Loading...
Report Carlson Geotechnical Main Office Salem Office Bend Office P.O. Box 23814 4060 Hudson Ave., NE P.O. Box 7918 A Division of Carlson Testing, Inc. Tigard, Oregon 97281 Salem, OR 97301 Bend, OR 97708 Geotechnical Consulting Phone (503) 684 -3460 Phone (503) 589 -1252 Phone (541) 330 -9155 'onstruction Inspection and Related Tests FAX (503) 670 -9147 FAX (503) 589 -1309 FAX (541) 330 -9163 - 1 901 t c ' ' cjvl Y PILE Copy Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services Howard Veterinary Clinic SW 68 Parkway Tigard, Oregon CGT Project: G0402317 ' ` Prepared for Mr. Gene Wellman Triplett Wellman Contractors PO BOX 160 Woodburn, Oregon 97071 May 20, 2004 Carlson Geotechnical Main Office Salem Office Bend Office P.O. Box 23814 4060 Hudson Ave., NE P.O. Box 7918 A Division of Carlson Testing, Inc. Tigard, Oregon 97281 Salem, OR 97301 Bend, OR 97708 Geotechnical Consulting Phone (503) 684 -3460 Phone (503) 589 -1252 Phone (541) 330 -9155 , onstruction Inspection and Related Tests FAX (503) 670 -9147 FAX (503) 589 -1309 FAX (541) 330 -9163 May 20, 2004 Mr. Gene Wellman Triplett Wellman Contractors PO BOX 160 Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services Howard Veterinary Clinic SW 68 Parkway Tigard, Oregon CGT Project: G0402317 Dear Mr. Wellman, Carlson Geotechnical is pleased to submit the results of our report of Geotechnical Engineering Services for the Howard Veterinary Clinic to be located on SW 68` Parkway in Tigard , Oregon. We performed our work in general accordance with our proposal P03066 dated May 3, 2004. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please call if you have any questions regarding this report. Sincerely, Carlson Geotechnical Jr Jared P. Mechetti Geotechnical Staff Attachments TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 PROJECT INFORMATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION 5 Project Information 5 Regional Geology 5 Site Geology 5 Site Surface Conditions 6 Site Subsurface Conditions 6 Field Exploration 6 Subsurface Materials 6 Ground Water 7 CONCLUSIONS 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 8 Site Preparation 8 Wet Weather Considerations 8 Structural Fill 9 On -site Materials 9 Imported Granular Material 10 Deep Foundations 10 Shallow Foundations 10 Bearing Pressure and Settlement 11 Lateral Capacity 11 Floor Slabs 11 Utility Trenches 12 Utility Trench Excavation 12 Trench Backfill Material 12 Drainage Considerations 13 Pavements 13 Retaining Structures 14 Seismic Design 15 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION 15 LIMITATIONS 16 Howard Veterinary Clinic • Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the Howard Veterinary Clinic to be located on SW 68 Parkway in Tigard, Oregon. The site location is shown on the attached Figure 1. The purpose of our geotechnical investigation was to evaluate subsurface conditions in order to provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction. Our scope of work included the following: • Explore shallow subsurface conditions by excavating 6 test pits to depths of up to 11.0 feet below ground surface (bgs) using excavating equipment provided by Carlson Geotechnical. • Classify the materials encountered in the explorations in general accordance with the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) D -2488 Visual- Manual Method. A qualified member of . CGT's staff observed and maintained detailed logs of the explorations. • Perform in -situ testing in the explorations. • Collect representative samples from the explorations to conduct laboratory testing. • Provide recommendations for site preparation, grading and drainage, fill type for imported materials, compaction criteria, cut and fill slope criteria, trench excavation and backfill, use of on -site soils as structural fill, and wet/dry weather earthwork • Provide geotechnical- engineering recommendations for design and construction of shallow spread foundations, including allowable design bearing pressure and minimum footing depth and width. • Estimate settlement of footings and floor slabs for the design loading. • Provide geotechnical- engineering recommendations for the design and construction of concrete floor slabs, including an anticipated value for subgrade modulus and recommendations for a capillary break and vapor barrier. • Provide recommendations for subsurface drainage of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements, if necessary. • Recommend design criteria for retaining walls, including lateral earth pressures, backfill, compaction, and drainage. • Provide recommendations for design pavement sections, including base course and asphalt concrete thicknesses for the new roadway. • Provide recommendations for the Uniform Building Code (UBC) site coefficient and seismic zone, as well as qualitatively evaluating liquefaction potential. • Provide a written report summarizing the results of our geotechnical investigation. Carlson Geotechnical Page 4 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 PROJECT INFORMATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION Project Information Development at the 1.26 -acre site will include construction of a two -story wood - framed building and appurtenant pavement and utilities. No detailed structural information has been provided; however, we have assumed that floor slab Toads will be less than 250 pounds per square foot (psf), that continuous footing Toads will be Tess than 3 kips per linear foot (klf), and that site grading will include cuts and fills of less than three feet. Regional Geology The site is located within the Willamette Valley geologic province in Tigard, Oregon. The Willamette Valley was formed when the volcanic rocks of the Oregon Coast Range, originally formed as submarine islands, were added onto the North American Continent. The volcanic rocks slowly subsided forming a depression in which various types of marine sedimentary rocks accumulated. Approximately 15 million years ago, these marine sediments were covered by the Columbia River Basalts that flowed down the Columbia River Gorge as far south as Salem. Uplift and tilting of the Oregon Coast Range and the western Cascade Range formed the trough -like character of the Willamette Valley, and folded and faulted the Columbia River Basalts. The ancestral Columbia River deposited sand and gravel in the northern part of the valley near the site. Approximately 1.3 to 2.6 million years ago, a volcanic episode erupted the Boring Lavas in several localized