Geotechnical Engineering Services Report Proposed Assisted ... · Proposed Assisted Living - The...

Terradyne Project No.: D191241 September 12, 2019

Geotechnical Engineering Services Report

Proposed Assisted Living

The Residences at Alsbury

SW Alsbury Boulevard & Ridgehill Drive

Burleson, Texas

Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc.

730 N. Ninth Street

Salina, Kansas 67401

September 12, 2019

Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc.

120 E Main Street

Salina, Kansas 67401

Attn: Mr. Jeffery Gillam

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services Report

Proposed Assisted Living - The Residences at Alsbury

SW Alsbury Boulevard & Ridgehill Drive

Burleson, Texas

Terradyne Project No.: D191241

Dear Mr. Gillam:

Terradyne Engineering, Inc. has completed a soil and foundation engineering report at the above

referenced project site. The results of the exploration are presented in this report.

We appreciate and wish to thank you for the opportunity to service you on this project. Please do not

hesitate to contact us if we can be of additional assistance during the Construction Materials Testing

and Quality Control phases of construction.

Respectfully Submitted,

Terradyne Engineering, Inc.

Clayton Torrance, E.I.T. Shawn Wilson, P.E. Staff Engineer Vice President

Texas Firm Registration No. F-6799

Terradyne Engineering, Inc. D191241

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................i

1.0 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ...............................................1

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................1

2.1• Project Description ......................................................................................................1

2.2• Site Location and Description ......................................................................................2

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................2

3.1• Field and Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................2

3.2• Subsurface Conditions .................................................................................................2

3.3• Groundwater .................................................................................................................3

4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................3

4.1• Vertical Movements ....................................................................................................3

4.2• Site Preparation ............................................................................................................5

4.3• Foundation Recommendations .....................................................................................7

4.3.1• Shallow Foundations ....................................................................................7

4.3.2• Drilled Pier Foundations ...............................................................................9

4.3.3• Floor Slab .....................................................................................................10

4.4• Fill Materials ................................................................................................................10

4.5• Seismic Considerations ...............................................................................................11

4.6• Lateral Loads ...............................................................................................................11

4.7• Additional Considerations and Recommendations .....................................................12

4.8• Pavement Recommendations ......................................................................................13

4.8.1• Subgrade Soil Preparation ............................................................................13

4.8.2• Pavement Design ..........................................................................................14

5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.................................................................................15

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ..........................................................................................................16

APPENDIX Boring Location Plan

Boring Logs

Key to Log of Boring

i


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The soil conditions at the site of the proposed Assisted Living, The Residences at Alsbury, at

Alsbury Boulevard in Burleson, Texas were explored by drilling 14 test borings to depths of about

10 to 35 feet, due to auger refusal. Laboratory tests were performed on selected specimens to

evaluate the engineering characteristics of various soil strata encountered in our borings.

The results of our exploration, laboratory testing and engineering evaluation indicate the soils

underlying this site have moderate to high swell potential. Potential vertical movement ranging

between three (3) and four and one-half (4½) inches was estimated at the existing grade level for

dry moisture conditions.

The proposed building structure may be supported by shallow foundations, as requested by the

project structural engineer. The proposed building structure may be supported by a monolithic

slab on grade foundation, either conventionally reinforce or post-tensioned. The grade beams or a

matt type slab foundation bearing at a minimum depth of 2 feet below adjacent surface grade may be

designed for allowable net bearing pressures of 1,500 pounds per square foot. A slab foundation

bearing at a minimum depth of 10-inches below final grade may be designed for allowable net bearing

pressures of 1,500 pounds per square foot.

Groundwater seepage was not encountered in our borings at the time of our field exploration.

Detailed descriptions of subsurface conditions and foundation design recommendations are

included in this report.

This summary does not contain all the information that is included in the full report. The report

should be read in its entirety to obtain a more complete understanding of the information provided.

Geotechnical Report: Proposed Assisted Living - The Residences at Alsbury

SW Alsbury Boulevard, Burleson, Texas 1


1.0 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

The services of Terradyne Engineering, Inc. were authorized on August 7th, 2019 by Mr. Jeffery

Gillam, Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc. by approving our proposal No: DP191102 dated June 4,

2019.

