Loading...
Report 1 I • o e rs� ' RECEIVED Geatechnical a Environmental . Special Inapectkma.. AUG 4 2014 lumbia lilies _ ��' CITY OFTIGARD BUILDING DIVISION Geotechnical Site Investigation Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard, Oregon June 20, 2013 4 1:2'A)P2f514-091.s7 . .y of Tigard A 'rove. Plans girlie Date Q is.'.056.5 OFFICE COPY t z • C''F ' :1 ,d 11917 NE 95-Street Vancouver,Washington 98682 phone:360-823-2900,fax 360-823-2901 www.columbiawestengineering.com a Soeciai Inspection Columbia West=- GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION BONAVENTURE SENIOR LVING TIGARD, OREGON Prepared For: Bonaventure Senior Housing Mr. Robert Underwood 3220 State St. Suite 200 Salem, Oregon 97301 Site Location: 8325 SW Ross Rd Tigard, Oregon 97224 Prepared By: Columbia West Engineering, Inc. 11917 NE 95th Street Vancouver, Washington 98682 Phone: 360-823-2900 Fax: 360-823-2901 Date Prepared: June 20, 2013 Geotechnical•Environmental•Special Inspections 11917 NE 95-Street Vancouver,Washington 98682 • Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 www columbiawestengineering.corn TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ii LIST OF APPENDICES iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General Site Information 1 1.2 Proposed Development 1 2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SOIL CONDITIONS 1 3.0 REGIONAL SEISMOLOGY 2 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC FIELD INVESTIGATION 3 4.1 Surface Investigation and Site Description 4 4.2 Subsurface Exploration and Investigation 4 4.2.1 Soil Type Description 4 4.2.2 Groundwater 5 5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5 5.1 Site Preparation and Grading 5 5.2 Engineered Structural Fill 6 5.3 Cut and Fill Slopes 7 5.4 Foundations 7 5.5 Slabs on Grade 8 5.6 Settlement 9 5.7 Excavation 9 5.8 Lateral Earth Pressure 9 5.9 Seismic Design Considerations 10 5.10 Liquefaction 11 5.11 Drainage 12 5.12 Bituminous Asphalt and Portland Cement Concrete 12 5.13 Wet Weather Construction Methods and Techniques 13 5.14 Soil Erosion Potential 14 5.15 Utility Installation 15 6.0 CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS 15 REFERENCES FIGURES APPENDICES Columbia West .. onavenI re 1igerd Project(BSI Geolectfcar Peport113 t 16.Bonaventue Senor Living.Tigard.Oregon Geoteohnical Report.do o rev.June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page ii Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 1 Site Location Map 2 Test Pit Location Map 3 Typical Cut and Fill Slope Cross-Section 4 Minimum Foundation Slope Setback Detail 5 Typical Perimeter Footing Drain Detail 6 Typical Perforated Drain Pipe Trench Detail Columbia West=v-- Tgard Protect(BSI-OGeotechnica6Repon'.t:t t6.Bonaventure Senor Livmg.Tigard.Oregon Geolechnical Report deco rev Jwe 2otl Geotechnical Site Investigation Page iii Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon LIST OF APPENDICES Number Title A Analytical Laboratory Test Reports B Subsurface Exploration Logs C Soil Classification Information D Report Limitations and Important Information ,!nxncM�C.1f.E.^.,;ir:'enmun:al•4nec+a!:napac!ams._ Columbia West-4= rnav ensure Tigard Project iBSM1Geotechn,cahReport113116.Bonaventure Senior Living.Tigard,Oregon Geotechnical Report docx, rev.Jane 2013 GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING TIGARD, OREGON to INTRODUCTION Columbia West Engineering, Inc. was retained by Bonaventure Senior Housing to conduct a geotechnical site investigation for the proposed Bonaventure Senior Living center located at 8325 SW Ross Rd in Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of the investigation was to observe and assess subsurface soil conditions at specific locations and provide geotechnical engineering analyses, planning, and design recommendations. The specific scope of services was outlined in a proposal contract dated May 15, 2013. This report summarizes the investigation and provides field assessment documentation and laboratory analytical test reports. This report is subject to the limitations expressed in Section 6.0, Conclusion and Limitations, and Appendix D. 1.1 General Site Information As indicated on Figures 1 and 2, the subject site is located at 8325 SW Ross Rd in Tigard, Oregon. The site is comprised of tax parcel W250644 totaling approximately 5.85 acres. The subject site is bounded by residential properties. The regulatory jurisdictional agency is the City of Tigard, Oregon. The approximate latitude and longitude are N 45° 24' 40" and W 122° 45' 45", and the legal description is a portion of the NW 1/4 of Section 12, T2S, R1 W, Willamette Meridian. 1.2 Proposed Development Review of preliminary site plans produced by Bonaventure Senior Housing indicates that the proposed development will include construction of a 3-story independent living center, a 3-story assisted living center, a 4-story common area, a trash enclosure area, a single-story memory care courtyard, and associated drive and parking areas. Columbia West understands that minor cut and fill areas will be proposed. This report is based upon proposed development as described above and may not be applicable if modified. 2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SOIL CONDITIONS The subject site lies within the Willamette Valley/Puget Sound Lowland, a wide physiographic depression flanked by the mountainous Coast Range on the west and the Cascade Range on the east. Inclined or uplifted structural zones within the Willamette Valley/Puget Sound Lowland constitute highland areas and depressed structural zones form sediment-filled basins. The site is located within the central portion of the PortlandNancouver Basin, an open, somewhat elliptical, northwest- trending syncline approximately 60 miles wide. Columbia West=" - rr onaventure Tigard Project IBSHpGeoteclnicarReport\1 3116.Bonaventure Senor Living,Tigard.Oregon Geotechnlcal Report done rev.June 2013 • Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 2 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon According to the Generalized Geologic Map of the Willamette Lowland (Marshall W. Gannett and Rodney R. Caldwell, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, 1998), near-surface soils are expected to consist of silt, sand, and gravel deposited primarily by late Pleistocene glacial outburst floods derived from catastrophic outburst floods of Glacial Lake Missoula (Qs). The Web Soil Survey (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service [USDA NRCSJ, 2013 Website) identifies surface soils as Quatama loam. Quatama series soils are fine-textured silts and clays with moderate permeability, moderate water capacity, and low shear strength. Quatama soils have low to moderate shrink-swell potential and slight erosion hazard based primarily upon slope grade. 3.0 REGIONAL SEISMOLOGY Recent research and subsurface mapping investigations within the Pacific Northwest appear to suggest the historic potential risk for a large earthquake event with strong localized ground movement may be underestimated. Past earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest appear to have caused landslides and ground subsidence, in addition to severe flooding near coastal areas. Earthquakes may also induce soil liquefaction, which occurs when elevated horizontal ground acceleration and velocity cause soil particles to interact as a fluid as opposed to a solid. Liquefaction of soil can result in lateral spreading and temporary loss of bearing capacity and shear strength. There are at least four major known fault zones in the region that may be capable of generating potentially destructive horizontal accelerations. These fault zones are described briefly in the following text. Portland Hills Fault Zone The Portland Hills Fault Zone consists of several northwest-trending faults located along the eastern boundary of the Portland Hills. The fault zone is approximately 13 miles in length and is located approximately 6 miles north of the site. According to Seismic Design Mapping, State of Oregon (Geomatrix Consultants, 1995), there is no definitive consensus among geologists as to the zone fault type. Several alternate interpretations have been suggested, including various strike-slip and dipping thrust fault theories. Evidence exists to suggest that fault movement has impacted shallow Holocene deposits and deeper Pleistocene sediments. Seismologists recorded a M3.9 earthquake thought to be associated with the fault zone near Kelly Point Park in April 2003, and a M3.5 earthquake possibly associated with the fault zone occurred approximately 1.3 miles east of the fault in 1991. Therefore, the Portland Hills Fault Zone is generally thought to be potentially active and capable of producing possible damaging earthquakes. Geceochnkal•E+.nonmantat•Sreci:at:repec front Columbia West=1.—,__/' - mavenwre Tigard Project(BS1-01GeotechniceARepart113116 Bonaverave Senior Living.Tigard.Oregon Geotechncal Report doc:. rev.June 2013 • r Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 3 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon Gales Creek-Newberg-Mt. Angel Fault Zone Located approximately 9 miles southwest of the site, the 50-mile long Gales Creek- Newberg-Mt. Angel Structural Zone consists of a series of discontinuous northwest- trending faults. Possible late-Quaternary geomorphic surface deformation may exist along the structural zone (Geomatrix Consultants, 1995). Although no definitive evidence of impacts to Holocene sediments has reportedly been observed, a M5.6 earthquake occurred in March 1993 near Scotts Mills, approximately four miles south of the mapped extent of the Mt. Angel fault. It is unclear if the earthquake occurred along the fault zone or a parallel structure. Therefore, the Gales Creek-Newberg-Mt. Angel Structural Zone is considered potentially active. Lacamas Creek-Sandy River Fault Zone The northwest-trending Lacamas Creek Fault and northeast-trending Sandy River Fault intersect north of Camas, Washington approximately 20 miles northeast of the site. According to Geology and Groundwater Conditions of Clark County Washington (USGS Water Supply Paper 1600, Mundorff, 1964) and the Geologic Map of the Lake Oswego Quadrangle (Oregon DOGAMI Series GMS-59, 1989), the Lacamas Creek fault zone consists of shear contact between the Troutdale Formation and underlying Oligocene andesite-basalt bedrock. Secondary shear contact associated with the fault zone may have produced a series of prominent northwest-southeast geomorphic lineaments in proximity to the site. Recorded mild seismic activity during the recent past indicates this area may be potentially seismogenic. Cascadia Subduction Zone The Cascadia Subduction Zone has recently been recognized as a potential source of strong earthquake activity in the Portland/Vancouver Basin. This phenomenon is the result of the earth's large tectonic plate movement. Geologic evidence indicates that volcanic ocean floor activity along the Juan de Fuca ridge in the Pacific Ocean causes the Juan de Fuca Plate to perpetually move east and subduct under the North American Continental Plate. The subduction zone results in historic volcanic and potential earthquake activity in proximity to the plate interface, believed to lie approximately 20 to 50 miles west of the general location of the Oregon and Washington coast (Geomatrix Consultants, 1995). 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC FIELD INVESTIGATION A geotechnical field investigation consisting of visual reconnaissance and 5 soil boring explorations (SB-1 through SB-5) was conducted at the site on June 10, 2013. Subsurface soil profiles were logged in accordance with Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) specifications. Disturbed soil samples were collected from relevant soil horizons within the explorations and submitted for laboratory analysis. Sample results are presented in Appendix A. Exploration locations are indicated on Figure 2. Exploration logs are presented in Appendix B. Soil descriptions and classification information are provided in Appendix C. Columbia West-Ir maventure Tigard Protect(BSFQIGeotechucaeReportt13116.Bonaventtte Senior Living.Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Report.docx. rev.June 2013 • Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 4 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon 4.1 Surface Investigation and Site Description The 5.85-acre subject site lies on an open, relatively flat field, vegetated with tall grass, shrubs, and trees. The site has historically been utilized as a farm. Current development and structures at the site consist primarily of a residential home which includes a swimming pool area, two barns, an outbuilding, associated paved drive areas, and a soil stockpile located at the approximate northern central portion of the site as indicated on Figure 2. According to elevation data obtained from topographic maps and Google Earth, the site elevation ranges from 204 to 208 feet above mean sea level (amsl) across the property. 4.2 Subsurface Exploration and Investigation Soil boring explorations SB-1 through SB-5 were advanced at the site to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet using a truck-mounted, mud-rotary and hollow-stem auger drill system on June 10, 2013. Exploration locations were selected to observe subsurface soil characteristics in proposed development areas. Approximate exploration locations are indicated on Figure 2. 4.2.1 Soil Type Description Soil boring exploration indicated that the site is covered with approximately 12 inches of organic-rich topsoil. Underlying the topsoil, surficial soils resembling the Quatama loam soil series were encountered. Subsurface lithology was reasonably consistent at all explored locations and may generally be described by soil types identified in the following text. Soil Type 1 — Sandy SILT and Sandy Lean CLAY Soil Type 1 was observed to consist primarily of heavily mottled, orange, gray, and light brown, medium stiff, very moist, Sandy SILT and Sandy Lean CLAY. Soil Type 1 was observed below the topsoil in soil boring explorations SB-1 through SB-3, and SB-5, and interlayered at various depths between Soil Types 2 and 3. Analytical laboratory testing conducted upon representative soil samples obtained from soil borings SB-1 and SB-2 indicated approximately 51 to 66 percent by weight passing the No. 200 sieve and in situ moisture contents ranging from 26 to 35 percent. Atterberg Limit test results indicated a liquid limit ranging from 31 to 37 percent and a plasticity index ranging from 6 to 15. Soil Type 1 is classified as CL and ML according to USCS specifications and A-6(8), A-4(1), and A-4(4), according to AASHTO specifications. Soil Type 2 — Silty SAND Soil Type 2 was observed to consist of brown to gray, wet, loose to dense silty SAND with interlayered lenses of poorly graded SAND. Soil Type 2 was observed underlying Soil Type 1 in soil boring explorations SB-1 through SB-3, and SB-5, underlying the topsoil at SB-4, and interlayered at various depths between Soil Types 1 and 3. Columbia (vest Tr - ,neventure Tigard Project(BSM1GeotechnicahRepon113116.t3onaventure Senior Living,Tigard,Oregon Geotechnical Reporl.docx. rev.June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 5 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon Analytical laboratory testing conducted upon representative soil samples obtained from soil boring SB-1 indicated approximately 36 percent by weight passing the No. 200 sieve and in situ moisture content of 30 percent. Atterberg Limit test results indicated that Soil Type 2 is non-plastic. Soil Type 2 is classified as SM or SP according to USCS specifications and A-4(0) according to AASHTO specifications. Soil Type 3— Lean CLAY with Sand Soil Type 3 was observed to consist primarily of heavily mottled, brown, blue, orange, gray, medium stiff to very stiff, very moist, Lean CLAY with Sand. Soil Type 3 was was observed underlying Soil Type 2 in soil boring explorations SB-1 through SB-3, and SB-5, and interlayered at various depths between Soil Types 1 and 2. Analytical laboratory testing conducted upon representative soil samples obtained from soil borings SB-1 through SB-3 indicated approximately 71 to 76 percent by weight passing the No. 200 sieve and in situ moisture contents ranging from 26 to 29 percent. Atterberg Limit test results indicated a liquid limit ranging from 27 to 48 percent and a plasticity index ranging from 6 to 27. Soil Type 3 is classified as CL or CL-ML according to USCS specifications and A-4(3), A-7-6(15), and A-7-6(18), according to AASHTO specifications. 4.2.2 Groundwater Light perched groundwater seepage was encountered in all subsurface explorations at an approximate depth of 10 feet bgs. Measurements from inside the boreholes at soil borings SB-3 through SB-5 indicated that seepage was occurring from a sandy layer underlain by a less permeable sandy CLAY layer. According to Estimated Depth to Groundwater in the Portland Oregon Area, 2013 Website (USGS, Oregon Water Science Center), the shallow static aquifer altitude in the vicinity of the site is approximately 161 to 164 feet amsl corresponding to an approximate depth to groundwater at the site of 40 to 45 feet depending upon ground surface elevation. Groundwater levels are often subject to seasonal variance and may rise during extended periods of increased precipitation. Perched groundwater may also be present in other localized areas. 5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The geotechnical site investigation suggests the proposed development is generally compatible with surface and subsurface soils, provided the recommendations presented in this report are utilized and incorporated into the design and construction processes. Design recommendations are presented in the following text sections. 5.1 Site Preparation and Grading Vegetation should be cleared and topsoil stripped from areas identified for structures and site grading. Vegetation, other organic material, and debris should be removed from the site. Stripped topsoil should also be removed, or used only as landscape fill in nonstructural areas with slopes less than 25 percent. A stripping depth of Columbia West=' maventure Tigard Project IBSM1GeotectnrcaftReport■13116.Bonaventure Senior Living.Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Report.docx. no June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 6 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon approximately 12 inches is anticipated. The required stripping depth will increase in areas with unsuitable fill, remnant building foundations and drive areas, or previously disturbed soils. Stripped material should be stockpiled prior to removal or placed in a separate designated location away from other material. The post-construction maximum depth of topsoil or landscape fill placed or spread at any location onsite should not exceed one foot. Previously disturbed soil, debris, remnant building debris, soil stockpiles, or unsuitable fill encountered during grading or construction activities should be removed completely and thoroughly. This includes test pit locations conducted as part of this investigation. Demolished structures should be removed entirely. This includes old foundations, the swimming pool at the existing residence, utilities, and associated unconsolidated soils. Abandoned septic systems, including tanks and drain fields, should be removed completely. Excavation areas should be backfilled with engineered structural fill. Wells should be properly abandoned and filled with bentonite, cement grout, or other suitable means in accordance with applicable state and federal regulations. Additional geotechnical assessment is recommended if structures are proposed in proximity to abandoned wells. Site grading activities should be performed in accordance with requirements specified in the 2009 International Building Code (IBC), Chapter 18 and Appendix J, with exceptions noted in the text herein. Site preparation, soil stripping, and grading activities should be observed and documented by an experienced geotechnical engineer or designated representative. 