFR 87 -10, 1987.
Geology of Portland, Oregon and Adjacent Areas. D.E. Trimble, United States Geologic Survey Bulletin
1119, 1963.
Geomatrix Consultants, 1995, Seismic Design Mapping, State of Oregon: unpublished report.
' Goldfinger, C., Kulm, L.D., Yeats, R.S., Applegate, B, MacKay, M.E., and Cochrane, G.R., 1996, Active
strike -slip faulting and folding of the Cascadia Subduction -Zone plate boundary and forearc in central
' and northern Oregon: in assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific Northwest, v.
1: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1560, P. 223 -256.
' Madin, I.P., 1990, Earthquake hazard geology maps of the Portland metropolitan area, Oregon: Oregon
Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Open -File Report 0 -92, scale 1:24,000, 22p.
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
Project No. 1001.005.G
Page No. 16
Peterson, C.D., Darioenzo, M.E., Burns, S.F., and Burris, W.K., 1993, Field trip guide to Cascadia
' paleoseismic evidence along the northern California coast: evidence of Subduction zone seismicity in
the central Cascadia margin: Oregon Geology, Vol. 55, p. 99 -144.
' Slope Stability of Clark County. A.J. Fiksdal, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Division of
Geology and Earth Resources (DGER), OFR 75 -10, 1975.
' Slope Stability of Longview -Kelso Area, Cowlitz County. A.J. Fiksdal, Washington Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources (DGER), OFR 73 -1, 1973.
' Unruh, J.R., Wong, J.G., Bott, J.D., Silva, W.J., and Lettis, W.R., 1994, Seismotectonic evaluation: Scoggins
Dam, Tualatin Project, Northwest Oregon: unpublished report by William Lettis and Associates and
Woodward Clyde Federal Services, Oakland, CA, for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, CO (in
Geomatrix Consultants, 1995).
Werner, K.S., Nabelek, J., Yeats, R.S., Malone, S., 1992, The Mount Angel fault: implications of seismic
' - reflection data and the Woodburn, Oregon, earthquake sequence of August, 1990: Oregon Geology,
v. 54, p. 112 -117.
' Yeats, R.S., Graven, E.P., Werner, K.S., Goldfinger, C., and Popowski, T., 1996, Techtonics of the
Willamette Valley, Oregon: in Assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific
Northwest, Vol. 1: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1560, P. 183 -222, 5 plates, scale
1:100,000.
Yelin, T.S., 1992, An earthquake swarm in the north Portland Hills (Oregon): More speculations on the
seismotectonics of the Portland basin: Geological Society of America, Programs with Abstracts, v. 24,
no. 5, p.92.
•
1
1
1
1 .
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
1
APPENDIX
' FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING
FIELD EXPLORATION
' Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling one (1) exploratory test boring on May
15, 2008. The approximate location of the test boring exploration is shown in relation to the
proposed new structure and its associated site improvements on the Site Exploration Map, Figure
No. 2.
The test boring was drilled using truck - mounted solid -stem, hollow - flight, auger drilling equipment
in general conformance with ASTM Methods in Vol. 4.08, D- 1586 -94 and D- 1587 -83. The test boring
was drilled to a depth of approximately 29.0 feet beneath existing site grades. A detailed log of the
' test boring is presented on the Boring Log, Figure No. 5. The soils were classified in accordance with
the Unified Soil Classification System (SCS), which is outlined on Figure No. 4.
' The exploration program was coordinated by a field engineer who monitored the excavating and
exploration activity, obtained representative samples of the subsurface soils encountered, classified
the soils by visual and textural examination, and maintained continuous logs of the subsurface
conditions. Disturbed and /or undisturbed samples of the subsurface soils were obtained at
' appropriate depths and /or intervals and placed in plastic bags and /or with a thin walled ring sample.
Ground water was not encountered in the exploratory test boring at the time of drilling to the
' maximum depth explored of approximately 29.0 feet beneath existing site grades.