vents, including Mt. Scott, Mt. Sylvania, and Mt. Tabor. Catastrophic floods washed into the Willamette Valley approximately 12,000 to 15,000 years ago and deposited silt and fine- to coarse - grained sands and gravels (Pleistocene Flood Deposits) throughout the region. Site Geology The site is located on the western margin of the Willamette Valley. The available mapping (Madin, 1990 indicates that the site is underlain by fine-grained Pleistocene soils that resulted from catastrophic flooding that ended approximately 12,000 years ago. Locally, the fine - grained flood deposits are approximately 30 feet thick and underlain by various sedimentary soils including Sandy River Mudstone and gravels of the Troutdale Formation. The depth to the basement rocks, which consist of Columbia River basalts, basalts of Waverly Heights, and associated undifferentiated sedimentary rocks, is approximately 300 feet. An inferred fault is mapped approximately 1 /4 miles to the southwest of the site. ' Madin, 1990. Earthquake Hazard Geology Maps of the Portland Metropolitan Area, Oregon. Ian P. Madin. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Open File Report 0 -90 -2. Carlson Geotechnical Page 5 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Site Surface Conditions The site is bordered by SW 68 Parkway to the west, commercial development to the east, and by forested areas to the north and south. The northern portion of the site is relatively level. The southern portion of the site exhibits a gentle slope to the northwest. At the time of our explorations, the surface of the site was covered with grasses, blackberry, small shrubs, and small conifers and deciduous trees. In alignment with the planned building site, directly west of SW 68 Parkway, site topography includes a decrease in elevation of approximately 10 -12 feet to an existing heavily vegetated swale. The roadway embankment is relatively planar and is raised relative to surrounding grades to the west, which suggests that it has been constructed with substantial fill. The planned building site may include some associated fill material as well, as site grades, in general mimic the roadway surface. We understand that an east -west trending drainpipe was installed within the building site and underneath SW 68 Parkway some time in the past, most likely during the time of embankment construction. The drainpipe inlet is located within the existing commercial development located east of the site, bisects the central portion of the building site and SW 68th Parkway, and outlets on the west side of the roadway embankment. Two manholes located at the surface of SW 68 Parkway are believed to be connected to this drainpipe to divert stormwater from the street. However, the depth and exact location of this pipe within the building site is unknown. Site Subsurface Conditions Field Exploration We excavated six test pits (TP -1 through TP -6) on May 11, 2004, to depths of up to 11.0 feet bgs. The approximate test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. A member of CGT's staff logged the soils observed in the test pits in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), collected samples, and performed in -situ testing. We have provided an explanation of the USCS classification as Figure 3. Logs of the test pits are presented in the attached Figures 4 through 9. Subsurface Materials Within the exterior of the site, including test pits TP -1, TP -3, and TP -5, our subsurface explorations in general encountered up to 12 inches of very soft to stiff silt topsoil at the Carlson Geotechnical Page 6 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 • surface. The topsoil in test pit TP -1 included trace gravel. Below the silt topsoil, we encountered stiff to hard native silt with trace to some sand that extended to the full depths of our explorations, up to 10.0 feet bgs. Within the central portion of the site, including test pits TP -2, TP -4, and TP -6, our subsurface explorations encountered up to 12 inches of very soft to stiff silt topsoil fill. Below the silt topsoil fill, we encountered stiff to very stiff silt fill with trace sand that extended to depths of up to 4 feet bgs. Below the silt fill, we encountered soft to medium stiff native silt with trace to some organics (roots, wood debris) that extended to depths of up to 9 feet bgs. Below the organic silt layer, we encountered soft to medium stiff sandy silt. The sandy silt extended to the full depth of our exploration in test pit TP -2. In test pits TP -4 and TP -6, below the sandy silt layer, we encountered very stiff to hard silt with trace sand that extended to the full depths of our explorations, 9.5 feet bgs. The subsurface materials are described in more detail on the attached test pit logs, Figures 4 through 9. Ground Water We encountered minor ground water seepage in test pits TP -2 and TP -4 at approximately 9 feet and 8 feet, bgs, respectively. We anticipate that ground water levels will fluctuate due to seasonal variations in precipitation, changes in site utilization, or other factors. Additionally the site soils are conducive to the formation of a perched water table. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our explorations and testing, the site may be developed as proposed, providing that structures and pavements are not constructed over compressible, organic soils, such as those encountered on the north side of the planned building location. Our site observations and reconnaissance of the nearby topography indicates that this area was likely an old swale that was filled at some time in the past. Although the consistency of the fill in this area is likely adequate to support building loads, the soft silt located beneath the fill will consolidate under additional loading, resulting in settlement with magnitudes that are unacceptable for construction. In addition, the presence of wood and other organic debris in this material will result in further long -term settlement. Provisions to mitigate the adverse effects of this settlement will need to be undertaken prior to construction of buildings within the filled swale. These provisions could include deep Carlson Geotechnical Page 7 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic . ` Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 foundations that derive support from the very stiff to hard silt located below the soft silts or over - excavation of soft material and subsequent backfilling with imported granular, structural fill. Alternatively, the