5.2 Engineered Structural Fill Areas proposed for fill placement should be appropriately prepared as described in the preceding text. Surface soils should then be scarified and compacted prior to additional fill placement. Engineered structural fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches in depth and compacted using standard conventional compaction equipment. The soil moisture content should be within two percentage points of optimum conditions. A field density at least equal to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, obtained from the modified Proctor moisture-density relationship test (ASTM D1557), is recommended for structural fill placement. For engineered structural fill placed on sloped grades, the area should be benched to provide a horizontal surface for compaction. Compaction of engineered structural fill should be verified by nuclear gauge field compaction testing performed in accordance with ASTM D6938. Field compaction testing should be performed for each vertical foot of engineered fill placed. Engineered fill placement should be observed by an experienced geotechnical engineer or designated representative. Engineered structural fill placement activities should be performed during dry summer months if possible. If fill placement occurs during dry weather conditions, clean native a,ncnr:zat a �a:r , ci.' r• Columbia West , -- nevenere Tigard Project(8SM'Geotechrca6Repon113116.8onevendee Senor h o.,6.Tigard,Oregon Geotechncal Report.docv, rev.Jrna 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 7 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon soils may be suitable for use as structural fill if adequately moisture-conditioned to achieve recommended compaction specifications. Because they are moisture- sensitive, fine-textured soils are often difficult to excavate and compact during wet weather conditions. If adequate compaction is not achievable with clean native soils, import structural fill consisting of well-graded granular material with a maximum particle size of three inches and no more than five percent passing the No. 200 sieve is recommended. Representative samples of proposed engineered structural fill should be submitted for laboratory analysis and approval by the geotechnical engineer prior to placement. Laboratory analyses should include particle-size gradation and modified Proctor moisture-density analysis. 5.3 Cut and Fill Slopes Fill placed on existing grades steeper than 5H:1V should be horizontally benched at least 10 feet into the slope. Fill slopes greater than six feet in height should be vertically keyed into existing subsurface soil. A typical fill slope cross-section is shown in Figure 3. Drainage implementations, including subdrains or perforated drain pipe trenches, may also be necessary in proximity to cut and fill slopes if seeps or springs are encountered. Drainage design may be performed on a case-by-case basis. Extent, depth, and location of drainage may be determined in the field by the geotechnical engineer during construction when soil conditions are exposed. Failure to provide adequate drainage may result in soil sloughing, settlement, or erosion. Final cut or fill slopes at the site should not exceed 2H:1V or 15 feet in total height without individual slope stability analysis. The values above assume a minimum horizontal setback for loads of 10 feet from top of cut or fill slope face or overall slope height divided by three (H/3), whichever is greater. A minimum slope setback detail for structures is presented in Figure 4. Concentrated drainage or water flow over the face of slopes should be prohibited, and adequate protection against erosion is required. Fill slopes should be constructed by placing fill material in maximum 12-inch level lifts, compacting as described in Section 5.2, Engineered Structural Fill and horizontally benching where appropriate. Fill slopes should be overbuilt, compacted, and trimmed at least two feet horizontally to provide adequate compaction of the outer slope face. Proper cut and fill slope construction is critical to overall project stability and should be observed by an experienced geotechnical engineer. 5.4 Foundations Foundation recommendations will ultimately depend upon the size and locations of structures proposed in the final development plan. It is our understanding that proposed buildings will likely consist of slab-on-grade, 3 to 4-story, wood-frame buildings. Maximum anticipated loads are approximately 5 to 6 kips per foot for perimeter footings and 85 to 95 kips per column. If actual loading exceeds anticipated Columbia West= - .naventure Tigard Project(8SN(tGeotechnicaaReporn13116.8onaventure Senior Living,Tigard,Oregon Geotechnical Report.docx, rev.June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 8 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon loading, additional analysis should be conducted for the specific load conditions and proposed footing dimensions. The existing ground surface should be prepared as described in Section 5.1, Site Preparation and Grading, and Section 5.2, Engineered Structural Fill. Foundations should bear upon a 12-inch-thick layer of crushed aggregate base compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density placed on firm competent native soil or engineered structural fill. Disturbed or soft surface soils should be removed from foundation alignments and replaced with granular structural fill. Footings should extend to a depth at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent exterior grade to provide adequate bearing capacity and protection against frost heave. If foundations are constructed during wet weather conditions, over-excavation and additional granular structural backfill is recommended. Excavations adjacent to foundations should not extend within a 1.5H:1V angle projected down from the outside bottom footing edge without additional geotechnical analysis. To evaluate bearing capacity for proposed structures, serviceability and reliability of shear resistance for subsurface soils was considered. Allowable bearing capacity is typically a function of footing dimension and subsurface soil properties, including settlement and shear resistance. Based upon in-situ field testing and laboratory analysis, the estimated allowable bearing capacity for well-drained foundations prepared as described above is 1,500 psf. Bearing capacity may be increased by one- third for transient lateral forces such as seismic or wind. The modulus of subgrade reaction is estimated to be 200 psi/inch. The estimated coefficient of friction between firm native soil or engineered structural fill and in-place poured concrete is 0.42. Lateral forces may also be resisted by an assumed passive soil equivalent fluid pressure of 250 psf/f against embedded footings. The upper six inches of soil should be neglected in passive pressure calculations. Foundations should not be permitted to bear upon disturbed soil. Because soil is often heterogeneous and anisotropic, the geotechnical engineer of record or designated representative shall observe, test, and approve foundation subgrade soils prior to placing crushed aggregate base rock, forms, or reinforcing bar. 5.5 Slabs on Grade The proposed buildings may have slab-on-grade flooring. Slabs may be supported on competent native soils or engineered structural fill. If encountered, disturbed soils, organic-rich topsoil, or undocumented fill in the proposed slab locations should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Preparation and compaction beneath the slab should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 5.1, Site Preparation and Grading, and Section 5.2, Engineered Structural Fill. Slabs should be underlain by at least six inches of free-draining crushed aggregate. Geotextile filter fabric may be used below the crushed aggregate to increase subgrade support. A moisture barrier may be constructed beneath the slab. A typical moisture Columbia West= ;' ,naventure Tigard Project(BSt1)1GeotecteicahRepor1113116.B0000mlve Senor Uvula.'Tigard.Oregon Geotedvecal Report doe:, rev.J,ne 201 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 9 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon barrier consists of 6 mil visqueen plastic overlain with two inches of fine sand constructed over the crushed aggregate subgrade. Alternative moisture barriers may be specified by a licensed, experienced structural engineer or architect. Slabs should be appropriately waterproofed in accordance with the anticipated type of finished flooring. Slab thickness and reinforcement should be designed by an experienced structural engineer. 5.6 Settlement Total long-term static footing displacement for shallow foundations constructed as described in this report is not anticipated to exceed approximately 1 inch. Differential settlement between comparably loaded footing elements is not expected to exceed approximately 1/2 inch over a span of 50 feet. For deep fill areas, total footing settlements may increase due to consolidation of fill material and underlying native soil. The resulting vertical displacement after loading may be due to elastic distortion, dissipation of excess pore pressure, or soil creep. Expansion of subgrade may also occur due to uplift rebound forces after unloading of native soils in deep cut areas. Settlement described above pertains to static loads. 5.7 Excavation Soils at the site were explored to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet using a truck-mounted, mud-rotary and hollow-stem auger drill system. Bedrock was not encountered and blasting or specialized rock-excavation techniques are not anticipated. Light perched groundwater seepage was encountered during subsurface exploration in all soil boring explorations at an approximate depth of 10 feet bgs. Based upon laboratory analysis and field testing, near-surface soils may be Oregon State Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Type C. For temporary open-cut excavations deeper than four feet, but less than 20 feet in soils of these types, the maximum allowable slope is 1.5H:1V. OSHA soil type should be confirmed during field construction activities by the contractor. Soil is often anisotropic and heterogeneous, and it is possible that OSHA soil types determined in the field may differ from those described above. The contractor should be held responsible for site safety, sloping, and shoring. Columbia West is not responsible for contractor activities and in no case should excavation be conducted in excess of all applicable local, state, and federal laws. 5.8 Lateral Earth Pressure Lateral earth pressure should be carefully considered for design of retaining walls. Hydrostatic pressure and additional surcharge loading should also be considered. Retained material may include engineered structural backfill consisting of imported granular material meeting Section 02630 and Table 02630-1 of ODOT Standard Specifications. Backfill should be prepared and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor test (ASTM D1557). Recommended parameters for lateral earth pressures for engineered structural fill are Columbia West=v7-- maventure Tigard Project(BSM\GeotectrucallRepo,tt13116,Bonaventure Senor Living,Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Report.dxa. rev Jule 2013 • Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 10 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon presented in Table 1. The design parameters presented in Table T are valid for static loading cases only. The recommended earth pressures do not include surcharge loads, dynamic loading, hydrostatic pressure, or seismic design. If seismic design is required, seismic forces for unrestrained walls may be calculated by superimposing a uniform lateral force of 10H2 pounds per lineal foot of wall, where H is the total wall height in feet. The resultant force should be applied at 0.6H from the base of the wall. Base coefficient of friction and bearing capacity for retaining wall design may be estimated based upon the values identified previously in Section 5.4, Foundations. Table 1. Recommended Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters Equivalent Fluid Pressure Drained for Level Backfill* Internal ' Backfill Material Wet Density Angle of At-rest Active Passive Friction Imported granular backfill 60 pcf 38 pcf 517 pcf 140 pcf 35° per 02630-1 ODOT *The upper 6 inches of soil should be neglected in passive pressure calculations. If exterior grade from top or toe of retaining wall is sloped, Columbia West should be contacted to provide location-specific lateral earth pressures. A continuous one-foot-thick zone of free-draining, washed, open-graded 1-inch by 2-inch drain rock and a 4-inch perforated gravity drain pipe is assumed behind retaining walls. Geotextile filter fabric should be placed between the drain rock and fine-textured backfill soil. Specifications for drainpipe design are presented in Section 5.11, Drainage. If walls cannot be gravity drained, saturated base conditions and/or applicable hydrostatic pressures should be assumed. Final retaining wall design should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. Retaining wall subgrade and backfill activities should also be observed and tested for compliance with recommended specifications by the geotechnical engineer or designated representative during construction. 5.9 Seismic Design Considerations According to the National Seismic Hazard Maps, Open-File 02-420, United States Geologic Survey (USGS), October 2002, the anticipated peak ground and maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations resulting from seismic activity for the subject site are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Approximate Probabilistic Ground Motion Values for`firm rock'sites based on subject property longitude and latitude 10%Probability of 2%Probability of Exceedance in 50 yrs Exceedance in 50 yrs Peak Ground Acceleration 0.19 g 0.40 g 0.2 sec Spectral 0.44 g 0.93 g Acceleration 1.0 sec Spectral 0.15 g 0.34 g Acceleration mhrt,ai• .T.:11a:a$^„ac+�; t.actiins Columbia West ,naven0.re Tigard Project(BSH)1GeotechnicaeReport113110,Bonaventure Senior Living,Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Report.docx, rev.June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 11 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon The listed probabilistic ground motion values are based upon "firm rock" sites with an assumed shear wave velocity of 2,500 ft/s in the upper 100 feet of soil profile. These values should be adjusted for site class effects by applying site coefficients Fa and Fv as defined in 2009 IBC Tables 1613.5.3(1) and (2). The site coefficients are intended to more accurately characterize estimated peak ground and respective earthquake spectral response accelerations by considering site-specific soil characteristics and index properties. Based upon observed subsurface soil conditions at the site, and review of well logs and local geologic maps, site soils may be considered to be Site Class D as defined in 2009 IBC Section 1613.5.2. This site class designation indicates that some amplification of seismic energy may occur during a seismic event because of subsurface conditions. Additional seismic information is presented in Section 5.10, Liquefaction. Localized peak ground accelerations exceeding the adjusted values may occur in some areas in direct proximity to an earthquake's origin. This may be a result of amplification of seismic energy due to depth to competent bedrock, compression and shear wave velocity of bedrock, presence and thickness of loose, unconsolidated alluvial deposits, soil plasticity, grain size, and other factors. Identification of specific seismic response spectra is beyond the scope of this investigation. If site structures are designed in accordance with recommendations specified in the 2009 IBC, the potential for peak ground accelerations in excess of the adjusted and amplified values should be understood. 5.10 Liquefaction Liquefaction, defined as the transformation of the behavior of a granular material from a solid to a liquid due to increased pore-water pressure and reduced effective stress, may occur when granular or non-plastic silt materials quickly compact under cyclic stresses caused by a seismic event. The effects of liquefaction may include immediate ground settlement and lateral spreading. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are generally saturated, cohesionless, loose to medium-dense sands within 50 feet of the ground surface. Recent research has also indicated that low plasticity silts and clays may also be subject to sand-like liquefaction behavior if the plasticity index determined by the Atterberg Limits analysis is less than 8. Potentially liquefiable soils located above the existing, historic, or expected ground water levels do not generally pose a liquefaction hazard. It is important to note that changes in perched ground water elevation may occur due to project development or other factors not observed at the time of investigation. Based upon the results of the field investigation, laboratory analysis, and review of ground water mapping, near-surface soils are not saturated and exhibit low to moderate plasticity characteristics. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction of shallow soils at the site is considered to be low. Columbia West= 1" ,naventure Tigard Project(BSH)\GeotechnicaPReport113116.Bonaventure Senior Living.Tigard Oregon Geotechnical Report.docx, rev.June 2013 Geotechnica/ Site Investigation Page 12 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon 5.11 Drainage At a minimum, site drainage should include surface water collection and conveyance to properly designed stormwater management structures and facilities. Drainage design in general should conform to the City of Tigard regulations. Finished site grading should be conducted with positive drainage away from structures. Depressions or shallow areas that may retain ponding water should be avoided. Roof drains, low-point drains, and perimeter foundation drains are recommended for structures. Drains should consist of separate systems and gravity flow with a minimum two-percent slope away from foundations into the stormwater system or approved discharge location. Concentrated discharge of water should be prohibited across slopes and water should not be diverted, routed, or allowed to flow over or across slope faces. Perimeter foundation drains should consist of 3-inch perforated PVC pipe surrounded by a minimum of 1 ft3 of clean, washed drain rock per linear foot of pipe and wrapped with geotextile filter fabric. Open-graded drain rock with a maximum particle size of 3 inches and less than 2 percent passing the No. 200 sieve is recommended. Geotextile filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent, with AOS between No. 70 and No. 100 sieve. The water permittivity should be greater than 1.5/sec. Figure 5 presents a typical foundation drain. Perimeter drains may limit increased hydrostatic pressure beneath footings and assist in reducing potential perched moisture areas. Subdrains should also be considered if portions of the site are cut below surrounding grades. Shallow groundwater, springs, or seeps should be conveyed via drainage channel or perforated pipe into the stormwater management system or an approved discharge. Recommendations for design and installation of perforated drainage pipe may be performed on a case-by-case basis by the geotechnical engineer during construction. Failure to provide adequate surface and sub-surface drainage may result in soil slumping or unanticipated settlement of structures exceeding tolerable limits. A typical perforated drain pipe trench detail is presented in Figure 6. Foundation drains and subdrains should be closely monitored after construction to assess their effectiveness. If additional surface or shallow subsurface seeps become evident, the drainage provisions may require modification or additional drains. The geotechnical engineer should be consulted to provide appropriate recommendations. 