LABORATORY TESTING
' Pertinent physical and engineering characteristics of the soils encountered during our subsurface
investigation were evaluated by a laboratory testing program to be used as a basis for selection of
' soil design parameters and for correlation purposes. Selected tests were conducted on
representative soil samples. The program consisted of tests to evaluate the existing (in -situ)
moisture - density, gradational characteristics, Atterberg Limits, direct shear strength and
' consolidation tests.
Dry Density and Moisture Content Determinations
' Density and moisture content determinations were performed on both disturbed and relatively
undisturbed samples from the test pit explorations in general conformance with ASTM Vol. 4.08 Part
D -216. The results of these tests were used to calculate existing overburden pressures and to
correlate strength and compressibility characteristics of the soils. Test results are shown on the test
pit logs at the appropriate sample depths.
1
REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
1
' •A -2
Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit (LL) and Plastic Limit (PL) tests were performed on representative samples of the sandy,
clayey silt and clayey, sandy silt subgrade soils in accordance with ASTM Vol. 4.08 Part D- 4318 -85.
These tests were conducted to facilitate classification of the soils and for correlation purposes. Test
results appear on Figure No. 6.
' Gradation Analysis
Gradation analyses were performed on representative samples of the subsurface soils in accordance
with ASTM Vol. 4.08 Part D -422. The test results were used to classify the soil in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The test results are shown graphically on Figure No. 7.
Direct Shear Strength Test
' One (1) Direct Shear Strength test was performed on a remolded sample at a continuous rate of
•
' shearing deflection (0.02 inches per minute) in accordance with ASTM Vol. 4.08 Part D- 3080 -79. The
test result was used to determine engineering strength properties and is shown graphically on
Figure No. 8.
Consolidation Test
One (1) Consolidation test was performed on an undisturbed soil sample in accordance with ASTM
' Vol. 4.08 Part D -2435. The test was run at loading increments of 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000,
and 16,000 pounds per square foot (lbs/ft and the results were used to help evaluate the
consolidation and /or settlement potential of subgrade soils under load. The test results are shown
' graphically on Figure No. 9.
•
The following figures are attached and complete the Appendix:
' Figure No. 4 - Key To Exploratory Boring Log
Figure No. 5 Boring Log
' Figure No. 6 Atterberg Limits Test Results
Figure No. 7 Gradation Test Results
Figure No. 8 Direct Shear Strength Test Results
' Figure No. 9 Consolidation Test
1
1 -
1
' REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS
SYMBOL
' GRAVELS CLEAN Well graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no
Q GRAVELS GW fines.
U ¢ p MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN Poorly graded gravels or gravel -sand mixtures, little or
Q Q t OF COARSE 5% FINES) G P no fines.
I N 2 z FRACTION IS
LARGER THAN GRAVEL
WITH GM Silty gravels. gravel- sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines.
Z O O.
NJ `�
LL Q N NO. 4 SIEVE FINES GC Clayey gravels, gravel- sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines.
Q F- w CLEAN .
I _ w SANDS $ANDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands little or no fines.
w Q N MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN S P Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines.
to
Q • a OF COARSE 5% FINES) y g g y
O w FRACTION IS
o rn SANDS SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines.
2 SMALLER THAN WITH
NO. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines.
w ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour. silty or
V) LL LL w N SILTS AND CLAYS
L IQUID LIMIT IS clayey fine sands or clayey. silts with slight plasticity
0
I norganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly
J J w W C L clays. sandy clays. silty clays. lean clays.
_ 2 y LESS THAN 50%
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity.
I w
z O
Y2
g _ - ory SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or
f- Q silty soils, elastic silts.
O
it H Z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays.
I Z 2 Q Q 7
LL I GREATER THAN 50%
H OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils.
i DEFINITION OF TERMS
U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS
200 40 10 4 3/4" 3 , 12"
SAND GRAVEL
I SILTS AND CLAYS - COBBLES BOULDERS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
GRAIN SIZES •
I SANDS.GRAVELS AND BLOWS /FOOT f CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS /FOOT f
NON-PLASTIC SILTS PLASTIC SILTS
I VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 VERY SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2
LOOSE 4 - 10 SOFT 1/4 - 1/2 2 - 4
FIRM 1/2 - 1 4 - 8
I MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16
DENSE 30 - 50 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32
VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 •
I RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY
t Number of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch 0.0.0-3/8 inch I.D.)
split spoon CASTM 0-1586).
