The URL can be used to link to this page

Report (47) 66036 . 1112.3 5/,,) atz, /4, GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. Real-World Geotechnical Solutions Investigation•Design•Construction Support July 3,2001 GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 Way W.Lee General Contractor,Inc. 5210 SE 26th Avenue Portland,OR 97202 Attn: Ken Lee(Fax 503-234-0593) Subject: FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION LEE OFFICE BUILDING CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON Dear Mr.Lee: • At your request,GeoPacific Engineering, Inc.(GeoPacific)performed a foundation investigation for the proposed Lee Office Building located on SW 68th Parkway in the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon(see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The general site layout and locations of our explorations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan,Figure 2. The purpose of the geotechnical study was to explore and evaluate the surface and subsurface conditions at the site,and based on the conditions observed, provide geotechnical recommendations for foundation design and construction. PROJECT INFORMATION The following table presents a summary of project information: Location: The project site is a 15,000 ft2 building site located on SW 68th Parkway, approximately 500 feet south of Pacific Highway in the City of Tigard, Washington County,Oregon I Owner/Developer: Way W.Lee General Contractor, Inc. 5210 SE 26th Avenue,Portland,Oregon 97202 Architect: Waddle Design and Planning Architecture 1927 NW Kearney, Portland,Oregon 97209 Structural Engineer: Conlee Engineers, Inc. 1308 SW Bertha Boulevard,Portland, Oregon 97219 Jurisdictional City of Tigard,Oregon Agency: a • 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road,Suite 100 Tel(503)598-8445 Portland,Oregon 97224-7010 Fax(503)598-8705 July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property is a 5-acre parcel on the west side of SW 68th Parkway(see Figure 2). The central portion of the property includes a creek and several groundwater seepage areas.Preliminary plans are to site the building on the northeastern quadrant of the property adjacent to SW 68th Parkway (see Figure 2). Slopes in the vicinity of the building site incline at about 10% grade. The proposed development is a three-to four-story commercial building with a partial basement for parking and an approximate footprint area of 15,000 ft2. Building construction will incorporate steel framing, composite concrete/steel decking,slab-on-grade floors,concrete retaining walls, isolated footings for columns, and continuous spread footings for load bearing walls. The project structural engineer indicates that approximate column loads will range between 300 and 600 kips with column spacing of 20 to 35 feet. The structure is planned with the lower floor partially below grade, "daylighting"at the southern end of the building at approximately Elevation 85 feet. Paved parking and driveways are planned around the perimeter of the building. SCOPE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZATION The scope of work for this foundation investigation was presented in our March 13,2001 proposal, and consisted of a field exploration program of site reconnaissance,exploratory drilling,a cone penetrometer test(CPT)sounding,geotechnical analyses,and preparation of this report. This scope of services and our General Conditions for Geotechnical Services were authorized by Ken Lee on March 25,2001. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Subsurface conditions were explored on March 29,2001 by drilling three exploratory solid-stem auger borings(designated B-1 through B-3)to depths of 21.5 to 31.5 feet below the ground surface using a trailer-mounted drill rig, and advancing one CPT sounding to a depth of 28.5 feet using a 20-ton, truck- mounted cone penetrometer. Logs of the explorations are attached to this report. The exploration locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The explorations were located in the field by pacing or taping distances from property corners and other site features. As such, the locations of the explorations should be considered approximate. During drilling of the auger borings,a GeoPacific engineering geologist observed and recorded pertinent soil information such as color, stratigraphy, strength,and soil moisture. Samples were evaluated, described,and classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, and the Oregon Department of Transportation Soil and Rock Classification Manual. Logs of our explorations are attached to this report. Laboratory testing for the project consisted of consolidation testing in general accordance with ASTM D2435 and soil moisture content testing in general accordance with ASTM D2216. Consolidation testing was performed on a relatively undisturbed Shelby Tube sample recovered from a depth of 12 feet in boring B-2. Results of the consolidation testing are attached. Natural moisture samples were collected in plastic bags. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage of the mass of water lost during oven drying to the dry weight of soil. The moisture content test results are presented on the exploration logs at the appropriate sample depth intervals. it a 01.7231-Lee Office 2 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001. GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The following discussion is a summary of subsurface conditions encountered in our explorations. For more detailed information regarding subsurface conditions at specific exploration locations, refer to the attached CPT sounding and boring logs. Also,please note that subsurface conditions can vary between exploration locations, as discussed in the Uncertainty and Limitations section below. Our exploration program indicates that the site is underlain by fill, native clayey silt belonging to the Willamette Formation, and residual soil and weathered rock belonging to the Boring Lava. The observed conditions and soil properties are summarized below. Fill: Fill consisting of clayey SILT(ML)with gravel and localized areas of concrete rubble is present within 2 to 4 feet of the ground surface. This fill appears to be associated with the prior development of the site and construction of SW 68th Parkway. Willamette Formation: Underlying the fill is clayey SILT(ML)belonging to the Willamette Formation. Standard penetration tests indicate that the clayey SILT(ML)is generally stiff with N=values ranging between 7 and 24. Residual Soil and Weathered Boring Lava: Residual soils are the result of in-place(in-situ) decomposition of bedrock. Residual soil consisting of clayey SILT(ML)with sand, fragments of weathered basalt, weathered tuff(welded volcanic ash)and clay seams was encountered underlying the Willamette Formation.. In borings, the thickness of residual soil ranged from 5 to 15 feet. Underlying t the residual soil is weathered BASALT and TUFF belonging to the Boring Lava geologic unit. Practical drill rig refusal was encountered on medium hard(R3)to hard(R4)rock at depths of 21.5 to 32 feet. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was encountered in each of the auger borings at the site. On March 29,2001, static water levels ranged between 5 and 11.3 feet below the ground surface. A pore pressure dissipation test conducted in the CPT sounding indicated static groundwater level of about 111 feet below ground surface. Groundwater conditions observed in borehole explorations can be very erratic because if often takes hours or even days for the groundwater seepage to reach equilibrium; explorations are typically only open a short time. The localized water table may actually be higher than that indicated during the exploration program. The groundwater conditions reported above are for the specific date and locations indicated,and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. Furthermore, it is anticipated that groundwater conditions will vary depending on the season,local subsurface conditions,changes in land use and other factors. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Our investigation indicates that the proposed development is geotechnically feasible,provided that the recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design and construction phases of the project. • The proposed structure may be supported on shallow foundations bearing on competent undisturbed native soils and/or engineered fill,designed and constructed as recommended in this report. Additional recommendations are presented below for site preparation,rough grading, wet weather construction, spread foundations,footing drains, auger-cast pile foundation alternative,concrete slabs-on-grade, below-grade walls,seismic design,excavating conditions and utility trenches,dewatering,pavement sections, and erosion control. I • 0i-7231-tee Office 3 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 SITE PREPARATION All proposed structure,parking and driveway areas to receive fill should first be cleared of vegetation and any loose debris or undocumented fill, and all debris from clearing should be removed from the site. Organic-rich topsoil should then be stripped. The final depth of stripping removal will be determined on the basis of a site inspection after the initial stripping has been performed. Stripped topsoil should be stockpiled only in designated areas and stripping operations should be observed and documented by the geotechnical engineer or his representative. Any existing subsurface structures(tile drains,old utility lines,septic leach fields,etc)beneath structures and pavements should be removed and the excavations backfilled with engineered fill. In construction areas,once stripping is approved,the area should be ripped or tilled to a depth of 12 inches,moisture conditioned, and compacted in-place prior to the placement of engineered fill or crushed aggregate base for pavement. Exposed subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. For large areas,this evaluation is normally performed by proof-rolling the exposed subgrade with a fully loaded scraper or dump truck. For smaller areas where access is restricted, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing the soil with a steel probe. Soft/loose soils identified during subgrade preparation should be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition or over-excavated and replaced with engineered fill,as described below. The depth of overexcavation, if required,should be evaluated by GeoPacific at the time of construction. • ROUGH GRADING Grading for the proposed development should be performed as engineered grading in accordance with Appendix 33 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code(UBC)unless specifically superseded herein. In general,we anticipate that soils from the planned cuts will be suitable for use as engineered fill provided it is adequately moisture conditioned prior to compacting. Imported fill material must be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to being imported to the site. Oversize material greater than 6 inches in size should not be used within 3 feet of foundation footings,and material greater than 12 inches in diameter should not be used in engineered fill. Engineered fill should be compacted in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches using standard compaction equipment. We recommend that engineered fill be compacted to at least 95%of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698 or equivalent. On-site soils may be wet of optimum,therefore, we anticipate that aeration of native soil will be necessary for compaction operations performed during late Spring to early Summer. Proper test frequency and earthwork documentation usually requires daily observation and testing during stripping, rough grading,and placement of engineered fill. Field density testing should conform to ASTM D2922 and D3017,or D1556. All engineered fill should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical engineer or his representative. Typically,one density test is performed for at least every 2 vertical feet of fill placed or every 500 yd3,whichever requires more testing. Because testing is performed on an on-call basis,we recommend that the earthwork contractor be held contractually responsible for test scheduling and frequency. WET WEATHER EARTHWORK The on-site soils are moisture sensitive and may be difficult to handle or traverse with construction equipment during periods of wet weather. Earthwork is typically most economical when performed under dry weather conditions. Earthwork performed during the wet-weather season will probably require expensive measures such as cement treatment or imported granular material to compact fill to the 01.7231-tee Office 4 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 recommended engineering specifications. If earthwork is to be performed or fill is to be placed in wet weather or under wet conditions when soil moisture content is difficult to control,the following recommendations should be incorporated into the contract specifications. • Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soils should be followed promptly by the placement and compaction of clean engineered fill. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. Under some circumstances, it may be necessary to excavate soils with a backhoe to minimize subgrade disturbance caused by equipment traffic. • The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water. • Material used as engineered fill should consist of clean,granular soil containing less than 5 percent fines. The fines should be non-plastic. Alternatively,cement treatment of on-site soils may be performed to facilitate wet weather placement. • The ground surface within the construction area should be sealed by a smooth drum vibratory roller,or equivalent,and under no circumstances should be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture. Soils that become too wet for compaction should be removed and replaced with clean granular materials. • Excavation and placement of fill should be observed by the geotechnical engineer to verify that all unsuitable materials are removed and suitable compaction and site drainage is achieved. • Bales of straw and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to control erosion. Under wet weather,the construction area will unavoidably become wet and the condition of fill or native soils exposed will degrade. To limit the impacts of wet weather on the finished building pad surface, consideration may be given to placement of a crushed aggregate pad. Where used,we recommend the working pad be constructed using 11/2"-0 crushed aggregate,and should have minimum thickness of at least 12 inches. This thickness is considered adequate to support light construction traffic, but will not be sufficient to support heavy traffic such as loaded dump trucks or other heavy rubber-tired equipment. SPREAD FOUNDATIONS Based on our understanding of the proposed project and the results of our exploration program, and assuming our recommendations for site preparation are followed,spread foundations may be a feasible alternative for support of the planned building. The foundation system selected will depend on the final design configuration, including lower finish floor elevation,total building height and loads,column spacing,etc. Due to the compressibility of the native silt materials beneath the site, spread footing bearing pressures will be limited by allowable settlement. In addition, maintaining settlements within tolerable levels can be accomplished by overexcavation of soils beneath the footings,as discussed below. If structural considerations dictate, a deep foundation pile alternative (auger-cast piles) is presented in a subsequent section. 