The URL can be used to link to this page

14100 SW 72ND AVENUE-1 71 .� DANA �4 + 4 rLemFAIL. ... . .ra..a-Y•wr.a.w w+ Y•._r......w..w.ww.aw.•r.�v.w.�w.M..r.�wrs,.tines-.+.w.........+►..e_ww.w tiY.r._.....r.-.w.wwr.w...w •rr..YYn.w�aWw....�w,........w ..��.....•�.-a....r.w.ww.+...._..r�wur.Y.Y...nrw'..r..'A Mrw.Frw...+r+r-...,.._._._.Mir.\MM...M.�...'w..wrwti.MM.rwr.n�r.+Yriav+r.lrlr.asMrwa.oa.�ww r.W.+f..�.r.r wrY..,r.rN..�tlY�ww,waw..a.w.�._.ww..w.._w_w+h+-,w .. ,r.rra.a�.'Y MwIMa.LyM..M.r.t.a.r+r...��r.r hrw.-�n.a..�,.wsw..v.�su.+w. rr'.w..a......w�..._r.w...... .A��.. .w�a, ti.a.r._..w+era.Y...,.....rra .r...._... .. .. .........wr-..�.�...IMr ...• _... �-- �,,, � _ ; �;% �1�r: � r� �u'� �"-l'f G �!GI� t '��c� � ��, ;� _i;�% • ? ;.,�.�� Vic.-.►� � ��-1�-' �.�•�:.� `:' �►Cr�-;�� :o(%� ��.:•t/ 1 X41.(K) SW '.I' D Avw:.niUE DTiTL_ 1. ID F 1 T BY 7 ! i•r ` �;>� - '� I �'' <<f- �{ - �.� ✓ 72 I :�. �r�C,,'-�"'v ' .::; _^� Kv'1` V 5 • !�C ��-� �� hJ G ,� `; '?t� , � � w - - +►-- - - - - _ a -s--� ,` . -. .... ._ - .,,,, - Ilij llllI h'i{If11111 f7jA 11 11*11 11 Jill I)l�" �1�1 1 1 'f�l�l I�flII I�111) 1�111�� Ip1 r)f II111�1 Ij111j1 i�lll�� i�llil� IJillli lJill11 T{II��I i�lllli tlilijilii�fi�i .� � I I � fir � � � � � l ) I I I .,I I I , NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ( 2 3 �`..` 5 s 7 g 12 - DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE;"IT IS DUE TU �w TFIE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL ---DRAWING. QE 6? 9? LZ 9? SZ 11P LP EZ ZZ iZ OZ 61 81 LI 91 SI bl EI ZI II 01 6 9 L 9 S b E Z 1aira�w �,,% �nrllufllllllllulnnlmll�I)Ilnulul mlulllllrillll�llluh�Illll�,Ial��tul!II�11�1u1u1I�1j�11111111111n1111111fill uUlU11111ill 111 111111 124 1( JUNE1992 ,3 r 9j O I� O J N a t m i �_ 14100 SW 72nd Ave W ` ■ rN Form 2a SUMMARY Project For building agency use only i. Project name BuSi�c�s cf.-A7rrr1-PN Building 2. Project address I-5 y-V Zia AV16 . g permit number 3. City/town - �� OR Plan checked by 4. Building area(s I/ 2 %0 5.1C. Approved by —'— ErNew construction Notes and comments: New addition Interior remodel Attached Compliance paths for new or alterations to Compliance path for new or alterations to lighting Forms exterior building envelope. Check only one: systems: Form 3a Form 5a Check boxes to ❑ Prescriptive Path Interior Lighting Power indicatedForm 3b Form 5b attached forms Component Pei-formance Path LJ Interior Switching and Luminaire Count Compliance path for new or alterations to HVAC -� Form 5c and plumbing s;rstems: Exterior Lighting Form 4a Systems Other (e) ---------_-- (b) — Docu- #of Pages _Description of Document menta / CALcucii7icnY5 Enter all supporting calculations, test reports and catalog cuts. Applicli Name of applicantF_ n�iw�� 8. Firm/company Gam. S/3i_Ta �' .�•s sac. 6. Representing SP/�� ? 5 ' 9. Telephone number Z2 _ 'FS 76 7. Signature _--_ 10. Oate 2_/2.ft 1'i NPI / Form 3b - Page 1 COMPONENT PERFORMANCE PATH Building 1. Roof/ceiling area(sf) Areas f 2 : 2. Opaoue roe area(,sf) 2 3. Divide line 2 by line 1 I �� 4. Skylight area (sf) 5. Divide line 4 by line 1 6. Wall area (sf) 7. Opaque wall area (sf) 25C�� 8. Divide line 7 by line 6 q? 9. Door area(sf) I 10. Divide line 9 byline 6 , 11. Glazing area (sf) 12.. Divide line 11 by line 6 .� -- Actual 13. Opaque wall Ri j 14. Divide line 8 by line 13 Uo - Walls Rt- Total Thermal 15. Door Ri II 16. Divide line 10 by line 15 Resistance. The I ,8 sum of the -- resistance for all of 17. Glazing U-Value 18. Multiply line 17 by Line 12 the individual components of the 19. Actual Uo -walls. Add line 14, line 16 and line 18 r assembly. Actual 20. Wall Macs. (lbs/sgft) Walls 21. TDEQ(from the Code,Table 53•D) 22. Multiply line 21 by line 14 _ �3 Required for 23. Climate Station ifrom the Coae. mechanically Tahle 53-A) WTILAN4) cooled building 24. Solar Factor(from the Code, only. Table 53-A) 3•�- ___ 26. Multiply values in three lines. 25. Glazing Shading Coefficient s�. Line 24 by line 25 by line 12 ��•BS'3 27. Summer Design Temperature- (from the Code, Table 53•A) 85 28. AT. Subtract 72 from line 27 3 29. Multiply line 28 by line 18 3 .FjO 30. Actual OTTV -walls. Add line 22, line 26 and line 29 17, Actual 31. Opaque roof.ceiling Rt �� 32. Divide line 3 by line 31 Uo - Roof/ 34. Multiply line 33 by Line 5 Gelling 33. Skylight U Value 35. Actual Uo roof/ceiling. Add line 32 and line 34 �.y�3 ru Envelope Slab an Grad Perimeter insulation in-;, Ocd%rith minimum total distance C'CN)weC j r-5 Floor_ of 24 inches per the Cc:e SF,-tion 5303(d) Enter the reference Air LeakaManufactured doors and tyinJows are ;ertified,and building 3-eoe �4� c' to plans and ge joints are sealed per thrt Clodo, Sectwn 5303(e) specifications Vapor barrier material iy r.ateii a' one errr or less, and Moisture Control p p 7A c.c,Frp W/T/y installed per the the C.rx'e-`'ection 5303(f) ane Foran 3b - Page 2 COMPONENT PERFORMANCE PATH DVM Compli- -- — (a) (b) ante — _ _ Compliance Criteria Actual Maximum Uo Enter compliance Walls - criteria values from the Code. Maximum OTTV' Table 53-A in — column(a). Roof/Ceiling Maximum Uo _ J Enter your actual Floor over Maximum Uo 868 /v/A alues m column U cheated Space (b) ---- i Unheated ',Required forI Slab on Grade Minimum mechanically R-Value I Heated I a� cooled building slab only. 36 Does design meet target? Enter"Y"it all the components meet the criteria. Otherwise redesign 'r Y Notes and Comments -- _ --- _ O1V/ffi1Tl�O TIE' � �' CGb.E r�G�S NOT r:�✓Ef %1_ ` 1dC.5uvlTi Q�•gwn�s. /1bw,Ev,G�,.� 6Ec�1u5� Tom/-�wT- '0-174 - //►�/QovE,�IbvTS ►yicc. aeewe fie! /? fuTuitE ,O-r74wAe r/eOViGlNlnGCtJtI►TrG�/ �'J/� G�TE/t /I79/f�Ort�nlfii75 ' - W6 I-,4o Tb77L` ,'S S7/1-A-4'ISO _ ?' i. wr>f� if s Eek co.�ns tic�¢ i.� Bun o..•�� ,y P/ltrtser 2 . TI-fE oKcwi� 7'E�i►>NT �/!�/xovE.�r�..�7- __-- r4P�EYt',�.se��_----- �L�� /lrriaw_� cr- S7t�R -d`'T AS Z'oU 4vitc ^ro?E -- _ gc7t�4� C/�-�Tfk,1 w"ZF-j �r TE�►�f►+T ��'zovE�4� /5 CONST�ZLlG`'/`.O CGKJfQ4r7.5 ZO T� C�/rl/4�C�_ C/"-iT��__. SL/}d /i`(Sucit'TrOti• �i/E i'f�_T_�._�`_-�'�"�E ��`ST�-ab �f'�ieOyAr--,B�1-� �! TrL Zb�__-��i_r_o�.�b f.� ►�EG�'ar� /H Acco",000icE_ wirr/ y6c 51P I CALCU L,'�TT I ON F_ ROOF MOVING AIR . 17 BUILT-UP ROOF . 33 PLYWOOD .77 ROOF FRAMING W/R-19 19.00 VAPOR BARRIER 0. 00 STILL AIR .68 ACOUSTICAL TILE 2 . 48 TOTAL R 23 . 43 WALLS #/SF %TOTAL SF -INTERIOR 8. 0 29 STILL AIR . 68 DRYWALL . 56 FRAMING 2X4 W/R-11 8.91 DRYWALL . 56 STILL AIR . 68 TOTAL R 11. 39 -CONCRETE 144 . 0 57 MnvTING AIR . 17 CONCRETE, 2 . 64 STILL AIF . 17 TOTAL R 3 . 49 -SOFFIT 8 . 0 14 MOVING AIR . 17 DRYWALL . 56 FRAMING 2X6 W/R-13 11 .96 STILL AIR . 6n TOTAL R 13 . 37 REP(RT OF GECTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TIGARD, ORE(;ON FOR SPIEKER PARTNERS I � AUGUST 76 , 1991 I � C '� UNW-DRUW-1f W-XMFIWks Q Geo Engineers Geotechnical, GeoenvironmentaJ and Auguet 28, 1991 Geologic Services Spieker Partners 5550 Southwest Macadam Portland, Oregon 97201 Attention: Mr. .John B. Souther Jr. GeoEngineers, Inc, is pl.ea,ed to submit two copies of our "Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services" for the proposed commercial development located at 14100 Southwe,t 72nd Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. Our services were verbally authorized by Ar. John B. Souther, Jr. on June 14, 1991. We appreciate _he opportunity to work with you. Please call if you have Questions regarding this report or if we can be of fu.