5.12 Bituminous Asphalt and Portland Cement Concrete According to preliminary site plans, the subject site is anticipated to include asphalt concrete streets, drive aisles, loading areas, and parking stalls. Based upon analytical laboratory test results and field exploration, Columbia West recommends the general pavement design consist of a minimum of 10 inches of compacted crushed aggregate base overlain with a minimum of 3 inches of asphalt concrete pavement for onsite parking and drive areas. The general pavement section identified above assumes adequate subgrade support provided by firm compacted engineered structural fill or a Columbia West=w,'-- rnaventure Tigard Project(BSH)\GeotectnicaAReport113116.Ronavenrtre Senor living,Tigard.Oregon Geotednical Report.docx. rev.Jule 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 13 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon well-drained, recompacted, native subgrade. Columbia West recommends adherence to the City of Tigard's standards for public works construction if improvements to public roads are proposed. For dry weather construction, pavement surface sections should bear upon competent subgrade consisting of scarified and compacted native soil or engineered structural fill. Wet weather pavement construction is discussed later in Section 5.13, Wet Weather Construction Methods and Techniques. Subgrade conditions should be evaluated and tested by a licensed geotechnical engineer or designated representative prior to placement of crushed aggregate base. Subgrade evaluation should include nuclear gauge density testing and wheel proof-roll observations conducted with a 12-cubic yard, double-axle dump truck or equivalent. Nuclear gauge density testing should be conducted at 150-foot intervals or as determined by the onsite geotechnical engineer. Subgrade soil should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Areas of observed deflection or rutting during proof-roll evaluation should be excavated to a firm surface and replaced with compacted crushed aggregate. Crushed aggregate base should be compacted and tested in accordance with the specifications outlined above. Asphalt concrete pavement should be compacted to at least 91 percent of maximum Rice density. Nuclear gauge density testing should be conducted to verify adherence to recommended specifications. Testing frequency should be in accordance with the City of Tigard specifications. Portland cement concrete curbs and sidewalks should be installed in accordance with the City of Tigard specifications. Curb and sidewalk aggregate base should be observed and proof-rolled in the presence of an experienced geotechnical engineer or designated representative. Soft areas that deflect or rut should be stabilized prior to pouring concrete. Concrete should be tested during installation in accordance with ASTM C171, C138, C231, C143, C1064, and C31. This includes casting of cylinder specimen at a frequency of four cylinders per 100 cubic yards of poured concrete. Recommended field and analytical laboratory concrete testing includes slump, air entrainment, temperature, and unit weight. 5.13 Wet Weather Construction Methods and Techniques Wet weather construction often results in significant shear strength reduction and soft areas that may rut or deflect. Installation of granular working layers may be necessary to provide a firm support base and sustain construction equipment. Granular layers should consist of all-weather gravel, 4-inch by 6-inch gabion, or other similar material (6-inch maximum size with less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve). Construction equipment traffic across exposed fine-textured soil should be minimized. Equipment traffic induces dynamic loading, which may result in weak areas and significant reduction in shear strength for soils above plastic limit. Wet weather Columbia West-a-- rnavenWre Tigard Project(BSI-01GeotechnicaIReport113116,Bonaverxwe Senior Living,Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Report door rev June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 14 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon construction may generate significant excess quantities of soft wet soil, which should be removed from the site or stockpiled in a designated area. Construction during wet weather conditions may require increased base thickness. Road base should consist of 3"-0 or 11/4"-0 crushed aggregate and should be placed on previously stripped and structurally competent subgrade. Over-excavation may be necessary to provide a firm base upon which to place crushed aggregate. Geotextile filter fabric such as Mirafi 500X or an approved equivalent is also recommended. Crushed aggregate base should be installed in a single lift with trucks end-dumping from an advancing layer of granular fill. During extended wet periods, stripping activities may also need to be conducted from an advancing layer of granular fill. Once installed, the crushed aggregate base should be compacted with several passes from a static drum roller. A vibratory compactor is not recommended because it may further disturb the subgrade. Subdrains may also be necessary to provide subgrade drainage and maintain structural integrity. Crushed aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density according to the modified Proctor density test (ASTM D1557). Compaction should be verified by nuclear gauge density testing. Observation of a proof-roll with a loaded dump truck is also recommended as an indication of subgrade performance. It should be understood that wet weather construction is risky and costly. An experienced geotechnical engineer or designated representative should observe and document wet weather construction activities. Proper construction methods and techniques are critical to overall project integrity. 5.14 Soil Erosion Potential Based upon field observations and laboratory testing, the erosion hazard for site soils in flat to shallow-gradient portions of the property is likely to be low. The potential for erosion generally increases in sloped areas. Therefore, disturbance to vegetation in sloped areas should be minimized during construction activities. Soil is also prone to erosion if unprotected and unvegetated during periods of increased precipitation. Erosion can be minimized by performing construction activities during dry summer months. Site-specific erosion control measures should be implemented to address the maintenance of exposed areas. This may include silt fence, biofilter bags, straw wattles, or other suitable methods. During construction activities, exposed areas should be well-compacted and protected from erosion with visqueen, surface tactifier, or other means, as appropriate. Temporary slopes or exposed areas may be covered with straw, crushed aggregate, or riprap in localized areas to minimize erosion. Erosion and water runoff during wet weather conditions may be controlled by application of strategically placed channels and small detention depressions with overflow pipes. rFroncn<,ysrt.c.y, n.,n1,i Ss:ecia'rmpavfters Columbia (Nest " mevenWre T d Project opct(BSM1GeatecMicaPRepor1113116,Bonavennre Senior Living,Tigard.Oregon Geotechnical Rapan.docs, rev.June 2013 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 15 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon After grading, exposed surfaces should be vegetated as soon as possible with erosion- resistant native species. Jute mesh or straw may be applied to enhance vegetation. Once established, vegetation should be properly maintained. Disturbance to existing native vegetation and surrounding organic soil should also be minimized during construction activities. 5.15 Utility Installation Utility installation at the site may require subsurface excavation and trenching. Excavation, trenching and shoring should conform to federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (29 CFR, Part 1926) and OR-OSHA regulations. Site soils may slough when cut vertically and sudden precipitation events or perched ground water may result in accumulation of water within excavation zones and trenches. These areas should be dewatered in accordance with appropriate discharge regulations. Due to potential shallow ground water conditions, significant dewatering and pumping may be necessary. Utilities should be installed in general accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. Utility trench backfill should consist of crushed aggregate or other coarse-textured, free-draining granular material acceptable to the client, City of Tigard, and the site geotechnical engineer. Trench backfill material within 18 inches of the top of utility pipes should be hand compacted (i.e., no heavy compaction equipment). The remaining backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor moisture-density test (ASTM D1557). Clean, free-draining, fine bedding sand is recommended for use in the pipe zone. With exception of the pipe zone, backfill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness. Compaction of utility trench backfill material should be verified by nuclear gauge field compaction testing performed in accordance with ASTM D6938. It is recommended that field compaction testing be performed at 250-foot intervals along the utility trench centerline at the surface and midpoint depth of the trench. Compaction frequency and specifications may be modified for non-structural areas in accordance with recommendations of the site geotechnical engineer. 6.0 CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS This geotechnical site investigation report was prepared in accordance with accepted standard conventional principles and practices of geotechnical engineering. This investigation pertains only to material tested and observed as of the date of this report, and is based upon proposed site development as described in the text herein. This report is a professional opinion containing recommendations established by engineering interpretations of subsurface soils based upon conditions observed during site exploration. Soil conditions may differ between tested locations or over time. Slight variations may produce impacts to the performance of structural facilities if not adequately addressed. This underscores the importance of diligent QA/QC Columbia West v -- 'noventure Tgard Protect(&S11)1GeotectvvicePReport111116.Bonevermre Senior Living.Tigard,Oregon Geotectvvicel Report doca, rev.Jrrre 2013 • Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 16 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon construction observation and testing to verify soil conditions are as anticipated in this report. Therefore. this report contains several recommendations for field observation and testing by Columbia West personnel during construction activities. Columbia West cannot accept responsibility for deviations from recommendations described in this report. Future performance of structural facilities is often related to the degree of construction observation by qualified personnel. These services should be performed to the full extent recommended. This report is not an environmental assessment and should not be construed as a representative warranty of site subsurface conditions. The discovery of adverse environmental conditions, or subsurface soils that deviate significantly from those described in this report, should immediately prompt further investigation. The above statements are in lieu of all other statements expressed or implied. This report was prepared solely for the client and is not to be reproduced without prior authorization from Columbia West. Final engineering plans and specifications for the project should be reviewed and approved by Columbia West as they relate to geotechnical and grading issues prior to final design approval. Columbia West is not responsible for independent conclusions or recommendations made by other parties based upon information presented in this report. Unless a particular service was expressly included in the scope, it was not performed and there should be no assumptions based upon services not provided. Additional report limitations and important information about this document are presented in Appendix D. This information should be carefully read and understood by the client and other parties reviewing this document. Sincerely, ¢6G1sTE/k0 COLUMBIA W ST E GINEERING, Inc. fI OREGo,; I ��``! BENJAMIN L 10. r Berrja in L. C ok, RG cR St f eOtogist c�t i.o.,s� _r_ E„xP, tZ 1—v3 ,-3 than:rell E. Lehto, PE, GE Principal Engineer � rr ;, <; , / . 132,88 E �t iZ- 3'-t� Columbia West= '` 16-Donnverduro=lgard pt sled LbsFpp..,t. cap,epp,h1711,3 bor .MU.ee,,,o,3ving•Ig.d.ategOn gee bCisdca!!report !w Tune 20,3 Geotechnical Site Investigation Page 17 Bonaventure Senior Living, Tigard, Oregon REFERENCES Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Soil and Rock(I), v04.08, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1999. Beeson, M.H., Tolan, T.L., Madin, I.P., Geologic Map of the Lake Oswego Quadrangle, Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties, Oregon; Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries; Geological Map Series GMS-59, 1989. Estimated Depth to Groundwater in the Portland, Oregon Area, USGS Oregon Water Science Center 2013 Website, http://or.water.usgs.gov/projs_dir/puz/index.html Generalized Geologic Map of the Willamette Lowland, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Marshall W. Gannett and Rodney R. Caldwell, 1998. Geomatrix Consultants, Seismic Design Mapping, State of Oregon, January 1995. International Building Code: 2009 International Building Code, 2006 edition, International Code Council, 2009. McCarthy, Kathleen A., and Anderson, Donald B., Ground Water Data for the Portland Basin, Oregon and Washington, Open File Report 90-126, United States Geological Survey, 1990. National Seismic-Hazard Maps, Open File Report 02-420, United States Geological Survey, October, 2002. Oregon Administrative Rules, Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division, Excavations, Subdivision P. Portland Maps(http://www.portlandmaps.com) Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, 29 CFR Part 1926, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), revised July 1, 2001. U. S. Geological Survey, National Water Information System: Web Interface, http://waterdata.u sgs.gov/wa/nwi s/current/?type=flow&g rou p_key=basi n_cd Web Soil Survey, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture 2013 website (http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm.). Wong, Ivan, et al, Earthquake Scenario and Probabilistic Earthquake Ground Shaking Maps for the Portland, Oregon, Metropolitan Area, IMS-16, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 2000. Youd, T. L, and Idriss, I. M., Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 4, April, 2001. Columbia West 1: - tnacenture Tgard Project IBSM1Geotect,ica\Report113116.Bonaventure Sensor Luang.Tigard.Oregon Geotechn¢al Report.docx, rev.June 2013 FIGURES - r, ",2 ,' � f rOt Lid.itu A West Iry ..+ N r s,,,,f_ wavy>-Syi+' �4, ,,,1 IA r 'lam _ / /41p.„_.,.'" s k ek-.--N oS -:a ove rx ,,,,S; W ( 1 r 'NII J *" i..a WeS, .., a.„� S Aloha . x of ;V 7 __sw r ,..0..--: -.1'try.. . r i Siyx i, f r,.,gton Beaverton i Raleigh Fails 3 Gabriel Dark " 4 ; a I, y. „n�1 L P� �ite.''dJSWA'j �. I, ':' 3nr ��i - park rT . 4 ,N y H . ,n.;: s .. v.> -} Met:gex r�` `4, _ �,,,_ SITE LOCATION •--, , \ r'y : x i:,ren€reek F - r: T:gard r tir.r t3rr;X '�' .., • \. Lake I. 'rG:v w:rr Oswe +1,2.1: .d e 4 —.. .. , - 1 K T sidSisi } cnn 41 "Jr Country Club R ' - ,.ail.: .:... .V . 5K�oErw RI .,, :.,.r y asz 1k <. J .. y siltrlana Rµ 0". ,. v Avvy St s t , x- .;:,. -j ...:'7f _.. SW itrltdC>n.iS1�~ e? F` Sht"rrcrad '�i .. t T ._ 'Snycer Parr •* J.- x b� as,� 1�. 3 �-1t im ¢ Aa r , ,7 1 t } sw e'wea" ' Palk at I " r'" ' a> . a a ; ✓ c 2 f, „.,„,.'`''f)7.,,...'": c '' a,- ' . . 11. Merryrteld CheF aiem Cierai -11.„,,,...„- r.t Gr ata Oak J k r 1' i,taturePark * w 1 cr.:11t * 1,..r.r.. ti 1,1.1°v.l.r a :1` "r 1' t . Park �_ >�, MAP SOURCE:,GOOGL.E MAPS 2013 i` L . Design: Drawn: BLC SITE LOCATION MAP Checked: LVL Date: 6(13/13 Columbia West%-client: BONAVENTURE Rev By Date FIGURE Job No.: 13116 BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING 11917 NE 95'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 8325 SW ROSS ST 1 Phone 360.823-2900,Fax 360.823.2901 CAD File: FIGURE www.columbiaxestergmeermg.com Scale: N/A TIGARD, OREGON - � � - `I ;P Atd .,� g 4,'44;"sy 1 't' ...,*7. 4,..A4,4e 41,, , A t ,,,, , _ Ott .4106 1. _ # ,f APPROXIMATE •SITE BOUNDARY ,Y �` -�-- "`$ 1 ' �, i ■44"4".4 t it. .,� .......4# '"lyt"v * 1 , ,.. 4 . N r * a , : 9 ►.i -sr * -#u.A - pY} ik� 0 k S`: 77. �� 1„...1 �4Y �{� 0, SB-3 r Iiii 4--■40 —SOIL STOCKPILE +` ' ' . ... * 7 2;F,", rj 1.k t rye' 1 q ,, fi �m v� or ....,,,a a z ,/�,a ut t% - ' yip .. t � .s,,�s' Y �* ,�° . w SB-1 . ..,.;,,wwhr n. -... �y �-.. ,t 4...—.. . --"1". r . ..,-, :44,41, P. I. .4..■ .4 x++xaui .Aq�q,.a,•zx3 w d .) •+ ....................,... '. �$ 'z fi "® r�� .7 y . as d� g" 1 N APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SOIL BORING • g',.,u. ' _ �x. . . NOTES: z, w,r.LwuAauy.ctnn. Design: Drawn:FILL 1.SITE LOCATION: 8325 SW ROSS ST, TIGARD, OREGON. — . SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION MAP 2.SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 5.85 ACRES IN SIZE. Columbia West f Checked:LVL Date:6/13/13 3.DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE. Client:BONAVENTURE Rev By Date FIGURE 4.BASE MAP OBTAINED FROM GOODIE EARTH. 5.SOIL. BORING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND NOT 111417 NE85MSTREET Job N4:13116 BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING 2 SURVEYED. 3808232 0 FAX 360E232901 CAD File:FIGURE 2 TIGARD, OREGON vomasokombeNestenginesoingsam I SCale:NONE TYPICAL CUT AND FILL SLOPE CROSS-SECTION EXISTING GROUND SURFACE COMPACTED ENGINEERED STRUCTURAL FILL TYPICAL CUT SLOPE; PLACED IN 12-INCH LIFTS GRADE MAY BE DETERMINED BY SITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 1 1� BUT NOT TO EXCEED 2H:1V III- TYPICAL FILL SLOPE; GRADE MAY BE DETERMINED BY -.—I I I SITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 1:11-11 —I 1 1` POSSIBLE GROUND BUT NOT TO EXCEED 2H:1V ........-.... I —I I -:-. WATER SEEP IIr SIC-III' ROUTE DRAINS THROUGH SOLID PIPE TO ` ill 4 FEET (TYPICAL) DAYLIGHT AT SLOPE FACE. MAINTAIN SOLID TO APPROVED DISCHARGE LOCATION. -- —I I 111 DO NOT ALLOW TO FLOW OVER SLOPE FACE. —I —I I I- __ POSSIBLE GROUND • III � � WATER SEEP TOE BENCH/KEY -:'�.:�J _ I I— '-1 I I I I _ ? i I I ..__I. POSSIBLE GROUND a-- WATER SEEP III ' III—. —I I—II I. 2 FEET (TYPICAL) —III—III—' ' ' NEED FOR DRAINS SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER DURING CONSTRUCTION MINIMUM MINIMUM 10 FEET 5 FEET TYPICAL DRAIN SECTION DETAIL �.�. _. DRAIN SPECIFICATIONS n..� '�J�): GEOTEXTILE FABRIC - GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL CONSIST OF MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED MINIMUM �.` T >t WASHED DRAIN ROCK MINIMUM EQUIVALENT WITH AOS BETWEEN No. 70 AND No. 100 SIEVE. 2 FEET c, >,-. 2 FEET MINIMUM 3-INCH DIAMETER. -- _•~ PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE WASHED DRAIN ROCK SHALL BE OPEN-GRADED ANGULAR DRAIN ROCK 'k,%,• )1 WITH LESS THAN 2 PERCENT PASSING THE No. 200 SIEVE AND A MAXIMUM PARTICLE SIZE OF 3 INCHES. MINIMUM MINIMUM 2 FEET 2 FEET 'i.'u�n,"44'•"a°I'aiiantilr S'•,'°" "00n°'�,` Design: Drawn:BLC TYPICAL CUT AND FILL q NOTES: Columbia West=, Checked:LvL Date:6/13/13 SLOPE CROSS—SECTION FIGURE 1. DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE. I"' Client: BONAVENTURE Rev By Date • 2.SLOPES AND PROFILES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. 11917 NE95a,STREET Job No: 13116 BONAVENTRUE SENIOR LIVING Z Z 3.DRAWING REPRESENTS TYPICAL FILL AND CUT VANCOUVER.WASHINGTON 98682 SLOPE SECTION, AND MAY NOT BE SITE-SPECIFIC. PHONE 3604323-2900 FAX:360-823-2901 CAD File:FIGURE 3 TIGARD, OREGON www.colambaiwestengineenngcool Scale:NONE TYPICAL CUT AND FILL SLOPE CROSS-SECTION PROPOSED STRUCTURE COMPACTED ENGINEERED STRUCTURAL FILL OR COMPETENT NATIVE CUT SOIL + 10 FEET FOOTING 1, I RECOMMENDED MINIMUM HORIZONTAL SETBACK H 1:1-x' I DISTANCE BETWEEN BOTTOM EDGE OF FOOTING <0" II I AND FACE OF SLOPE IS 10 FEET OR SLOPE HEIGHT DIVIDED BY 3, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. MINIMUM SETBACK DISTANCE ASSUMES SLOPE - EXISTS ON ONE PROPERTY BORDER. FOR PROPERTY — CORNERS WITH ADJOINING SLOPES, ADDITIONAL - ENGINEERING ANALYSIS MAY BE REQUIRED. T 1 III III III NOTES: �� MINIMUM FOUNDATION Columbia West=+rr,/� Checked:LVL Drawn:BLC Date:6/13/13 SLOPE SETBACK DETAIL FIGURE 1. DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE. ` Client: BONAVENTURE Rev By Data 2.SLOPES AND PROFILES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. 3.DRAWING REPRESENTS TYPICAL FOUNDATION 11917NE95u STHFFT Job No: 13116 BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING 4 SETBACK DETAIL. AND MAY NOT BE VANCOUVER WASHINGTON 98682 SITE—SPECIFIC. PIIONE.360823.2900 FAX 360.623-2901 CAD File:FIGURE 4 TIGARD. OREGON ww.v.cnlwnmeiwestengineenn0cnni Scale: NONE TYPICAL PERIMETER FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL �/ FINAL EXTERIOR GRADE SHOULD PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM STRUCTURES SLOPE TO DRAIN TOPSOIL MATERIAL __ ,_ W � W W w W W * W w .Y W W W W W W� WWWWWWWW A GEOTEXTILE FABRIC W W W W W (MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT) ILI -I I [ FOOTING I •O ^• • o 0. ...it,.e � .� . I I MINIMUM DEPTH 11 HI 1 I = OF 24 INCHES • re •••■■ 4110 Lj 11 1 --11H-111 .4 4,-01 lil i—i i l I I I— n I = / II I 1 FILTER SAND COMPETENT NATIVE SOIL PERFORATED OR SLOTTED 3—INCH RIGID PVC DRAIN BEARING SURFACE OR PIPE INSTALLED AT MINIMUM 2 PERCENT SLOPE WITH ENGINEERED STRUCTURAL FILL GRAVITY FLOW TO APPROVED DISCHARGE LOCATION OPEN—GRADED DRAIN ROCK WITH MAXIMUM PARTICLE SIZE OF 3 INCHES Design: Drawn:BLc ,/� Checked:LVl Dates 13/13 TYPICAL PERIMETER Columbia West-1/37- / FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL FIGURE NOTES: / Client: BONAVENTURE Rev, By Date 1. DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE. 11917NEOSahSTREET Job No: 13116 BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING 2.DRAWING REPRESENTS TYPICAL FOOTING DRAIN VANCOUVER.WASHINGTON 98692 5 PHONE:360-023-2900 FAX:360-8232901 DETAIL AND MAY NOT BE SITE—SPECIFIC. CAD File:FIGURE 5 TIGARD, OREGON www.cnlumbeiwestenginaa:ing.cnm Scale: NONE , TYPICAL PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE TRENCH DETAIL STRUCTURAL AREAS NON-STRUCTURAL AREAS ASPHALT PAVEMENT SURFACE 1 1/4"-0 CRUSHED AGGREGATE ROAD BASE NON-STRUCTURAL FILL / TOPSOIL STRUCTURAL FILL • '?' -11 MINIMUM 1 FOOT 2 FEET (TYPICAL) r'CNat : -a'_ - 111 I 104 ID°, •Pd, �r��r��I 11.p• _,' OPEN-GRADED FRACTURED-FACE •, `_.i ANGULAR DRAIN ROCK WITH . ' MAXIMUM 3-INCH PARTICLE SIZE VARIES i' .