01-7231-Lee Office 5 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 Design Considerations Shallow,conventional isolated or continuous spread footings may be used to support the proposed structures,provided they are founded on competent native soils,or compacted engineered fill placed directly upon the competent native soils. We recommend a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot(psf)for designing the footings. For a 600-kip column load, the estimated primary settlement is 2' inches. The amount of settlement can be reduced by overexcavating subgrade soils below the footing bottoms and backfilling the overexcavations with 1/z"-0 crushed rock. Table 1 shows our estimates of settlement under column loads of 300 and 600 kips, for overexcavation depths of 0,2 and 4 feet below bottom of footing. Table 1. Estimated Primary Settlement of Footings at 3,000 psf Allowable Bearing Pressure Thickness of Compacted Crushed Estimated Primary Settlement(Inches) Rock Beneath Footing(feet) 300-kip Column Load 600-kip Column Load 0 13/4 21 4 11/4 1 1/2 High groundwater levels beneath the,structure result in the potential for fluctuating groundwater to soften subgrade soils and/or result in additional settlements due to changes in stress conditions beneath footings. As a result, it is our opinion that at least 2 feet of crushed rock should be provided beneath footings to protect against the effects of fluctuating groundwater levels. Where used,the crushed rock should be compacted to engineered fill standards as recommended in the Rough Grading section. The crushed rock should extend beyond the footing edges,with the base of the crushed rock layer at least as wide as a 1H:1V projection downward from the footing edges. The maximum allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 the recommended value,for short- term transient conditions such as wind and seismic loading. All footings should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade or below top of slab(interior footings). We recommend minimum footing widths of 18 and 24 inches for continuous strip and isolated column footings, respectively. Assuming construction is accomplished as recommended herein, and for the foundation loads • anticipated,we estimate total settlement of spread foundations as indicated in Table 1, and differential settlement between two adjacent load-bearing components of about one-half the total estimated. We anticipate that the majority of the estimated settlement will occur during construction, as loads are applied. It should be noted that settlements indicated in Table 1 are for the maximum thickness of native silt materials anticipated, at the southern end of the building. In the northern portion of the building, portions of the compressible silt unit will be removed during excavations for the partial below-grade floor, resulting in a decrease in estimated settlement toward the north. Wind,earthquakes, and unbalanced earth loads will subject the proposed structure to lateral forces. Lateral forces on a structure will be resisted by a combination of sliding resistance of its base or footing on the underlying soil and passive earth pressure against the buried portions of the structure. For use in design, a coefficient of friction of 0.5 may be assumed along the interface between the base of the footing and subgrade soils. Passive earth pressure for buried portions of structures may be calculated a using an equivalent fluid weight of 400 pounds per cubic foot(pcf),assuming footings are cast against competent native soils or engineered fill. The recommended coefficient of friction and passive earth a O1-7231-ee Office 6 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 pressure values do not include a safety factor. The upper 12 inches of soil should be neglected in passive pressure computations unless it is protected by pavement or slabs on grade. Construction Considerations All footing excavations should be trimmed neat and the bottom of the excavation should be carefully prepared. All loose or softened soil should be removed from the footing excavation prior to placing reinforcing steel bars. We recommend that footing excavations be observed by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing steel and concrete,to verify that the recommendations of this report have been followed, and that an appropriate bearing stratum has been exposed. If footing excavations are open during the winter season or periods of wet weather, it may be helpful to provide a lean concrete mat or a layer of crushed aggregate to help preserve the subgrade until the footings are cast. If lean concrete is used,a 2-sack mix is recommended. If crushed aggregate is used to protect the footing subgrade, it should consist of 11/2"-0 crushed a::regate per the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT)Standard Specifications. Footing Drains The outside edge of all perimeter footings should be provided with a drainage system consisting of 4-inch diameter,perforated,rigid plastic pipe embedded in a minimum of 1 ft3 per lineal foot of clean, free-draining sand and gravel or 2"-1/2"drain rock. The use of flexible, thin-walled,corrugated plastic pipe should be avoided. The drain pipe and surrounding drain rock should be wrapped in non-woven geotextile(Mirafi 140N,or approved equivalent)to rnininme. the potential for clogging and/or ground loss due to piping. Water collected from the footing drains should be directed into the local storm drain system or other suitable outlet. A minimum 0.5 percent fall should be maintained throughout the drain and non-perforated pipe outlet. Down spouts and roof drains should not be connected to the foundation drains in order to reduce the potential for clogging and/or introduction of roof drain water into the subsurface. The footing drains should include clean-outs to allow periodic maintenance and inspection. Grades around the proposed structure should be sloped such that surface water drains away from the building. AUGER-CAST PILE ALTERNATIVE I Design Considerations In our opinion,auger-cast piles are a suitable foundation alternative for the structures. This may be the most viable foundation support alternative if the structure is planned to be 4 stories with 600-kip column loads. Auger-cast piles should be embedded a minimum of 5 feet into hard weathered basalt,anticipated at depths ranging from about 12 to 23 feet below the planned lower finish floor elevation of 85 feet. Total pile lengths would therefore be in the range of 17 to 28 feet below planned finish floor grade. Variable pile lengths should be anticipated due to the irregular depth to basalt rock beneath the site, variable depth of excavation for the structure,etc. Recommended allowable vertical, uplift, and lateral loads for 16- and 20-inch diameter auger-cast piles embedded at least 5 feet into hard weathered basalt materials are presented in Table 2. I 6 01-7231-Lee Office 7 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 Table 2. Recommended Auger-cast Pile Capacities Pile Recommended Allowable Pile Diameter Capacities (laps) Type (inches CmPressi" UPlift Lateral Auger-Cast 16 60 30 16 20 90 40 24 The recommended vertical and uplift capacities include safety factors of approximately 3 and 2 respectively. Lateral capacities were estimated assuming a limiting lateral deflection of 1/2 inch at the pile top,free head conditions,vertical loads equal to the allowable vertical capacity for each pile,and pile length of 25 feet. The lateral pile capacities listed above do not include a factor of safety. If needed for design, GeoPacific can perform additional lateral pile capacity analysis using the LPILE computer model,to determine pile deflections,maximum pile moment and depth to zero shear. We recommend a minimum pile spacing of 2.5 pile diameters. For this spacing, the concrete grout should be allowed to cure at least 24 hours prior to installing adjacent piles. No reduction in vertical pile capacity for group action is necessary for piles installed on spacings of at least 2.5 pile diameters. Construction Considerations Auger-cast piles are installed by drilling with a continuous flight hollow stem auger to the required depth,and pumping grout through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. Once the auger is completely removed,steel reinforcement can be placed