planned structure could be relocated to avoid these soils. If this alternative is chosen, the building may be supported on shallow spread foundations. The following paragraphs present specific geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed project. RECOMMENDATIONS Site Preparation Where present, existing topsoil and excessively organic soils should be stripped and removed from proposed building and pavement locations, and for a 5- foot - margin around such areas. Based on our explorations, the depth of stripping of organic topsoil will be on the order of 12 inches. If the organic materials located within the filled swale are to be removed, we anticipate that stripping depths will be on the order of up to 9 feet. Stripped material should be transported off site for disposal or stockpiled for use in landscaped areas. After site grading, and prior to excavation for footings, a representative from CGT should observe the existing site subgrades to identify areas of excessive yielding. The subgrade should be evaulated by proof rolling with a fully loaded dump truck. If areas of soft soil or excessive yielding are identified, the material should be excavated and replaced with compacted materials as recommended for structural fill. Areas that appear too soft and wet to support proof rolling equipment should be prepared in accordance with recommendations for wet weather construction given below. Silt fences, hay bales, buffer zones of natural growth, sedimentation ponds, and granular haul roads should be used as required to reduce sediment transport during construction to acceptable levels. Measures to reduce erosion should be implemented in accordance with Oregon Administrative rules 340 -41 -006 and 340 - 41-455 and Washington County regulations regarding erosion control. Wet Weather Considerations The site soils are highly susceptible to disturbance during wet weather. Trafficability of the site soils may be difficult and significant damage to subgrade soils could occur if earthwork is undertaken without proper precautions at times when the exposed soils are more than a few percentage points above optimum moisture content. Carlson Geotechnical Page 8 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 For construction that occurs during the wet season, the site preparation activities may need to be accomplished using track - mounted equipment, loading removed material into trucks supported on granular haul roads, or other methods to limit soil disturbance. A qualified geotechnical engineer or their representative should evaluate the subgrade during excavation by probing rather than proof rolling. Soils that have been disturbed during site preparation activities, or soft or loose areas identified during probing, should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Haul roads subjected to repeated heavy construction traffic will require a minimum of 18 inches of imported granular material. Twelve inches of imported granular material should be sufficient for Tight staging areas. The imported granular material should consist of crushed rock that is well - graded between coarse and fine, contains no unsuitable materials or particles larger than 4 inches, and has less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift over the prepared, undisturbed subgrade and compacted using a smooth -drum, nonvibratory roller. We recommend that a geotextile be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and imported fill in areas of repeated construction traffic. The geotextile should have a minimum Mullen burst strength of 250 pounds per square inch for puncture resistance and an apparent opening size (AOS) between the U.S. No. 70 and No. 100 Sieves. Structural Fill On -site Materials Use of the on -site silts as structural fill may be difficult because the silt is sensitive to small changes in moisture content and is difficult, if not impossible, to adequately compact during wet weather. Moisture conditioning should be expected in order to achieve adequate compaction. When used as structural fill, the on -site silts should be placed in lifts with a maximum thickness of 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the materials maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Fills should be tested for compaction every two vertical feet as the fill is being placed. If the on -site soils cannot be properly moisture - conditioned, we recommend using imported granular material for structural fill. Carlson Geotechnical Page 9 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Imported Granular Material Imported granular structural fill should consist of angular pit or quarry run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well - graded between coarse and fine particle sizes. The fill should contain no organic matter or other deleterious materials, have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, and have less than 5 percent passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve. The percentage of fines can be increased to 12 percent of the material passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve, if placed during dry weather and provided the fill material is moisture - conditioned, as necessary, for proper compaction. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and be compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. During the wet season or when wet subgrade conditions exist, the initial lift thickness should be increased to 24 inches and should be compacted by rolling with a smooth -drum, nonvibratory roller. Fills should be tested for compaction every two vertical feet as the fill is being placed. Deep Foundations We recommend that buildings located in the swale area be founded on aggregate piers, such as Geopiers Geopiers are a proprietary foundation system that consists of installation of short, aggregate piers through unsuitable soils. The Geopier contractor provides both design and installation. If this foundation alternative is chosen, the aggregate piers should be constructed through the silt fill and underlying deleterious materials and terminated in the very stiff to hard silt. The piers should be constructed in accordance with design recommendations provided by the Geopier Shallow Foundations We recommend that spread footings be founded on the very stiff to hard silts, or on structural fill that is properly placed and compacted on these strata during construction. If soft or otherwise unsuitable soils are encountered, they should be overexcavated