• ijiftl• �• 11- 1∎4640°•• I0 • • 'all:•. ',:0 I G(MIRAFI 140N OR FABRIC (MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT) .•�`+,,I MINIMUM 6-INCH DIAMETER ,��'• 1 RIGID PVC OR HOPE DRAIN PIPE I I I I�`1 I I_ 1I 11 UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL I=1 I I—I ' ' —III=1 1 '- MINIMUM 2 FEET NOTE: LOCATION, INVERT ELEVATION, DEPTH OF TRENCH, AND EXTENT OF PERFORATED PIPE REQUIRED MAY BE MODIFIED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER DURING CONSTRUCTION BASED UPON FIELD OBSERVATION AND SITE-SPECIFIC SOIL CONDITIONS. CS•,n•,chn,c.0•En,.,III:r_”..1"Scncn"tIninect ors Design: Drawn:BLC TYPICAL PERFORATED olumbia West (") Checked:LvL Date:6/13/13 DRAIN PIPE TRENCH DETAIL FIGURE Client:BONAVENTURE Rev By Date 11917 NE 95th ST ET Job No: 13116 BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING 6 VANCOUVER.WASHINGTON 98682 PHONE 360.8232900 FAX 360823-2901 CAD File: FIGURE 6 www.cdumbewe& neenng;nm TIGARD, OREGON Scale:NONE APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Ger.techn;c:!`- • .�-r-n. a e :i.-7.1:-:,:,7', '- -:- . . 1 11917 NE 95"'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 C o l u m b i a West-wiry- ..columbiawestengineering.com ...., PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-287 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SBI.1 _ Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 _ ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy Lean CLAY Soil Boring SB-01 CL, Sandy Lean Clay depth =2.5 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-6(8) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart "i✓lary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 68.7 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 32.8°' coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 34.8% liquid limit= 37 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 65.2% plastic limit= 22 effective size,D1101= n/a plasticity index= 15 Df301= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a Dom= n/a SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I interp. max I min 6.00" 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00" 100.0 100.0% 3.00" 75.0 100.0% ":-. :'A , Z WE R a a as a; 2_1 250" 63.0 100.0% 100% •, • •••• u•• s • • • •• -• • - 100% 2.00" 50.0 1000 I •• 1.75 45.0 100.0% •900/, .'. 1 •• 90% J 1.50" 37.5 100.0% j 1.25" 31.5 100.0% 80% 80% 1.00" 25.0 100.0% 718" 22.4 100.0% • 80 k 3/4" 19.0 100.0% 70% , '• 70% 5/8" 16.0 100.0% dl ;'0 ; 1/2" 12.5 100.0% • 3/8" 9.50 100.0% 60% •- - 60% 1/4" 6.30 100.0% at c #4 4.75 100.0% y m 50% 50% #8 2.36 99.8% I• ; #10 2.00 99.8% • #16 1.18 99.3% 40% . 40% #20 0.850 99.0% #30 0.600 98.3% 30% _ 300 p #40 0.425 97.5% Z #50 0.300 96.1% a rn #60 0.250 95.3% 20% . 20% #80 0.180 91.2% #100 0.150 88.9% 10% - 10% #140 0.106 710% #170 0.090 71.4% 0% I 0% #200 0.075 65.2% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/13/13 / / MJR- + sieve sizes -0-sieve data ty�-f--_ This report may rot be reproduced except it h.without pia written autlnra�on by Columbia West Ergineeritg,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC aiiMrized stratum C W E-s 12-r07112 11917 NE 95s Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 Columba West='� www.columbiawestengineering.com `` ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-287 Tigard.Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB I.1 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy Lean CLAY Soil Boring SB-01 CL.Sandy Lean Clay depth=2.5 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine. Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION LIQUID LIMIT © o © © tool liquid limit= 37 wet soil+pan weight,g= 40.47 40.38 40.09 90°6 plastic limit= 22 dry soil+pan weight,g= 35.35 35.02 34.54 80% plasticity index= 15 pan weight,g= 20.52 20.77 20.88 70°'0 N(blows)= 35 24 15 1b 60% 2 50% moisture,%= 34.5% 37.6% 40.6°'. c 40% - G---____aa SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E 30% © 8 © © 20% • 10% shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 27.16 27.16 0% , shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight,g= 26.01 26.00 10 25 I:C pan weight,g=_ 20.81 20.82 number of blows,"N" moisture.%= 22.1% 22.4% ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART 80 . %gravel= 0.0% %sand= 34.8% • %silt and clay= 66 2% 70 �* - - •"U"Line %silt= n/a %clay= n/a 60 .. moisture content= 32.8% I "A'Line __ - CH or OH 40 I r•' ." , N a 30 Cu x Ou 0 MH or OH 10 ■• I •CL•ML / leL or OL - DATE TESTED TESTED BY 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/1.3 MJR liquid limit 6 _______, --- ---- This report may not be reproduced except in lull without prior smitten authorization by Columbia West Engineering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authorized signature C W E-s 14-r 12/09 1 19 17 NE 95'-^Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823.2901 Columbia West=:-��www.columbiawestengineer ing.com I PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-288 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB 1.2 _ Salem, Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy SILT Soil Boring SB-01 ML, Sandy Silt depth=5 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-4(4) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart "Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913, D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 125.9 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 35.1% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 33.7% liquid limit= 34 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 66.3% plastic limit= 27 effective size,Dt,c= n/a plasticity index= 7 DI,o1= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a Dom= n/a SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US 1 mm act. I interp. max I min 6.00' 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00' 100.0 100.0% Q 3.00' 75.0 100.0% �r• •k"A� C N a Ig E E `E R $ F $! Ha 2.50" 63.0 100.0% 100% 0700-Q00Q 0000 0 0 ,0 0 00 0 •--., - - • iii I 1-.t. _ 100% 2.00" 50.0 100.0% -' 1 f * •• 1.75 45.0 100.0% 90% , I 1•• I ' 90% -1 1.50' 37.5 100.0% 1.25' 31.5 100.0% o • g 1.00' 25.0 100.0% 80% • - - • - 80% O 7/8' 22.4 100.0% 3/4" 19.0 100.0% s 70% t 70% 5/8 16.0 100.0% 1/2' 12.5 100.0% I ' 3/8' 9.50 100.0% 60% I i 60% 1/4' 6.30 100.0% C, - c -• #4 4.75 100.0% H a 50% 50%a : 550% #8 2.36 100.0% #10 2.00 100.0% #16 1.18 99.8% 40% .1 - I 40% #20 0.850 99.7% #30 0.600 99.1% 30% - 30% 0 #40 0.425 98.4% #50 0.300 97.1;; H #60 0.250 96.4% 20% , . ' - - 20% #80 0.180 92.6% #100 0.150 90.6% 10% 10% #140 0.106 78.4% #170 0.090 72.6% #200 0.075 66.3% 0% I I t I-- - 0% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/13/13 / MJR + sieve sizes -�sieve data J•g�---------' ( -.c This report may not be reproduced except n hi without prior written atthcrizabon by Cottia West Engineering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authorized sigma re C W E-s 12-r07/12 Geotechnical ■ Environmental ■ Special Inspection= 11917 h ne: NE 955'Street Vancouver,Fax: 60 823 2901 98682 C o t u rn b i a 1ND s t-- Phone:360-823-2900,mbiaw engi Fax: g.com 3-2901 www.calumbiawestengineerrng.com _ ti ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-288 Tigard-Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB 1.2 Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy SILT Soil Boring SB-0I 1 ML. Sandy Silt depth=5 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine. Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION LIQUID LIMIT © ® © © 100% liquid limit= 34 wet soil+pan weight,g= 39.54 40.63 40.23 90% plastic limit= 27 dry soil+pan weight,g= 34.92 35.54 35.08 80% plasticity index= 7 pan weight,g= 20.89 20.74 20.82 70% N(blows)= 33 22 17 ei 60% 50 moisture,%= 32.9% 34.4% 36.1% a c 40% _ SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E 30% Q -0 © e • © 20% 10% shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 27.27 27.44 0% . . , . __, shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight,g= 25.86 25.97 10 25 100 pan weight,g= 20.58 20.50 number of blows."N" moisture,%= 26.7% 26.9% ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART 80 %gravel= 0.0% • sand= 33.7% I silt and clay= 66.3% 70 ' - I"U"Line %silt= n/a %clay= n/a 60 . moisture content= 35.1% - x 50 i z • "A"Line c CH or OH 40 i• u - i ii ca JD .-.• CL OrOL MH or OH 10 /LOLI , _ , , DATE TESTED TESTED BY o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/13 _ MJR liquid limit This report may not be reproduced except in full without pia written authorization by Columbia West Engineering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.authorized signature CWE-s14-02/09 11917 NE 95"Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Col���'� � �Phone:360$23-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 www..columbiavvestengineenng.com i PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-289 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB 1.3 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Silty SAND Soil Boring SB-01 SM, Silty Sand depth=7.5 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-4(0) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart"Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 105.3 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 30.3% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 63.5% liquid limit= 0 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 36.5% plastic limit= 0 effective size,D1101= n/a plasticity index= 0 D(30)= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a D1601= 0.133 mm SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US 1 mm act. I intern. max I min 6.00' 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00' 100.0 100.0% ' 3.00' 75.0 100.0% r+N � Z Wo R x ° R 3 �? ?A: 2.50" 63.0 1000% 100% •iiiiiiiiiirniimiiiiioi• •• •• • I 100%I 1.75' 45.0 100.0% 90% • I 90% J 1.50 37.5 100.0% o I j 1.25' 31.5 100.0% 1.00" 23511°5 5.0 100.0% 70 h 1lIIIluUII II■lul'� 70% 518' 6.0 100.0°6 112' 12.5 100.0°,6 318' 9.50 100.0% : mil rn CD 50% 11111111 I 1 I 60% 1!4" 6.30 100.0% #4 4.75 100.0% a 50% 11111_I 'llRIiI 50%0 #O 2.00 99.9% 99.9 e #16 1.18 99.7% 6 #20 0.850 99.6% #30 0.600 98.2% 30: iiiamiii 1 - 30% D #40 0.425 96.7% #50 0.300 89.2% 20% III 'om 20°h y #80 0.180 85.2% 72.1% 0 iiiiia•iuii_______ 8°!0 10 k 10% #140 0.106 0% iEIM II 0°k DATE#TESTED,0 075 36.5%''° TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/13/13 MJR + sieve sizes sieve data i This report may not be reproduced except n h.without prior mitten authorization by Coketia West Ergneerng,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.authorized sigi�re CWE-s12407/12 1 , e Geotechnicai • Environmental • Special Inspections _1 1 19 17 NE 95"Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900, Fax:360-8232901 www.columbiawestengineenng.com Columbia West PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-290 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB L4 Salem. Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Silty SAND Soil Boring SB-01 SM. Silty Sand depth= 10 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-2-4(0) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart"Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 144.2 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 31.0% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 73.6% liquid limit= 0 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 26.4% plastic limit= 0 effective size,D1101= n/a plasticity index= 0 D(30)= 0.083 mm PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a D1601= 0.181 mm SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I intern. max I min 6.00' 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00" 100.0 100.0% 3.00" 75.0 100.0% kn ..nN : : a w f. F A i E Lg ammo. 2.50' 63.0 100.0% 100% • •• u•• •••• • • • •• • • , . 100% 2.00' 50.0 100.0% • • 1.75' 45.0 100.0% 90% - I I 90% J 1.50 37.5 100.0% > 1.25 31.5 100.0% re 1.00' 25.0 100.0% 80% -. •. 80% 0 mir 22.4 100.0% 3/4' 19.0 100.0% 70% 70% 5/8' 16.0 100.0% ' 112' 12.5 100.0% • 3/8' 9.50 100.0% 60% ' • I 60% 1/4' 6.30 100.0% a . c #4 4.75 100.0% al w 50% . a 50% #S 236 99.9% CL . #10 2.00 99.8% #16 1.18 99.5% 40% 40% #20 0.850 99.4%• i #30 0.600 96.5% • 30% - - ' 30% p #40 0.425 93.6% a #50 0.300 80.8% to #60 0.250 74.2% 20% • - • 20% #80 0.180 59.8% #100 0.150 51.8% 10% 10% #140 0.106 39.1% #170 0.090 33.1% #200 0.075 26.4% 0% - - I I- - I - 0% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/13/13 rMJR + sieve sizes -0-sieve data �-+ Pis report may not be reproduced except in rd without pia widen authatatico by Courtia West Eng:e•ig,Inc COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.ailtnr¢ed Wigwam CWE-s12-r07/12 Geotechnical • Environmental a Special Inspections 1 19 17 NE 95=Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 C o lu mb i a West p v,...colu m biawestengineering.com PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-291 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB 1.5 Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE SILTY CLAY with Sand Soil Boring SB-0I CL-ML,Silty Clay with Sand depth= 17.E feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-4(3) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart "Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 1 19.6 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 29.9% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 26.3% liquid limit= 27 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 73.7% plastic limit= 21 effective size,Dom= n/a plasticity index= 6 Dt30)= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a 0t501= n/a SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I intern. max I min 6.00" 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00• 100.0 100.0% 3.00" 75.0 100.0% ,., - • 'N - a •= ; # < Li Eg `°A 250" 610 100.0% 100% 0,,00-0300 a000 0 0 0 0 • •. . . , ■ I fI t I ;I I r i r, = 100% 200" 50.0 10o.o% 1.75 45.0 100.0% 90% ' L I a . 90% W 1.50" 37.5 100.0% < 1.25" 31.5 100.0% ce 1.00" 25.0 100.0% 80% . - . I 80% C7 7/8' 22.4 100.0% 3/4' 19.0 100.0% 70% •• 70% 5/8" 16.0 100.0% 1!7 12.5 100.0% : 3/8" 9.50 100.0% 60% 60% 114" 6.30 100.0% N . #4 4.75 100.0% A 50% 50% #8 2.36 99.9% c #10 2.00 99.9% #16 1.18 99.2% 40% • 40% #20 0.850 98.7% #30 0.600 97.7% 30% - - 30% 0 #40 0.425 96.7% _ #50 0.300 94.4% to #60 0.250 93.2% 20% 20% #80 0.180 88.7% #100 0.150 86.2% 10% - 100 #140 0.106 79.9% #170 0.090 77.0% #200 0.075 73.7% 0% 1 - - I ' I 0% DATE TESTED TESTED 8Y 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/014/13 BJR + sieve sizes --0-sieve data '. - , C--- L This report may not be reprodxed eacept in lull without prior written aMa¢alim by Columbia West Engineereg,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authorized*mature CWE-s12-r07/12 •I • • Geotechnical ■ Environmental • Special Inspections 11917 NE 95m Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 COI um hi a Vile St / . www.columbiawestengineenng.com ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-291 Tigard-Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB LS Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE SILTY CLAY with Sand Soil Boring.SB-01 CL-ML.Silty Clay with Sand depth= 17.5 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA I ABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine,Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION LIQUID LIMIT 0 0 0 0 100% liquid limit= 27 wet soil+pan weight,g= 41.03 40.62 41.50 90 143 plastic limit= 21 dry soil+pan weight.g= 36.85 36.43 37.02 80% plasticity index= 6 pan weight,g= 20.65 20.84 20.91 ; 70% N(blows)= 35 26 16 : 60% i. 3 50% moisture,%= 25.8% 26.9% 27.8% c 40% SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E 30% 0—_____a_e © A © © 20% 10% shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 28.20 28.02 0%I shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight,g= 26.91 26.76 10 25 100 pan weight,g= 20.68 _ 20.76 number of blows."N" moisture,%= 20 7;% 21.0% ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART BO _ %gravel= 0.0% %sand= 26.3% • %silt and clay= 73.7% 70 t• •"U"Line j %silt= n/a %cfay= n/a 60 - moisture content= 29.9% x 50 `% , a "A' Line .= - CH or OH a 40 �• i U N I 30 / CLOrOL 10 M1LorOL _ DATE TESTED TESTED BY 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/13 - MJR liquid limit `� This report may not be reproduced except in full without pia written authorization by Columbia West Engineering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authonzed signature CWE-s14-r12/09 Geotechnical • Environmental ■ Special Inspections- 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 99692 Phone:360.923-2900,Fax:360923-2901 Columbia West r r� wvw.columbiawestengineering.com PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-292 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB1.6 Salem. Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Lean CLAY with Sand Soil Boring SB-0I CL, Lean Clay with Sand depth=20 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-7-6(18) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart"Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTMI D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 124.1 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 26.6% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 28.7% liquid limit= 48 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 71.3% plastic limit= 21 effective size,D1101= n/a plasticity index= 27 Dt301= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a 0160)= n/a SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I interp. max I min 6.00" 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00" 100.0 100.0% 3.00' 75.0 100.0% e ^ tv== ^^ 7 N = Z __ _ F. _ _ FA =8 #_1 2.50" 63.0 1000% 100% • • ••• •••• • • • , ••-.a% I It, - 100% 2.00" 5(10 100.0% I 1.75" 45.0 100.0% 90% 1 I• I - 90% J 1.50" 37.5 100.0% • ; > 1.25' 31.5 100.0% °• ; ix 1.00' 25.0 100.0% 80% i 80% t7 7/6" 22.4 100.0% 314• 19.0 100.0% • 70% . • 70% 5/8" 16.0 100.0% 1/2" 12.5 100.0% 3l8" 9.50 100.0% co so 1 60% 1/4 6.30 100.0°%• 5 ; #4 4.75 100.0% A 50% 50% #8 2.36 99.8% c ; ; #10 2.00 99.8% #16 1.18 98.5% 40% i 40% #20 0.850 97.7% • #30 0.600 95.3% 30% 30% 0 140 0.425 93.0% Z #50 0.300 89 3% rn #60 0.250 87.4% 20% _i - - 20% #80 0.180 84.2% • #100 0.150 82.5% 10% 10% #140 0.106 76.9;6 #170 0.090 74.2% #200 0.075 71.3% 0% I I 1 I - 0% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/14/13 BJR + sieve sizes -0-sieve data �� This report may not be reproduced except in full Mbeut prior written auUta¢aAe by Caturbia west Ergs eerig,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.authorized swage C W E-s 12-r07112 Geotechnical • Environmental • Special Inspectiofr. 11917 NE 95t'Street Vancouver.Washington 98682 Co I u m hi a West7TF:-.7- Phone:360-823-2900,Fax: g.c 823-2901 www.columbiawestengineering.com ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-292 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB 1.6 Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Lean CLAY with Sand Soil Boring SB-01 CL,Lean Clay with Sand depth=20 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine. Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION LIQUID LIMIT 0 0 0 0 100% liquid limit= 48 wet soil+pan weight,g= 41.17 39.37 39.83 90% plastic limit= 21 dry soil+pan weight,g= 34.68 33.30 33.33 80% plasticity index= 27 pan weight,g= 20.60 20.49 20.71 e 70% •• - - N(blows)= 35 22 15 m 60% .8 50% �`Q moisture,%= 46.1 % 47.1% 5L3% 40% SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E :go 4 A 0 0 20% 10% shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 27.16 27.48 0 . . . . . . I shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight,g= 26.03 26.29 10 25 100 pan weight,g= 20.76 20.58 number of blows,"N' moisture,%= 21.4% 20.8% ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART 80 . %gravel= 0.0% n/sand= 28.7% •j %silt and clay= 71.3% 70 1 . - "U"dine %silt= n/a =j %clay= n/a �•• moisture content= 26.6% I x 50 r f c CH or OH "A' Line ›" 40 i A n 30 /orOL/' L or OL 0 DATE TESTED TESTED BY o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/13 MJR liquid limit _--- This report may not be reproduced except in MI without Aria Witten authorization by Columbia West Engineering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.authorized signature C W E-s 14-r 12/09 11917 NE 95?'