Our scope of services included drilling a total of 14 soil test borings at the site. Four (4) borings were

in the pavement area to a depth of approximately 10 feet to 15 feet; six (6) borings within the building

footprint to a depth of 25, 30, and 40 feet; two (2) borings near the retaining walls to a depth of 30

and 40 feet; two (2) borings within the detention ponds to a depth of 20 feet below the existing ground

surface, limited laboratory testing of select soil samples to evaluate pertinent physical properties, and

to perform engineering analysis to develop foundation and pavement design criteria.

The scope of services did not include an environmental assessment for determining the presence or

absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, surface water, groundwater,

or air on or below, or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding

odors, colors, and unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for informational purposes.

Prior to development of this site, an environmental assessment is advisable.

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 Project Description

The proposed project consists of an Assisted Living Complex, The Residences at Alsbury, having a

footprint area of approximately 44,949 square feet with associated paving, detention ponds and

retaining walls. Based on information provided by the client, it is understood that the proposed

buildings will consist of a story structure with wood framed load bearing walls. Structural loading

information was not available at the time of writing this report, we have therefore, assumed maximum

wall loads will be less than 2 kips per linear foot. Based on information provided by the project

structural engineer Mr. Mike Falbe, it is understood that the proposed building structure has no

columns. It is further understood that Mr. Falbe intends to support the building on a matt type slab

foundation without the use of any grade beams.

The foundation recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project

information, project location, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If any of the noted

information is incorrect, please inform Terradyne in writing so that we may amend the

recommendations presented in this report, if appropriate and, if desired by the client. Terradyne will

not be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes

in the project.




2.2 Site Location and Description

The site for the proposed project is located at southwest Alsbury Boulevard in Burleson, Texas.

The proposed site is located at the intersection of SW Alsbury Boulevard and Ridgehill Drive. The

ground surface slopes up to the southwest, with a vertical relief of about 20 to 30 feet, based on

visual observations.

The foundation recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project

information, project location, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If any of the noted

information is incorrect, please inform Terradyne in writing so that we may amend the

recommendations presented in this report if appropriate and if desired by the client. Terradyne will

not be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes

in the project.

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Field and Laboratory Testing

The site subsurface conditions were explored with 14 soil test borings advanced to depths of about 10

to 35 feet, due to auger refusal, below the existing ground surface. The approximate boring locations

are indicated on the Boring Location Plan enclosed in the Appendix. Copies of the Logs of Borings

are also enclosed in the Appendix.

The borings were advanced utilizing continuous flight auger drilling methods and soil samples were

routinely obtained during the drilling process. Drilling and sampling techniques were accomplished

generally in accordance with ASTM procedures. Select soil samples were tested in the laboratory to

determine material properties for our evaluation. Laboratory testing was accomplished generally in

accordance with ASTM procedures.

3.2 Subsurface Conditions

As shown on the Dallas Sheet of the Geologic Atlas of Texas, the site is located in an area where

Cretaceous Age deposits of Grayson Marl and Main Street Limestone (Kgm) undivided are located

near the surface. Mostly Grayson Marl; consists of mostly calcareous clay and marl, blocky,

yellowish gray and medium gray. Some 0.25 to 1-foot limestone beds in upper one-third. Main

Street Limestone; medium grained, chalky, some 6 to 8 foot units of calcareous shale, thin bedded

to massive, yellowish gray, weathers light gray to white.

Clayey Sand was encountered at the ground surface and extended to depth of approximately 3 feet

in two of fourteen borings. Brown clay was encountered at the ground surface and extended to depths




ranging between 13 to 20 feet in twelve of fourteen borings. In two borings this clay was encountered

at a depth of 3 feet extended to a depth of about 15 feet. Laboratory plasticity tests indicated that

samples of this clay have liquid limits ranging from 45 to 73 and plasticity indices ranging from

26 to 53. Light brown weathered marl was encountered below the clay in eleven of fourteen

borings and extended to depths ranging between 15 and 20 feet. Dark gray marl was encountered

below the weathered marl in ten of fourteen borings and extended to final boring termination depth

of 20 to 35 feet.

The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface

stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs included in the appendix should

be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. These records include soil/rock

descriptions, stratifications, penetration resistances, and locations of the samples and laboratory test

data. The stratifications shown on the boring logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring

locations. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring locations. The stratifications

represent the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and the actual transition may be

gradual and indistinct. Water level information obtained during field operations is also shown on

these boring logs. The samples, which were not altered by laboratory testing will be retained for 30

days from the date of this report and then will be discarded.