•ther assistance. Yours very truly, Geo. ,gineers, Inc. 6 �'A t�-rte--- Jack K. Tuttle, P. Principal :KT:min File No. 1192-081-PO1 cc: Mr. Gene Mildren Mackenzie/Saito b Associates (4401011tYm Iw. ";(N SA ilridgelwirt Rjmd Ihinland, OR 9"214 1*16111t*(UH)(1.:4•g1'4 Fug (;(lil(r!11•ir>♦11 PmtM m rnnc�f pp, w R a Geolm Engineers T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Page No. INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 SURFACE CONDITIONS 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 GROUND WATER CONDITIONS 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 GENERAL 4 EROSIGN CONTROL 5 SITE PREPARATION 5 WET WE/LTHER CONSIDERATIONS 5 STRUCTURAL FILL 7 PERMANENT SLOPES 3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS 8 FLOOR SLABS 9 RETAINING STRUCTURES 9 RESISTANCE TO SLIDING 10 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1.1 SITE DRAINAGE 11 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUC'T'ION 12 .IMITATIONS 12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. VICINITY MAF 1 PROPOSED DE11FLOPMENT AND TEST PIT LOC ''IONS 2 SUBSURFACE DRILLING LOCATIONS 3 APPENDIX A Page No. FIELD EXPLORATIONS A-1 TEST PIT EXCAVATIONS A-1 SUBSURFACE. DRILLING A-2 hMMd w mmlM mw Geolm Engineers T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S (Continued) LIST OF APPENDIX A FIGURES Page No. SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM A-1 LOG OF TEST PIT A-2. through A-10 LOG OF SHALLOW f�ORING A-11 LOG OF MONITOR WELL A-12 through A-14 APPENDIX B Page No. LABORATORY TESTING B-1 LIST OF APPENDIX B TABLES fable No. MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION B- 1 IN-SITU MOISTURE AND DENSITY DATA B-2 AMaE nn r"lod r*W GAM Engineers REPORT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PROPOSED co)W.RC:AL DEVELOPMENT TIGARD, OREGON FOR SPIEKER PARTNERS INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation of as approximate 6 5-acre parcel in Tigard, Oregon. The site is located at 14100 Southwest 72nd Avenue. The general site location is shown in Figure 1. Additional services completed by GeoEngineers for this project include Phase I and II ESAs (environmental site assessments) of the property. Information obtained from explorations drilled for the Phase II ESA was used to supplement our understanding of the subsurface conditions for this geotechnical study. We understand that the developil;,_nt will consist primarily of two concrete tilt-up commercial buildings (Figure 2) . Interior and exterior column loads will be about 50 and 60 kips, respectively. The average ounds per distributed floor load is expected to be less than 250 psf (p square foot) . We understand that up to 5-foot deep cuts and 5-foot thick fills will be required in the northern and southern portions of the property, respectively. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purposes of our services are to explore the subsu face conditions at the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for site development and foundation design. The specific scope of our geotechnical services iacludes : Explore shallow subsurface conditions at 15 locations using a tractor-mounted backhoe. I F4~M""ledMM Geolp Engineers 2. Visually classify t' : soils encountered at the site and perform laboratory moisture content and density determinations on selected samples. 3. Provide recommendations for site preparation, grading and dr. inage, stripping depths, fill type for any imported materials, compaction criteria, cut and fill slope criteria. slope stability, procedures for use of on-site soils, and wet/dry weather earthwork procedures. 4. Provide recommendations for d_sign and construction of shallow spread foundations including allowable design beari.ag pressure and minimum footing depth and width. 5 . Estimate settlement performance of footings and floor slabs for the design loadings. 6. Recommend design criteria for retaining walls including Lateral earth pressure, backfill, compaction and drainage. 7 . Provide recommendations for management of any ground water conditions identified which may affect_ construction or subsequent performance of structur•�s nr pavement. B. Evaluate design pavement sections including subbase, base course and paving for parking areas and access roads. 9. Prepare specifications for earthwork, trenching, backfilling, compaction and asphalt concrete paving based on the standard. three-part CSI format provided by Mackenzie/Salto & Associates. The specifications are presented in a separate document. SITE DESCRIPTION SitpFACE CONDITIONS The site is located at 14100 Southwest 72nd Avenue and lies between the existing Williams Controls , Inc. facility and Southwest 72nd Avenue. The majority of site is undeveloped. A paved drive, a parking area and storage shed are located on-site at the approximate locations shown in Figure 2. A grove of small trees and shrubs is located on the north central portion of the site. The remainder of the site i.s covered with ankle- to knee-high 2 f� R t � t !► � IR Geo*Engineers grass and weeds. The northern portion of the site slopes downward toward. the south; the southern portion of the site is relatively level. The elevation of the site ranges between approximately 153 and 172 feet. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by excavating 15 test pits at the locations shown in Figure 2. The test pits were excavated to depths ranging between 8.0 and 14.0 feet below the ground surface using A rubber-tired backhoe. In addition, we evaluated subsurface information obtained from six borings completed during our Phase II ESA. Three of the six borings were completed as monitor wells. The locations of the borings and monitor wells are shown in Figure 3. The subsurface exploration program is described in Appendix A. The test pits were continuously monitored by an engineer from GeoEngineers who maintained a det-ilud log of the soils encountered, obtained representative soil saml•les and observed ground water conditions. Test pits logs are presented in Figures A-3 through A-10. Boring logs (Figure A-11) and mon-.tor well logs (Figures A-12 through A-14) are included for informational purposes. The results of the geotechnical laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. The subsurface condi.tions are relatively uniform across the entire site with only mi .ior variations ooserved in the explorations. With the exception of the paved and storage building area, the majority of the site is mantled by a 4- to 6- 1.nch sod layer. Underlying the sod, our explorations encounr.eced '3. 5 to 2. 5 feet of brown silt fill underlain by dark gray and brown silt which extended to a depth ranging between 1. 5 and. 'j .3 feet-. The layer is underlain by brown silt with varying sand content. Blue -gray silt was encountered between approximately 10 and 12. 