I
4 Unconfined compressive strength in tons /so. ft. as determined by laboratory testing or approximated
by the standard penetration test CASTM D-1586), pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation.
I KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
Unified Soil Classification System CASTM D -2487)
I :ED REDMOND DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE
GEOTECHNICAL Tigard, Oregon
SERVICES -
PO Box 20547 • PORTLAND. OREGON 97294 PROJECT NO. DATE
1001.005.G 5/23/08 Figure 4
1
I DRILLINGCOMPANY: Subterranean, Inc. RIG: Mobile B -61 DATE: 5/15/08
BORING DIAMETER: 6.0" DRIVE WEIGHT: 1 40 # DROP: 30" ELEVATION: 211 ' ±
I W a a 0 vi .,
a N ° W „ ,- z . SOIL DESCRIPTION
N W V
a > o a o z o m BORING NO. B -1
0
ML Dark brown, moist to very moist, soft,
I organic, sandy, clayey SILT (Topsoil)
ML Medium brown to olive- brown, very moist,
x 9 27.7 medium stiff to stiff, sandy, clayey '—
I SILT
5— --
i x [ 1 1 29.4
10 — —
I x1 8 28.5
II 15— --- —,
I ML Gray- brown, very moist, stiff to hard,
x 13 24.3 clayey, sandy SILT
II 20 — ---
I _
xf 16 25.1 --
25— —
I --
x 19 22.9 / Total Depth = 29.0 feet
' No groundwater encountered
30 ' '
I BORING LOG
PROJECT NO. 1001.005.G I DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE I FIGURE NO. 5
I REDMOND GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
I ,
1
60 - - - - -
I
50 - -
' C H N,,
u P
40 -- —
X
I -- CL —
30
Z
I-
F-
' U MH
Q 20 or —
a
• OH
I 10
4 ^ CL - ML "j'," or OL
I 0 ML I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
I LIQUID LIMIT (%)
I -
NATURAL PASSING
UNIFIED
KEY BORING SAMPLE LIQUID PLASTICITY LIQUIDITY SOIL
I WATER N0. 200
SYMBOL NO. DEPTH LIMIT INDEX INDEX CLASSIFICATION
CONTENT SIEVE SYMBOL
( feet) % . % % %
I El B -1 3.5 27.7 .47.4 15.2 86.8 ML
O B -1 18.5 24.3 34.8 8.4 78.8 ML
I
I
I
I
I PLASTICITY CHART AND DATA
REDMOND
/ G
I 7 DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE
,� Tigard, Oregon
• . S EOTECHNICAL ERVICES PROJECT NO DATE
I PO Box 20547 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97294 F igu re 6
1001.005.G 5/23/08
I
' UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
(ASTM 0 422.72)
U. S STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
I 100 7 6 3 2 1 3/4 1/2 1!4 I 5,• 16 . 30 40 5060 50100 200 325
1 • ■•___insI.1•I•N∎sI ∎Ins/I.1...... _— _�.allsolimiNIM■aliminsi.momms∎ ∎_ —_■ O
•=11MIONEN •••■• ••111111•• =I •=1111■•■11•11•1■1 = ►:� !...1IIII. 1N•MIN•IIIIIII ■11111∎ ■ I•MI MN IIIMB■11
•__•I••_• ____ ■•••• • IMIIMINIMMINIMINBIM•z• IN. .I■11INIM NOM mil ow∎II•••— Um — •
— •1••a11106 aMBINIIIIMIBIM5iMMEI■111 X111••1∎• ■• •aI•.- a••►. _IM•.•MINNIE•∎ ON •b•BEN /M ■•
1•Ell■MI •I•aa111.11 I111• OM I••11• a=111■• 11•■•■ =MIMS ilmIN IN= II: JONI=\ 111••IMMS 11f•MIN■•IaaaIIII■ =BIMMEM 1=1•11MIN
00 -- •I••a MIIIIa∎11•1 ■•aI111111111•mi■amillimiel∎ =No •a•■ •Iso ■•■■ __ MN= IN■ 20
I=mo•IIIIIII•11111=•NM= IIM■IBM IMI■l•IMMEiMENIMIIIMINIII•111•11•1111•1■11 ∎•.•■• ∎•■X11•imillia_
-- •___a rite II•IS• 1■__MINII _•111•1111•s •11Mis.: ■∎ I ∎=111■111•1111■1111111111111■■••
10 on — •_11•_11• a I�I�a1••� ••�I�== III••M• •11••••01 I••a•a1•••a•I•■ I =•• t0∎ 30
a — .....∎aa■II•a •ate• IMENOMM■•11•IMMI••••IMIM•I∎ 61M6 • I ma .a••.11■ MID.■■■
L I ••MINI■ • •••a1•MI IINIMMIIII1111• MOB 6MIIIMIll MO•I•111•1111■x,11 ∎'MIMI •1111111■- 1••1•■Il .