3.3 Groundwater

Ground water was not encountered in the borings during drilling. Groundwater levels fluctuate

seasonally as a function of rainfall, proximity to creeks, rivers and lakes, the infiltration rate of the

soil, seasonal and climatic variations and land usage. Therefore, at a time of the year different from

the time of drilling, there is the possibility of a considerable change in the recorded levels or the

occurrence of water where not previously encountered. The groundwater levels presented in this

report are the levels that were measured at the time of our field activities. We recommend that the

Contractor determine the actual groundwater levels at the site at the time of the construction

activities.

4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Vertical Movements

High plasticity clay soils encountered in the borings have potential for volume change with

changes in moisture content. The volume change is normally evidenced by the heaving and

cracking of concrete floor slabs. Based on TXDOT method TEX-124-E and our experience with

the shrink/swell characteristics of similar soils, the Potential for Vertical Rise (PVR) is estimated

to range between three (3) and four and one-half (4½) inches, depending on location, for slab on

grade construction at existing grades.




If a non-seasonal moisture source becomes available, such as a plumbing or drainage leak or poor

surface drainage, swell in excess of the estimated PVR may occur. Therefore, it is recommended that

positive drainage away from the building should be provided. If positive drainage is not provided,

water will pond around or below the building and excessive total and differential movements may

occur.

The estimated PVR values are based on the current site grades. If cut and fill operations are

performed, the PVR values could change significantly. If the existing grade is to be raised to attain

finish grade elevation, select structural fill should be placed in lifts and properly compacted as

recommended under Fill Materials section of this report.

Remedial measures associated with swelling soils typically consist of either using a structurally

suspended floor slab system utilized in conjunction with drilled pier foundation system or reducing

the swell potential by removing some of the high plasticity soils and replacing them with low swell

potential select fill materials. Removing top six (6) feet of existing soils and replacing with select fill

is estimated to reduce the PVR to the order of about one (1) inch. Any additional fill required to

achieve final grade should consist of select fill materials.

Moisture conditioning of the existing subgrade soils, by removing and re-compacting a certain

depth of the existing subgrade soils below the final grade with a cap of select fill can also reduce

the swell potential to acceptable limits. Moisture conditioning of the top 12 feet depth of subgrade

is estimated to reduce the PVR to the order of about one (1) inches. A one and one half (1½) foot

thick cap of select fill should be placed on top of the moisture conditioned soils to prevent drying

during construction. As an alternative to removal and replacement of the existing clay soil,

injection of soil stabilization chemicals has been used in the area to reduce the swell potential of

the clay soils.

The performance of a grade supported floor slab or a shallow foundation system can be

significantly influenced by yard maintenance, recessed landscaping additions near the building,

utility leaks and any other free water sources, and deep-rooted trees and shrubs. Deep-rooted trees

and shrubs located near the structure, within an approximate distance equal to about their ultimate

mature height, could cause foundation settlement due to ground shrinkage as a result of long-term

moisture absorption of the roots. It is also imperative that moist soil conditions be maintained

within 10 feet of the foundation perimeter during prolonged periods of dry weather to prevent deep

desiccation crack development and associated settlement due to ground shrinkage. Providing

flatwork around the buildings will help in reducing moisture variation under the buildings. In areas

where flatwork does not abut the building, a moisture barrier may be provided at a shallow depth

below the ground surface to prevent moisture variation below the building.




The following design recommendations have been developed on the basis of the previously described

project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered. If there are any changes in these

project criteria, including project location on the site, a review must be made by Terradyne to

determine if any modifications in the recommendations will be required. The findings of such a

review should be presented in a supplemental report.

4.2 Site Preparation

To reduce the potential for moisture induced movement of the site soils, it is important that

consideration is given to reducing the potential for moisture changes of the site soils. As a minimum,

positive drainage away from the building should be provided. If positive drainage is not provided,

water will pond around or below the building and excessive total and differential movements may

occur.