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 ■ Phone:360-823-2900, Fax:360-823-2901 COrn m b 1 a West -w%- www.col u m bi ewes tenginee ring.co m PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-293 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB2.1 Salem, Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy SILT Soil Boring SB-02 AIL, Sandy Silt depth=2.5 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-4(1) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart "Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913. D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 93.4 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 28.5% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 48.8% liquid limit= 31 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 5I 2% plastic limit= 25 effective size,0(10). n/a plasticity index= 6 Dt3d)= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a D1601= 0.092 mm SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I interp. max I min 6.00" 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00• 100.0 100.0% m�! �' o a a $8 E1-2.1 3.00' 75.0 100.0% -:g 't a wE 250' 63.0 100.0% 100% • •• •••• •••• • • I •• -•i .• i 100% 2.00" 50.0 100.0%• • 1.75' 45.0 100.0% 90% I I •• I - 90% J 1.50' 37.5 100.0%il 1.25' 31.5 100.0% • • Ix 1.00' 25.0 100.0% 80% 80% ° 718' 22.4 100.0% • 3/4' 19.0 100.0% 70% . I . 70% 5/8' 100.0% • 1/2' 12.5 100.0% 318' 9.50 100.0% 60% I • - 60% 1/4' 6.30 100.0% 5 #4 4.75 100.0% co . A 50% 50% #8 236 99.9% a ; #10 2.00 99.8% #16 1.18 99.3% 40% 40% #20 0.850 99.0% ; ; #30 0.600 97.8% 30% 30% #40 0.425 96.6% #50 0.300 93.3% to #60 0.250 91.7% 20% 20% #80 0.180 84.4% #100 0.150 80.4% 10% - 10% #140 0.106 65.8% #170 0.090 58.9% #200 0.075 51.2% 0% I I I I I 0" DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/14/13 BJR + sieve sizes sieve data This report may not be reproduced except n NII without prior mitten arthorizabon by C.okar.ia west Engineeng,It COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.atthcrized signature C W E-s 12-r07/12 11917 NE 95s Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax 360-823-2901 Colurn b'a West=4F:7 www.columbiawestengineering.com ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S 13-293 Tigard.Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB2.1 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED 8Y 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy SILT Soil Boring SB-02 ML.Sandy Silt depth=2.5 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine. Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION LIQUID LIMIT liquid limit= 31 wet soil+pan weight,g= 42.23 38.42 41.71 90% plastic limit= 25 dry soil+pan weight,g= 37.35 34.18 36.55 80% plasticity index= 6 pan weight,g= 20.88 20.93 20.75 e. 70% N(blows)= 30 20 16 60 50% moisture,%= 29.6% 32.0% 32.7% o m% , SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E 3o% o--o--,D 0 0 0 0 20% 10% shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 28.44 28.17 . • 0% I shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight,g= 26.91 26.71 10 25 100 pan weight,g= 20.72 20.83 number of blows."N" moisture.%= 24.7% 24.8;6 ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART 80 I %gravel= 0.0% %sand= 48.8% 70 - l ` r .. I %silt and clay= 51.2% - ,"U"Line %silt= n/a %clay= n/a 60 moisture content= 28.5% 50 - x o - :.• "AJ Line CH or OH T.; .e ten a 30 ';', CL or Ou , MH or OH 10 /MLOL DATE TESTED TESTED BY 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/13 MJR liquid limit (--. t — This report may not be reproduced except in full without prior written authorization by Columbia West Engneering,Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authorized signature C W E-s 14-r12/09 Geotechnical • Environmental • Special Inspections lik 1 19 17 NE 951'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823 Fax:360-823-2901 CDIII m b a West4r, PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-294 Tigard, Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB2.6 Salem, Oregon 97301 GATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Sandy SILT Soil Boring SB-02 ML.Sandy Silt depth=20 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-4(0) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart "Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913, D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= 104.5 %gravel= 0.0% as-received moisture content= 32.9% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 40.9% liquid limit= 0 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 59.1% plastic limit= 0 effective size,D1101= n/a plasticity index= 0 D1 = n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a D(60)= 0.077 mm SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I interp. max I min 6.00' 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00" 100.0 100.0% 3.00" 75.0 100.0% 2.50" 630 100.0°6 100% • •• • •••• • • • • •• • -•-•' i : 100% 2.00" 50.0 1000% ••• 1.75 45.0 100.0% g0% • 90% W 1.50" 37.5 100.0% 1.25" 31.5 100.0% ce 80% • 80% 1.00" 25.0 100.0% • I 80/0 7/8" 22.4 100.0% 3/4" 19.0 100.0% 70% • 70% 5/8" 16.0 100.0% • 1/2" 12.5 100.0% 3/8" 9.50 100.0% 60% - - l - i 60% 1/4" 6.30 100.0% CI in - #4 4.75 100.0%• re 50% - 50°h #8 2.36 99.9% Q #10 2.00 99.9% #16 1.18 99.6% 40% . : 40% #20 0.850 995% #30 0.600 99.2% 30% 30% p #40 0.425 98.8°0 s #50 0.300 96.8°6 N #60 0.250 95.8°% 20% 20% #80 0.180 88.4% #100 0.150 84.4% 10% i - i 100 #140 0.106 71.7% #170 0.090 65.8% #200 0.075 59.1% 0% 0% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/14/13 BJR + sieve sizes -0-sieve data may+•--__ C - Tits report rte/rot be rapddsed except it hi without Orr written autictization by Cdurt,ia West Engineering.Inc. COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING.INC.adwraed signature CWE-s12407/12 Geo*.echnic • _E' _rr.-•_,`:;I . Scec•al lr•,.:-ctti^n:; 1 1917 NE 95�'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 C olumbia West Phone:360-823-2900, Fax:360823-2901�wvw.columbiawestengineerng.com PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-295 Tigard. Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st. Suite 200 06/20/13 SB3.3 Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Lean CLAY with Sand Soil Boring SB-03 CL, Lean Clay with Sand depth= 15 feet SPECIFICATIONS AASHTO SOIL TYPE none A-7-6(15) LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Rainhart"Mary Ann" Sifter 637 ASTM D6913, D422 ADDITIONAL DATA SIEVE DATA initial dry mass(g)= I05.6 %gravel= 0.7% as-received moisture content= 27.2% coefficient of curvature,Cc= n/a %sand= 23.0% liquid limit= 41 coefficient of uniformity,Cu= n/a %silt and clay= 76 3% plastic limit= 2l effective size,Don)= n/a plasticity index= 20 D1301= n/a PERCENT PASSING fineness modulus= n/a 0(60)= n/a SIEVE SIZE SIEVE SPECS US I mm act. I intern. max I min 6.00" 150.0 100.0% GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 4.00• 100.0 100.0% �N = AN N = Z I7Z- : : ' a ti �a sY8 2.50" 63.0 100.0% �+ 2.50" 63.0 100.0% 100% •. •• •••• •••• • • • -I ••••• I I I 100% 2.00" 50.0 100.0% • • 1.75" 45.0 100.0% I I I •I • I 1.50' 37.5 100.0% 90% 90 •• > 1.25" 31.5 100.0% ce 1.00" 25.0 100.0% 80% I •• 80% C2 718" 22.4 100.0% ' • 3/4" 19.0 100.0% 70% : 70% 5/8" 16.0 100.0% 1/2" 12.5 100.0% • • 318" 9.50 100.0% 60% 60% 1/4" 6.30 100.0% m ' _ - #4 4.75 99.3% m 50% - 50% #8 2.36 98.5% a ' #10 Z.00 98.3% e - #16 1.18 97.3% 40% 40% #20 0.850 96.7% #30 0.600 95.7% 30% 30% o #40 0.425 94.7% Z #50 0.300 92.7% - a rn #60 0.250 91.7% 20% 20% #80 0.180 88.2% #100 0.150 86.3% 10% 10% #140 0.106 81.3% #170 0.090 78.9% #200 0.075 76.3% 0% - I - I 0% DATE TESTED TESTED BY 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 particle size(mm) 06/14/13 BJR + sieve sizes -0-sieve data - 7 This report may not be reproduced except n rul wnitnut prig written a thorvatm by C lurbia West Ergneerng,Inc COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.atlnr¢ed sign�xe C W E-s 12-r07/12 Geotechnical is Environment4i s Special Inspections + 11917 NE 951'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 Columbia Vilest r-- www.columbiawestengineering.com ATTERBERG LIMITS REPORT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. LAB ID Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 S13-295 Tigard.Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE FIELD ID 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/20/13 SB3.3 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL SAMPLED MATERIAL SOURCE USCS SOIL TYPE Lean CLAY with Sand Soil Boring SB-03 CL,Lean Clay with Sand depth= 15 feet LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Liquid Limit Machine. Hand Rolled ASTM D4318 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION 0 0 0 0 LIQUID LIMIT 100%7 liquid limit= 41 wet soil+pan weight,g= 42.89 41.22 38.32 90 plastic limit= 21 dry soil+pan weight,g= 36.60 35.27 33.17 80% p lastici ty index= 20 pan wei g ht,g= 20.68 20.70 20.89 _ �o o --- N(blows)= 35 26 17 ai 60 50°x, moisture,%= 39.5% 40.8% 41.9% .0 40% 0----0----o SHRINKAGE PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION E 30% O ® 0 0 20% ..__._ 10% - shrinkage limit= n/a wet soil+pan weight,g= 27.25 27.53 0% shrinkage ratio= n/a dry soil+pan weight.g= 26.11 26.35 10 25 100 pan weight,g= 20.74 20.78 number of blows,"N" moisture.%= 21.22% 21.2% ADDITIONAL DATA PLASTICITY CHART eo %gravel= 0.7% %sand= 23.0% . 70 ' t %silt and clay= 76.3% "U"Line %silt= n/a ." %clay= n/a moisture content= 27.2% x 50 `: m ' "A'Line .= - ••••••• CH or OH _>. 40 .-: an m 1 30 - 'i CL or OL - ./ 0 MH or OH 10 r .CL-ML ML or OL DATE TESTED TESTED BY 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 06/19/13 NUR liquid limit 61----___or C______ —"--._ This report may not be reproduced except in full without prior%aaen autlorizabon by Columbia West Engineering,in COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.authorized signature CWE-s14-02109 Geotechnical • Environmental• Special Inspections 1 1917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:350-823-2900.Fax:360-823-2901 Columbia We s t www.columbiawestengineering.com MOISTURE CONTENT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing _ 13116 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE PAGE 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/18/13 1 of 3 Salem.Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Despatch LEB2 ASTIv1 D2216.Method B MOIST DRY CONTAINER LAB ID FIELD ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND SOURCE MASS+PAN MASS+PAN MASS MOISTURE CONTENT OVEN TEMP. S 13-296 SB l.7 grayish brown sandy silt/clay 187.74 163.35 86.25 31.6% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-01,depth=25 feet grayish brown silty/clayey sand S13-297 SB 1.8 Soil Boring 5B-01,depth=30 feet 206.37 178.17 87.20 31.0% 1 10±5'C S I3-298 SB 1.9 brown sand 207.39 179.93 86.90 29.5% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-0l,depth=35 feet light brown sandy silt/clay S13-299 SBI.10 ±5°C Soil Boring SB-0 1,depth=40 feet 192.81 169.38 87.72 28.7% I I i l S 13-300 SB I.I 1 light brown silty/clayey sand 195.97 165.97 87.06 38.0% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-01,depth=45 feet S 13-301 SB 1,12 light brown silty/clayey sand 195.21 161.00 87.04 46.3% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-0l,depth=50 feet S 13-302 SB2.2 light brown silty/clayey sand 201.42 171.65 87.05 35.2% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02,depth=5 feet brown sand S13-303 SB2.3 Soil Boring SB-02.depth=7.5 feet 204.61 175.72 86.69 32.4% 1 I 0±5'C S 13-304 SB2.4 brown sand with silt/clay 208.70 176.42 86.68 36.0% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth= 10 feet S 13-305 SB2.5 brown sand with silt/clay 215.64 186.10 86.88 29.8% 110±5°C' Soil Boring SB-02,depth= 17 feet NOTES: This report may Rd be reIXeduced except In full mnnut peer mitten autlgnzabcn by Columbia'West Engneenng,Inc. DATE TESTED TESTED BY 06/14/13 BJR COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.aubonzed sgnahoe CWE-s11-r02/10 Geotechnical • Environmental• Special Inspections 1 1917 NE 95°'Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360-823-2900.Fax:360-823-2901 COI u m b r a Wes t www.columbiawestengineering.com MOISTURE CONTENT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE PAGE 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/18/13 2 of 3 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Despatch LEB2 ASTM D2216.Method B MOIST DRY CONTAINER LAB ID FIELD ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND SOURCE MASS*PAN _ MASS.PAN MASS MOISTURE CONTENT OVEN TEMP. S 13-306 SB2.7 brown sand with silt/clay 207.47 179.66 85.64 29.6% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth=25 feet S13-307 SB2.8 brown sand 200.43 1 76.50 87.15 26.8% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth=30 feet S 13-308 SB2.9 brown sand 202.00 169.60 86.84 39.1% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth=35 feet S 13-309 SB2.10 brown sand 211.64 182 74 86.96 30.2% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth=40 feet SI3-310 SB2.1 I brown silt/clay with sand 199.98 174.59 85.99 28.7% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-02.depth=45 feet brown silty/clayey sand S I=-;I tiB2.12 Soil Boring SB-02.depth=50 feet 199.01 171.68 87.60 32.5% 110±5°C S 13-312 SB3.2 brown silty/clayey sand 197.75 170.60 86.90 32.4% 110±5°C Soil Boring SB-03,depth=10 feet S13-313 SB4.I brown silty/clayey sand 199.99 169.47 86.95 37.0% 110 t 5°C Soil Boring SB-04,depth=5 feet S13-314 SB4.2 brown sand with silt/clay 108.96 84.35 10.50 33.3% 110±5'C Soil Boring SB-04,depth= 10 feet S13-315 SB4.3 brown sand 1 15.31 89.70 10.42 32.3% III)± 5'C Soil Boring SB-04,depth= 15 feet NOTES; This report may not be reproduced except in full Mthout prior mitten authorization by Columbia West Engineering,Inc. DATE TESTED TESTED BY 06/14/13 _ BJR COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.a4onzed signature CWE-s11-r02/10 Geotechnical • En i - =ntat ■ Special Inspections I NE 95th Street.Vancouver,Washington 98682 O' �'a West • Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 www.columbiawestengineering.com MOISTURE CONTENT PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard Parcel Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 Tigard,Oregon Robert Underwood REPORT DATE PAGE 3220 State st.Suite 200 06/18/13 3 of 3 Salem,Oregon 97301 DATE SAMPLED SAMPLED BY 06/10/13 ASR LABORATORY TEST DATA LABORATORY EQUIPMENT TEST PROCEDURE Despatch LEB2 ASTM D2216.Method B MOIST DRY CONTAINER LAB ID FIELD ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND SOURCE MASS.PAN MASS*PAN MASS MOISTURE CONTENT OVEN TEMP. S13-316 SB5.2 brown sand 115.64 91.48 10.08 29.7% 110±5"( Soil Boring SB-05,depth= 10 feet S 13-317 SB5.4 grayish brown sandy silt/clay 111.42 88.61 10.21 29.1% l 10±5°C Soil Boring SB-05.depth=20 feet NOTES -nisi[Cobb may not be reproduced except m lull mlhout pnor mitten auttanzation oy Columba'Nest Engineering.Inc. DATE TESTED TESTED BY 06/14/13 BJR COLUMBIA WEST ENGINEERING,INC.aulhonzed signature C W E-s 1 1402/10 APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone.360$23-2900,Fax.360-823-2901 Gnotechnical •Envlronmontal•Special Inspections vww.co:umbiawestengireering.com çol um bla V lest n g i n c c r i n 9 , I n c `. SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO. Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-1 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO. Tigard.Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 1 of 2 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 mud rotary split spoon 6/10/13 830 REMARKS APPROX SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1100 d a Depth Sample Dover SPT Sample USCS C.apNC §a-, 5&.. a, = 1E:7.- y (!eel) Type Recovery Blow Feld ID Depth Sol Log LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS `e mg;e J $ d= e2` (inches) Count (feel} Type a a r a y ;.-..;.,..• Topsoil. Light brown,sandy SILT with fine roots. 7022 CL- /ilili4 Light brown,medium stir very moist.sandy SILT with •/////� ra mottling and sandy lean CLAY.[Soil Type l - ML /W//I/r SPT 13 18 1 3 1.1 2.5 IIIIII• 32.8 65.2 37 15 3 %IIIIii 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 96682 Phone:360-823-2000.Fax:360-823-2901 Gootnchnical.Environmental•Spacial tn;pecttons www.cclumbiawestengineering.com Columbia West'' 2 n g i n c e r i n q , I n c SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-1 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO Tigard, Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 2 of 2 _ BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 mud rotary split spoon 6/10/13 830 REMARKS APPROX SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1100 Drive/ SPT Semple USCS D eP h Samd e Gracile a m (feel) Type Recovery Blow Feld ID Depth Sol Log LITI-.OLOGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS —o c,e &F C yv (inches) jj Count (feet) Type S� ag SPT IS 1S U 12 1.8 30 CL / Brown.gray,blue,and red.stiff to very still very moist. 31.0 17 lean CLAY with Sand. [Soil Type 3][continued] 22 35— SPT 18 18 X 10 1.9 35 SP Brown to multicolored.dense,moist,poorly graded 29.5 14 SAND.[Soil Type 21 15 40- ` SPT 18 18 12 1.10 40 ML Light brown to tan,hard,moist,sandy SILT.with thin 28.7 16 iron banded layers and lenses of sand.[Soil Type I] 20 45- - SPT 18 18 X 6 1.11 45 CL Red to tan,very stilt,very moist,lean CLAY with sand. 38.0 10 [Soil Type 3] 12 5" Z SPT 1818 6 1.12 50 16.3 0 7 m 11 a. Bottom of borehole at 51.5 feet. Ground water not encountered. Borehole backfilled with bentonite on 6 10 2013. In 15 z 5 it m 0 n c0 0 J 0 co m 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver.Washington 98682 Phone:360-B23-2900.Fax:360-823.2901 Gaotochnical•Environmental.Special Inspection .y ,ww.columbiawestengineering.com Columbia Westr- = n G i n e r t n g , I n c -. SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO. BORING NO Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-2 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO. Tigard.Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 1 of 2 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 mud rotary split spoon 6/10/13 1100 REMARKS APPROX.SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1350 Oe Ih On'� SPT Sample USCS ; v_� ' Y E_ d P Sample Graphic $" o N Recover Blom Fietd ID De h Sal LITHOLCGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS F tgo aE 1 8°Y ^�_ (feet} Tie P Type L09 Inches ��" a�� �� as a c�-�N�^ (inches) Count (feel} Z a ;:-7 Topsoil. Light brown.sandy SILT with fine roots. ML Light brown,medium stiffvery moist-sandy SILT with – gray mottling.[Soil Type 1] i SPT 1818 V 2 2.l 2.5 28.5 51.2 31 6 5 I 3 –SPT 18 18 2 2.2 5 SM 35.2 Brown-loose.wet,silty SAND.[Soil Type 2] 35 4 1 –SPT 13 18 2 2.3 7.5 32.4 2 t.' 5 10— SPT 18 18 V 2 2.4 10 Light groundwater seepage observed at 10 feet bgs. 36.0 15--- CL- 0'4 Brown,medium stiff to stiff:very moist silty CLAY irio – ML 00 with Sand.[Soil Type 3] _ ii✓� SPT 18 12 4 2.5 17 ML Red brown.stiff to very stilt very moist sandy SILT. 29.3 – 4 [Soil Type 1] c 3 0 " 20--- • f SPT 18 18 3 2.6 20 32.9 59.1 0 0 o — 10 m 12 o. u n 0 m 0 U, O -. C9 ? 25— cc o SPT 18 18 9 2.7 25 SP ` : Brown to multicolored.medium dense to dense.moist 29.6 – 10 poorly sraded SAND with interlayering of silty m 16 SAND and clean coarse SAND.[Soil Type 2j m – °m, 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver.Washington 98682 Phone.360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 Gaotachnical•Environmental•Special Inspection www.columbiawestengineering.com Columbia West E n g i n c e r i n p , I n c SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-2 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO Tigard_Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 2 of 2 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPUNG METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 mud rotary- split spoon 6/10/13 1100 REMARKS APPROX.SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND`NATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1350 Depth Sart pe Dnef SPT Semple USCS Soi uraPhc UTHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS 2' 2 8 (feel) Type Re:every Blow Fdd ID Depth Lag e- (inches) Count (feo T e 2 SPT 1 8 18 V 12 2.3 30 CL % Brown to multicolored,v e r y to hard.very moist. 126.8 L/\t 18 lean CLAY with Sand.[Soil Type 3] '9 35— j SPT 18 18 8 2.9 35 SM Brown to multicolored.medium dense to dense,wet. 39.1 •3 •� silty SAND.[Soil Type 2] 15 40— ••' �:: SPT 1818 17 2.10 40 ':. 30.2 20 2 _7 45— —SPT 18 18 9 2.11 45 28.7 _ 9 - 0 50— :... o SPT 18 18 V 15 2•12 50 32.5 18 25 Bottom of borehole at 51.5 feet. Ground water not encountered. 