in the grout-filled bore hole. The rate at which the auger is withdrawn must be consistent with grout supply. If the auger is withdrawn too quickly, the pile will be under-grouted,resulting in"necking"of the pile,or contamination of grout materials from caving soil. The quality of auger-cast concrete piles is primarily dependent on the procedures and workmanship of the contractor who installs them. A properly functioning pressure gage and pump stroke counter or flow meter should be provided on the grout pump to assist in monitoring auger cast pile installation. The • counter is used to determine the approximate volume of grout pumped by counting the number of strokes of a displacement-type pump. The pump should,therefore,be calibrated prior to its use. Use of a flow meter on the grout hose allows direct measurement of grout volume. The pressure gage is used to monitor the pressure of the grout to evaluate the rate at which the auger should be retracted, and if the auger or hoses are plu-:ed. The auger should be withdrawn with slow positive rotation at a slow steady pull and should not be pulled until the grout has been pumped a few feet above the tip. Because of the inherent operator-sensitive nature of auger cast pile quality, installation should be subcontracted to an experienced contractor. Furthermore,all pile installation operations should be monitored by the geotechnical engineer. PERMANENT BELOW-GRADE WALLS • Lateral earth pressures against below-grade retaining walls depend upon the inclination of the back- slope,degree of wall restraint, type of backfill,method of backfill placement,degree of backfill compaction,drainage provisions,and magnitude and location of any surcharge loads. At-rest soil pressure is exerted on a subsurface wall when the wall is restrained against rotation. Such restraint may be the result of an inherently stiff wall or if the wall is braced by rigid structural elements,such as a floor A - gg 01-723I-Lee Office 8 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 • GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 system. In contrast,active soil pressure will be exerted on a subsurface wall if the top of the wall is allowed to rotate or yield. For this project, it is anticipated that subsurface walls will be restrained by structural floors. As such,an at-rest earth pressure equivalent to that generated by a fluid weighing 50 pounds per cubic foot(pcf)is recommended for use in design. If yielding walls are required, they should be designed for an active earth pressure of 32 pcf. The above recommendations assume no adjacent surcharge loading. If the walls will be subjected to the influence of surcharge loading within a horizontal distance less than the height of the wall,the walls should be designed for the surcharge loading,using a suitable method. The recommendations assume that drainage provisions,as described below,will be included in the design of the walls. Accordingly,the recommended lateral earth pressures do not include hydrostatic pressure. The lateral load resistance of retaining wall footings will be a combination of sliding resistance of the footings on the underlying soil and passive earth pressure against the sides of the footings. The lateral load resistance of retaining wall footings may be evaluated using the parameters recommended in the Spread Foundations section. During a seismic event, lateral earth pressures acting on below-grade structural walls will increase by an incremental amount that corresponds to the earthquake loading. A concomitant decrease in passive earth pressure also occurs. However, if at-rest earth pressures are used in design,a conservative structural design that can readily accommodate the temporary seismic overloading conditions generally results. Therefore,it is our opinion that the dynamic incremental pressures from earthquake loading may be neglected if the below-grade structures are designed based on at-rest earth pressures. Adequate drainage of below-grade walls is critical to long-term performance. For embedded structural walls,we recommend prefabricated geosynthetic drain panels be placed behind the wall,extending the full height of the wall. The drain panels should be Miradrain G100N or an approved equivalent. These drainage panels should be at least 12 inches wide and placed on 5-foot centers. Drainage at the base of the wall should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter perforated pipe, surrounded in pea gravel. The prefabricated vertical drain sheets should be wrapped around the perforated pipe. All water collected by the toe drains should be directed under control to a positive and permanent discharge system such as the storm sewer. CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE Preparation of areas beneath concrete slab-on-grade floors should be performed as recommended in the Site Preparation section. A minimum of 12 inches of compacted granular structural fill should be provided below the floor slab and capillary break materials. Prior to constructing concrete slabs-on- grade,if subgrade soils have been adversely impacted by wet weather or otherwise disturbed,the surficial soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioned to within about 3 percent of optimum moisture content,and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density, determined using ASTM 0698(Standard Proctor). Scarification and compaction will not be required if floor slabs are placed directly on recently placed engineered fill. Concrete slab-on-grade floors should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches. This recommendation is based on geotechnical conditions only;structural considerations such as heavy, concentrated loads may dictate thicker floor slabs. Where concrete slabs are designed as beams on an elastic foundation, the 01-7231-Lee Office 9 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 compacted subgrade may be assumed to have a modulus of subgrade reaction of 75 pounds per cubic inch. Interior slab-on-grade floors should be provided with an adequate moisture break. The capillary break material should consist of free-draining,crushed rock or well-graded sand and gravel,with a maximum particle size of 3/4 inch,with no more than 80 percent passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 5 percent fines (material passing the U.S.Standard No. 200 sieve). For dry-weather construction,the minimum recommended thickness of capillary break materials on re-compacted soil subgrade is 6 inches. The total thickness of crushed aggregate will be dependent on the subgrade conditions at the time of construction, and should be verified visually by proof-rolling. Under-slab aggregate should be compacted to at least 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 or equivalent. Due to the shallow groundwater conditions on site,we recommend an underslab drainage system to reduce the potential for groundwater intrusion to create a wet slab condition. The underslab drain system should consist of a series of 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipes,placed 20 feet on center. The perforated pipe should be surrounded by a minimum of 0.7 ft per lineal foot of drain rock,and the pipe and drain rock wrapped in filter fabric(Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Drain pipe invert elevation should range from about 12 to 18 inches below the bottom of the slab. The pipes should be connected and provided with minimal slope to drain into the storm drain system or other approved outlet. A sump and pump system should be provided for permanent dewatering of the below-grade floor level. In areas where moisture will be detrimental to floor coverings or equipment inside the proposed structures,a 10-mil polyethylene vapor barrier should be placed directly over the capillary break. An approximately 2-inch thick layer of sand should be placed over the vapor barrier to protect it from damage, to aid in curing of the concrete,and also to help prevent cement from bleeding down into the underlying capillary break materials. Consideration may be given to providing additional protection to reduce the potential for damp floors and damage to moisture-sensitive flooring, including the following: 1) Maintain a slab water cement ratio of 0.42 or less utilizing mid-range plasticizers. 