Initially, all topsoil and deleterious materials, including any dumped soils, trees, tree roots and any

existing foundation and utilities must be removed from the areas proposed for construction. After

stripping and excavating to the proposed subgrade level, as required and prior to placing fill, the

exposed subgrade should be proof-rolled with a tandem axle dump truck or similar rubber tired

vehicle. Soils, which are observed to rut or deflect excessively under the moving load, should be

undercut and replaced with properly compacted fill. The proof-rolling and undercutting activities

should be witnessed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer and should be performed

during a period of dry weather. After proof-rolling, the subgrade soils should be scarified and re-

compacted to between 93 to 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density ASTM D698,

in the moisture range of at least 5% or more above optimum, for a depth of at least 8 inches below

the surface.

After subgrade preparation and observation have been completed, fill placement may begin. The

first layer of fill material should be placed in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be adequately

keyed into the stripped and scarified subgrade soils.

Option 1: Undercut the building subgrade to a depth of six (6) feet below the proposed floor slab

subgrade elevation. The exposed subgrade should then be proof-rolled, scarified and re-compacted as

described above. After subgrade preparation, a minimum of six (6) feet depth of select fill should be

used to achieve final grade, additional fill required to achieve final grade should also consist of select

fill.

Select fill materials should be free of organic or other deleterious materials, have a maximum particle

size less than two (2) inches, and have a liquid limit less than 35 and plasticity index between 5 and

15. Select fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as

determined by ASTM Designation D 698.




Select fill should be placed in maximum lifts of eight (8) inches of loose material and should be

compacted within the moisture range of 2% below optimum to 4% above the optimum moisture

content value. Undercut and select fill should extend five (5) feet beyond the building perimeter,

however the top one and one-half (1½) feet depth of select fill should extend only to the building

perimeter and top one and one-half (1½) feet depth of fill outside the building perimeter should

consist on on-site clay fill.

Option 2: Undercut the building subgrade to a depth of twelve (12) feet below the proposed final

grade. After preparing the exposed subgrade as described above, backfill to a depth of one and

one-half (1½) foot below the proposed floor slab subgrade elevation using on-site excavated soils.

This on-site fill should be compacted to between 93 to 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum

dry density ASTM D698, in the moisture range of at least 5% or more above optimum.

The top and one-half (1½) feet depth of fill should consist of select fill materials as described in

option 1 above and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as

determined by ASTM Designation D 698 in the moisture range of 2% below optimum to 4% above

the optimum moisture content value. Undercut and backfill of moisture conditioned fill should

extend horizontally at least ten feet beyond the perimeter of the building. Select fill should extend

only to the building perimeter and all fill outside the building perimeter should consist on on-site

clay fill.

All Fill should be placed in maximum lifts of 8 inches of loose material. Each lift of compacted-

engineered fill should be tested by a representative of the Geotechnical engineer prior to placement

of subsequent lifts.

Option 3: Chemical Injection - As an alternative to removal and replacement of the existing clay

soil, injection of soil stabilization chemicals has been used in the area to reduce the swell potential

of the clay soils. The injection process uses an acid based solution to exchange ions on the clay

particles which reduce the clay’s ability to attract water. The typical process uses a depth of inject

of 10 feet. However, the injection can be done to other depths if appropriate. Vendors doing this

injection work have indicated to us that the swell in the zone that is injected will be reduced to

about one (1) percent or less. The chemical injection should extend horizontally at least ten feet

beyond the perimeter of the building. Our recommendations for this project are based on the upper

ten (10) feet of soil being injected and the injection process reducing the swell potential to about

one (1) percent. After injection, test borings would need to be drilled in the building areas and

samples collected for swell testing to confirm that the reduction in swell is sufficient. If the project

criteria is not met the contractor will need to conduct additional passes to meet the requirements.

After acceptance testing, top 8-inches of the subgrade should be scarified and compacted to at least

95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Designation D 698

in the moisture range of at or above the optimum moisture content value. The top one (1) foot of

subgrade should consist of select fill materials as described in option 1 above and compacted to at




least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Designation

D 698 in the moisture range of 2% below optimum to 4% above the optimum moisture content

value. Select fill should extend only to the building perimeter and all fill outside the building

perimeter should consist on on-site clay fill.

A below surface moisture barrier, consisting of minimum 6 mil polyethylene sheeting, should be used

outside the building perimeter. This is recommended in areas, where flatwork does not abut against

the building perimeter. The moisture barrier should be placed 12-inches below the surface and should

extend a minimum of 8 feet beyond the perimeter of the building slab and foundation and should

slope away from the building at minimum 5 percent slope.