5 feet below the ground surface in TP-4, TP-5, TP-7 , TP-14, TP-1.5, MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3. The brown silt fill layer encountered immediately beneath the sod Laver appeared well. compacted at the test pit locations . We encountered approximately S.0 feet 3 hMf�d tM��iM ppr � aQ � �■r sa t iwr � GeAEngi leers of random fill beneath the sod layer in TP-13. This fill is probably associated with the excavation made to remove USTs (underground storage tanks) in that area. Soil samples obtained from the test pits and shallow borings were examined in our laboratory to confirm our field classifications. Selected Isamples were tested to determine the moisture content and density of the Ii samples. The ASTM standards used for the laboratory testing procedures are described in Appendix B. Moisture contents typically ranged between 20 and 37 percent. TI-e dry density of the surficial so!1 layer ranged between 88 and 94 pcf (pounds pec cubic foot) . The moisture contents and dry densities are summarized in Tables B-1 and B-2. GROUND WATER CONDITIONS Ground water seepage was observed in nearly all of the test pits between the depths of 8.0 and 12.0 feet below the ground surface. Seepage was observed to originate from the thin sand laver encountered in the test pits. Ground water seepage was not observed in test pits TP-6, TP-8 and TP- 13. Test pit TP-1 was left open for approximately two hours; the ground water elevation was measured at approximately 12.0 feet below the ground surface. Ground water measurements were obtained from the three monitor wells in June 1991 as part of the Phase 11 ESA. The static ground water table in the three wells was between 4.7 and 5.9 feet below the ground surface. The ground water levels in the monitor wells were allowed to stabilize prior to measurement and most likely represent: the true ground water elevation at the time the measurements were made. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL We conclude that --he planned building can be supported satisfactorily using shallow spread footings. The site soils are moisture-sensitive which means it will be difficult, if not impossible, to properly compact these soils when wet. We recommend completing the earthwork d,iring the drier summer months when the site will be more trafficable and the on-si:.e soils can be reworked for use in engineered fills. 4 t pmtoO-lKwied MOs' ' GeV Engineers EROSION CONTROL The native silt at this site is easily eroded by wind and water. Therefore, erosion control measures should be carefully planned and in place prior to the start of construction. Erosion control plans are required on construction projects located within the Tualatin. River and Lake Oswego (.rainage basins in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rules 340-41-006 and 340-41-455. Washington County and the United Sewerage Agency have developed technical guidelines for implementation of rules. In general, erosion control measures must limit sediment transport to less than 1 tor. per acr )er year, as calculated by the Universal Soil Loss Equation. ,-ITE PREPARATION The vegetation and sod layer should be removed from all of the proposed building and paved areas. The stripped material should be wasted off-site or used for landscaping purposes. Based on the test pit explorations, the required stripping depths will range between 4 to 6 inches; however, greater stripping depths may be required to remove localized zones of soft or organic soils and root balls from trees and shrubs. In addition, most of the test pins encountered up to 2.0 feet of fill consisting of silty soil. Although the "It appeared well compacted at the test pit locations, there may be zones or areas not Identified by the test pits where soft or loose conditions occur. After clearing, grubbing, stripping and asphalt removal and ny required excavation have been completed, the subgrade should be proofrolled with a loaded clump truck or similar heavy-wheeled construction equipment to identify any soft or loose zones. If soft or loose %ones :are identified, they should be excavated and replaced w a compacted materials as recommended for structural till . We also recommend that the existing asphalt paveme•.it be removed. WET WEATHER CONSIDERATIONS Trafficability of the site can be expected to be difficult during periods of rainfall or when the surficial soils are a few percentage points above optimum moisture conte;:t. When wet, the native silt is susceptible to disturbance and generally provides inadequate support for construction 5 Mnun on r"led oeDM Geo Engineers equipment. During wet weather or if wet ground conditions exist, proo£roll- in.g of the native silt subgrade should not be performed. The subgrade should be evaluated by probing. Soils that have been disturbed during site preparation act_iviti.s or any or loose zones identified during probing should be removed and replaced with structural fill. During periods of wet weather, a layer of imported granular material will be necessary for construction staging areas, haul roads, and a working . surface in tho building area. Twelve inches of imported granular material should generally be sufficient for light staging areas and the basic building pad, but is generally net expected to be adequate to support heavy equipment ar truck traffic. Haul roads and areas with repeated heavy construction traffic should be constructed with a minimum of 18 inches of impor,ed granular material. During wet weather, poor trafficability conditions may necessitate that stripping and filling operations be done progressively across the site. Stripping could be done using a track-mounted excavator equipped with smooth bucket. The excavator should work from the area to be stripped and systematically advance across the site loading stripped material on dump trucks operating on the layer of granular material. Imported granular materiel should consist of crushed rock, crushed gravel or pit ruin sand and gravel that is well. graded between coarse and fine sizes, is free or deleterious materials, contains no rock particles larger than 3 inches, and has less than 8 percent_ by weight passing the U.S. Standard No, 200 Sieve. If construction occurs during wet weather, a 4-inch layer of granular material should be placed and compacted over exposed bearing surfaces which consist of native undisturbed silt or structural fills comprised of silty soil to protect them from disturbance. The granular material should cnnsi.st of crushed rock with a maximum particle size of 3/4 inch and less than 8 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. 