2) Thicken the rock subgrade to a minimum of 12 inches and utilize clean rock with no more than 2%fines. 3) Slope the subgrade soil away from the center of the slab at an approximate gradient of 1%. 4) Apply a moisture intrusion barrier on the slab(Preseal, Creteseal or approved equivalent) to the surface of the concrete while curing. Moisture barrier products should be installed in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. The building should be complete and the HVAC system operating for a period of time during wet-weather before moisture-sensitive flooring is applied. This time period should be long enough to allow the vapor gradient within and below the building to stabilize and obtain acceptable slab moisture content. SEISMIC DESIGN The project site lies within Seismic Zone 3,as defined in Chapter 16, Division IV of the 1997 Uniform Building Code(UBC). Seismic Zone 3 includes the western portion of Oregon,and represents an area of relatively high seismic risk. For comparison, much of California and southern Alaska are defined as Seismic Zone 4,which is an area of highest seismic risk. Consequently, moderate levels of earthquake 01-7231-Lee Office 10 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 shaking should be anticipated during the design life of the proposed improvements,and the structures should be designed to resist earthquake loading in accordance with the methodology described in the 1997 UBC. Based on the subsurface conditions we observed during our exploration program, UBC Soil Type SD may be assumed for the site. The corresponding seismic factors may be used in developing normalized response spectra for the assumed UBC Soil Type. Potential seismic impacts also include secondary effects such as soil liquefaction,fault rupture potential, and other hazards as discussed below: • Soil Liquefaction Potential—Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein saturated soil deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to earthquake shaking. Soil liquefaction is generally limited to loose,granular soils located below the water table. On-site soils consist of generally medium stiff to very stiff fine-grained soils that are not considered susceptible to liquefaction. Therefore, it is our opinion that special design or construction measures are not required to mitigate the effects of liquefaction. • Fault Rupture Potential—Based on our review of available geologic literature,we are not aware of any mapped active(demonstrating movement in the last 10,000 years) faults on the site. During our field investigation,we did not observe any evidence of surface rupture or recent faulting. Therefore,we conclude that the potential for fault rupture on site is very low. • Seismic Induced Landslide Site grades are gentle to moderate,with total relief across the site of about 65 feet,and slope inclinations of about 10 percent in the vicinity of the proposed building. The potential for slope instability and seismic induced landslide on site is considered low to very low. • Effects of Local Geology and Topography—In our opinion,no additional seismic hazard will occur due to local geology or topography. The site is expected to have no greater seismic hazard than surrounding properties and the Tigard area in general. 17; EXCAVATING CONDITIONS AND U I1LITY TRENCHES We anticipate that on-site soils can be excavated using conventional heavy equipment such as scrapers and trackhoes. Based on results of our exploration program,it appears that a medium to large excavator will be capable of reaching excavation depths of 8 to 10 feet over most of the site with moderate effort. Deeper excavations into the medium hard to hard basalt rock would require heavy ripping, use of pneumatic rock breakers,or other rock removal methods. Maintenance of safe working conditions,including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the contractor. Actual slope inclinations at the time of construction should be determined based on safety requirements and actual soil and groundwater conditions. All temporary cuts in excess of 4 feet in height should be sloped in accordance with U.S. Occupational Safety and Heath Administration (OSHA) regulations(29 CFR Part 1926),or be shored. The existing native soils classify as Type B Soil and temporary excavation side slope inclinations as steep as 1H:1V may be assumed for planning purposes. This cut slope inclination is applicable to excavations above the water table only. Vibrations created by traffic and construction equipment may cause some caving and raveling of excavation walls. In such an event,lateral support for the excavation walls should be provided by the - -7231-L2e Office 11 GEOPACIF1C ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 contractor to prevent loss of ground support and possible distress to existing or previously constructed structural improvements. PVC or thermoplastic pipe should be installed in accordance with the procedures specified in ASTM D2321. We recommend that structural trench backfill be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density obtained by Standard Proctor(ASTM D698)or equivalent. Initial backfill lift thickness for a 3/i'-0 crushed aggregate base may need to be as great as 4 feet to reduce the risk of flattening underlying flexible pipe. Subsequent lift thicknesses should not exceed 2 feet. If imported granular fill material is used,then the lifts for large vibrating plate-compaction equipment(e.g. hoe compactor attachments)may be up to 2 feet,provided that proper compaction is being achieved and each lift is tested. Use of large vibrating compaction equipment should be carefully monitored near existing structures and improvements due to the potential for vibration-induced damage. Sufficient density testing should be performed during construction to verify the specified relative compaction is being achieved. Typically,one density test is taken for every 4 vertical feet of backfill on each 200-lineal-foot section of trench. DEWATERING Groundwater seepage will likely be encountered in trench excavations during construction, especially following an extended period of wet weather. If shallow groundwater is encountered during excavation, we expect that it can generally be controlled by using ditches,sumps,and pumps,provided excavations do not extend greater than a few feet below the groundwater level. Regardless of the dewatering system used, it should be installed and operated such that in-place soils are prevented from being removed along with the groundwater. a If groundwater is encountered within sand deposits during construction,reasonable care should be taken to prevent groundwater from flowing in from the bottom of the excavation, thereby creating a"quick" condition. Under quick conditions,the density of the natural soils will be reduced, resulting in increased pipe settlement during and after construction. To reduce the risk of creating a quick condition,we recommend the groundwater level be kept at least 2 feet below the bottom of the excavation in areas where sand is encountered. Shallow groundwater conditions may impact the planned below-grade lower floor of the building. A permanent drainage system consisting of a sump and pump,outletting to the storm drain system,is lr recommended. PAVEMENT SECTIONS The scope of our investigation did not include an evaluation of subgrade strength for pavement design. However,a typical minimum pavement section for dry-weather construction conditions and soil subgrade similar to that at the project site is presented in Table 3. This typical section is for average automobile and light truck traffic loading at office building sites. a a 01-7231-Lee Office 12 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 • GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 Table 3. Typical