8 Borehole back511ed with bentonite on 6 10 2013. (' J C7 R 55— m (7 - rysZ - V Q 1 11917 NE 55th Street,Vancouver.Washington 98682 Gcotechnical.Enviranmanenl•Spacial In:poctlan- Phone:360-823-2900.Fax:360-823-2901 www.columhiawestengineering.com Columbia West 7i 3 n o I n e c r i n q , I n c `� + SOIL BORING LOG j PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-3 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO Tigard, Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 1 of 1 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 hollow stem split spoon 6/10/13 1350 REMARKS APPROX.SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1450 Depth Sample Drivel SPT sample USCS Graphic R Recovery &cw F.�d ID Depth Sol LITHOLCGICDESCRIPTIONANDREMARKS Icy cyie ae „3 "°Y m (feel} Type 1 Type log 1�" ary`-' �- �E (2,-1'"--rNv (inches) Count (feel cl a z z �., .a Topsoil. Light brown,sandy SILT with tine roots. ML Light brown-medium stiff moist,sandy SILT with gray _ mottling_[Soil Type 1] 5— SPT I818 2 3.1 5 _ 3 SM •:�.:.'1: Brown,loose,moist,silty SAND.[Soil Type 2] SPT 18 18 2 3.2 10 , Light groundw-ucr seepage observed at 10 feet bgs. 32.4 7 :L t 15— Z, SPT 18 18 3 3.3 15 CL % Brown to gray.medium stiff to stiff very moist lean 27.2 76.3 41 20 7 CLAY with sand.[Soil Type 3] 0 8 cc o a.• – 0 o – g 20- O SPT 1818 5 3.-1 20 E – 7 aa J 5 – Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feel. 0 Ground water not encountered_ , Borehole backfilled with bentonite on 6 10 2013. r, 0 – J ce o 1 1S 17 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Phone:360.823-2900.Fax:36023-2501 Geotechniwl.Environmental•Special Inspection; t www.columbiawestengineering.com Columbia West �'- r-- E n g i n e e r i n g , I n c SOIL BORING LOG J PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO. Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-4 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO Tigard.Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 1 of 1 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 hollow stmt split spoon 6/10/13 1500 REMARKS APPROX SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1550 Dm/ SPT sample USCS �d Ac m— gN2 d m v e Y E �— NIA, sT pe (fee) Ty pe Recover Blew Field De So Lo UTHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS WF •h.mm � l 3 1 e5' g v (inches) Count (leg Type a� � a= o N o z • _ ._.T Topsoil. Light brown.sandy SILT with fine roots. SM r.: Y Brown.loose.wet silty SAND.[Soil Type 2] ,.. ...i.....,.. 5 .: SPT 18 12 3 4.1 5 37.0 5— 5 i ;. 10 SPT 18 12 2 4.2 10 SP Brown.loose,wet,fine.SAND.[Soil Type 2] 33.3 2 I4 • `. Light groundwater seepage observed at 10 feet bgs. e, 15— • SPT 1812 2 4.3 15 323 o 3 z G m a V o _ v in 0 20— O SPT 18 18 2 4.4 20 SM Light brown,medium dense.wet.fine silty SAND.[Soil •o _ 5 Type 3] N• — Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feet. F- Ground water not encountered. F, _ Borehole backflled with bentonite on 6 10 2013. 0 0 J 0 z 0 O co 11917 NE 95th Street,Vancouver,Washington 98682 Gaotachnical. Environmental.Spacial Inmpactinn• Phone:360223-25CC,Fax.360-823-2901 ww.n.columbiawesmngineering.com Columbia West E n g i n e e r i n g , I n c SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT NAME CLIENT PROJECT NO BORING NO Bonaventure Senior Living Bonaventure Senior Housing 13116 SB-5 PROJECT LOCATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILL RIG ENGINEER PAGE NO. Tigard,Oregon Subsurface Technologies Diedrich B50 Turbo ASR 1 of 1 BORING LOCATION DRILLING METHOD SAMPLING METHOD START DATE START TIME see Figure 2 hollow stem split spoon 6/10/13 1600 REMARKS APPROX.SURFACE ELEVATION GROUND WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE FINISH TIME 206 feet not encountered 6/10/13 1700 Depth Sample Dn,e! SPT Sample USCS Graphic , e ^e °E a e _ vN feel Recovery Blew Field ID Depth Soi Le LITHOLCGIC DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS –> „,8 ,?J �_ 82 z_ (feel) Type (Inches) Counl (feel) Type Log n Z J a � v~Nv Topsoil. Light brown,sandy SILT with fine roots. ML Light brown,medium stilt very moist-sandy SILT with gray mottling.[Soil Type 1] 5— :,`,•'. SPT 18 12 3 51 5 SM `•a..' :=` Brown,loose.wet silty SAND.[Soil Type 2] 5 5 r.v 10--- SPT 18 12 2 5.2 10 Light groundwater seepage observed at 10 feet bgs. 29.7 3 3 15— SPT 18 12 2 5.3 15 CL f Brown-stilt:very moist,lean CLAY with Sand.[Soil 3 j Type 3] o cs co o – `N' 20— SPT 1818 2 5.4 20 / 29.1 z _ 8 0 9 5 – Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feet. co Ground water not encountered. Borehole backfilled with bentonite on 6 10 2013. 0 z rr 0 m APPENDIX C SOIL CLASSIFICATION INFORMATION SOIL DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES Particle-Size Classification ASTM/USCS AASHTO COMPONENT size range sieve size range size range sieve size range Cobbles >75 mm greater than 3 inches >75 mm greater than 3 inches Gravel 75 mm—4.75 mm 3 inches to No.4 sieve 75 mm—2.00 mm 3 inches to No. 10 sieve Coarse 75 mm—19.0 mm 3 inches to 3/4-inch sieve - - Fine 19.0 mm—4.75 mm 3/4-inch to No.4 sieve - - Sand 4.75 mm—0.075 mm No.4 to No.200 sieve 2.00 mm—0.075 mm No. 10 to No.200 sieve Coarse 4.75 mm—2.00 mm No.4 to No.10 sieve 2.00 mm—0.425 mm No.10 to No.40 sieve Medium 2.00 mm—0.425 mm No.10 to No.40 sieve - - Fine 0.425 mm—0.075 mm No.40 to No.200 sieve 0.425 mm—0.075 mm No.40 to No.200 sieve Fines(Silt and Clay) <0.075 mm Passing No.200 sieve <0.075 mm Passing No.200 sieve Consistency for Cohesive Soil POCKET PENETROMETER SPT N-VALUE (UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE CONSISTENCY (BLOWS PER FOOT) STRENGTH,tsf) Very Soft 2 less than 0.25 Soft 2 to 4 0.25 to 0.50 Medium Stiff 4 to 8 0.50 to 1.0 Stiff 8 to 15 1,0 to 2.0 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2.0 to 4.0 Hard 30 to 60 greater than 4.0 Very Hard greater than 60 - Relative Density for Granular Soil SPT N-VALUE RELATIVE DENSITY (BLOWS PER FOOT) Very Loose 0 to 4 Loose 4 to 10 Medium Dense 10 to 30 Dense 30 to 50 Very Dense more than 50 Moisture Designations TERM FIELD IDENTIFICATION Dry No moisture. Dusty or dry. Damp Some moisture. Cohesive soils are usually below plastic limit and are moldable. Moist Grains appear darkened,but no visible water is present. Cohesive soils will clump. Sand will bulk. Soils are often at or near plastic limit. Wet Visible water on larger grains. Sand and silt exhibit dilatancy. Cohesive soil can be readily remolded. Soil leaves wetness on the hand when squeezed. Soil is much wetter than optimum moisture content and is above plastic limit. AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TABLE 1.Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Granular Materials Silt-Clay Materials General Classification (35 Percent or Less Passing.075 mm) (More than 35 Percent Passing 0.075) Group Classification A-1 A-3 A-2 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7 Sieve analysis,percent passing: 2.00 mm(No.10) _ - _ 0.425 mm(No.40) 50 max 51 min - - - - - 0.075 mm(No.200) 25 max 10 max 35 max 36 min 36 min 36 min 36 min Characteristics of fraction passing 0.425 mm(No.40) Liquid limit 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min Plasticity index 6 max N.P. 10 max 10 max 11 min 11 min General rating as subqrade Excellent to good Fair to poor Note:The placing of A-3 before A-2 is necessary in the'left to right elimination process"and does not indicate superiority of A-3 over A-2. TABLE 2.Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Granular Materials Silt-Clay Materials General Classification (35 Percent or Less Passing 0.075 mm) (More than 35 Percent Passing 0.075 mm) A-1 A-2 A-7 A-7-5, Group Classification A-1-a A-1-b A-3 A-2-4 A-2-5 A-2-6 A-2-7 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7-6 Sieve analysis.percent passing: 2.00 mm(No.10) 50 max - - - - - - - _ _ - 0.425 mm(No.40) 30 max 50 max 51 min - - - - - - - - 0.075 mm(No.2001 15 max 25 max 10 max 35 max 35 max 35 max 35 max 36 min 36 min 36 min 36 min Characteristics of fraction passing 0.425 mm(No.40) Liquid limit 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min Plasticity index 6 max N.P. 10 max 10 max 11 min 11 min 10 max 10 max 11 min 11min Usual types of significant constituent materials Stone fragments, Fine gravel and sand sand Silty or clayey gravel and sand Silty soils Clayey soils General ratings as subqrade Excellent to Good Fair to poor Note:Plasticity index of A-7-5 subgroup is equal to or less than LL minus 30.Plasticity index of A-7-6 subgroup is greater than LL minus 30(see Figure 2). AASHTO=American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials r e a • .. GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME o5%fines Cuz4 and 150003 .GW .15%sane Wellgraded drawl /e - 015%sand Well-graded gravel with sand Cu<4 and/or 1=Cc=3 •GP—._____ v<15%sand—a Poorly graded gravel _-------•015%sand Poorly graded gravel with sand Ines=ML or NH .OW-GM 015%sand Wl49radetl gravel unto silt Cuzi and tsCcs3 215%sand—.WlFyraded gravel with soh and sand /, noes=CL CH •GIN-GC a<15%said Well-graded gml watt clay(or silty clayI GRAVEL / or CL-tLI 015%sand WN railed Iw th cla F'9 gnw y and saM %gtas.l a 1-12%Mg< for silty clay and sandl %mid _.Anna=ML or MH .OP-GM 015%sand a Poor:graded gravel with Sift Cu<4 aedlor 1>C4>7 z15%sand -Poorly graded gravel with Sift and sand fines=CL CH. .GPGC 015%sand Poorly graded growl with clay for silty clay I or CLa 111 015%sand a Poorly graded gravel with clay and sand for silty clay and sand] M1nes=ML or MH GMT_---�<75%sand .Silty gravel —+215%sand Silty gravel with sand .12%Ines Ines=CL or CH GC <15%sad Clayey grata 215%sand Clayey gravel with sand fines=CL-ML •GC-GM t <15%sand Silty.claret gnsl 1.215%sand Silty.clayey gravel with sand e<5%Ines Cuz6 and 1SCdll3 , SW <15%gravel Well-graded sand / 015°.4 grovel—►Well-graded sand with growl �CunS orator 1>CosS .OP 15%drawl ►Paddy graded sand 015%gravel .-Poorly graded sand with gravel / fines=ML or MH •SW-SM <15%growl a Wn6yraded sand warn vk Cuzd and ts0CSJ zl5%9nvN --.WeLLgnaed sand swam sill and gmal fines=CL CH. ---- .SWSC—</5%drawl Wa1F9raded sand:tn clay■orsilly days SAND (or CL-ALI 215%drawl Wall-graded sand with clay and gravel %sand z 5-12%Ines for silty clay and gravel) %gravel Hies•ML or MH •SP-3M—,--is<15%gravel Poorly graded sand with silt Cu<6 adler 1>Cp>3 _-- --ai 015%grovel Poorly graded sand with sit and gravel fines=CL CH. - -.SPSC~_ 015%gravel—.PoorN graded sand ninth clay for silty clay i for CL-ML, -----------.-<t5%gravel Peony graded sand with clay and gravel or silty clay and 3rasell ones=ML or NH SM <1vel Si sand z15%5%gragravel Sitlty y sandmth gravel .12%fines .fines=CL or CH -SC 15%growl Clayey sand 215%gravel�Clayey sane•with grovel fines=CL<ML SCSM 0<15%gravel Silty,clayey sand 015%gravel Silty.clayey sand with gravel Flow Chart for Classifying Coarse-Grained Soils(More Than 50%Retained on No.200 Sieve) GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME c 30%plus No.200 <15%plus No.200 .Lean clay 15-29%plus No. v.%sand 2%gravel—s.Loan clay with sand PI=7 and p l o t s CL 0S%sand<%gravel—•Lean clay with gravel on or bow -4"-line _.2 30%Plus No.200 %sand z%drawl =155.6%drawl .Sady ban clay gravel .Sandy lean clay with gravel • sane<%drawl <15%sand Gravelly lean clay z t51'.sane Gravelly lean clay with sand <30%plus No.200 *%,15%plus No.200 .Silty clay 5-29%plus No.200 %said z%growl—.Silty clay with sane 45P1 S 7 and CL-ML %sand<%gravel—e.Silty clay with gravel ltnargaed .plait pit on above \ %sand 0%gravel <15%growl Sandy sdy day 'A'aitta _y z 30%plus No.200 oC 0 15%gravel .Sandy silly clay with gravel %sand c%gravel 15%sand.Gravelty snhy clay \ 2 15%sand Grandly silty cloy with sand <30%plus No.200 <15%plus N9.2S0 Silt LL<MI • 00 75-29%plus No.200 %sand 0%gravel—.Silt with sand PI<6 or plots ML %said<%gravel_y SAX mN gravel below'A'-ho %said z%drawl <15%gravel gang s�k 2 30%plw No.tag z 15%gmel Sandy silt with gravel %sand<%gravel <15%sand Grawelty sift LL awndned z 19%sand anwlly sett with sand Organic l <0.75 OL 1 LL-lot dned <30%plus Na.200- <15%plus No.200 ,Fat clay 15-29%this No.200 %sand 0%gravel—.Fat clay wdh sand PI plots on or --.CH �%sand<%gravel—..Fa clay with l a ow'A'-line %sane z% sl <15% gravel / gn grad—.Sandy tat c::Y / z 30%plus No.200 2 15%drawl .Sandy tat clay with gravel %sand c%3nwel S<15%sand .Onwlly fat dey Ihafganc z 15%sand .Gravely tat clay with sand <]O%plus No.200 <15%plus No.200 - --. •Elastic silt 15.29%plus ws.200-----------.%%sane z%gravel—.Elastic sin with sand LL> \PtPlotsblow MH sand<%diesel Elastic silt with gravel 'A'aine %sand z%growl <15%drawl—.Sandy elashc's'ilt"z 70%plus No.200 - z 15%grad Sandy elastic s'itt'mth gravel LL-.maned %sand c%gravel <t5%sand-- .Gravelly elastic silt •Organic <0.75 OH z 15%sand Gravely elastic sett min sand LL-tot tined - Flow Chart for Classifying Fine-Grained Soil(50%or More Passes No.200 Sieve) APPENDIX D REPORT LIMITATIONS AND IMPORTANT INFORMATION r . • • Genle-chnical • Envirnnmertal • Special irtpectinns Columbia West r," Date: June 20, 2013 Project: Bonaventure Senior Living Tigard, Oregon Geotechnical and Environmental Report Limitations and Important Information Report Purpose, Use, and Standard of Care This report has been prepared in accordance with standard fundamental principles and practices of geotechnical engineering and/or environmental consulting, and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill typical of currently practicing local engineers and consultants. This report has been prepared to meet the specific needs of specific individuals for the indicated site. It may not be adequate for use by other consultants, contractors, or engineers, or if change in project ownership has occurred. It should not be used for any other reason than its stated purpose without prior consultation with Columbia West Engineering, Inc. (Columbia West). It is a unique report and not applicable for any other site or project. If site conditions are altered, or if modifications to the project description or proposed plans are made after the date of this report, it may not be valid. Columbia West cannot accept responsibility for use of this report by other individuals for unauthorized purposes, or if problems occur resulting from changes in site conditions for which Columbia West was not aware or informed. Report Conclusions and Preliminary Nature This geotechnical or environmental report should be considered preliminary and summary in nature. The recommendations contained herein have been established by engineering interpretations of subsurface soils based upon conditions observed during site exploration. The exploration and associated laboratory analysis of collected representative samples identifies soil conditions at specific discreet locations. It is assumed that these conditions are indicative of actual conditions throughout the subject property. However, soil conditions may differ between tested locations at different seasonal times of the year, either by natural causes or human activity. Distinction between soil types may be more abrupt or gradual than indicated on the soil logs. This report is not intended to stand alone without understanding of concomitant instructions, correspondence, communication, or potential supplemental reports that may have been provided to the client. Because this report is based upon observations obtained at the time of exploration, its adequacy may be compromised with time. This is particularly relevant in the case of natural disasters, earthquakes, floods, or other significant events. Report conclusions or interpretations may also be subject to revision if significant development or other manmade impacts occur within or in proximity to the subject property. Groundwater conditions, if presented in this report, reflect observed conditions at the time of investigation. These conditions may change annually, seasonally or as a result of adjacent development. Additional Investigation and Construction QA/QC Columbia West should be consulted prior to construction to assess whether additional investigation above and beyond that presented in this report is necessary. Even slight variations in soil or site conditions may produce impacts to the performance of structural facilities if not adequately addressed. This underscores the importance of diligent QA/QC construction observation and testing to verify soil conditions do not differ materially or significantly from the interpreted conditions utilized for preparation of this report. Therefore, this report contains several recommendations for field observation and testing by Columbia West personnel during construction activities. Actual subsurface conditions are more readily observed and discerned during the earthwork phase of construction when soils are exposed. Columbia West cannot accept responsibility for deviations from recommendations described in this report or future Geotechnical•Environmental•Special Inspections•Materials Testing 11917 NE 95 Street Vancouver,Washington 98682 •Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-823-2901 14.1.tw co/umbljtA ester.ginBering.c am Geotechnical and Environmental Report Limitations and Important Information Page 2 of 2 Columbia West Engineering,Ina performance of structural facilities if another consultant is retained during the construction phase or Columbia West is not engaged to provide construction observation to the full extent recommended. Collected Samples Uncontaminated samples of soil or rock collected in connection with this report will be retained for thirty days. Retention of such samples beyond thirty days will occur only at client's request and in return for payment of storage charges incurred. All contaminated or environmentally impacted materials or samples are the sole property of the client. Client maintains responsibility for proper disposal. Report Contents This geotechnical or environmental report should not be copied or duplicated unless in full, and even then only under prior written consent by Columbia West, as indicated in further detail in the following text section entitled Report Ownership. The recommendations, interpretations, and suggestions presented in this report are only understandable in context of reference to the whole report. Under no circumstances should the soil boring or test pit excavation logs, monitor well logs, or laboratory analytical reports be separated from the remainder of the report. The logs or reports should not be redrawn or summarized by other entities for inclusion in architectural or civil drawings, or other relevant applications. Report Limitations for Contractors Geotechnical or environmental reports, unless otherwise specifically noted, are not prepared for the purpose of developing cost estimates or bids by contractors. The extent of exploration or investigation conducted as part of this report is usually less than that necessary for contractor's needs. Contractors should be advised of these report limitations, particularly as they relate to development of cost estimates. Contractors may gain valuable information from this report, but should rely upon their own interpretations as to how subsurface conditions may affect cost, feasibility, accessibility and other components of the project work. If believed necessary or relevant, contractors should conduct additional exploratory investigation to obtain satisfactory data for the purposes of developing adequate cost estimates. Clients or developers cannot insulate themselves from attendant liability by disclaiming accuracy for subsurface ground conditions without advising contractors appropriately and providing the best information possible to limit potential for cost overruns, construction problems, or misunderstandings. Report Ownership Columbia West retains the ownership and copyright property rights to this entire report and its contents, which may include, but may not be limited to, figures, text, logs, electronic media, drawings, laboratory reports, and appendices. This report was prepared solely for the client, and other relevant approved users or parties, and its distribution must be contingent upon prior express written consent by Columbia West. Furthermore, client or approved users may not use, lend, sell, copy, or distribute this document without express written consent by Columbia West. Client does not own nor have rights to electronic media files that constitute this report, and under no circumstances should said electronic files be distributed or copied. Electronic media is susceptible to unauthorized manipulation or modification, and may not be reliable. Consultant Responsibility Geotechnical and environmental engineering and consulting is much less exact than other scientific or engineering disciplines, and relies heavily upon experience,judgment, interpretation, and opinion often based upon media (soils) that are variable, anisotropic, and non-homogenous. This often results in unrealistic expectations, unwarranted claims, and uninformed disputes against a geotechnical or environmental consultant. To reduce potential for these problems and assist relevant parties in better understanding of risk, liability, and responsibility, geotechnical and environmental reports often provide definitive statements or clauses defining and outlining consultant responsibility. The client is encouraged to read these statements carefully and request additional information from Columbia West if necessary. Geotechnical•Environmental•Special Inspections•Materials'estng 1 1917 NE 95 Street Vancouver,Washington 93632 •Phone:360-823-2900,Fax:360-323-2901 4s wcol mataf,esteng?ree,Ina c..m. 13U F'20 ii-(--0015 i . Y `` v2-- S,D ttF --r-AA : 1-(2-' S.,, 54..) 