Where the option of a structurally suspended floor slab is utilized, detailed site preparation

activities may not be required and the existing soils can remain in place, additionally any fill

required to achieve final subgrade elevation may consist of on-site or similar soils.

4.3 Foundation Recommendations

If some differential movement can be tolerated, a monolithic slab on grade supported on modified

subgrade, may be considered as one option for building foundation. If the referenced movements

are not acceptable, consideration should be given to supporting the building structure on a drilled

pier foundation system with a structurally suspended floor slab.

4.3.1 Monolithic Slab on Grade Foundations

The foundation system may consist of a monolithic slab on grade or a stiffened mat type slab

foundation reinforced with conventional and/or post-tensioned reinforcing, provided that expected

total and differential movements can be tolerated. The foundation should be designed with exterior

and interior grade beams to provide adequate rigidity to the foundation system to sustain the

vertical soil movements expected at this site.

Grade beams or a slab foundation bearing on properly compacted select fill, may be designed using

a net allowable bearing capacity of 1500 pounds per square foot. The grade beams should have a

minimum width of 10 inches, even if the actual bearing pressure is less than the design value. In

areas where flatwork does not abut the building perimeter, consideration should be given to

providing deep perimeter grade beams (3-feet or more), so they can act as a vertical moisture

barrier. If soft or loose soils are encountered at the design bearing level, they should be undercut

to stiff or dense soils and the excavation backfilled with low swell potential fill or concrete.

It is important that the beams be excavated, bearing soils observed by the geotechnical engineer or

his representative, formwork and reinforcing steel and/or cables installed, and concrete placed as




quickly as possible. Extreme care should be taken to prevent the weakening of the foundation

bearing materials because of prolonged atmospheric exposure, construction activity disturbance or

an increase in moisture content. Leaving foundation excavations open overnight is not

recommended. If foundation excavations are to remain open for more than one day, they should

be adequately protected to reduce evaporation or entry of moisture.

A moisture barrier of polyethylene sheeting or similar material should be placed between the slab

and the subgrade soils to retard moisture migration through the slab. It should be understood, by

all parties, that a soil-supported foundation system will experience movement with time, however,

with proper design, construction and maintenance, the magnitude of the movement can be kept to

a manageable level.

Foundation design criteria for use with Post tensioned Foundation Design based on Post

Tensioning Institute’s (PTI) manual are given in Table 1 below. Also included in the table below

is information for use in conventionally reinforced slab-on grade foundation.

TABLE 1 – 3rd Edition PTI Values

Effective

Plasticity

Index

Edge moisture variation

distance, em (feet)

Differential movement

ym (inches)

Center Lift Edge Lift Center Lift Edge Lift

Modified Subgrade Per

Option 1 of Site

Preparation section of this

report (6 feet select fill).

20 9.0 4.5 1.1 1.5

Modified Subgrade Per

Option 2 or of Site

Preparation section of this

report - 12 foot deep

moisture conditioning with

1½ -foot select fill cap

or Option 3

10 foot chemical injection

with 1 foot select fill cap).

42 7.0 3.6 2.3 3.5

If drilled piers are used below the beams of a soil supported, monolithic slab-on-grade, the piers

should not be rigidly connected to the beams in case heave occurs




If potential movements associated with a soil supported floor slab are not acceptable, it is

recommended that drilled pier foundations be utilized to support the building structure with a

structurally suspended floor slab.

4.3.2 Drilled Pier Foundations

If it is desired to limit potential movements due to shrinking and swelling of the site soils as well as

due to existing fill, it may be desirable to support the building structure on drilled pier foundations.

Straight shaft piers should be founded in the underlying gray marl, with a minimum penetration of 4

feet into the gray marl. The piers will utilize a combination of end bearing and skin friction within the

gray marl to develop load carrying capacity. Piers founded in the referenced materials may be

proportioned assuming a maximum allowable end bearing capacity of 20,000 pounds per square foot

based on dead load plus design live load considerations. The piers may also be designed for an

allowable skin friction value of 2,000 pounds per square foot in axial compression for the portion of

the pier in contact with the gray marl. Top 2 foot of embedment into the gray marl should be neglected

for skin friction resistance. In no case should piers be designed with a shaft diameter less than 12

inches. Piers should have a minimum clear spacing at least equal to or larger than twice the diameter

of the end bearing area of the largest adjacent pier.