as recommended by CGT. The resulting overexcavation should be brought back to grade with granular structural fill. All pads for overexcavated footings should be constructed a minimum of 6 inches wider for every vertical foot of overexcavation. We recommend that all spread footings have a minimum width of 24 inches, and the base of the footings be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches and be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Excavations near foundation footings should not extend within a 1 H:1 V (horizontal to vertical) plane projected from the bottom of the footings. Carlson Geotechnical Page 10 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Bearing Pressure and Settlement Footings founded as recommended should be proportioned for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. This bearing pressure is a net bearing pressures and applies to the total of dead and Tong -term live loads, and may be increased by 1/3 when considering seismic or wind loads. For the recommended design bearing pressures, total settlement of footings is anticipated to be less than 1 inch. Differential settlements should not exceed %2 -inch. Lateral Capacity We recommend using a passive pressure of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for design, for footings confined by the stiff to hard silts, or by new structural fill. In order to develop these capacities, concrete must be poured neat in excavations, the adjacent grade must be level, and the static ground water must remain below the base of the footing throughout the year. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12- inch -depth of adjacent, unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. A coefficient of friction equal to 0.32 may be used when calculating resistance to sliding for the on -site silts. Floor Slabs Satisfactory subgrade support for floor slabs, supporting up to 200 psf area loading, constructed on grade can be obtained from the stiff to hard silts, or on structural fill that is properly placed and compacted on these strata during construction. A minimum 6- inch -thick layer of crushed rock base, compacted to not less than 95 percent of the materials maximum dry density, as determined in general accordance with ASTM D 1557, should be placed over the prepared subgrade to provide a more uniform surface for placing the concrete, and supporting the slabs. With the crushed rock base, a subgrade modulus of 150 pounds per cubic inch can be used for the design of floor slabs. Floor slabs constructed as recommended will likely settle less than 'A -inch. We recommend that slabs be jointed around columns and walls to permit slabs and foundations to settle differentially. Base rock material placed directly below the slab should be 3 / -inch maximum or less. The surface of the base rock should be filled with sand just prior to concrete placement. Filling the base rock surface reduces the lateral restraint on the bottom of the concrete during curing. Carlson Geotechnical Page 11 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CG T# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Due to the presence of fine - grained, silt soils, moisture should be expected at the subgrade surface. A capillary break, consisting of at least 6 inches of coarse granular material having less than 5 percent of the material passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve, typically provides protection against moisture. Where moisture vapor emission through the slab must be minimized, e.g. impervious floor coverings, storage of moisture sensitive materials directly on the slab surface, etc., a vapor retarding membrane or vapor barrier below the slab should be considered. Factors such as cost, special considerations for construction, floor coverings, and end use suggest that the decision regarding a vapor retarding membrane or vapor barrier be made by the architect and owner. Utility Trenches Utility Trench Excavation Trench cuts should stand near vertical to a depth of approximately 4 feet in the on -site silts and clays provided no ground water seepage is observed in the sidewalls. If seepage is encountered that undermines the stability of the trench, or caving of the side walls is observed during excavation, the sidewalls should be flattened or shored. Trench dewatering may be required to maintain dry working conditions if the invert elevations of the proposed utilities are below the ground water level. Pumping from sumps located within the trench will likely be effective in removing water resulting from seepage. If ground water is present at the base of utility excavations, we recommend placing trench stabilization material consisting of 1 foot of well - graded gravel, crushed gravel, or crushed rock with a minimum particle size of 4 inches and Tess than 5 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 Sieve at the base of the excavation. The material should be free of organic matter and other deleterious material and should be placed in one lift and compacted until well- keyed. While we have described certain approaches to the trench excavation, it is the contractor's responsibility to select the excavation and dewatering methods, to monitor the trench excavations for safety, and to provide any shoring required to protect personnel and adjacent improvements. All trench excavations should be in accordance with applicable OSHA and state regulations. Trench Backfill Material Trench backfill for the utility pipe base and pipe zone should consist of well - graded granular material containing no organic material or other deleterious material, have a maximum particle size of 3 / -inch, and have less than 8 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. Carlson Geotechnical Page 12 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Backfill for the pipe base and within the pipe zone should be placed in maximum 12- inch -thick lifts and compacted to not Tess than 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557 or as recommended by the pipe manufacturer. Backfill above the pipe zone should be placed in maximum 12- inch -thick lifts and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Trench backfill located within 2 feet of finish subgrade elevation should be placed in maximum 12- inch -thick lifts and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Drainage Considerations We recommend that subsurface drains be connected to the nearest storm drain or other suitable discharge point. We also