6 A11rIMl m rMKIMI MIMr Geole Engineers STRUCTURAL FILL The native silt is geterally sensitive to small changes in moisture content. Consequently, adeq.tate compaction becomes difficult to achieve during wet weather. These soils cannot be properly compacted when the moisture content is more than a few percentage points above the optimum moisture content. The natural moisture content of the native silt is expected to be greater than the optimum moisture content for satisfactory compaction throughout most of the ,year. Therefore, we recommend that the native silt not be used for engineered fill except during the mid-summer to early-fall seasons. In order to use the native silt in structural fill, it should be expected that the native soils will require some aeration to reduce soil moisture to achieve adequate compaction. Imported granular material should be used as structural fill during Wet weather or if the on-site materials are too wet. The imported granular material should consist of pit or quarry run rock, crushed rock, crushed gravel and sand or sand that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine. The fill should contain no clay balls, roots, organic matter or other deleterious materials and have a maximum particle size of 4 inches with less than 8 percent fine material passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. Fill placed beneath and for a distance of at least S feet beyond building, parking lot, and access road limits should be placed in ltfts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 10 to 12 inches and compacted to not less Char, 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM ^1557. In ocher areas, the fill should be compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density. If the subgrade soils are wet, the initial lift of granular fill should be 12 to 15 inches in uncompacted thickness and be compacted with a smooth drum non vibratory roller to avoid disturbing the native soils. During the dry season, the native materials may be used for structural fill if they are properly moisture conditioned. The native materials should be free of clay balls, roots, organic matter, and other deleterious materials and should not contain rock particles larger than 4 inches in 7 Rimwl nn recveieE owN M OF Geols Engineers diameter. Within the building and paved areas, the native soils should be placed in 8-inch loose lifts and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. The backfill in the test pits has been compacted with the bucket of the backhoe. When the test pit locations lie within buildin_ , parking lot, or access road areas, the backfill in the pits should be excavated and replaced with structural. fill. The fill associated with removal of the USTs (TP-13) should also be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. PERMANEET SLOPES Permanent cut and fill slopes should not exceed ?kli) :l(V) . .a 5. footings should be located at least 5 feet from the wp edge of fill slopes. The slopes should be plait-ed with appropriate vegetation to prcv- de protection against erosion. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS We recommend that the structures be supported on continuous wall or isolated column footings founded on the undisturbed medium stiff to very istiff native silt or on structural fill underlain by the undisturbed native soils . Continuous wall footings should be proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf and .should be at least 1.8 inches wide. The bottom of the footings should be at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Individual column footings should also be proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf . The least dimension of column footings should be 24 inches. The bottom of exterior footings should be at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Tine bottom of interior footings should be as least 12 inches below i.he top of the floor slab. 'The recommended allowable bearing pres.,,ure applies to the Loral of dead plus long-term live loads. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for short-germ loads such as those due wind or seismic events. 8 AN edMMMWdMW Geole Engineers Total settlement of footings founded as recommended is anticipated to be less than 1 inch. Differential settlement between adjacent comparably loaded column footings can be expected to be less than 1/2 inch. FLOOR SLABS Satisfactory subgrade support for building floor sla'.)s supporting up to 250 psf areal loading can be obtained on the native soil that has been proofrolled or on structural. fill placed and compacted as recommended. A 4-inch layer of crushed rock or crushed gravel should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade to form a capillary break. Settlement of floor slabs supporting the anticipated design loads and constructed as recommended is not expected to exceed 1/2 inch. F�.TAINING STRUCTURES Below gradE walls should be designed for active earth pressures of 35 psf;f (pounds per square foot per foot) of -.gall height applied triangularly. This value is applicable providing that; 1) the walls will not be restrained against rotation when the backfill is placed, 2) the backfill is level, 3) Ithe backfill consists of clean granular material , and 4) the backfill is drained. if below grade walls will be restrained against rotation during Ibackfilling, the walls should be designed for an at-resr earth pressure of 60 nsf/f. This value should be increases to 70 psf/f if she backfill has a 2(H) : l(V) slope behind the wall. An allowance of 1 foot of increased wall. height should be made for each 100 psf of floor load which may be imposed behin� the wall. The above criteria are based on achieving drained conditions and that the walls will. be backfilled with clean, granular material; i.e. , medium sand, sand and gravel , or well-graded gravel with not more than 2 percent passing the No. 200 sieve (washed analysis) . A drain pipe may be required to remove water from this granular backfill if the wall bears on the less permeable native silt. The perforated pipe installed at the base of the wall should be sloped to drain and should lead toward a suitable discharge. Backfill should be placed and compacted ac recommended for structural fill. , with the exception of backfill placed immediately adjacent to the 9 I NMno M "led DOW I L I I I I It / m1!< Geolp Engineers walls. Backfill adjacent to the walls should be compacted to a lesser standard to reduce the potential for generation of excess pressure on the walls. We recommend that fill placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall be compacted to approximately 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. If slabs or pavement will be placed adjacent to the wal., we recommend that the upper 2 feet of fill be compacted to 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 . The contractor should avoid overcompaction of the backfill so that damage to the walls does not occur. Retaining wall footings which bear on the medium stiff to very stiff silt may be designed for an allowable soil-bearing value of up to 2,500 psf. This assumes that the resultant of the foundation loads is located within the middle third of the footing. The subsurface wall footings should be embedded a minimum of 2 feet beneath the l(west adjacent finished grade. RESISTANCE TO SLIDING Lateral loads on retaining walls and footings can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of foctings and by friction on the base of the footings The available passive earth pressure for footings confined by structural fill or for footings constructed in direct contact with the undisturbed native soil is 350 psf/f. Typically, the movement required to develop the available passive resistance may be relatively large. Therefore, a reduced value of passive pressure may be appropriate for design purposes. For dock height walls and oth9r walls less than 10 feet high, we recommend using a value of 250 psf/f. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12 inches of adjacent unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. A coefficient of friction equal to 0. 35 should be used when calculating resistance to sliding. The recommended lateral earth pressure and coefficient of friction values incluse a factor of safety against failure of the soil of about I.S . 10 ►nmme�,� „oeoer Ew W e t N t GeoWp Engineers PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The pavement suhgrade should be prepared in accordance with the previously described site preparation, wet wea;har construction, and structural fill recommendations. We do not have specific information on the frequency or loading of vehicles which will use the paved area. However, a pavement section consisting of at least 3.5 inches of AC (asphalt concrete) over a minimum of 8 inches of crushed rock should be appropriate for access roads and in maneuvering and parking areas exposed to occasional large trucks . The crushed rock should conform to Section 703.07 of the State of Oregon Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. If some roadways or parking areas are limited to passenger au�omobilea only, the pavement section may be reduced to 2 inches minimum of AC over 6 inches minimum of crushed rock. These recommended paverr,%nt sections ate based on the assumption that the subgrade soil gill remain in an undisturbed condition during construction 9[ the pavement section. These pavement sections will be difficult, if riot impossible, to construct during rainy weather. The native silt will not adequately support r1 a equipment used to install, grade and compact the crushed rock, and place tie asphalt pavement. During the rainy season, we recommend that a subbase consisting of at least 12 inches of imported granular fill be placed prior to placement of the pavement section. SITE DRAINAGE Pavement surfaces should be sloped to direct surface water run-off away from the buildings. All roof drains should be connected to a tightline leading to storm drain facilities . Ground water was measured approximately 4.7 to 5.9 feet below the ground surtace in monitor wells located near the north property boundary. Because there will be cuts up to 5 feet deep near the north property boundary, we recommend installing a subsurface drainage system to intercept and remove ground water. We recommend that a french drain be located ~sear the north property boundary and designed to lower the ground water below the 11 hlnnE m e�vcied O�Dn M! r RA Geo4W Engineers level of the building floor slab base rock. GeoEngineers can assist in the design of the subsurface drainage system during the construction phase of the project. OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION Satisfactory foundation and earthwork performance depend, to a large degree, on quality of construction. Sufficient monitoring of the contrac- tor's activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specificatinns. We recommend that GeoEngineers, Inc. be retained to observe excavation, proofrolling, and general fill placement. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface exploration. Recognition of changed conditions often requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect_ if subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by Spieker Partners and other members of their design and construction team for the proposed commercial development. The data and report should be utilized for bidding or estimating purposes but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as warranty of the subsurface conditions . Test pit observations, the shallow and monitor well borings indicate soil conditions only at those specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. They do not necessarily reflect soil, strata, or water level variations that may exist between explorations. Tf subsurface conditions differing from those described are noted during the course of excavation and construction, reevaluation will be necessary. If there are changes in the loads, grades, location, configuration or type of construction for the buildings and pavement ar(.as, the conclusions and recommendations presented may not be applicable. If design changes are made, we request that we be given the opportunity to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written modification or verification. 12 mm�e m Inure won Geo ImEngineers Within the limitations of scope, schadule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. - 0 0 0 We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have: questions concerning this report or if we can provide Additional services, please call. Yours very truly, GeoEngin n . CA G Marcella M. Boyer Staff Engineer w #13701'° ORitGON V LA\O- Scott V. Mills, P.E. Senior Engineer Jack K. Tuttle, P.E Principal MMS:SVM:JKT:min i i 13 P11 Wwwmwram, ' .1• -. •� ♦ i � �: {/M�� I �I - •`-"�! spm =�0/�� •/•� �� _ �� _.,� ti�vJ i L ��JJ �w I� • •.ter'"i' !,•° '�/ 1 � � ./•i r.• V J + �y may; /' " —1�� • 1 �\ ' �'• 1.� %` - r w� - - � ,,°zn �' •� I+\. , `v -.�• � �'�,. � _/•��. • � Wu r ' ••• •��; �... e' o • '\�y zI - 39 I ta'�\(I,(('• s.� _ �, '•`� -, � o •so 11'0 N - .r•D'11 - r.. y 00 'r`'_:_ a + non I' 7 9 File 494 ..44 _. __, lllt ii��rh t�► r93 "'': 1::k=�'� °�"'' ryant• Coo k um 0 1000 4011ii SCALE IN FEET N I i`FFFRFNCE : USGS 1 . 5 ' TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS, "LAKE OSWEGO & BEAVERTON, OR" A 10 VIC NITY MAP ;co ti�Engineers --- FIGURE 1 Ow SANDVIK POWER RENTS CORPORATION TP-1 TP-5* z TP-4 d Q a. STP-3 7 / J 41TP-2 PARKING w z ' TP-7 -- uj I PARKING / Z � N � TP-8 � 0�` �--E X I S t 1 N G T P-12 .z EXISTING ph% /' TP-10\` PAVEMENT -- Ln �- `7 I,�,T P-13 x TP-8 EXISTING —� --i 4.T P-14 STORAGE a BUILDING i TP-15 TP-9�—+FF ^j TP--1 1 /~ I PARKING C_ �/ I EXISTING PAVED DRIVE--- _ NELSON BUSINESS CENTER 0 80 160 SCALE 17FEET w•, t s N WILLIAMS CONTROLS, INC . EXPLANATION : TP-1F TEST PIT NUMBER AND LOCATION ----- EXISTING FEATURES FISKARS GERBER ' LEGENDARY BLADES REFERENCE : DRAWING ENTITLED "SITE GRADING, TED NELSON BUSINESS CENTER, PHASE 3 , TIGARD, OREGON, BY MACKENZIE/SAITO & ASSOCIATES, P . C .- PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT - � I AND TEST PIT LOCATIONS �IE',U��Il ;l�ll.'f_'��S FIGURE 2 ( SANDVIK POWER RENTS CORPORATION I +MW-2 + MW-1 I C 1 L SB-2 PARKING 1- / , MW-3 +SB-1 -- ij PARKING Z - - 09.\ �----E X I S T I N G PAVEMENT EO / EXIS NG � z - EXISTING --+� c STORAGE 1_ a BUILDING I I I �{ SB-3 PARKING I CL�----EXISTING PAVED DRIVE ----7 I ! NELSON BUSINESS CENTER U 90 160 "CAIF IN FEFT N WILL. IAMQ CONTROLS , INC: . EXPLANATION : MIN-1 MONITOR WELL NUMBER AND LOCATION sS•1 5,1ALLOW BORING NUMBER AND LOCATI ——— EXISTING FEATURES i, ♦ !;-NCHMARK ON ASPHALT CURB SURROUNDING A TREE . ASSUMFP ELEVATION 100 . 