4- 47112_ • l'�i- - 2.-1o' L7Ca z.a. °' lI• v Ihr' 2-' 7...--10 L' VA : 2....3 ,c 41.71 = e.755 0 3.-o t-. �� 1 '"c' QSSU s T(3.315- .1- DP.-31S T e f 1/ 4s24.1(Z 1) • 05-;c, = T (v.*),'') + T (•Z-3i) 177 L Ti •: fr d�.. ,. 651cv7L.5s ' /L24 11 44 Ja•z \ev "f U•& ,, "/3 , Zuo °/v6 IPEN 54, J•1 1- ' 4X55 s� („e, ❑ •L---310"‘t. S E• 4`` WP ,t5 S, 11(22. - 1!it, T-€ - 2Q a i ^'Jrc." � 1 r (?/0-0 ',its.) T7(15 , yo1 x z4,1Z > 9z6'.fv^,- 1' may,(.. ... Qe_ I.a a '/,4,w14L fc4)• SIA,l QaP I!2_ PI�w>'-C. ,, 1" (.C)OS S -6 ti "I'- E _ '34932- ...... 4 .... ,tirs. T— , yo, 3,18 - \S 39 u 1 -- 5/e; toy Co.c8 / A-,,-.--'"i ut,fi-vI -_-_ (7---\ k_i______— _ #243 4 ,--A.1-' -, /, Il— 3j q 9 y c 18 ' , r• [3P l2 3/,o., y .0-Y 'al ",,c:it u,, S /�' • •EGON Lo `'kJ,10 N90 DAN GREEN 9`L '��� FILE NO. lei o(„01 SHEET NO. !.!. / ENGINEERING,INC. I EXPIRES: SC)//5 I DESIGNER c)sc. DATE /0(/1,/,-f SALEM,OREGON CLIENT fLJr.)c.. AA-e- PROJECT T1 c� A.A.rJ. (_C)ti\ & I-" ),a XHEZ.F-C-2351 - Through-penetration Firestop Systems Page 1 of 2 ONLINE CERTIFICATIONS DIRECTORY XHEZ.F-C-2351 Through-penetration Firestop Systems PaP a Bottom Through-penetration Firestop Systems See General Information for Through-penetration Firestop Systems System No. F-C-2351 April 18,2007 F Rating—1 Hr T Rating— 1 Hr a � A , ‘ A - Q a;i/1� m Section A44 1, Floor-Ceiling Assembly—The 1 hr fire-rated wood joist floor-ceiling assembly shall be constructed of the materials and in the manner specified in the individual L500 Designs in the UL Fire Resistance Directory,as summarized below: A. Flooring System—Lumber or plywood subfloor with finish floor of lumber,plywood or Floor Topping Mixture*as specified in the individual Floor-Ceiling Design. Max diam of opening is 6 in. (152 mm). B. Wood Joists—Nom 10 in. (254 mm)deep(or deeper)lumber,steel or combination lumber and steel joists,trusses or Structural Wood Members*with bridging as required and with ends firestopped. C. Gypsum Board* —Thickness,type, number of layers and fasteners as required in the individual Floor-Ceiling Design. 2.Plastic Plumbing Fixtures+ -Shower Base Receptor—One-piece molded nonmetallic shower base receptor with stainless steel drain plate. Shower base receptor to be installed in accordance with the manufacturer\'s instructions. TILE-REDI LTD—Model 3360L,3360R,37NE0,3737,4837,4837ADA,4837MB or 4848 3.Tile—(Not Shown)-Ceramic or stone tile applied to shower pan floor with epoxy adhesive in accordance with shower base receptor installation instructions. 4.Nonmetallic Pipe—Nom 2 in.(51 mm)diam Schedule 40 solid or cellular core PVC pipe solvent-welded into drain in the bottom of the shower base receptor and centered in the floor opening. 5. Firestop System—The details of the firestop system shall be as follows: A. Fill,Void or Cavity Materials* -Wrap Strip—Nom 1/8 in.(3.2 mm)thick intumescent http://database.ul.com/cgi-bin/XYV/template/LISEXT/1 FRAME/showpage.html?name=X... 5/15/2007 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE CHAPTER 10 MEANS OF EGRESS SECTION 1017.5 2006 Edition IBC Interpretation 56-08 Issued 1-15-2010 BU_D6_56_08 1017.5 Corridor continuity.Fire-resistance-rated corridors shall be continuous from the point of entry to an exit,and shall not be interrupted by intervening rooms. Exception: Foyers, lobbies or reception rooms constructed as required for corridors shall not be construed as intervening rooms. • • • • • • • • • • Q: In accordance with the provisions of Section 1017.5 of the International Building Code a fire-resistance-rated corridor must be continuous from the point of entry into the corridor to an exit. Upon entry into a fire-resistance-rated corridor, is the corridor required to be continuous to all required exits? A: No. The code does not mandate any specific path of travel an occupant must use to reach an exit; however, once an occupant enters a fire-resistance-rated corridor, and provided with a required level of protection, that level of protection must be continuously maintained until the occupant reaches at least one exit. Access to other required exits does not have to be within a rated corridor. FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED CORRIDORS CONTINUOUS TO ONE OF THE REQUIRED EXITS EXIT OCCUPIED AREA (NOT CONSISTING OF A FOYER,LOBBY OR RECEPTION AREA) X � X W 1 W x EXIT Page 1 of 1 Appendix SR State of Oregon April 8, 2014 Building Codes Division Appendix SR Comparison to 2014 OSSC Better Buildings for Oregon IBC Chapter: Appendix SR 2014 OSSC Description Evacuation timing of Evacuation timing is evaluated in Eliminates evacuation timing of residents and brings residents consideration of occupancy Oregon in line with the 2015 IBC and NFPA 101. classification. Chapter 3: Principally based on I-1,I-2,R-3 and Adopts and modifies 2015 IBC provisions. Based on Occupancy Classifications R-4 with supplemental"SR" either I-1 or R-4 with consideration of: requirements. • Condition 1=No assistance • Condition 2=Limited assistance may be required. Code official makes no determination relative to "Condition l or 2."Rather,Oregon amendments in Sections 308.3(I-1)and 310.6(R-4)provide a prescriptive classification for use types consistent with DHS Licensing. Chapter 4: Required by SR104.3 No requirement for a Point of Safety.Oregon Point of Safety amendments in Section 420 adopt 2015 IBC model code provisions for smoke barrier/refuge area provisions in Section 420. Chapter 4: Section SR106.2.Requires walls Follows model code provisions in Section 420. Sleeping Room Separation separating sleeping rooms from other Includes R-4 occupancies in requiring walls separating sleeping rooms and corridors to be sleeping rooms from other sleeping rooms,corridors equivalent to ''A inch,non-rated and other occupancies to be constructed as"fire gypsum wall board. partitions."Applicable to Groups 1-1,R-1,R-2,R-3 and R-4 occupancies. Chapter 4: Section SRI04.3.1.Subdivide every Oregon amendments in Section 420.4 adopt 2015 IBC Smoke Barriers story used by residents for sleeping model code provisions. Requires separation of certain or treatment into at least two smoke Group I-1 Condition 2 occupancies by smoke barriers compartments with an area of not into no fewer than 2 smoke compartments of not more more than 10,000 square feet or than 22,500 s.f. more than 16 residents per floor. Chapter 4: Section SR104.3.1.1.Requires No requirement for a"horizontal exit"based on type Horizontal Exit horizontal exit in sleeping areas of construction.Aligns with both 2015 IBC and located in Types III,N and V current NFPA 101 model codes. construction. Chapter 5: Section SR105.Limits Memory Care Adopt 2015 IBC model code provisions.New model Maximum Building Height (Alzheimer)to first floor. Does not code limits I-1 type VA to 3 stories by not allowing allow sprinkler story increase for story increase for sprinklers.No first floor restriction SR-1. for"Memory Care." Chapter 9: Section SR107.2.Applies Oregon amendments in Section 903.2.8 adopt 2015 Sprinkler Systems appropriate NFPA 13 standards for IBC model code provisions,similar to SR.Requires type of occupancy(13, 13R, 13D). NFPA 13 for I-1 Condition 2.Requires NPFA 13R for R-4 Condition 2 while adding heat detectors or fire resistive construction. Chapter 9: Section SRI07.3.Required Follows model code provisions in Section 420. Fire Alarms compliance with NFPA 72 with Compliance with NFPA 72 required. certain exceptions. Building Codes Division • Department of Consumer and Business Services • State of Oregon r �, 1535 Edgewater St. NW, Salem,OR 97304 • P.O. Box 14470, Salem,OR 97309-0404 • ,`>:r 503-378-4133 • Fax: 503-378-2322 • bcd.oregon.gov �~ [BC Chapter: Appendix SR 2014 OSSC Description Chapter 9: SR107.3.1 Follows model code provisions. Smoke Detection Chapter 10: Per Section SR107.3.2. Follows model code with no amendments.Note: Alarm Verification.(Positive Positive Alarm Sequencing is allowed by NFPA 72 Alarm Sequencing) Section 23.8.1.3 where approved by the building official. Chapter 10: Per Section SR107.3.3. NFPA 72,Chapters 23&24,address the installation Approved Paging System of paging systems. Chapter 10: Per Section SR108.3.Specified Oregon amendments in Section 1008.1.9.6 adopt 2015 Controlled Egress Locks supplemental fire sprinkler and fire IBC model code provisions and maintain existing alarm requirements for use of Oregon allowances for: controlled egress locks. • Up to two special locking doors in a series. • Refuge areas meeting criteria are not required to comply with automatic deactivation requirements. Maintains supplemental fire sprinkler and fire alarm requirements for use of controlled egress locks. Chapter 10: Section SRI04.2.Required to Follows model code provisions with no amendments. Corridor Construction comply with Smoke Partitions Requires a Fire Partition(Section 1018): where serving more than 10 • I-1: 1-Hour fire-rating occupants. • R-4: '/2 Hour fire-rating.Not required less than 10. Chapter 10: Section SR104.2.Required 72"wide Follows model code for corridor width.No Corridor Width corridor requirement for a 72"wide corridor. Chapter 11: Not applicable.Previously not in Oregon amendments adopt 2015 IBC model code Accessibility—Group I-1 OSSC but in licensing regulations. provisions and Oregon amendments in Section Condition 2 1107.5.1 provide special requirements for roll-in showers with grab bars in excess of model code. Exception for accessible tubs. Satisfies DHS licensing requirements. Chapter 11: Not applicable.Previously not in Oregon amendments adopt 2015 IBC model code Accessibility—Group I-I OSSC but in licensing regulations. provisions requiring that 10%of units be accessible Condition 2 units.Section 1107.5.1.2 require that every dwelling or sleeping unit be a Type A Unit in excess of model code.Satisfies DHS licensing requirements. Chapter 11: Not applicable.Previously not in Oregon amendments in Section 1107.6.4 provide Accessibility—Group R-4 OSSC but in licensing regulations. special requirements for roll-in showers with grab Condition 2 bars in excess of model code.Exception for accessible tubs.Satisfies DHS licensing requirements. Chapter 11: Not applicable.Previously not in Oregon amendments adopt 2015 IBC model code Accessibility—Group R-4 OSSC but in licensing regulations. provisions requiring that 10%of units be accessible Condition 2 units.Section 1107.6.4.2 require that every dwelling or sleeping unit be a Type A Unit in excess of model code.Satisfies DHS licensing requirements. Chapter 34: Not applicable.Previously not in Oregon amendments in Section 3411.8.8 clarify that Existing Buildings OSSC but in licensing regulations. compliance with Type A Units is only applicable to Type A Units the quantity of spaces altered. Satisfies DHS licensing Group I-1,Group R-4 requirements. Condition 2 In contrast,where spaces undergo a change of occupancy resulting in a residential care facility, compliance with Type A Units is required.Provides for a limited exception.Satisfies DHS licensing requirements. COMcheck Software Version 3.9.4 Interior Lighting Compliance Certificate 2010 Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code Section 1: Project Information Project Type: New Construction Project Title : Bonaventure of Tigard Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: 15000 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR Section 2: Interior Lighting and Power Calculation A B C D Floor Area Allowed Allowed Watts Watts/ft2 Health Care-Clinic 167900 0.89 149431 Total Allowed Watts= 149431 Section 3: Interior Lighting Fixture Schedule A B C D E Fixture ID: Description/Lamp/Wattage Per Lamp/Ballast Lamps! #of Fixture (C X D) Fixture Fixtures Watt. Health Care-Clinic(167900 sq.ft.) Linear Fluorescent 1:A3:48"T8 32W:Electronic: 3 50 88 4400 Linear Fluorescent 2: B3:48"T8 32W:Electronic: 3 152 88 13376 Compact Fluorescent 1:Cl:Triple 4-pin 32W: Electronic: 1 211 31 6541 Compact Fluorescent 2:C4:Triple 4-pin 42W:Electronic: 2 15 94 1410 Compact Fluorescent 3:CW:Triple 4-pin 32W: Electronic: 1 2 31 62 Linear Fluorescent 3:D:48"T8 32W: Electronic: 2 52 58 3016 Compact Fluorescent 4:D1: Spiral 13W: Electronic: 1 56 13 728 Linear Fluorescent 4:D3:48"T8 32W: Electronic: 3 3 88 264 Compact Fluorescent 5:E:Spiral 20W:Electronic: 8 18 165 2970 Compact Fluorescent 6:El:Spiral 13W: Electronic: 3 1000 39 39000 Compact Fluorescent 7:El:Spiral 13W: Electronic: 3 610 39 23790 Compact Fluorescent 8:E2:Spiral 26W: Electronic: 4 99 108 10692 Compact Fluorescent 9: E3: Spiral 26W: Electronic: 3 14 78 1092 Linear Fluorescent 5: Fl:48"T8 32W:Electronic: 2 165 55 9075 Linear Fluorescent 6: F2:48"T8 32W:Electronic: 3 45 88 3960 Linear Fluorescent 7:G1:46"T5 HO 54W:Electronic: 2 45 121 5445 Compact Fluorescent 10:G3:Quad 2-pin 13W: Electronic: 3 6 39 234 Compact Fluorescent 11:G5: Spiral 20W: Electronic: 5 171 100 17100 Compact Fluorescent 12:G7:Quad 2-pin 13W: Electronic: 1 15 13 195 Linear Fluorescent 8:J2:24"18 17W: Electronic: 1 186 22 4092 LED 1: K: LED PAR 15W: 1 42 14.5 609 Compact Fluorescent 13:G4:Spiral 20W:Electronic: 4 16 80 1280 Total Proposed Watts= 149331 Section 4: Requirements Checklist Project Title: Bonaventure of Tigard Report date: 07/30/14 Data filename: P:\2014\14-0239-Bonaventure of Tigard\1 ENGR\11 SPPT\Bonaventure of Tigard Electrical Comcheck.cck Page 1 of 5 In the following requirements,blank checkboxes identify requirements that the applicant has not acknowledged as being met. Checkmarks identify requirements that the applicant acknowledges are met or excepted from compliance. 'Plans reference page/section'identifies where in the plans/specs the requirement can be verified as being satisfied. Lighting Wattage: • 1. Total proposed watts must be less than or equal to total allowed watts. Allowed Wattage: 149431 Proposed Wattage: 149331 Complies:YES Mandatory Requirements: ✓ 2. Exit signs. Internally illuminated exit signs shall not exceed 5 watts per side. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 3. Daylight zone control.All daylight zones are provided with individual controls that control the lights independent of general area lighting in the non-daylight zone. In all individual daylight zones larger than 350 sq.ft.,automatic daylight controls is provided.Automatic daylight sensing controls reduce the light output of the controlled luminaires at least 50 percent,and provide an automatic OFF control, while maintaining a uniform level of illumination.Contiguous daylight zones adjacent to vertical fenestration may be controlled by a single controlling device provided that they do not include zones facing more than two adjacent cardinal orientations(i.e.,north,east, south,west). Daylight zones under skylights shall be controlled separately from daylight zones adjacent to vertical fenestration. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 4. Interior lighting controls.At least one local shutoff lighting control has been provided for every 2,000 square feet of lit floor area and each area enclosed by walls or floor-to-ceiling partitions.The required controls are located within the area served by the controls or are a remote switch that identifies the lights served and indicates their status. Plans reference page/section: • 5. Sleeping unit controls. Master switch at entry to hotel/motel guest room. Plans reference page/section: NA ✓ 6. Egress lighting.Egress illumination is controlled by a combination of listed emergency relay and occupancy sensors to shut off during periods that the building space served by the means of egress is unoccupied. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 7. Additional controls. Each area that is required to have a manual control shall have additional controls that meet the requirements of Sections 505.2.2.1 and 505.2.2.2. Plans reference page/section: • 8. Light reduction controls. Each space required to have a manual control also allows for reducing the connected lighting load by at least 50 percent by either 1)controlling(dimming or multi-level switching)all luminaires;or 2)dual switching of alternate rows of luminaires,alternate luminaires,or alternate lamps;or 3)switching the middle lamp luminaires independently of other lamps;or 4)switching each luminaire or each lamp. Plans reference page/section: • 9. Buildings larger than 2,000 square feet are equipped with an automatic control device to shut off lighting in those areas.This automatic control device shall function on either: 1)a scheduled basis,using time-of-day,with an independent program schedule that controls the interior lighting in areas that do not exceed 10,000 square feet and are not more than one floor;or 2)an occupant sensor that shall turn lighting off within 30 minutes of an occupant leaving a space;or 3)a signal from another control or alarm system that indicates the area is unoccupied. Plans reference page/section: • 10.Occupancy sensors in rooms that include daylight zones are required to have Manual ON activation. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 11.An occupant sensor control device is installed that automatically turns lighting off within 30 minutes of all occupants leaving a space. Plans reference page/section: • 12Additional controls.An occupant sensor control device that automatically turns lighting off within 30 minutes of all occupants leaving a space or a locally activated switch that automatically turns lighting off within 30 minutes of being activated is installed in all storage and supply rooms up to 1000 square feet. Plans reference page/section: • 13.Occupant override.Automatic lighting shutoff operating on a time-of-day scheduled basis incorporates an override switching device that: 1)is readily accessible,2)is located so that a person using the device can see the lights or the area controlled by that switch,or Project Title: Bonaventure of Tigard Report date: 07/30/14 Data filename: P:12014\14-0239-Bonaventure of Tigard\1 ENGR111 SPPT\Bonaventure of Tigard Electrical Comcheck.cck Page 2 of 5 so that the area being lit is annunciated,3)is manually operated,4)allows the lighting to remain on for no more than 2 hours when an override is initiated,and 5)controls an area not exceeding 2,000 square feet. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 14 Holiday scheduling.Automatic lighting shutoff operating on a time-of-day scheduled basis has an automatic holiday scheduling feature that turns off all loads for at least 24 hours,then resumes the normally scheduled operation. Plans reference page/section: NA ✓ 15.Exterior lighting controls. Lighting not designated for dusk-to-dawn operation shall be controlled by either a combination of a photosensor and a time switch,or an astronomical time switch.Lighting designated for dusk-to-dawn operation shall be controlled by an astronomical time switch or photosensor. Plans reference page/section: • 16.Tandem wiring.The following luminaires located within the same area shall be tandem wired: 1. Fluorescent luminaires equipped with one,three or odd-numbered lamp configurations,that are recess-mounted within 10 feet center-to-center of each other. 