recommend that paved surfaces, and ground near or adjacent to the residences be sloped to drain away from the residences. Surface water from pavement surfaces, and open spaces should be collected and routed to a suitable discharge point. Runoff from roof and pavement areas should not be directed into the foundation drain system. We do not recommend infiltrating storm water into the subsurface at this site. Pavements If pavements are to be located within the swale area, provisions will need to be undertaken to mitigate the adverse effects of settlement due to the consolidation of the underlying soft silt and organic debris. If the design team elects to eliminate the potential of settlement from these soft and organic soils, overexcavation depths of up to 9 feet of soft materials and subsequent backfilling with imported granular, structural fill will be required. If the design team elects not to perform complete over - excavation work, some repair to the pavement section should be expected over the life of the project. After site stripping and preparation of the pavement area subgrade soils, we recommend observing a proof roll of the pavement subgrade soils to identify areas of excessive yielding or organic soils. If soft or organic soils are encountered in pavement areas during site preparation activities, we recommend over excavating a minimum of two feet of these materials and replacing them with granular structural fill. For pavement subgrades in which the soft or organic subgrade soils are over excavated, we recommend over excavating a minimum of two feet of the subgrade soils and replacing the resulting excavation with granular structural fill. Structural fill should conform to the recommendations for imported granular material recommendations presented in the structural Carlson Geotechnical Page 13 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 fill section of this report. A representative of CGT should provide recommendations for additional overexcavation depths based on observations during pavement subgrade preparation. We recommend using a pavement section of 21/2 inches of asphaltic concrete over 6 inches of aggregate base in areas that will be exposed to Tess than 2 trucks and 100 passenger cars per day. The design of the recommended pavement section is based on an assumed California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 3 for the on -site silts, the assumption that the pavement subgrade within the swale area consists of a minimum of two feet of granular structural fill properly placed during construction, and the assumption that construction will be completed during an extended period of dry weather. Increased base rock sections may be required in wet conditions in order to support construction traffic, and protect the subgrade. Asphalt pavement, and base course material should conform to the State of Oregon, Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Place aggregate base in one lift, and compact to not less than 95 percent of the materials maximum dry density, as determined in general accordance with ASTM D 1557. Retaining Structures We recommend that retaining walls be founded on the stiff to hard native silt, or on new structural fill that is properly installed during construction. If soft or organic soils are encountered in the footing excavations, they should be overexcavated as recommended by the geotechnical engineer. The resulting overexcavation should be brought back to grade with suitable granular structural fill. If retaining walls are to be located within the swale area, we recommend supporting the proposed retaining structures on Geopier aggregate piers that are constructed through the silt fill and underlying deleterious materials and are terminated in the very stiff to hard native silts. The piers should be constructed in accordance with design recommendations provided by the Geopier Corporation. For walls not restrained from rotation, we recommend using an equivalent fluid pressure of 33 pcf for design. We recommend using an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf for design of walls restrained from rotation. When computing resistance to lateral Toads, we recommend using a base friction coefficient of 0.32. Footings for the retaining walls should be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Carlson Geotechnical Page 14 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic • Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 Wall drains should include perforated drainpipe wrapped in a non -woven geotextile filter installed behind the walls at the base. Walls should be backfilled with imported granular material, as described in the "Structural Fill" section of this report. The above design recommendations are based on the assumptions that: (1) the walls consist of conventional cantilevered retaining walls or embedded building walls, (2) the walls are Tess than 10 feet in height, (3) the backfill is level and drained and consists of imported granular materials, and (4) no surcharges are imposed behind the wall. Reevaluation of our recommendations will be required if the retaining wall design criteria for the project vary from these assumptions. Seismic Design The site is located in Seismic Zone 3 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Based on our understanding of the subsurface conditions, the UBC soil profile that best characterizes the site is "S We recommend using a seismic coefficient of C = 0.36 and C,= 0.54 for site conditions corresponding to the amplification of an SD soil profile. Based on the absence of loose sand to silty sand soils beneath the ground water table within the depths explored on May 11, 2004, there is a low risk of liquefaction of the on -site soils. If desired, a cone - penetrometer test and liquefaction analysis could be performed at an additional cost to determine liquefaction potential beneath the depths explored. OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION Satisfactory pavement and earthwork performance depends to a large degree on the quality of construction. Sufficient observation of the contractor's activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during subsurface explorations, and recognition of changed conditions often requires experience. We recommend that qualified personnel visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect whether subsurface conditions change significantly from those observed to date and anticipated in this report. We recommend that site stripping, rough