Settlements of the order of ½ inch with differential settlements (between adjacent piers) on the order

of ¼ inch should be considered. The piers should be reinforced for their full depth to resist potential,

tensile forces, which may develop due to swelling of the site soils, and due to structural loads. Uplift

forces due to swelling soils can be approximated by assuming an uplift adhesion value of 1600 pounds

per square foot over the perimeter of the shaft for a depth of 10 feet. Uplift resistance will be provided

by the dead load on the pier and by skin friction resistance within the limestone. Resistance to uplift

can be calculated using an allowable skin friction value of 1,400 psf for the portion of the pier in

contact with the gray limestone.

It is recommended that the design and construction of drilled piers should generally follow methods

outlined in the manual titled Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods

(Publication No: FHWA-IF-99-025, August 1999).

Detailed inspection of pier construction should be made to verify that the piers are vertical and

founded in the proper bearing stratum, and to verify that all loose materials have been removed prior

to concrete placement. Temporary casing must be used where necessary to stabilize pier holes and to

control water inflow.

Any accumulated water must be removed prior to the placement of concrete. A hopper and tremie

should be utilized during concrete placement to control the maximum free fall of the wet concrete to




less than five feet unless the mix is designed so that it does not segregate during free fall and provided

the pier excavation is dry.

If the pier hole has been cased, sufficient concrete should remain in the casing as the casing is

withdrawn to prevent any discontinuities from forming within the concrete section. Concrete placed

in drilled piers should be placed at slumps between six to eight inches. Concrete, which is placed in

piers at a slump less than six inches, increases the potential for honeycombing. Concrete used in piers

should be designed to achieve the required strength at the higher slumps as referenced above. For

any given pier, excavation, placement of steel and concreting should be completed within the same

workday. Where water inflow or caving soils are encountered, excavation of piers and placement of

concrete within a very short time frame will frequently aid in proper pier construction.

Structurally supported grade beams, pier caps if required, and floor slab should be isolated from the

subgrade soils by providing a minimum 10-inch positive void beneath the floor slab, grade beams and

pier caps. Void forms will not be required for pier supported monolithic slab on grade foundation

system. Voids can be produced using compressible cardboard carton forms specially manufactured

for this purpose. Care should be exercised so that the forms are not crushed, damaged or saturated

prior to placement of the concrete. In addition, barriers that will not rapidly decay should be placed

or constructed along the sides of the cardboard carton forms to prevent soil intrusion into the void

after the carton forms decay.

4.3.3 Floor Slab

It is recommended that the floor slabs utilized with the drilled pier foundation consist of a structurally

suspended slab. Structurally supported slab and grade beams should be isolated from the subgrade

soils by providing a minimum 10-inch positive void beneath the slab and the grade beams. Using

cardboard carton forms specially manufactured for this purpose can produce these voids. Care should

be exercised so that the forms are not crushed, damaged, or saturated prior to placement of the

concrete. In addition, barriers that will not rapidly decay should be placed or constructed along the

sides of the cardboard carton forms to prevent soil intrusion into the void after the carton forms decay.

4.4 Fill Materials

Fill should be free of organic or other deleterious materials and should have a maximum particle

size of 3 inches. Low swell potential select fill should have a maximum liquid limit of 35 and

plasticity index between 5 and 15.

Select fill should be placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95

percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor). The

moisture content at the time of compaction should be in the range of 2 percent below optimum to




4 percent above the optimum value as defined by ASTM D 698. The on-site moisture conditioned

fill should be compacted to between 93 to 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density

ASTM D698, in the moisture range of at least 5% or more above optimum. The referenced

moisture content and density should be maintained until construction is complete.

4.5 Seismic Considerations

Based on the 2012 International Building Code, Table 1613.3.2 Site Class Definitions read in

conjunction with and Table 20.3-1, chapter 20 of ASCE 7. The site soils can be characterized as

Site Class C.