Minimum Dry-Weather Pavement Section Layer Thickness(inches) Material Layer Automobile Automobile Compaction Standard —.. Driveways Parking Areas Asphaltic Concrete(AC) 3 2.5 91%of Rice Density AASHTO T-209 Crushed Aggregate Base 3/4"-0 2 2 95%of Modified Proctor (leveling course) ASTM D1557 Crushed Aggregate Base 1Y2"-0 8 6 95%of Modified Proctor '! ASTM D1557 Subgrade 12 12 95%of Standard Proctor ASTM D698 or approved native Subgrade soils should be compacted to a firm and relatively unyielding condition, to provide adequate support for pavement sections. GeoPacific recommends proof rolling directly on subgrade with a loaded { dump truck during dry weather and on top of base course in wet weather in order to verify subgrade strength during construction. Ripping,tilling,moisture conditioning and recompaction of native soils to at least 95%of ASTM D698 or equivalent may be necessary to create a stable base for pavement sections. Soft areas that pump,rut,or weave should be stabilized prior to paving. If pavement areas are to be constructed during wet weather,GeoPacific should review subgrade conditions at the time of construction so that specific recommendations can be provided. Wet-weather pavement construction is likely to require soil amendment,or geotextile fabric and a 6-inch increase in base rock thickness. During placement of pavement section materials,density testing should be performed to verify compliance with project specifications. Generally,one subgrade,one base course,and one asphalt compaction test is performed for every 100 to 200 linear feet of paving. EROSION CONTROL During our field exploration program,we did not observe soil types that would be considered highly susceptible to erosion. In our opinion,the primary concern regarding erosion potential will occur during construction, in areas that have been stripped of vegetation. Erosion at the site during construction can be minimized by implementing the project erosion control plan,which should include judicious use of straw bales and silt fences. If used,these erosion control devices should be in place and remain in place throughout site preparation and construction. ti Erosion and sedimentation of exposed soils can also be minimized by quickly re-vegetating exposed areas of soil,and by staging construction such that large areas of the project site are not denuded and exposed at the same time. Areas of exposed soil requiring immediate and/or temporary protection against exposure should be covered with either mulch or erosion control netting/blankets. Areas of exposed soil requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved grass seed mixture,or hydroseeded with an approved seed-mulch-fertilizer mixture. UNCERTAINTIES AND LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the owner and his/her consultants for use in design of this project only. This report should be provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating g 01-7231-Lee Office 13 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3, 2001 GeoPacific Project No. 01-7231 purposes; however,the conclusions and interpretations presented in this report should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that soil and groundwater conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations that may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If,during future site operations,subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein,GeoPacific should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report,and revision of such if necessary. Sufficient geotechnical monitoring,testing and consultation should be provided during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by explorations. The checklist attached to this report outlines recommended geotechnical observations and testing for the project. Recommendations for design changes will be provided should conditions revealed during construction differ from those anticipated,and to verify that the geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope,schedule and budget,GeoPacific attempted to execute these services in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology at the time the report was prepared. No warranty,express or implied,is made. The scope of our work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil,surface water, or groundwater at this site. 0.0 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Sincerely, GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING,INC. • 0 1- •.21, 1.-3 -(9\ EXPIRES: 06-30-206) Scott L. Hardman,P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Checklist of Recommended Geotechnical Testing and Observation Figure 1—Vicinity Map Figure 2—Site and Exploration Plan Boring Logs B-1 through B-3 Log of Cone Penetrometer Test CPT-1 Consolidation Test Results 01-7231-Lee Office 14 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. July 3,2001 GeoPacific Project No.01-7231 CHECKLIST OF RECOMMENDED GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND OBSERVATION Item Procedure Timing By Whom Done No. 1 Preconstruction meeting Prior to beginning site Contractor,Developer, work Civil and Geotechnical Engineers 2 Stripping, aeration,and root- During stripping picking operations Soil Technician 3 Compaction testing of During filling,tested engineered fill every 2 vertical or Soil Technician (95%of Standard Proctor) 500 yd3 4 Under-slab base rock Prior to placing vapor Soil Technician (95%of Modified Proctor) barrier or steel 5 Under-slab drainage system Prior to placing vapor Geotechnical Engineer barrier or steel 6A Footing Excavations/ Prior to placement of Geotechnical Engineer Overexcavations crushed rock/setting _ forms 6B Auger-Cast Pile Installation During installation of Geotechnical Engineer (If Used) piles 7 Compaction testing of trench During backfilling, 1 backfill tested every 4 vertical Soil Technician (95%of Standard Proctor) feet for every 200 lineal feet 8 Street subgrade compaction Prior to base course (95% Standard Proctor placement Soil Technician or approved native) 9 Base course compaction Prior to paving,tested (95%of Modified) every 200 lineal feet Soil Technician 10 AC Compaction During paving,tested (91%of Rice—Base lift) every 200 lineal feet Soil Technician (92%of Rice—Top lift) 11 Final Geotechnical Completion of project Geotechnical Engineer Engineer's Letter j 01-7231-Lee Office 15 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. GEOPACit=1C ENGINEERING,INC. 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road, Suite 100 VICINITY "IP_Portland,Oregon 97224 Tel: (503)598-8445 Fax:(503)598-8705 w // , il:si. Attivt,ter '� i 11 e /t' t ir �� _ _1\ tte ' 5 "t. ' • �11 �� t�U.., •?SO ' jamg i 1! ��l i /rto A . < I r , 4... ,4 .yiF yry6', / O .._`* -#y'.._.-- _ i • .}.1 t, y��• / L�//(/• roc.` Pte•Ommill. •r" i 1 `�I �•'^ ' I a;� r ^'`; ' i ` iiii -' ` INF, ,,,, �.—" as ' r ,r i , Y+77 .ir i ,,, . (�r • ---1, • „, u u [• 'r �r u� 1 l� .A - r�fig _. .••; pincer , •,/• 1 - -�� 1� �� 's. �,; 'i ;� ti:_. '• 5 .s ,: ,, SUBJECT SITE M' -- idoo ,.�1Int , %. ---..:-....*gist 53/r ,, ,, ,tvor,..-fp„.,,,. . - ,., ....._ , `i►i► ,• •t /r. , ,.. _ .. ... te �. ( •, t, , , ,,:„. �-• r ��#��„ , . `f . ,• �.C( ` /• Ci ,` ` '1, 4 ,4 t1 .. 4.4„,,5. i ji ,,.f..- �a _. R9, ,„„,,, ,rr �_-!!'r P '' r• J ' - ��...— - ,tom' y •'' 1 •• al _ (' • :t' ( ijt,`' t3 r� lel - _ 1 0,• 1 ' o I" i�t t t I'I V tt .1 • 7 i J 1 i i 'ik • ., .• w ,�. ��*IP 7..,;.lii• "t TC.�.�1�►\�•±.1•:-.4,::j1: .,��x,..:' y/1 l '� [ p�72..' r.. lYYsti_•�. ::'t•' ��r�'�i+r ,7 I!� i""fi. ,1, r M ',LA.' \ f/ , 1:16,1,111 15 ( '� l v� r C airy" i / I. !�#: i; qq; .., r�flt tori '; .,*;.:',;-:-. --c.'-,.., , -491( ` ,,, it , NVAliii, . ate. , �s- ' �3� 1. <. .4� t ji,_ 4, .......,,,.y ', ,:e•---...\ JjJJ •♦ if '• z, Yj .� r` 39 ., 11:t •• . ' . 14 .• III /L. ••�, / •n• a `� O� i 1 ,t ., 7 • ,• 1 .,,‘• t,„ i� t �� t a s� J + J �° ,-b.S__e . •ter-'+' *• ...,....,..„2:,...__, 03, i • 1 �>: •, ' i t 1' 'tet ' / d�- 'w,* .;',.'_,',..\,,,-,* 1 . "� , '• t- ,14.4:. -+ . R- -. i F i I / Lstit _ Y :.