i z
— — INEMEMB ID= •••■•MI aM _a•1.11■El ∎______a MOM= a6I•aISIMMI MI=INMI =IIMMINIO MN MOM= 1■1= D
m 60 — mmini•a1/•an wansam II.11•aIn■I• IMININE aa■111a•a•■ii I1I1•• ON= ••••••∎1•IMIN_ 40 L
• mi•■••11mmel•Mt■Nim ■•It•=11=IS 01•11•11■•1II■IIIIIII• ∎■•••∎•■11• III• a•1••IM•III■∎I••_•1 y
z SO — M�__ It• I7• I∎ It• sm �0It• �IS��•• II I•N•aa•I�IIa• • � I••1•••I••••••• 50 x4
, Om mm■IaimMIM1Mm•■Mil■ mMm■ m■06■66I ■MeI•••m•=MP MOM ••∎•■■•■•0mmm••imm a M■mmomm
i u
R MI S• =•�•�•���I �MN I7••� ���•■ M•a•— .�� -•1�� Z
w 40 — 1••S•NINII 11111aaa W ■•••■11111=1aIN= MI5=a•INIIIII■ MOB .aaI111111I■1•151■/• NIB ■1IM51■1 60 U
I• ■ •a••a••••tal IRM ■eat•1.•41.a ∎ 1•∎661 ■atata •ate =IMIIMIaa•a•t M11.16 ■•a aME .a•a. Z
■• a��••• aa•• Ia••aaa•��ta••aaaa••aa••tl��tf• Ilea•• aaa• ••■••a•••a�•.•a••�•��1.1�•Itf•� y
EN�•NII1����1I�� Imo• ���MN ���•� �•1••1�• I• ��M•_�•• 1
I• wi■O aa•a•a•O• a MEM i∎I ••a••••x•11• Ida1■1a•1♦•∎ a•1 OM 1•M•••a■11115•1I. 1a ∎115
30 51211110111151B MOB NM OEM INN I1ONDINIB MOB 1I• I• MIMII1/•■1111•I• IMO MIN II•INI=M•I■IMIN•aa•••— •• -II• VEINIIIIIIIIIMINIMBI• MI O••al■ 70
—•• •aa• OMINMI I• a•a•INNIRIa• Imo• ••aMII11• MEI- 5 ••■••••• I•aIB•1 NMI IIM•I11•aMININNI=••• • MIME MOINNEM
1 1•I• Miami •a1__ Ian• 11=11•■•■•ENIIIMM _•.a _,I411••∎∎∎141ta•••∎∎
••.ateI■•=15 M•a••I•a•aa• a1••••11111••I IMI M• E MO NMI •■IIIIIIM IN ■ a •• .I III∎ • ��MI • 10 I • • 1M I MN a• 1•661M
1.1•1P 1••II_I1511 a• ■a• N M MB 1=16111■•1MINIIIP•® MIME MO MINIS II= MINNII/M■IMMIM► —MIIMI IMMINIMEIMIIIMM
I• •• •MN EMI MOM •• asM MI Imo• a0•111•11■61.1.1a1• • MIN ••I• I■• MINIM ••a••aaMMI■••■■ •• ••• MINIM a1■
1•I• • =•a IM 11IMMIII■• aI111■11111• I1MIIIIIaM= M11• .Oa••IMM•■
10 I•IIa∎ •�.a•�I•• II•�aI• �••a� �I•a s Iaa••I�I•� •�•._.aaa•�_ = � ■ _m•� 90
I•MIMMINI•1.a■■•• =MO 11•aNI• 1■11•11• MUM U MI.= MEI•IMMI•I∎ MINIM 11MM MEM1-- :1 1• MO
•Mate•M. •••ata•1•a•I MMIIII••••I.1 •II• Twee MIMES •••M• 1 ••• MIN =,==e •••I IB•••II•5•■••:.I a —MN m;.=.