2. Fluorescent luminaires equipped with one,three or any odd-numbered lamp configuration,that are pendant-or surface-mounted within 1 foot edge-to-edge of each other. Plans reference page/section: ✓ 17.Medical task lighting or art/history display lighting claimed to be exempt from compliance has a control device independent of the control of the nonexempt lighting. Plans reference page/section: • 18.Each dwelling unit in a building is metered separately. Plans reference page/section: NA Interior Lighting PASSES_Design 0.1%better than code. Section 5: Compliance Statement Compliance Statement: The proposed lighting design represented in this document is consistent with the building plans,specifications and other calculations submitted with this permit application.The proposed lighting system has been desi.ned to meet the 2010 Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code requirements in COMcheck Version 3.9.4 and to comply with th- mand.t. requirements in the Requirements Checklist ' +/ �� Jeff Stauffer, PE Engineering Manager tl�/"MCI'"�' 30 July 2014 Name-Title Sig :tu - f Date Project Title: Bonaventure of Tigard Report date: 07/30/14 Data filename: P:\2014\14-0239-Bonaventure of Tigard\1 ENGR111 SPPT\Bonaventure of Tigard Electrical Comcheck.cck Page 3 of 5 n,,,, COMcheck Software Version 19.4 ,H,'„,,,,,,fr'' Exterior Lighting Compliance Certificate 2010 Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code Section 1: Project Information Project Type: New Construction Project Title : Bonaventure of Tigard Exterior Lighting Zone: 2 (Residential mixed use area) Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: 15000 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR Section 2: Exterior Lighting Area/Surface Power Calculation A B C D E F Exterior Area/Surface Quantity Allowed Tradable Allowed Proposed Watts Wattage Watts Watts /Unit (B x C) Driveway 89188 ft2 0.06 Yes 5351 3811 Entry canopy 1254 ft2 0.25 Yes 314 944 Parking area 5943 ft2 0.06 Yes 357 456 Main entry 12 ft of door width 20 Yes 240 93 Other door(not main entry) 24 ft of door width 20 Yes 480 376 Plaza area 11970 ft2 0.14 Yes 1676 1816 Total Tradable Watts'= 8417 7496 Total Allowed Watts= 8417 Total Allowed Supplemental Watts**= 600 'Wattage tradeoffs are only allowed between tradable areas/surfaces. "A supplemental allowance equal to 600 watts may be applied toward compliance of both non-tradable and tradable areas/surfaces. Section 3: Exterior Lighting Fixture Schedule A B C D E Fixture ID: Description/Lamp/Wattage Per Lamp/Ballast Lamps/ #of Fixture (C X D) Fixture Fixtures Watt. Driveway(89188 ft2):Tradable Wattage LED 1:S1: LED Roadway-Parking Unit 130W: 8 16 146 2336 LED 2:S2:LED Roadway-Parking Unit 223W: 8 5 295 1475 Entry canopy(1254 ft2):Tradable Wattage HID 1: SC: Metal Halide:Pulse start: 1 6 140 840 Compact Fluorescent 1:SH:Quad 2-pin 13W: Electronic: 4 2 52 104 Parking area(5943 ft2):Tradable Wattage Linear Fluorescent 1: SD:48"T8 32W: Electronic: 2 8 57 456 Main entry(12 ft of door width):Tradable Wattage Compact Fluorescent 2:C1:Triple 4-pin 32W:Electronic: 1 3 31 93 Other door(not main entry)(24 ft of door width):Tradable Wattage LED 3:SF: LED PAR 20W: 6 8 47 376 Plaza area(11970 ft2):Tradable Wattage Compact Fluorescent 3:SA:Spiral 13W:Electronic: 1 10 13 130 Compact Fluorescent 4:SA1:Spiral 13W: Electronic: 1 2 13 26 Compact Fluorescent 5:C4:Triple 4-pin 42W:Electronic: 2 2 94 188 Compact Fluorescent 6:SG:Spiral 23W:Electronic: 1 64 23 1472 Project Title: Bonaventure of Tigard Report date: 07/30/14 Data filename: P:12014\14-0239-Bonaventure of Tigard\1 ENGR\11 SPPT\Bonaventure of Tigard Electrical Comcheck.cck Page 4 of 5 Total Tradable Proposed Watts= 7496 Section 4: Requirements Checklist In the following requirements, blank checkboxes identify requirements that the applicant has not acknowledged as being met. Checkmarks identify requirements that the applicant acknowledges are met or excepted from compliance. Plans reference page/section'identifies where in the plans/specs the requirement can be verified as being satisfied. Controls, Switching, and Wiring: • 1. Lighting designated to operate more than 2000 hours per year for Uncovered Parking Areas shall be equipped with motion sensors that will reduce the luminaire power by thirty-three percent or turn off one-third the luminaires when no activity is detected. Plans reference page/section: Exterior Lighting Restrictions and Exceptions: • 2. Mercury vapor and incandescent lighting is not permitted for use as exterior lighting. • 3. Exempt lighting fixtures are equipped with a control device independent of the control of the nonexempt lighting and are identified in Section 3 table above. Plans reference page/section: Section 5: Compliance Statement Compliance Statement: The proposed exterior lighting design represented in this document is consistent with the building plans,specifications and other calculations submitted with this permit application.The proposed lighting system has been .-signed to meet the 2010 Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code requirements in COMcheck Version 3.9.4 and to comply the datory requirements in the Requirements Checklist. / Jeff Stauffer, PE Engineering Manager 4 30 July 2014 Name-Title Sig :ture Date Project Title: Bonaventure of Tigard Report date: 07/30/14 Data filename: P:\2014\14-0239-Bonaventure of Tigard\1 ENGR\11 SPPT1Bonaventure of Tigard Electrical Comcheck.cck Page 5 of 5 i Dan Nelson From: Jim Clarkson <JClarkson @livebsl.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:10 PM To: John Bosse; Dwight Wildeson; Dan Nelson Subject: FW: Bonaventure of Tigard Latest changes from city of Tigard (since the lasts set of changes) From: John Jensen [mailto:jjensen©cesnw.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:59 PM To: Eric Rouse Cc: Jim Clarkson Subject: RE: Bonaventure of Tigard Here's the list of changes for the current submittal: 1. Widened the path between 83`d and Hall to 10-feet and added tree wells for landscaping. The path will also have a 28-inch type C monolithic curb on the North edge as the path is higher than existing ground in this area. 2. Added a French drain along the north edge of the 10-foot path 3. Revised the street sections and asphalt dept for Ross,83`d and Matthew Park to 3-inches of M" dense asphalt mix. 4. Changed storm line B and catch basin leads on 83`d to PVC C-900 5. Added backflow device to irrigation meter serving the water quality pond. 6. Revised water line from 3-inch diameter to 4" diameter from main to 3-inch water meter. 7. Revised heighter of curbs around planter boxes to 18" for curb and gutter and 28"for the type C monolithic curb. 8. Revised the growing medium depth in the planters from 12inches to 18inches. 9. Revised the LIDA swales on Hall. Added 2-foot shelf behind curb,4:1 foreslope, and 6:1 slopes at each end of the LIDA swales. 10. Upsized the pipes from the LIDA swales from 10-inch diameter to 12-inch diameter. 11. Added 8-foot wide asphalt path tie end at the north end of Hall Blvd improvements. 12. Removed right angled sidewalk at south end of Hall Blvd improvements and angled walk from curb tight to right of way line. 13. Moved hydrant at Matthew Park and 83`d to west side of 83rd Ave. 14. Added approximately 270LF of 8-inch DIP water pipe,2 8-inch gate valves,a two inch blowoff assembly and another fire hydrant at the north side of the 83`d Avenue entrance. I'm expecting planning comments back by 10/6 and ODOT comments are trickling in slowly. If any changes come due to either of those I'll forward them on to you. John D.Jensen, PE CESNW, Inc. 13190 SW 68th Parkway,Suite 150 Tigard,OR 97223 (p) 503.968.6655 (f) 503.968.2595 www.cesnw.com From: Eric Rouse [mailto:erouse@livebsl.com] Sent:Tuesday, September 30, 2014 11:37 AM 1 To:John Jensen Cc:Jim Clarkson Subject: Bonaventure of Tigard John, We're going to need a list of changes on your latest plan submittal. We've bid this job out and awarded it to a Civil Contractor. We need to draft a PCC so the contractor can adjust his bid. Thanks. Regards, Eric Eric S. Rouse Project Manager Bonaventure Re tiremen tPerfected.com"" 3425 Boone Rd SE Salem, OR 97317 o:503 373 3162 c:503 572 0295 f: 503 480 3153 erouse @livebsl.com 2 • ► Dan Nelson From: Jim Clarkson <JClarkson @livebsl.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:10 PM To: John Bosse; Dwight Wildeson; Dan Nelson Subject: FW: Bonaventure of Tigard Latest changes from city of Tigard (since the lasts set of changes) From: John Jensen [mailto:jjensen(acesnw.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:59 PM To: Eric Rouse Cc: Jim Clarkson Subject: RE: Bonaventure of Tigard Here's the list of changes for the current submittal: 1. Widened the path between 83`d and Hall to 10-feet and added tree wells for landscaping. The path will also have a 28-inch type C monolithic curb on the North edge as the path is higher than existing ground in this area. 2. Added a French drain along the north edge of the 10-foot path 3. Revised the street sections and asphalt dept for Ross,83`d and Matthew Park to 3-inches of%2' dense asphalt mix. 4. Changed storm line B and catch basin leads on 83`d to PVC C-900 5. Added backflow device to irrigation meter serving the water quality pond. 6. Revised water line from 3-inch diameter to 4" diameter from main to 3-inch water meter. 7. Revised heighter of curbs around planter boxes to 18" for curb and gutter and 28"for the type C monolithic curb. 8. Revised the growing medium depth in the planters from 12inches to 18inches. 9. Revised the LIDA swales on Hall. Added 2-foot shelf behind curb,4:1 foreslope,and 6:1 slopes at each end of the LIDA swales. 10. Upsized the pipes from the LIDA swales from 10-inch diameter to 12-inch diameter. 11. Added 8-foot wide asphalt path tie end at the north end of Hall Blvd improvements. 12. Removed right angled sidewalk at south end of Hall Blvd improvements and angled walk from curb tight to right of way line. 13. Moved hydrant at Matthew Park and 83rd to west side of 83'd Ave. 14. Added approximately 270LF of 8-inch DIP water pipe, 2 8-inch gate valves,a two inch blowoff assembly and another fire hydrant at the north side of the 83`d Avenue entrance. I'm expecting planning comments back by 10/6 and ODOT comments are trickling in slowly. If any changes come due to either of those I'll forward them on to you. John D.Jensen, PE CESNW, Inc. 13190 SW 68th Parkway,Suite 150 Tigard,OR 97223 (p) 503.968.6655 (f) 503.968.2595 www.cesnw.com From: Eric Rouse [mailto:erouse@livebsl.com] Sent:Tuesday, September 30, 2014 11:37 AM 1 < L To:John Jensen Cc:Jim Clarkson Subject: Bonaventure of Tigard John, We're going to need a list of changes on your latest plan submittal.We've bid this job out and awarded it to a Civil Contractor. We need to draft a PCC so the contractor can adjust his bid. Thanks. Regards, Eric Eric S. Rouse Project Manager Bonaventure* RetirementPerfected.comlM 3425 Boone Rd SE Salem,OR 97317 o:503 373 3162 c:503 572 0295 f: 503 480 3153 erouse @livebsl.com 2 Dan Nelson From: Tom Rogers <rogers @douglasfast.net> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 1:12 PM To: Dan Nelson Cc: Mark VanDomelen Subject: Bonaventure Dan All structural items from my September 8 comments have been addressed, except for guardrail connection to the structure. The guardrails will apparently be a manufactured system and could be handled as a deferred submittal, if ok with you. The carports and signs are now noted on the architectural plans as requiring a separate permit. Structural calculations have not been submitted. Should I return all the documents? Any questions, let me know. Tom 1 Dan Nelson From: Tom Rogers <rogers @douglasfast.net> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:09 AM To: 'Jim Clarkson' Cc: Dan Nelson Subject: RE: BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING Jim Finished the review yesterday. I talked to Dan Green this morning about two of the items, he will be forwarding information to me later. #8 —the calculation page needed is 3C1, which was incorrectly noted on the review comments. #17—calculations specify a footing size for the flagpole, hut there is no detail. Regarding#15,the testing information provided addresses the rail components, but connection to the structure is still needed. Dan would need specific information about the baseplates, which may not be available until shop drawings are provided. Let me know how you want to handle this item. Thanks. Tom From: Jim Clarkson [mailto:JClarkson @livebsl.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:49 AM To: Tom Rogers Subject: BONAVENTURE SENIOR LIVING TOM What is status of our structural review for our senior living project-just trying to get an update for development team thanks JIM CLARKSON Bonaventure RetirementPerfected.com 3425 Boone Road SE Salem, OR 97317 W:503/373-3165 F: 503/588 3531 M: 503/851-2569 iclarkson@liveBSL.com 1 ROGERS ENGINEERING Structural Engineering•Building Design •Code Consulting•Inspection Services 558 S.E.Jackson St. Roseburg,Oregon 97470 Ph: (541)672-0315 Fax: (541)672-1787 rogersitierosenetnet September 8,2014 James Clarkson,Architect 3220 State Street, Suite 200 Salem, OR 97301 RE: Bonaventure Senior Housing, Tigard,OR Project 1403 Dear Mr. Clarkson, Rogers Engineering is providing structural plan review services for the City of Tigard. A preliminary review of the drawings for the above noted project has been completed. Additional information or clarification is needed for the following items in order to complete the review. 1. Provide snow drift and sliding calculations. OSSC Sec. 1608 2. Calculation page 3A7 specifies 3B24 as(3)2x 10. This does not appear to match sheet S3.3A. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 3. Calculation page 3B6 specifies 3B21 as 6-3/4x18 glulam. This does not appear to match sheet S3.3B. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 4. Calculation page 3B10 specifies 3B26 as 5-1/8x15 glulam. This does not appear to match sheet S3.3B. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 5. Calculation page 2B5 specifies 2B2 as 6-3/4x28-1/2 glulam. This does not appear to match sheet S3.2B. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 6. Calculation page 2B25 specifies 2B49 and 2B50 as 5-1/8x18 glulam. This does not appear to match sheet S3.2B. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 7. Calculation page 2B26 specifies 2B54,2B55 and 2B56 as 5-1/8x18 glulam. This does not appear to match sheet S3.2B. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 8. Provide a new calculation page 321. The page was copied as 8-1/2x11. OSSC Sec. 107.1 9. Calculation page 2C40 evaluates a 7'-6"square footing. Detail 14/S4.1 shows 7'-3". Clarify the required footing size. OSSC Sec. 1604.2 10. Calculation page 3.16 specifies shear wall S1 as type A. Where is this shown on thc plans? OSSC Sec. 107.1 11. Calculation page 3.18 specifies shear wall line Y as type D walls. Several of the walls on sheet S3.2A are type C walls. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1 12. Calculation page 3.41 specifies CS 16 straps at walls 11.4 and 11.6. It appears that straps have been omitted on sheet S3.2C. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1 13. Calculation page 3.41 specifies MST60 straps ar grid 13. Where are these shown on the plans? OSSC Sec. 107.1 Bonaventure September 8,2014 Page 2 14.Provide calculations for detail 2/S4.1,alternate turndown footing with eccentric loading showing the soil bearing capacity is not exceeded. OSSC Sec. 1604.4 15. Provide calculations for the guardrails. OSSC Sec. 1607.7 16. Provide calculations for the gazebo. OSSC Sec. 1604.4 17.Provide calculations for the flagpole footing. OSSC Sec. 1604.4 18. Detail S5.2 references drag truss or sheathing. The plans do not appear to include drag loads. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1 19. Provide a copy of the geotechnical report by Columbia West Engineering referenced on sheet S1.1. OSSC Sec. 107.1 20. Provide specifications for expansion anchors prior to installation. Continuous special inspection may be required, depending on the manufacturer. OSSC Sec. 1704.4 21. The carports and signs should be listed as deferred submittals on sheet A0.0 Provide structural calculations for review when available. OSSC Sec. 107.3.4.2 In order to expedite the review,provide a written response indicating how each item is resolved and which drawing,detail or calculation contains the supplemental information as applicable. Should you have questions or need additional information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectfully, c d/j/L �at/ Tom Rogers, P.E. C: Mark VanDomelen, Building Official RECEIVED OCT 1 3 2014 Addendum No. 1 CITY QF fIGARD CODE COMMENTS, OWNER CHANGES, AND GENERAL COORDINATION 10/8/2014 1UII rlff'f'ilpl!'ltJ1'l Bonaventure of Tigard Tigard, Oregon BSL# 1403 This addendum modifies the construction documents for the above referenced project and will be incorporated into the Contract. Architectural Drawings: (orig issue dated 7/11/2014) 1. A0.0—Cover sheet a REVISE Area Table b. ADD note designating separate permits for carport and signs 2. A0.1, A0.2 - Fire Life Safety a. ADD New smoke barrier and cross corridors in C wing to meet refuge space requirements b. RELOCATE upper floor and roof C-wing smoke barriers to meet refuge space requirements c. ADD (11) FECs and relocate others: i. (1) at each A-Wing stair, each floor-6 total ii. (1) at center of C wing corridors each floor—5 total 1. (1) at C wing laundries floors 2 and 3 2. (1) atALF charts, floor 1 3. (1)At MC Entrance 4. (1) at Soiled Linen iii. RELOCATE C wing FECs nearer stairs on stair wall 3. A1.1 Arch Site Plan a. ADD bike rack in front of core, per civil plan b. UPDATE site base to match current civil 4. A1.5—Schedule a. ADD New cross corridor doors#1093a (match dr type#1071) in C wing, 1st flr, 5. A2s a. A2.1 c-ADD new smoke barrier/smoke compartment/cross corridor doors in C wing Ito meet refuge space requirements b. A2.1b — REVISE and COORDINATE stone locations @ vestibule, including 2nd story above vestibule c. A2.1 b—ADD door and windows to café to match Garden Room d. A2s — upper floors: REVISE window types to comply with new code req't for upper level windows sills to be at 36"aff. A2.2c, A2.3c, A2.5c — RELOCATE C wing smoke barrier to meet refuge area reqts e. A2.4s Roof Plan - i. CLARIFY smoke barrier in attic and ADD rated access panel ii. CLARIFY metal roof at low roofs in front of core 6. A3.0 Porte cochere a. REVISE porte coche columns to coordinate with site grades and structural foundation b. REVISE porte cochere to open design c. REVISE vestibule roof to flat arch d. REVISE and COORDINATE stone locations @ vestibule, including 2nd story above vestibule 7. A3.1 s—Exterior Elevations— a. ALL upper floors on A3s — REVISE window types to comply with new code req't for upper level windows sills to be at 36"aff. (CHANGE DATED "ADDM#1, 8/22/14) b. E3.1 b— REVISE for new café door and garden room door reconfiguration c. E3.1 b— REVISE vestibule area for stone locations to coordinate with plan d. E3.1 a and c- KEY lower stair door roofs e. A3.1 b -ADD metal roofs at front elevation of core 8. A3.4— a. ADD stair roof detail 15/A3.4.Note this requires heavy blocking and ledger not specifically keyed on structural drawings M\Drafting\Projects\1403 Tigard\Current CDs\addmt-pending 1ADDM1 10-8-14 doc 1 of 3 9. A4.0b- REVISE MC Memory care box for typical location and SHOW blocking 10. A5s- Interior Elevations a. A5.3-REVISE MC Serving wall hts and countertop to quartz 11. A7s- a. ADD stair signage b REVISE and KEY stair roofs to new detail on A3.4 12. A8s- Interior Details a. A8.1 -ADD Elevator smoke door details b. A8.2-DELETE railing detail (replaced with that on A8.4) C. A8.4- REVISE Balcony Lobby details Structural Drawings: (orig issue date 7/11/14) S3 sheets Framing Plan - REVISE for miscellaneous beam and shear wall changes shown clouded, per structural review comments 2. S4.1 Foundation Details a. REVISE Porte Cochere footing size b. ADD flagpole foundation detail (shown on A1.2 Site Details) 3. S5.2 Framing Details-Clarify detail 4/S5.2 to reference shearwall notes. Civil Dwgs : 1. Added pavement width on Ross street 2. revised taper on Matthew Park 3. changed pipe type on Storm line 'D' 'E' and 'F' 4. added stilling basins on both pond outfalls 5. added fence and gate to pond 6. added 1" irrigation meter/backflow device for pond. 7. Changed street cross sections to reflect 3 1/2- inches of asphalt and 2"-0" base rock. 1. Widened the path between 83rd and Hall to 10-feet and added tree wells for landscaping. The path will also have a 28-inch type C monolithic curb on the North edge as the path is higher than existing ground in this area. 2. Added a French drain along the north edge of the 10-foot path 3. Revised the street sections and asphalt dept for Ross,83rd and Matthew Park to 3-inches of%2" dense asphalt mix. 4. Changed storm line B and catch basin leads on 83rd to PVC C-900 5. Added backflow device to irrigation meter serving the water quality pond. 6. Revised water line from 3-inch diameter to 4" diameter from main to 3-inch water meter. 7. Revised heighter of curbs around planter boxes to 18"for curb and gutter and 28"for the type C monolithic curb. 8. Revised the growing medium depth in the planters from 12inches to 18inches. 9. Revised the LIDA swales on Hall. Added 2-foot shelf behind curb, 4:1 foreslope, and 6:1 slopes at each end of the LIDA swales. 10. Upsized the pipes from the LIDA swales from 10-inch diameter to 12-inch diameter. 11. Added 8-foot wide asphalt path tie end at the north end of Hall Blvd improvements. 12. Removed right angled sidewalk at south end of Hall Blvd improvements and angled walk from curb tight to right of way line. 13. Moved hydrant at Matthew Park and 83rd to west side of 83'd Ave. M:\Drafting\Projects11403 Tigard\Current CDs\addml-pending\ADDM1 10-8-14.doc 2 of 3 14. Added approximately 270LF of 8-inch DIP water pipe, 2 8-inch gate valves,a two inch blowoff assembly and another fire hydrant at the north side of the 83rd Avenue entrance. END OF ADDENDUM#1 M:\Drafting\Projects\1403 Tigard\Curent CDs\addml-pending\ADDM1 10-8-14.doc 3 of 3