%•,11::"t',;• T �� ,fir•t M1 /( ,. ,• e , • / 4. a Legend Approximate Scale 1 in=2,000 ft Date: 5/9/01 Drawn by:PAC Base map: U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute Topographic Map Series, Beaverton and Lake Oswego Quadrangles, 1984 iii Project: Lee Office Building Tigard, Oregon Project No. 01-7231 I FIGURE 1 ii - GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING,INC. 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road,Suite 100 SITE AND Portland,Oregon 97224 EXPLORATION MAP Tel:(503)596-8445 Fax:(503}598-8705 NORTH ` 1524 �, ,;/ ,- < f A ,• 1 ctrl a. rr f,,r '• --—.... .'s''` ,. w_.. __,._ —5814 /([ . ,.~ i f ' 33218, — --- �-.-�sc.'''. �.-'' -• ----k•-.-..\-r- „____ '�.'� - , �' ( -4)97 .__MI{ �` t. • ft :' yfit .tip J� :U 1199,,` ,� ,. Old Concrete Wall ., _ • -t . --�'- 1523t' •, 2. . i • f . 5 ° t \ V Presumed A ' ` rea of Existing Fill ��'�.- � .� �^<� -''''°-'1 • 96 - , c)145'''' . _�1 ft. ' ; 1 • I - 118CC B-2 •_ ; �' ,A .; / ~ �/ 119(`.( f . ' t N ti-, ' - ,4, ., , , - ” 19 7'� i --I via • i / t se 1 tie+ ,,.- '12, _ �.. _ . __ .._ . Rcftlding ` (A prdxirnte) 1185 1524<',1/4. I 1 11874 ' r �. �� 118� .. ; ,1 1190-, • - - -_ ,. CY; i r • t0 x�" 1. d .....\.: 1 * (./.1 i -.:* .1 - - .'1191. / / • J 1, i j - Il I=7' 1u! l f. i/,j -'ti "�� ,,I,///7' 1' 8 1 iS /,f-,t� " l �/ t/ I tI-' I; ( -/..---',/,'?;-.' `-' . ``� . . ' . 1. � /� _.. ,, i •. f // C � � . t • / •' a ‘.� �Ti.14Nt),BOUNDARY .,.. __... , 9 I r I � d Legend - CPT-1 Cone Penetrometer APPROX. SCALE A Test Sounding 0 100 FEET Date: 519/01 -$ B-1 Exploratory Boring Drawn by: PAC Note: Topographic base map provided by others. Project: Lee Office Building Tigard, Oregon I Job No.01-7231 l FIGURE 2 •� GeoPacific Engineering,Inc. ^��±± 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road,Suite 100 BORING LOG Portland,Oregon 97224 �', Tel: (503)598-8445 Fax:(503)598-8705 Project: Lee Office Building Job No. 01-7231 Boring No. B-1 Tigard, Oregon 1 mE- 411 j��- 3— mN m `° 7 a, `° Material Description 3 St ot j _ Stiff to very stiff,clayey SILT(ML)with gravel, brown, damp(Fill) 11 15 — 5 1 13 Stiff,clayey SILT (ML), light brown to brown, micaceous, damp 1 13 29 9 7 (Willamette Formation) Shelby tube pushed from 6.5 to 8.5 feet. 10-- li 7 30.6 Moist to wet below 10 feet, medium stiff at 10 feet ,/ 15— ili g 29.5 Weak gray mottling at 15 feet Increase in stiffness at 17.5 feet 0—Stiff, clayey SILT(ML)with sand and occasional fragments of weathered rock, 20-- dampli brown (Residual Soil)to moist -_ Weathered BASALT, brown, medium hard to hard (R3 to R4)(Boring Lava) — Ill ‘4, 50 Practical Refusal on Hard Basalt at 23 feet r 25-H 5" Notes: Water first encountered at 8 feet. Static water level at 5 feet. 30-- ,e 35 LEGEND Date Drilled: 03/29/01 1' Logged By: PAC I000g E Surface Elevation: Static Water Table _ Bag Sample Spbt-Spoon Shelby Tube Sample at t kung Static Water Table Water Bearing Zone A • . GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road,Suite 100 Portland,Oregon 97224 BORING LOG 400 Tel:(503)598-8445 Fax:(503)598-8705 Project: Lee Office Building Job No. 01-7231 Boring No. B-2 Tigard, Oregon g ?'. 2 ti•oz- V--.. da 0, £ Z a 42 v Material Description Silty SAND and GRAVEL, brown, 2 inch recovery(Fill) Concrete fragment at 1 foot _ 15 M 5 Medium stiff to very stiff,clayey SILT(ML), brown to light brown,damp, 17 19.0- El micaceous (Willamette Formation) I — Shelby tube pushed from 7 to 9 feet I - 10 pg 11.1 8 29.2,7_37, 85.3 31.4 Shelby tube pushed from 12 to 13.5 feet 15- II Wet at 15 feet 7 33.0 20— 111 Stiff to very stiff,clayey SILT (ML)with sand and fragments of weathered rock, 15 31.1 brown, damp(Residual Soil) Rocky drilling from 22 to 23 feet. i 25- ' 17 Very stiff, clayey SILT(ML)with fat clay seams, mottled brown, yellow and gray, relict fractures,damp(Residual Soil to Decomposed Boring Lava) 30 Highly weathered BASALT and TUFF, soft(R2), mottled brown, yellow and il67 green, damp(Highly Weathered Boring Lava) II Practical Refusal at 32 feet Notes: Water first encountered at 13 feet. Static water level at 11.5 feet. it 35 LEGEND -r Date Drilled: 03/29/01 I ill 1000) cr.,. ,,, Logged By: PAC 1Aooq -- Surface Elevation: Bap Sample Spy-Spoon Shelby Tube Semple etas Water Tache Sleet Water Table Water Beanog Zone • . 04‘071,411r vGeoPacific Engineering, inc. 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road,Suite 100 Portland, Oregon 97224 BORING LOG - Tel: (503)598-8445 Fax:(503)598-8705 Project: Lee Office Building Job No. 01-7231 Boring No. B-3 Tigard, Oregon � � � t7 � ,,, tee, to z n Q• a o_ Material Description _ Very stiff,clayey SILT(ML),damp,crushed aggregate in upper 2 feet(Fill) i 23 r i 5 24 Stiff to very stiff, clayey SILT(ML), brown to light brown, damp to moist, I - micaceous(Willamette Formation) i 10-, 8 ��, 0-i i 15— il 0 9 _ Increase in stiffness at 17 feet __. 26/ 20— 50 Highly weathered BASALT,medium hard(R3), light greenish-brown for decomposed seams and relict fractures(Weathered Boring Lava) Practical Refusal at 21.5 feet. II 25 Notes: Static water level at 11.3 feet. 1 li 30-- d a 35 LEGEND z Date Drilled: 03/29/01 ill ,ontoEll ,a, %/'JLogged By: PAC Sag Sam* -- tical t tT Table V4 Surface Elevation: • a Split-Spoon �Split-Spoon Tuba Sample at Dieinga ab Static Water Table Water Bearer i Zone i i behavior type and SPT based on data bore UBC-1983 Subsurface Technologies Operator: W.MCC/A.MEE CPT DateTme: 03-29-01 10:34 Sounding: SND237 Location: CPT-1 TIGARD Cone Used: 442 TC Job Number: LEE OFFICE Tip Resistance Local Friction Friction Ratio Pore Pressure Diff PP Ratio Sol Behavior Type Qt(Ton/lt12) Fs(TonHM2) Fs/Qc(%) Pw(psi) (Pw-Ph)/Qc(%) Zone:UBC-1983 0.0 350.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 -20.0 100.0 -20.0 100,0 0.0 12.0 0.00 1 t 1 , 1 1 I I I till 1 I I I I ' III t 1 g. **--,......„... t 5.00 _ :,..w_.....- • x 10.00 _ ._...--1 ._ _. • a Oh15,00 – ,--- , .-� — .. ..,.., -- ,. - —r — , •, a 20,00 -__...,.,.,-----.__t.._ — "1/1– ..J..J.a _,._,_ • 25.00 • i 41 — =30.00 ill Maximum Depth u,28.54 feet Depth Increment=0.16 feet 1 sensitive fine grained •4 silty day to day •7 silty sand to sandy silt 10 gravelly sand to sand 4 $2 organic material •5 clayey silt to silty day •a sand to silty sand •11 very Miff fine grained(`) ■3 day ■6 sandy sit to clayey silt 9 sand ■12 sand to clayey sand(') it Data File:SND237 03-29-01 10:34 Operator:W.MCC / A.MEE Location:CPT-1 TIGARD j ,Cane ID:442 TC Job Number:LEE OFFICE ,Customer:surface Technologies Units:English Depth Qt Fs Pw Inc I (ft) (TSF) (TSF) (PSI) (deg) 2.30 33.5 0.578 1.06 0.10 2.62 25.3 1.267 -4.75 0.10 /2 .95 17.3 1.370 -5.24 0.10 3.28 13.8 0.669 -4.87 0.10 3.61 13.1 0.545 -6.52 0.10 13.94 13.2 0.683 -7.49 0.10 4.27 13.7 0.686 -8.65 0.10 4.59 19.0 0.800 -6.97 0.10 4.92 24.1 1.040 -7.42 0.10 15.25 20.1 0.982 -8.59 0.10 5.58 12.6 0.576 -6.43 0.10 5.91 13.9 0.749 -5.58 0.10 46.23 27.3 1.048 -1.82 0.10 16.56 19.4 0.813 -1.34 0.10 6.89 17.5 0.528 1.09 0.10 , 7.22 18.4 0.679 3.08 0.10 7.55 18.4 0.621 5.26 0.10 17.87 17.2 0.539 10.84 0.10 8.20 14.0 0.435 11.54 0.10 18.53 14.9 0.460 18.39 0.10 0.86 14.4 0.600 17.45 0.10 9.19 15.6 0.309 1.79 0.10 9.51 13.1 0.162 8.32 0.10 49.84 13.6 0.223 14.45 0.10 10.17 14.4 0.280 20.76 0.10 0.50 12.2 0.299 22.34 0.10 10.83 11.2 0.323 20.44 0.10 . 