00 FEET . FISKARS GERBER LEGENDARY BLADES REFERENCE : DRAWING ENTITLED "'; ITE GRADING , TED NELSON BUSINESS CENTER , PHASE 3 , TIGARD, OREGON, " BY MACKENZIE/SAITO b ASSOCIATES , P . C . SUBSURFACE DRILLING LOCATIONS I � I I APPENDIX A I I I i j i i Geo* Engineers A P P E N D I X A FIELD EXPLORATIONS The subsurface condi.cions at the proposed c.ommer,:i.al development site in Tigard, Oregon, were: explored by excavating fifteen test pits. Shallow borings were drilled and sampled and monitor well - were constructed at the site during our Pha:.ce II environmental site assessment. Information obtained from the borings was evaluated when developing our conclusions and rEcommendations for the geotechnical. study. The approximate Locations of the rest pits , shallow borings and monitor wells are shown in Figures 2 and 3. A representative from GeoEngineers determined the locations of the subsurface explorations and monitored all field activities. Our representative obtainid soil samples for geotechnical testing, examined and classified the soils encountered and prepared a detailed log of each exploration. The materials encountered during our subsurface explorations were classified in the field in general accordance with ASTM D2488, the Standard Practice for rhe Classification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) which is described in Figure A-l. Soil classifications and sampling intervals are shown i.n the rest pit logs (Figures A-3 and A-10, . The shallow boring logs (Figure A-li) and monitor well boring logs (Figures A-12 through A- 14) are included for informational purposes only. TEST PIT EXCAVATIONS The test pits were excavated on June 6 and 7, 1991, by W.G. Moe & Sons of Portland, Oregon, using a Case 580 rubber-tired backhoe. The depths of the test pits ranged between 8 .0 and 14.0 feet below the ground surface. Soil samples were obtained from the test pits by collecting grab samples from the br.ckhoe bucket. The gest pits were backfilled with the excavated material . SUBSURFACE DRILLING The borings were completed by Crisman Drilling of Tigard, Oregon, on J,i►le 19 , 1991 using MR22 Prospector hollow-stun auger drilling equipment. A 1 h,nlMl M rM,r I,IQ"W Geo*Engineers Three shallow borings were completed to approximately 3.5 feet below the grot;nd surface and three monitor well borings were completed to an approximate depth of 16.5 feet each. Representative soil samples were obtained from the shallow borings. Thin-wall. samplers were ised to obtain relatively undisturbed soil samples by placing the sample containers inside the barrel of a California Sampler with an inside diameter equal to 2.5 inches. The sampler was pushed using the hydraulic power of the drill rig. These borings were backfilled with the drill cuttings. rfirue M,WWIM OMW SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUP NAME SYMBOL GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVCI_ GW WELT-GRADED GRAVEL,FINE TO COARSE COARSE GRAVEL GRAINED GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL SOILS MORE THAN 50% GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE GC CLAYEY GRAVEL MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON BAND CLEAN BAND SW WELL-GRADED SAND, FINE TO NO. 200 SIEVE COARSE SAND SP POORLY-GRADED SAND monE THIN 50% SAND SM SILTY SAND OF COARSE FRACTION WITH FINES PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE SC CLAYEY SANn SILT AND CLAY ML SILT FINE INORGANIC GRAINED CL CLAY SOILS LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICII /, ;!LASTtC SILT MORE THAN 50% INORGANIC PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY 9t LIQUID LIMIT 50 OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: 1. Field classification is based on Dry - Ahsence of moisture, dusty, dry visual examination of soil in general to the touch accordance with ASTM D2488-84. Moist - Damp, but no visible water 7.. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487-85. Wet - Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from 3 Descriptions of Moil density or below water table consistency are basad on Interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. m �� IS. SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 14 FIGURE A-1 LABORATORY TESTS: SOIL GRAPH: CA Chemical Analysis SM Soil Group Symbol FIELD SCREENING TESTS: (See Note 2) Headspace vapor concentration data Distinct Contact Between given in parts per million Soil Strata Sheen cl�.ssification system: Gradual or Approximate NS No Visible Sheen Location of Change SS Slight Sheen Between Soil Strata MS Moderate Sheen Water Level HS Heavy Sheen Bottom of Boring NT Not Tested BLOW-COUNT/SAMPLE DATA: 22 ■ Location of relatively Blows required to drive a 2.4-inch I.D. undistLrbed sample split-barrel sampler 12 inches or other indicated distances using a --y- 12 0 Location of disturbed sample 300--pound hammer falling 30 inches. 17 ❑ wcation of sampling attempt with no recovery to ❑ Location of sample cbtained Blows required to drive a 1.5-inch I.D. in general accordance with (SPT) split-barrel sampler 12 inches Standard Penetration Test or other indicated distances using ASTM D-1586) procedures 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. ~28 iU Lc cation of SPT sampling ,rttempt with no recovery Lc,:ation of grab sample "P" indicates sarnpler pushed with weight of hammer or against weight of grill rig. NOTES: 1. The reader must refer to the discussion in 'he report text, th,! Key to Boring Lca Symbols and the exploration logs for a proper understanding of subs,uiace conditions. 2. Soil classification system is summarized in FigLfe A-1. c� iKE Engineers BORING LOG 3YN6OL3 LGeoV*1RkPengineers ----- FIGURE A-2 LOG OF TEST PIT DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP-1 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 172.5 FEET 0 0 0 5 ML SOD LAYER 0.5 - 2 ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) S - 5 5 ML DARK GRAY AND BROWN SILT WITH TRACE CLAY ANri SAND (VERY STIFF, `!^IST) l ML GROWN SILT WITH SAND TO SANDY SILT (STIFF, MOIST) BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN 11.5 TO 12.5 FEET TEST PIT COMPL.-TED AT 13.0 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 1.0, 2.0, 1.5, 7 5, 9.5, 11.0 AND 11.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 12.0 FEET TEST PIT T11-2 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION 161 0 FE"' ML SOD LAYER ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VFRY STIFF, MOISIN (FILL., ML DARK GRAY AND BROWN SILT WITH I U,LH CLAY AND SAND 'EERY STIFF. MOIST) ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND (VEPY STIFF, MOIST) BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN 10.5 TO 11 0 FEET TEST PTT COMPLETED AT 12 0 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 2.0, 4.0 AND 12.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 12.0 FEET 4' f I THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS. ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO P.t FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERACC OF MEASURFmFNTS ACR:ISS THE TEST PIT AND MOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCJtRATE TO 0.5 FOOT dGeu LOG OF TEST PIT �Engineers FIGURE A-3 LOG OF TEST PIT DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST_?IrTP-3 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 163.5 FEET 0 - 0 S ML SOD LAYER t 0 ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST, (FILL) 0 1 S ML DARK BROWN AND GRAY SILT WITH TRACE CLAY AND SAND (VERY STIF°. MOIST) 1.' ;) ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND TO SANDY SILT (STIFF TO VERY STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLE'(ED AT 12 0 F°ET ON 06106191 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 4 0 AND 12 0 FEET GROUND WATER S-EPAGE OBSE.AVED AT ' I FEET TEST PIT TP-4 APPROXIMATE. ELEVATION 164 0 FEET 0.0 - 0 7 ML SOD LAYER U 7 - ; 0 ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAJD ,VERY STIFF. MOIST) 1.0 5.0 ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE. SAND )VERY STIFF, MOIST) 5.0 - 10 0 ML BROWN SANDY SILT TO SILT WITH SAND (STIFF', MOIST) BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN A 0 TO 9.0 FEET 10.0 - 14.0 ML BIAIE-CRAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (MEDIUM STIFF. MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 14 0 FEET ON 06106191 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 1 0, 4 U. 6.0, 10.5 AND 14 0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 9 0 AND 12,0 FEET .'HE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS nCROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSInERED ACCURATE TO 0,5 FOOT. LOG OF TFST PIT Geolgas Engineers FIGURE A-4 DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP LOG OF TEST PIT GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP-5 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 168.0 FEET u a 0 ) ML SOD LAYER 0 7 ) ML 3ROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, HOIST) (FILL) 1 0 - 5 5 ML BROWN AND GRAY SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND (STIP. MOIST) 5 1 ML BROWN SILT WITH SAND (STIFF, MOIST) BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN R.0 TO 9 0 FEET ML BLUE C AY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 16 0 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 3.0 AND 13.5 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT R 0 AND 13.0 FEET TEST PIT TP- APPROXIMATE ELEVATION 158 5 FEET ML SOD LAYER 41 )ROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND 'STIFF MOIST) (FILL) ML ')ARI( GRAY AND BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY �StIFF, MOIST) ML GROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND (STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 13 5 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 1 0 AND 13.5 FEET NO GROUND WATER SEEPAGE. OBSERVED 1'NE DEPTHS ON 'fNE iF.SS PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHCMN t0 u 1 FOUt, ARE BASED ON AN AVF.RAGF. OF HEASURi:HF.NT ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD RE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO n 5 FOOT LG OF 'TEST PIT (le��WEnginecrs FIGURE A-5 DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP LOG OF TEST PIT GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT T7-7 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 138.0 FEET 0.0 - 0.5 ML SOD LAYER 0.5 - I 0 ML DARK BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY (STIFF, MOIST) 1 0 - !D 0 ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST) BLACK AND RED SAND LAYER FROM 8.0 TO 8.5 FEET 10 0 - 12 a ML RLUE-GRAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 12.0 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 2.0, 7 0 AND 12.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPA.;E OBSERVED AT 11 5 FEET TEST PIT TrB APPROXIMATE. ELEVATION: 156.0 FEET Mi. SOD L%YER ML BROWN SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (DENSE., MOIJT) (FILL) ML DARK BROWN AND GRAY .TILT WITH TRACE SAJD AND CLAY (STIFF TO VERY STIFF, MOIST) 4L BROWN SIL' WITH SAND 'STIFF, MOIST) ML BROWN SANDY SILT (STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 13.0 FEET ON 06106191 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 1.0 AND 11.0 FEET NO GROUND WATER SF—PAGE OBSERVED THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN :O 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASURFIIENTS ACROSS "H F. TEST FIT AND SHOU10 RE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0.3 FOOT. L00 OF TEST PIT GeuItolanginerrs FlouIlE a-e 1 LOG OF TEST PIT DE?TH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICAT'.ON (FEES SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TES7 PIT TP-9 APPROXIMA'0: ELEVATION: 155.5 FEET 0 0 a.5 ML SOD LAYER ML DARK BROWN SILT (STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) 0 - 2 5 ML BROWN SANDY SILT (VERY. STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) ? 5 - 5 1 ML DART( BROWN SILT 1-ITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY (STIFF, MOIST) a - 14 0 RL BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND TO SANLY SILT (STIFF, MOIST, TEST PIT ;;OMPLETF.D AT 16.0 FEET ON 06/06/91 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 2.0, 4 5, 10.0 AND 16.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 13,0 FEET TEST ?IT TP-10 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION 157 5 FEET 0 5 ML SOD LAYER 1.0 ML DARK ::RAY AND BROWN SILT WITH TRACE CLAY AND SAND (VERY STIFF. MOIST, 0 11.0 M1. BROWN SILT WiTN TRACE TO SOME SAND TO SANDY SILT (VERY STIFF MOIST) ?LACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN 9.5 TO 10 C FEET TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 06106191 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 3.5 AND 11 0 FEET HULK SAMPLE .)RTAINF.) AT 2.5 TO 1.5 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 10 0 FEET L HS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0 1 POOT. ARE RASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS HF TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0 5 FOOT LOG OF TEST PIT (jeo iRp Engineers FIGURE A-T LOG OF TEST PIT DCPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP-11 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 155.0 FEET 0.0 - 0.3 HL SOD LAYER 0.3 - 1.0 MI. BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND ..ND CLAY (VERY STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) 1 0 - 2.0 MI. BROWN ANT :RAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST) 2.0 - 12.5 ML BROW" —:7, WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND TO SANDY SILT (STIFF TO VERs TIFF, MOIST). BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN 1, 0 TO 12.0 FEET TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 12.5 FEET ON 06/06/Rl DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 3.0 AND 12 0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ORSFRVFD AT 11 n, FEET TEgPI_TP-12 APPROXIMATF. ELEVATION 156 5 FEET S ML SOD LAYER. ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VERY STIFF. MOIST) (FILL) HL OARS GRAY AND BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY tVERY STIFF. MOIST) ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOH. SAND TO SANDY SILT (STIFF TO VERY STIFF. MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 13.0 FEET ON :6101IRI DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT 2 0, 4 0, 11 0 AND 13 0 FEET SOIL SAMPLE OBTAINED AT 11.0 FEET WAS SUBMITTED FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 11.0 FEET IEE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH ;MOWN TO n 1 P(X)T. ARE RASED OW AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS NCRO55 THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE �.CNSIDLRED ALCURAIE TO 11 S FOOT, Q Engy -iN �- LOG OF TEST PIT 11C lricers FIGURE A-E! 15 LOG OF TEST PIT DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP UROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEED SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT T, _J APPROXIMATE ELEVATION 155.8 FEET 0 0 - 0,5 ML 0 5 8.0 ML/CPBROWN SILT WITH SAND, GRAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY, SANDY GRAVEL, CONCRETE AND ASPHALT rHUNXS (MEDILTM STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 8 0 FEET ON 06107/91 SOIL SAMPLE OBTAINED AT 4 0 FEET WAS SUBMITTED FOR rHEMICAL ANALYSIS NO GROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSFRVED TEST PIT TP-14 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION 155 8 FEET ML SOD LAYER ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, MOIST) ;FILL) ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND TO S:J+nY SILT ;STIFF, MOIST) MI- BLUE-GRAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, 4OI ST) TEST P-.T COMPLETED AT 14 0 FEE', ON 06/01191 SOIL SAMPLE OBTAINED At 12.0 FEST GROUND WATER SEEPAGE: OBSFRVED AT 11,0 FEET THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVF.RAGF. OF MEASUREMENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0 5 FOOT �y LOG OF TEST PIT Lngi neers FIGURE A-Q ITW LOG OF TEST PIT DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP-15 APPROXIMATE F.LEJATION: 155.8 FEET n u u S ML SOD LAYER u 5 1 5 ML BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND (VERY STIFF, MOIST) (FILL) c 5 ML DARK CRAY AND BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY (STIFF, MOIST) 5 12 S BROWN SILT WITH TRACE TO SOME SAND TO SANDY SILT (STIFF, MOIST), BLACK AND RED-BROWN SAND LAYER BETWEEN 10.5 TO 11 5 FEET .. - 1" "!I. BLUE-GRAY SILT WITH TRACE SAND (STIFF, MOIST) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 14,0 FEET ON 06107/01 SOIL SAMPLE OBTAINED AT 14.0 FEET WAS SUBMITTED FOR CHEMICAL. ANALYSIS ,ROUND WATER SEEPAGE OBSERVED AT 11 0 FEET THF, DEPTHS ON TNF: TEST PIT Loi;;, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO U.1 FOOT. ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE. OF MFASURF?1ENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD RF CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0 5 FOOT. I�j LOG OF TEST PIT (,C10\p higi nc(2 rs FIGURE. A-10 DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP LOG OF SHALLOW BORING GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATIOM (FEET) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SHALLOW BORING SB-1 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 160.5 FEET 0 0 - 0.5 ML SOD LAYER 0.5 3 5 ML BROWN SILT WITH 'i RACE SAND AND CLAY BORING COMPLETED AT 3.5 FEET ON 06/19191 UNDISTURBED SAMPLE. OBTAINED BETWEEN 2.5 AND 3,0 FEET SHALLOW BORING SB-2 APPROXIMATE. ELEVATION: 165.6 FEET 4L SOD LAYER 5 - 41. BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SANK BORING (:OMPI.F.TED AT 3 5 FEET C.4 06/19191 11NOISTURBED SAMPLE OBTAINED BEPWEEN 1 5 AND 3 0 FFE',- I SHALLOW BORING SB-.3 APPROXIMAIF. ELEVATION. 155.5 FEET SOD LAYER MI- BROWN SILT WITH TRACE SAND AND CLAY BORING COMPLETED AT 3.5 FEET ON 06/19/91 UNDISTURBED SAMPLE OB AINED BEIWLEN 2 5 AND 3 0 FF,FT -� gee. LOG OF SHALLOW BORING ROW I ngineer,s FIGURE A-11 MONITOR WELL NO. MW-1 WELL SCHEMAZIC Casing Elevation:108.40 Vapor (acing Stickup: 416 Cm 3 C 0. DESOUPtION onc P ) 0 7 E Group Sheen m V4 Symbol Surface Elevation: 10856 0Steel surface ML Brown silt with trace to some sand(medium stiff 0 monument to stiff,moist) Concrete Bentonite seal ll 2-inch,Schedule L 9NS 5 40 PVC casing 5 24013 CA(] Water level at 5.71 fe-t on 06/20/91 NS 2-inch Schedule t 40 PVC screen, 10 0.020-inch slot 10 width 160 5 [] NS i —Medium sand backfill MI Gray crit(soft,wet) i 15 Base of well it 15 15.0 feet 20(1 16 NS Ilonng completed at 16.5 feet on 06/19/91 F 2(1 i SII 15 25 rj m ' - 30 _ I -30 35 35 p a I a ll CID i 40 - 40 -4 Note:See Figure A-'!for explanation of symbols 'i11��. Lug of Monitor Well — Geo W Eiig) yrs ---- — Figure A--f 2 1 Nut WELL scllEMnnc MONITOR WELL NO. MVV-2 Casing Elevation:106.20 Vapor r Casing Stickup: -0.25 Conc.(ppm) o ]tL ('irou Q'. UESCRIP ION Sheen -a t7 ii Symbol Surface Elevation: 106.45 Ci !n Steel surface 1- Btow1t 1111 with trace sand(stiff.moist) 0 -T7 monument Concrete ML Light brown silt with trace sand(medium stiff benttonitonite seal f Ito rtiff,moist) 2-inch,Schedule 5 40 PVC casing I 110 Si Water level at 4.70 feet cin(Y)/20/910/ 1 5 � NS 2•mch,Schedule 40 PVC screen, 10 0.020-inch slot width 10 _2_•111 L (tea VS Medium sand ML Grav silt(stiff,moist) backfill 15 Base of well at 15 15.0 feet Ll t-) 12 tiS Doing completed at I6.S feet on 06/19/91 20 -20 ti to M 25 N 2$ to u m r 30 10 I 35 35 n m T) n 40 N"Ir `ee 15Fn,,c A-:Im rwplanation ofsymbol$ \ �- Log of Monitor Well (Jeo 1$0 Eliginccrs -- Figure A-13 �r MONITOR WELL NO. MW-3 WELL SCHEMATIC Casing Elevation:103.65 Vapor � Casing Stickup-. -.033 Conc.(pm) 3 C a. DC:CKIMON I J 3 E yu Shee❑ M O SGtymbopl Surface Elevation' 103.98 -Stecl swiei:- ML Pr"wn silt with trace clay nad sand(stiff,moist) monument Concr•.tc Bentonite seal 220 'l G4� t� 2-inch,Schedule /14L Oro"silt(stiff,moist) $ 40 PVC casing --5 =N 4ti r I 1 u I Water Ievt.l at 5.87 feet on 06/20/91 2-Inch,Schedule 40 PVC screen, 10 0.020-inch slot width 1 101901 1 ❑ I ti'S Medium sand MI. dray silt(stiff,moist) backfill is Basc of well at 1$ 15,0 feel Ir+l 12 vti - Iwnul11,nmldcwd It Ire S 1,rt on 00/19/91 II4I I �O .n nl .15 25 m 1 i! (I7 r 30 ill 35 F-is q I 1 Il. ! v i40 Note:See nprt:A-2 for explansnun,,f vymhols �ieU�j Engineers I-Og of Monitor W--Al Figure A-14 i I I r I I � IAPPENDIX B I I C� Y Geo Engineers APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING All of the samples obCained from the test pits were visually examined to confirm or modify field classifications. Selected soil samples were tested to determine their natural moisture content in accordance with ASTM D2216. The results of the moisture content determinations are presented in Table B-1. The undisturbed samples obtained from the shallow torings were rested to determine the in-situ moisture content and dry density. The tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D2937. The moisture contents and densities of the undisturbed samples are sumrnariz•�d in Table 8-2. �.niai n r -1 no0^, GeoEngineers TABLE B-1 N` 'STURE CONTENT DETERMINATION Depth of Test Pit Sample - --_ Percent Number ___-(feet Moistero TP-1 1.0 222 2.0 23.0 3.5 23.7 7.5 29.8 9.5 27.1 11.0 33.5 13.0 _ 33.5 TP-2 2.0 24.3 4.0 30.9 _ 12.0 32.1 TP-3 4.0 31.0 _-- 12.0 34.2 TP4 1.0 28.9 4.0 30.2 6.0 32.0 10.5 33.R __ -- 14.0 34.3 .--P.5 3.0 32.6 13.5 34.3 TP-6 3.0 21.5 -- 13.5 31.4 TP-7 2.0 18.7 7.0 33.8 12.0 35.2 TP-0 3.0 25.1 11.0 31.8 TP-9 2.0 22.6 4.5 26.4 10.0 33.8 _- 14.0 37.1 TP•10 3.5 34.7 11.0 35.4 TP-ii 3.0 20.8 12.0 27.2 TP-12 2.0 33.1 4.0 30.8 �.., 13.0 35.4 MMIM M wMM 111M. Geos*En,� neers TABLE B-2 IN-SITU MOISTURE AND DENSITY DATA Sample _ Moisture Dry Density ----- 7 Depth Soil Gor,t9nt (pounds per Test Pit (feet) T ercent Type � �p ) cubic foot) 53-1 2.5-3.0 ML 23.5 94,0 59-2 2.5-2.0 ML 307 98.1 SB-3 2.5-3.0 ML 2T.9 92.7 I Rmnn n,�gchd o�ow