grading, foundation and pavement subgrades, and placement of engineered fill are observed by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative. Because observation is typically performed on an on -call basis, we recommend that the earthwork contractor be held contractually responsible for scheduling observation. Carlson Geotechnical Page 15 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic - Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by the owner /developer and other members of the design and construction team for the proposed development. The opinions and recommendations contained within this report are not intended to be, nor should they be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions, but are forwarded to assist in the planning and design process. We have made observations based on our explorations that indicate the soil conditions at only those specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. These observations do not necessarily reflect soil types, strata thickness, or water level variations that may exist between explorations. If subsurface conditions vary from those encountered in our site exploration, CGT should be alerted to the change in conditions so that we may provide additional geotechnical recommendations, if necessary. Observation by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. The owner /developer is responsible for insuring that the project designers and contractors implement our recommendations. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that the design and specifications be reviewed by our firm to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. If design changes are made, we request that we be retained to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written modification or verification. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with the generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions express or implied, should be understood. Carlson Geotechnical Page 16 of 17 Howard Veterinary Clinic • Tigard, Oregon CGT# G0402317 May 20, 2004 We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geotechnical consultant on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, CARLSON GEOTECHNICAL 31/ei./Z4.‹ Brad M. Wilcox, E.I.T. Geotechnical Staff Jared P. echetti Geotechnical Staff #15 ..8 OR:,GOI Jeanne M. Niemer, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Figures 1 through 9 Doc ID: P: \GEOTECH \PROJECTS\2004 Projects \Howard Veterinary Clinic \Howard Geo Report.doc Carlson Geotechnical Page 17 of 17 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC SITE LOCATION • . � � i s • • �I Ts •1 > 2 R1 J Ii i , -- 1,/, ,, , ' Ii ` t rr -: • _1171100 G { ,� •�� _ • .• • : , 1 j i4 _ RS _�-F ,�, y' . � ill, f�y,� ; ° g r• - ': 14 • .e • ! l j l : r `�`' � ‘, 11 t ___, l � f , ' ; .�'. • I � �`, • I +0,. :+ , ,u / % ' n , l I .' P ^ 'fi _ ,. ' !'+` 1: ,--'� -- - t/J 1 .1 �Q ri - te r • � P. _ G� ! t ' _ _ ms's' __ ' ` t -. 't • t 1 k- ‘ - / t (*I . — � �'�_,sPi I Rb .� - ! ds5xAy s�- 4,-----;'-'7.1.- 3o V � { _ � ' 1 Ir - =. - '� / 9. /y • � '! � ,,k j�,� i11 :.-: 1, 1111 a �; ,f' 1 r _ ; I' o � _ - t--- : "mil ' i � . r Es' ! - =_s• �' 4. '7110* Alta r___.s.s,pi: - f - 1 1 4 A' II i ,! ": - ,, -- x.: I _ _ i Imm ; ,_.71 , , :,- .... ...„ so w - 4. , __- • : En , //- I I killitalt VI V \ MI . P a . gri t.‘", - -• • ,, N : ' :. N -,-,_---__:. J - 4 -- Fr air.. -■ fic. ,.... ,....iiii i . ., . ?•T ° ^*,•. ?� , I1:._ t SITE LOCATION . " , :.. ,. : �..�•e.•.. Z—!'f i .f• I 4 � : 7 I r _ :. 1 -- .. , _yam J. :01; e I Ir 2 i • :-y;" , 1�4 Af'AF • e , • • 7- . -%.-- _ ' 1/ • 'nom ...,,,,,...,,,,../41. x ---96 :„.,...i. • I' • y I V , . ,� i• f 1'i:. _ I . _, • • . y � ' '' E s �:` - �' _ 9► itigoi • 4.•_ ....V," \\,` ' - - ,a,:,• .- 4 :-. ; T, IP clip 0: ' ; 1- ti -1 7.! -'4- - -- - - -- ..- r '.;./... _ `�� ` ` }' :' $ '. •`Ir ' 11 �+ - = ��;;�`�.��`, �`• IrCL� • 'T - �u�r~�1: `; , : • {s1 r• y \• C - ,1•. ... ,_�!• « 1.11:11 ? • 1 1 ` . _ q - 'Z' • ` J' � 2��� ' „d y l •h..J�� •J h : � II rid 1 I • 1.: •. • '''4 ‘ % • .. • st,„ , 'I '• . .. --, I --. l■ • 1-• I I I . - – 1.• ,, • I `\ ' � i . , ... ' "a:Y.L - . -- ( Q i JI: ' 1 1 . E •i �� r � . • t . • • _ \\ t c7 '' ,. +• - Yom .I _ �_ <4.•�� . s tt i `r0 ln ` , . `. ` •, d ° . L I • : .. 1 AIRP{7 ] r <�'jl 1- �' I• 2 0 1. .. 2 .. P - \' ri•.- -s .�-: tIhi � , \ /ill . . ' /// ', • ° • Map created with TOPO! @2000 Wildflower Productions (www.topo.com) Scale 1 Inch = 2,000 feet USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Beaverton, OR Quadrangle. Map version 1961. Photorevised 1984 T1S., R1 W., Section 36 Willamette Meridian 0 2000 4000 P` • Carlson Geotechnical F.O. Box 23814 CGT Job No. G0402317 FIGURE 1 503-684-3460 Tigard, Oregon 97281 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC • SITE PLAN NORTH h ■ '"f 9 t S SW ? it 1 I c ° a ' ej 1i 1 � � rs #i • r i ,. - . i. �� d! . Y lr ' I / / /� lf'. :�� t. ,. ! I II � \ / / i i r i ' \ r -, : 41 �. J r z • F Z , � f z : 1 ti� Y i ? . z 1 j 1 • [u - • t"x a d F� .4 '• TP -1 F w r ,3 i t - 3e• •u C r 1 i:s .,k U'�1T k' Q i U ''4,5.r, i- > �i TP 5 N - - S r z, fr'" TP - / _ S - r, ti L - '. ,=- t ., l }t om 1.. f � - �i t _ / . -. R , ° r ', TP-6 ` N _ O t , \ PLANNED if J J \ \ CLINIC { , : 0 z 1r. 1. -': ,; � t � \ BUILDING r< :': -- -, .., . 1 t . \ a 0 1 -r ^: TP -3 a ' ' t ' \ `'Std :<t c r . c NOTES: LEGEND Site plan provided by Gene Wellman with CGT Job No. G0402317 Triplett Wellman. The drawing has been reproduced and modified by CGT staff. TP -1 Location of test pit MI exploration Date: 5/14/2004 All locations are approximates. - G P , •,j, Carlson Geotechnical P.O. Box 23814 FIGURE 2 a Tigard, Oregon 97281 Draw not to Scale. an 503. 