1.15 12.8 0.351 22.47 0.10 1.48 11.9 0.208 28.09 0.11 11.81 11.4 0.154 31.27 0.11 .2.14 12.7 0.223 43.99 0.11 12.47 14.5 0.354 11.92 0.11 12.80 13.9 0.283 14.60 0.11 13.12 11.3 0.166 20.05 0.12 13.45 11.6 0.187 23.18 0.12 ;3.78 11.0 0.174 25.03 0.12 4.11 13.6 0.376 25.82 0.14 14.44 12.4 0.298 29.23 0.14 14.76 11.2 0.237 31.81 0.14 5.09 13.1 0.237 36.52 0.14 5.42 13.4 0.293 43.42 0.14 15.75 16.1 0.447 43.01 0.15 `1,6.08 13.1 0.245 46.36 0.15 6.40 12.8 0.287 58.28 0.15 16.73 14.5 0.375 58.40 0.15 17.06 14.1 0.429 52.79 0.16 17.39 14.9 0.355 48.10 0.16 17.72 15.4 0.328 57.00 0.16 18.04 16.2 0.357 66.53 0.16 18.37 16.5 0.408 68.15 0.16 X8.70 17.2 0.308 77.62 0.16 09.03 18.2 0.292 76.43 0.32 19.36 19.3 0.322 97.62 0.32 19.69 21.6 0.447 48.37 0.32 '_0.01 18.8 0.529 79.25 0.32 a oil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 0 0 Data File:SND237 03-29-01 10:34 Operator:W.MCC / A.MEE Location:CPT-1 TIGARD ,Cone ID:442 TC Job Number:LEE OFFICE ,Customer:surface Technologies Units:English Depth Fs/Qc Pw/Qc (Pw-Ph) /Qc Soil Behavior Type SPT N* ! (ft) (%) (%) (%) Zone UBC-1983 60% Hammer 2.30 1.727 0.228 0.228 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 2.62 5.005 -1.351 -1.351 4 silty clay to clay 16 12.95 7.910 -2.178 -2.178 3 clay 18 3.28 4.832 -2.532 -2.532 3 clay 14 3.61 4.174 -3.596 -3.596 3 clay 13 3.94 5.185 -4.094 -4.094 3 clay 13 4.27 5.013 -4.551 -4.551 3 clay 15 4.59 4.208 -2.639 -2.639 3 clay 18 : 4.92 4.310 -2.214 -2.214 3 clay 20 15.25 4.880 -3.073 -3.073 3 clay 18 5.58 4.556 -3.663 -3.663 3 clay 15 5.91 5.388 -2.890 -2.890 3 clay 17 6.23 3.835 -0.479 -0.479 3 clay 19 1 6.56 4.199 -0.498 -0.498 4 silty clay to clay 14 6.89 3.012 0.447 0.447 4 silty clay to clay 12 7.22 3.692 1.205 1.205 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 17.55 3.370 2.054 2.054 4 silty clay to clay 12 17.87 3.125 4.528 4.528 5 clayey silt to silty clay 8 8.20 3.113 5.945 5.945 4 silty clay to clay 10 8.53 3.083 8.872 8.872 4 silty clay to clay 9 18.86 4.169 8.724 8.724 4 silty clay to clay 10 9.19 1.976 0.824 0.824 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 9.51 1.234 4.559 4.559 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 X9.84 1.643 7.657 7.657 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 10.17 1.935 10.345 10.345 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 0.50 2.447 13.161 13.161 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 10.83 2.876 13.123 13.123 4 silty clay to clay 8 11.15 2.748 12.685 12.685 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 #1.48 1.747 17.003 17.003 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 11.81 1.351 19.801 19.801 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 12.14 1.756 24.932 24.932 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 12.47 2.452 5.939 5.939 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 112.80 2.032 7.557 7.557 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 13.12 1.466 12.788 12.788 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 13.45 1.610 14.395 14.395 5 clayey silt to silty clay 5 13.78 1.582 16.383 16.383 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 44.11 2.758 13.638 13.638 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 14.44 2.396 16.916 16.916 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 14.76 2.108 20.362 20.362 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 45.09 1.812 20.094 20.094 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 5.42 2.183 23.304 23.304 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 15.75 2.785 19.283 19.283 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 16.08 1.869 25.446 25.446 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 e.40 2.242 32.733 32.733 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 .73 2.596 29.077 29.077 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 17.06 3.035 26.918 26.918 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 X17.39 2.387 23.270 23.270 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 0.7.72 2.139 26.735 26.735 5 clayey silt to silty clay 7 18.04 2.202 29.554 29.554 5 clayey silt to silty clay 8 ;18.37 2.478 29.826 29.826 5 clayey silt to silty clay 8 8.70 1.789 32.421 32.421 5 clayey silt to silty clay 8 #9.03 1.599 30.169 30.169 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 19.36 1.670 36.502 36.502 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 8 19.69 2.065 16.104 16.104 5 clayey silt to silty clay 10 0.01 2.816 30.365 30.365 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 ;oil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Depth Qt Fs Pw Inc (ft) (TSF) (TSF) (PSI) (deg) " ` 20.34 16.8 0.479 74.22 0.32 20.67 18.7 0'480 71.05 0.33 21.00 19.4 0.501 16.50 0.33 � . =1,�� 18.3 0'556 31.84 0'33 21'65 19,0 0.683 44.20 0.33 21.98 21.0 0'668 52.25 0.33 g3.31 20.5 0.809 25.11 0.44 22'64 19'6 0.701 39.25 0.44 22.97 68.9 2.326 1 .40 0.34 3.29 28.4 1.202 -I1,22 0.33 g3.62 34.6 1.88I -10.09 0.34 23.95 94.9 3.696 -7.56 0.33 24.28 83.6 3.692 -6.97 0.37 4-61 176'6 8.896 42.50 0.37 g4,93 163.1 7.422 -10.40 0.92 25.26 224.9 7.208 -10.82 1.26 25.59 232.3 10.749 -11.14 1.38 5.92 I83.9 I0.085 -13.33 1.26 t6.25 114'2 5'088 -9.67 1.11 26.57 118.6 7.994 -7.88 1'10 i .98 218'9 11'635 -I0.I3 1 .26 7.23 233.8 10^482 -5.52 1.30 7.55 90.3 4.566 -0'92 1 .40 27.89 1I7.8 7.219 2.86 1.55 8.22 271 .5 8.239 10.54 1.97 i8.54 332.4 -32768 2.76 1'97 oil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 gg 0 .^ 0 Depth Fs/Qc Pw/Qc (Pw-Ph)/Qc Soil Behavior Type SPT N* (ft) (U) (%) (%) Zone UBC-1983 60% Hammer 20.34 2.847 31.754 31.754 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 20.67 2.561 27.293 27.293 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 21.00 2.586 6.137 6.137 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 21.33 3.047 12.556 12.556 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 21.65 3.587 16.717 16.717 5 clayey silt to silty clay 9 21.98 3.129 17.878 17.878 4 silty clay to clay 13 22.31 3.940 8.810 8.810 4 silty clay to clay 13 22.64 3.580 14.437 14.437 5 clayey silt to silty clay 17 22.97 3.378 0.146 0.146 5 clayey silt to silty clay 19 23.29 4.230 -2.846 -2.846 5 clayey silt to silty clay 21 23.62 5.316 -2.098 -2.098 5 clayey silt to silty clay 25 23.95 3.893 -0.573 -0.573 5 clayey silt to silty clay 34 24.28 4.417 -0.600 -0.600 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 113 24.61 5.038 1.733 1.733 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 135 24.93 4.577 -0.462 -0.462 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 180 25.26 3.205 -0.346 -0.346 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 99 25.59 4.627 -0.345 -0.345 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 205 25.92 5.483 -0.522 -0.522 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 169 x6.25 4.455 -0.610 -0.610 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 133 26.57 6.741 -0.478 -0.478 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 144 26.90 5.315 -0.335 -0.335 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 182 27.23 4.483 -0.170 -0.170 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 173 x7.56 5.055 -0.073 -0.073 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 141 27.89 6.127 0.175 0.175 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 153 28.22 3.035 0.280 0.280 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 145 p8.54 -32768 0.060 0.060 0 <out of range> 0 oil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 i i i I I 1 i i i i a • Subsurface Technologies Operator W.MCC/A.MEE CPT DatelTime: 03-29-01 10:34 Sounding: SND237 Location: CPT-1 TIGARD Cone Used: 442 TC Job Number: LEE OFFICE Selected Depth(s) (meters) 10 _ 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 j 1 r 1 1 1111-111-11- 11111 1 1 1 r - 28~543 —i I - ..i — -t i — _ $ .-- , , i _ 1 7 ... = .- J 6 C - n 4 - _ — 7.1 II _ C 3_ _ 3 _ _ 2 _ __ _ C C ! 1 1 1.. ,. 11 1 I I 1 1 1 l 1 I I t 1 I ( I I 4 1 lir i I i i i I - 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Time:(minutes) Maximum Pressure=5208 psi Hydrostatic Pressure=0.0 psi III it • AMEC Earth&Environmental,Inc amee 7477 SW Tech Center Drive Portland.Oregon GeoPacific Engineering Inc. USA 97223-8025 17700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd, Ste. 100 Tel (503)639-3400 Portland, OR 97224-7010 Fax(503)620-7892 I CONSOLIDATION TEST: ASTM D 2435 PROJECT: Lee Office DATE 04/11/2001 PROJECT#: 9-61m-10250-7231 TESTED BY KE BORING B2 DEPTH (ft) 12 LAB# 4949 SOIL DESCRIPTION: sandy silt w/clay Consolidation Results IPreconsolidation Pressure, tsf 2.5 Compression Coeff., Cce 0.17 Recompression Coeff., Cre 0.019 Dry Unit Weight (IbiftA3) 85.30 Moisture Content, % 31.4% Consolidation Curve 0.05 0.1 0 C t • 015 02 - 025 I t S 1 11 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Load, tsf Verso n 012/96 Lab4949 consol xis