0 ■■ I•••• II• I••■ I•• a• I• II•• 11. 11•••I•II••• ∎II••••• ■III••uI••• • I. I••••• I• I •tI.irnwI••••••••ms••••em•m�. —J= 100
100 SO 10.0 5.0 1.0 0.5 0.1 .05 .01 005 .001
PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
U GRAVEL SAND
COBBLES SILT AND CLAY
i , COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM
I FINE
I
I UNIFIED
SAMPLE SOIL
KEY BORING ELEV. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
SYMBOL NO. DEPTH (feel) CLASSIFICATION
I (feel) SYMBOL
■
-p B -1 3.5 ML Medium brown to olive- brown,
I sandy, clayey SILT
—Q-- B -1 18.5 ML Gray- brown, clayey, sandy
SILT •
II GRADATION TEST DATA
_ / REDMOND DUTCH ga d HE OregonFFEE
I I, � ,� GEOTECNNICAL
SERVICES
PROJECT NO. DATE
I PO BOX 20547 • PORTLAND. OREGON 97294 FIGURE 7
5/23/08
I
I 2.5
•
2.0
•
I �1.5,
cn
w
a
I fn
OC
w1.0
I cn
I •
0.5
I 0.0,
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
NORMAL PRESSURE (KSF)
I
I SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA
DESCRIPTION: Medium to olive - brown, TEST NUMBER I 2 3 4
I sandy, clayey SILT NORMAL PRESSURE 1KSF)
0.5 1 .5 2 .5
SHEAR STRENGTH (KSF) 0.6 1.2 1 .8
BORING NO.: B -1 INITIAL H/0 CONTENT (%) 27.5 27.5 27.5'
I DEPTH (R.): 3.5 I ELEVATION (III: FINAL H2O CONTENT (%) 27.4 25.5 22.9
TEST RESULTS INITIAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) 88.5 88.5 88 . 5
APPARENT COHESION (C): 400 psf FINAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) 89.5 93.5 96.8
I APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION 10): 29 V STRAIN RATE: 0.02 i nches per minute
I
DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA
I REDMOND DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE
411/ 01111)
,� GEOTECHNICAI. Tigard, Oregon
° SERVICES PROJECT NO. DATE
I PO BOX 20547 • PORTLAND, OREGON 97294 Figure 8
1001.005.G 5/23/08
I
I
COMPRESSIVE STRESS IN KSF
I 0 10' 1 10 10
--
I
I .4
E-
I o
W
x
ll w o
F
d
I U Q
H
z 12 >
I W
0
C4
C7.3
I o
1 6
I
I 20 -
II BORING : B -1 DESCRIPTION : sandy, clayey SILT
DEPTH (ft) : 8.5 LIQUID LIMIT : 47.4
I SPEC. GRAVITY : 2.5 (assumed) PLASTIC LIMIT : 32.2
MOISTURE DRY DENSITY PERCENT VOID
I CONTENT (%) (pcf) SATURATION RATIO
INITIAL 29.0 86.6 88.3
I FINAL 24.7 90.7 98.3
I
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
I 7 REDMOND DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE
V
GEOTECNNICAL Tigard, Oregon
• SERVICES PROJECT NO. DATE
I . PO BOX 20547 • PORTLAND. OREGON 97294 Figure 9 `
1001.005.G 5/23/08