684.3460 g re g SOIL CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA AND TERMINOLOGY Classification of Terms and Content USCS Grain Size NAME : MINOR Constituents (12 -50 %); MAJOR Fines < #200 (.075 mm) Constituents ( >50 %); Slightly (5 -12 %) Sand Fine #200 - #40 (.425 mm) Relative Density or Consistency Medium #40 - #10 (2 mm) Color Coarse #10 - #4 (4.75) Moisture Content Gravel Fine #4 - 0.75 nch Plasticity Coarse 0.75 inch - 3 inches Trace Constituents (0 -5 %) Cobbles 3 to 12 inches; Other: Grain Shape, Approximate gradation, scattered <15% est., Organics, Cement, Structure, Odor.... numerous >15% est. Geologic Name or Formation: (Fill, Willamette Silt, Till, Boulders > 12 inches Alluvium,...) Relative Density or Consistency Granular Material Fine- Grained (cohesive) Materials SPT SPT Torvane tst Pocket Pen tsf Manual Penetration Test N -Value Density N -Value Shear Strength Unconfined Consistency <2 <0.13 >0.25 Very Soft Easy several inches by fist 0 - 4 VeryLoose 2 - 4 0.13 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.50 Soft Easy several inches by thumb 4 -10 Loose 4 - 8 0.25 - 0.50 0.50 -1.00 Medium Stiff Moderate several inches by thumb 10 - 30 Medium Dense 8 - 15 0.50 - 1.00 1.00 - 2.00 Stiff Readily indented by thumb 30 - 50 Dense 15 - 30 1.00 - 2.00 2.00 - 4.00 Very Stiff Readily indented by thumbnail >50 Very Dense >30 >2.00 >4.00 Hard Difficult by thumbnail Moisture Content Structure Dry: Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch Stratified: Alternating layers of material or color >6 mm thick Damp: Some moisture but leaves no moisture on hand Laminated: Altemating layers < 6 mm thick Moist: Leaves moisture on hand Fissured: Breaks along definate fracture planes Wet: Visible free water, likely from below water table Slickensided: Striated, polished, or glossy fracture planes Plasticity Dry Strength Dilatancy Toughness Blocky: Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular lumps which resist further breakdown ML Non to Low Non to Low Slow to Rapid Low, can't roll Lenses: Has small pockets of different soils, note thickness CL Low to Med. Medium to High None to Slow Medium Homogeneous: Same color and appearance throughout MH Med to High Low to Medium None to Slow Low to Medium - CH Med to High High to V. High None High - Unified Soil Classification Chart (Visual - Manual Procedure) (Similar to ASTM Designation D -2488) Major Divisions Group Typical Names Symbols Coarse Gravels: 50% Clean GW Well graded gravels and gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines Grained or more Gravels GP Poorly - graded gravels and gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines Soils: retained on Gravels GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures More than the No. 4 sieve with Fines GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures 50% retained Sands: more Clean SW Well- graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines on No. 200 than 50% Sands SP Poorly- graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines sieve passing the Sands SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures No. 4 Sieve with Fines SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures Fine - Grained ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts Silt and Clays g y plasticity, gravelly y y y y Soils: CL Inorganic clays of low to medium lastici ravel) clays, sandy clays, lean clays 50% or more Low Plasticity Fines OL Organic silt and organic silty clays of low plasticity Passes No. MH Inorganic silts, clayey silts 200 Sieve Silt and Clays CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays High Plasticity Fines OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, muck, and other highly organic soils vP �.f, Carlson Geotechnical GEOTECHNICAL P.o.i9ox23814 CGT Job No. G0402317 FIGURE 3 503- 684 -3460 Tigard, Oregon 97281 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC • • Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable - d 2 T N o N — a o N E a . N ° v Material Description w C- c ( %)Z E g o o w 2 a cn 0 2 E C9 Do ML Very soft to soft brown SILT TOPSOIL FILL with trace gravel; 12 -inch root — 0.0 zone; moist. 1— 0.5 ML Very stiff medium brown SILT with trace sand; slightly mottled; moist. — 3.5 2 3.0 S -1 ' aR 22 — 2.0 stiff to very stiff below 2.5 feet. 3-- 2.0 — 2.5 4 2.0 S -2 a 28 5 — 6— with some sand below 6 feet. 7- 8— S -3 . 29 9- 10 Test pit exploration terminated at 10.0 feet bgs. 11 - • - 12 -- 13 14 -- 15 16— NOTE: No ground water seepage or caving observed during excavation. 17 - Job No. G0402317 Log of Test Pit 1 Figure: 4 P� • 0401iTi Carlson Geotechnical - P.O. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 503 - 664.3460 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable m w - c t °�o 4 a. ~ , 1 ) � 3 r °�v a .o d Material Description p a c cn z to U 2 w co C7 �O ML Very soft brown SILT TOPSOIL FILL; 9 -root zone; moist. -- 0.0 1 — 2.0 ML Stiff medium brown SILT FILL with trace sand; moist. — 2.0 2— 2.0 S -1 at , 31 — 2.0 3 1.5 brown -blue gray below 3.0 feet. — 1.5 4 -- 1.5 S-2 T 29 ML Soft to medium stiff blue -gray SILT with trace to some organics (roots, wood debris); moist. 5— *8 -inch diameter log at 5 feet. 6 -- 7— S -3 . 8 very moist below 8 feet. 9— �0 a light gray, sandy, no organics below 9 feet. S -4 a 30 *minor groundwater seepage at 9 feet. 10 11 Test pit exploration terminated at 11.0 feet bgs. 12-- 13 14 -- 15 -- 16-- NOTE: No caving observed during excavation. 17 -- Job No. G0402317 Log of Test Pit 2 Figure: 4 P� 4. MAIO Carlson Geotechnical - P.O. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 • 503- 684 -3460 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 = Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable d � E° r - E c. E o o" E E n " °' ' U - _ Material Description a c v)Z E g o w b N A in 2 E m ML Soft to medium stiff brown SILT TOPSOIL; 8 -inch root zone; moist. — 0.5 1 -- 1.o ML Stiff medium brown SILT with trace sand; moist. — 1.0 2— 1.5 — 2.0 stiff to very stiff below 2.5 feet. 3 — 2.0 S -1 T 30 — 2.0 4— 2.5 5- 6- 7— 8- S -2 a 35 9- 10 ' Test pit exploration terminated at 10.0 feet bgs. 11— 12 -- 13 14— 15 16— NOTE: No ground water seepage or caving observed during excavation. 17 Job No. G040231 7 Log of Test Pit 3 Figure: 5 fri Carlson Geotechnical - P.O. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 603- 684.3460 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 = Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable w � - o m a o° E E a o c Material Description a c o z E go ,� d to U 2 to C7 U ML Medium stiff to stiff brown SILT TOPSOIL FILL; 12 -inch root zone; moist. — 1.0 1 2.0 ML Stiff medium brown SILT FILL with trace sand; moist. — 1.5 2 1.0 S -1 a 35 — 1.0 *wood stake (vertical orientation) at 2.5 feet 3-- 0.5 ML Soft to medium stiff blue -gray SILT with trace to some organics (roots); — 0.5 moist. 4—' 0.5 S -2 a 32 5 6- 7— 6 light gray, with some sand below 7.5 feet. 8— S-3 26 ® p *minor groundwater seepage at 8 feet. 9 very stiff to hard, medium brown, with trace sand below 9 feet. 10— Test pit exploration terminated at 9.5 feet bgs. 11- 12- 13 14-- 15 16-- NOTE: No caving observed during excavation. 17 -- Job No. G0402317 Log of Test Pit 4 Figure: 6 Carlson Geotechnical - P.O. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 503 - 6643460 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable � , a w o d _ Y E c a (2 o ° E E a 6 c Material Description ac a3 in E ° o ' v, co � 0 2 E m a 6 n C7 U ML Stiff brown SILT TOPSOIL; 12 -root zone; moist. — 1.5 1 — 1.5 ML Very stiff medium brown SILT with trace sand; moist. — 3.5 2— 2.5 S -1 J r 22 — 2.0 3 - 2.0 — 2.5 4 3.0 5— very stiff to hard below 5 feet. 6 S -2 T 28 7 . Test pit exploration terminated at 7.0 feet bgs. 8 • 9- 10- 11- 12- 13 14- 15 16— NOTE: No ground water seepage or caving observed during excavation. 17 Job No. G0402317 Log of Test Pit 5 Figure: 7 Carlson Geotechnical - P.O. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 503 - 6813460 HOWARD VETERINARY CLINIC Logged by: BMW / KJS Date Excavated: 05/11/04 Location: See Figure 2 Surface Elevation: Unavailable � u a y �u�ia 3 1 E E v to w Material Description a ° m y m� n o c c y • y CL I a`i to Z E � U 2 ` `— a co c 0 � U ML Very soft to soft brown SILT TOPSOIL FILL; 9 -inch root zone; moist. — 0.0 1 — 0 ML Very stiff brown SILT FILL; moist. — 2.5 2— 2.5 — 3.0 3-- 2.5 ML Soft to medium stiff blue -gray SILT with trace to some organics (roots, wood — 1.0 debris); moist. 4 0.5 5 *6 -inch diameter log at 5 feet. soft, light gray, with some sand, no organics below 5.5 feet. 6- 7- 8— 9 very stiff to hard, brown, with trace sand, mottled below 9 feet. 10— Test pit exploration terminated at 9.5 feet bgs. 11- 12- 13 14- 15 16— NOTE: No ground water seepage or caving observed during excavation. 17 Job No. G0402317 Log of Test Pit 6 Figure: 8 "ow Carlson Geotechnical - P 0. Box 23814 - Tigard, Oregon 97281 - 684 -3460 - Fax 670 -9147 503.6644460 HAY-05- 2005(THO) 14 :04 P.007/010 Fire Marshal's Division Offices Tualatin Valley North - 14480 SW Jenldns Rd.. Beaverton, OR 97005, (503) 356 -4700 Fire at Rescue South - 7401 SW Wash Ct. Tualatin, OR 97062, (503) 612 -7010 This worksheet is required to be submitted to and approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) before any permits for new budding construction, building expansion or fire hydrants wW be issued by any building department within the TVP&R District. See the instructions for assistance completing this form or call one of the above numbers. Preparer Informal on Preparer Name: (Chris C. VanVleet P.E. - Lewis & VanVieet inc. Phone: X503.885.8605 J Facr503.685.1206 Architect 1 Engineer of Record: iStudio 3 Architecture Phone: Pr390.6500 1 Fa;:r503.390.6501 1 General Building information 1 Project Name: [Cascade Veterinary Referral Center Project Address: 111140 S.W. 66th Parkway City :ITigerd ( County4Washington J Zrp:197223 1 Construction Type(s): Type V-8 J Total Bldg Area: 1 9,6121sgft Total Fire Area: , 9.6121sgft Bldg Fire Flow, ( 2647IGauona Per Nnnuto Describe Pim Area: of mo.e than on, pre aea, Made on E 1/23111 or 11 n dome; Ineiconno the meow*, nu.) Ground Floor Area = 7882 square feet Second Floor Area =1650 square feet Type of occupancy or Use of Building: (B _� MAY- 05- 2005(11) 14:04 P.003/011 ,r. s l Ie OCCURanC�r' I u amn, � "� �r1 : Atd0Nt37vaettemi3) Al Building Eire Flow 2647 GPM A2 Occupancy Factor r 11 A3 Required Fire Fbw 1 254,GPM JUSB Either dam A,AbDve or item B B& W, But':911 itBot I 8. • _ o cu • '•:. • ?(If•uslnp:Item .B,.DONOTuse item A) 81 Determine percent of each occupancy hazard in the fire area. +�� g Hazard '., .,. _�. • �w��.� ....:...L.—.7:- ,- 0 SF .'7 1 SF :'� , I c:. 0 % Ordinary Hazard G • 1 0 SF —g-. ' 1 SF 90000.4t 0 % Ordi - Hazard G • 2 0 SF Extra Hazard Grp 1 0 SF E 1 SF t, e•: ;:,: 0 % Extra Hazard Grp 2 0 SF ,'� 1 SF .'; 0 % Total Must equal 100% I 0 % 82 Calculate Fire Flow _Light Hazard 1.0 M 0 % =. 2647 GPM 0 GPM • Ordinary Hazard Grp 1 1.2 1 '•': 1 0 % .,_ 2647 GPM 0 GPM Ordinary Hazard Grp 2 1.3 MP. 0 % E" =; 2647 GPM 0 GPM Extra Hazard Grp 1 1.4 f -1 0 % 2647 GPM • 0 GPM Extra Hazard Grp 2 1.6 . 0 % 2647 GPM: - ■ 0 GPM t. 83 Required Flre Flow I 0 GPM I C. Min1mum Numberofire•Hydranta Required . • Required Fire Flow 2647 = 3 No. of Hydrants Required D. Reduction of fire F low - "Reductfons:aredraeed on thefolbwlnq: D1 - Reduced by 25% for a NFPA 72 Fire Alarm System (multiply by .75) D2 - Reduced by 75% for NFPA 13 Automatic Sprinklers (multiply by .25) L E: • :Requited:Fire Flow . . • • • • : • • .a El. Fire Flow 2647 GPM x 1 = I 2647 GPM (Max. 3000 . Mth u;oo apm) I F. Available Fire Fbw to the Building I Test Results: I 3,600 1 GPM Manually enter available fire flow here. Please attach documentation of the flow test that was made. It shall Include date, time, location of static/residual and flow hydrants, and the tester's name, phone number and address. MAY- 05-2005(THO 14 :04 P, 009 /010 06/04/05 WED 14:ga_Eia 503 691 0966 TVWD ENGINEERING it 1( TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT /S / W 3 L fl D FIRE HYDRANT FLOW TEST REPORT / Location: Y`/.a ,7 4- s uJ 1.7k A - Date: ,s �` /S Test Made By (Company 8 Individual) 04,y77 ,r•�.�rra�_ Witness: ,l, I 7 e/ AJ s Time: 5' /f)► Purpose of Test: 0 814 • a #1 #2 #3 • #4 Total Flow Hydrant Ports GPM C = Hydrant Coefficient D = Inside Dia. Of Outlet, in. P = Pitot Reading e/ Q = GPM y • Flow equation: Q = 29.83 C D (Pr Use C = 0.9 for hydrant picot flow gauge See Hydrant Monster data for flow equation. Flow tubes Used? Yes X No Hose Monster Used? Yes No. X No. of ports flowed at a time: jez • • Static Pressure . S psi Residual Pressure "7 9 psi Flow at 20 psi Residual Pressure (Calculated) 36 'gO y i �'Sa' qpm 51/99 Remarks Location Map: Show on map which hydrants were flowed and which were used to monitor residual pressure. Label ports #1, #2, etc. Notes: . ,,: 06? / • s / '"1i° zs 6 goo 5 The mapping, flow. or pressure information contained herein reflects conddions on the date and time of the test. Tualatin Valley Water District makes no representations as to the system's ability to meet specd'm Are flow requirements. Future system capability may differ from the flows reported herein because of subsequent modifications to the District's system and/or because flow and pressure may vary by time of day and season. 4f1INMUbnn4x 1AY-05- 2005(TNO) !1:04 P,010/010 05/04/05 !6D 14:21 FAX 503 Si 8 0085 TYND ENGINEERING M002 Ce A VI )1 a 7 ,, a _I_ . 0 e n 1 ______ 'lilt .1% ... .... t ev' in i la .8 c / flaj) ED ST ATLANTA ST " --- w III -- a d EN w CNI cm • I s 9A„,, so �s ®� K ® m DA I N 0 CN 1 .44- , ,0 _ • .. I _ f • --- • _ .6, _______- V cuPfTON 6, , 0 N) 0 — ED j _ . _____ -..- . an , s • .n 11111111k 1: . ,Jj.