4.6 Lateral Earth Pressure

Some retaining walls may be needed at this site. The equivalent fluid density values were evaluated

for various backfill materials. These values are presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2 – Lateral Pressure Parameters

Backfill Material Equivalent Fluid Density, PCF

Active Condition At Rest Condition Passive Condition

a. Crushed Limestone 40 60 530

b. Clean Sand 40 60 360

c. Select Fill (PI ≤ 15) 65 85 265

These equivalent fluid densities do not include the effect of seepage pressures, surcharge loads

such as construction equipment, vehicular loads or future storage near the walls.

If the basement wall or cantilever retaining wall can tilt forward to generate “active earth pressure”

condition, the values under active condition shall be used. For rigid non-yielding walls which are

part of the building, the values” at rest condition” shall be used. The compactive effort shall be

controlled during backfill operations. Over compaction can produce lateral earth pressures in

excess of at rest magnitudes. Compaction levels adjacent to below-grade walls shall be maintained

between 95 and 98 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D698) maximum dry density.

The backfill behind the wall shall be drained properly. The simplest drainage system consists of a

drain located near the bottom of the wall. The drain collects the water that enters the backfill and

this may be disposed of through outlets along the base of the wall. To ensure that the drains are

not clogged by fine particles, they shall be surrounded by a granular filter. Despite a well-

constructed toe drain, substantial water pressure may develop behind the wall if the backfill




consists of clays or silts. A more satisfactory drainage system, consisting of a back drain of 12

inch to 24 inches width gravel may be provided behind the wall to facilitate to drainage.

The maximum toe pressure for wall footings founded a minimum depth of 24 inches into the on-

site clay soils shall not exceed 1,500 pounds per square foot. Horizontal loads acting on shallow

foundations are resisted by friction along the foundation base and by passive pressure against the

footing face, which is perpendicular to the line of applied force. For lateral loads, the coefficient of

friction between the base of the footing and the subgrade soils is 0.32. The ultimate passive earth

pressure, in psf, can be computed by using an equivalent fluid pressure of 240 pcf/ft.

4.7 Additional Considerations and Recommendations

The following information has been developed after review of numerous problems concerning

foundations throughout the area. It is presented here for your convenience. If these features are

incorporated in the overall design and specifications for the project, performance of the project will

be improved.

1. Prior to construction, the area to be covered by buildings should be prepared so that water

will not pond beneath or around the buildings after periods of rainfall. In addition, water

should not be allowed to pond on or around pavements.

2. Roof drainage should be collected and transmitted by pipe to a storm drainage system or to

an area where the water can drain away from buildings and pavements without entering the

soils supporting buildings and pavements.

3. Sidewalks should not be structurally connected to buildings. They should be sloped away

from buildings so that water will be drained away from structures.

4. Paved areas and the general ground surface should be sloped away from buildings on all

sides so that water will always drain away from the structures. Water should not be allowed

to pond near buildings after the floor slabs and foundations have been constructed.

5. Backfill for utility lines that are located in pavement, sidewalk and building areas should

consist of low swell potential fill. The backfill should be compacted as described in the "Fill

Material" section of this report. Lesser lift thickness may be required to obtain adequate

compaction.

6. Care should be exercised to make sure that ditches for utility lines do not serve as conduits

that transmit water beneath structures or pavements. The top of the ditch should be sealed to

inhibit the inflow of surface water during periods of rainfall.




7. Flower beds and planting areas should not be constructed along building perimeters.

Constructing sidewalks or pavements adjacent to buildings would be preferable. If required,

flower beds and planting areas could be constructed beyond the sidewalks away from the

buildings. If it is desired to have flower beds and planting areas adjacent to a building, the

use of above grade concrete box planters, or other methods which reduce the likelihood of

large changes in moisture content of soils adjacent to or below structures should be

considered.

8. Water sprinkling systems should not be located where water will be sprayed onto building

walls and subsequently drain downward and flow into the soils beneath foundations.

9. Trees in general, should not be planted closer to a structure than the mature height of the tree.

A tree planted closer to a structure than the recommended distance may extend its roots

beneath the structure, allowing removal of subgrade moisture and/or causing structural

distress.

10. Utilities which project through slab-on-grade floors, particularly where expansive soils or

soils subject to settlement are present, should be designed with some degree of flexibility

and/or with a sleeve to reduce the potential for damage to the utilities should movement

occur.

4.8 Pavement Recommendations

4.8.1 Subgrade Soil Preparation

Initially, all topsoil including any deleterious materials must be removed from the areas proposed for

pavement construction. After stripping and excavating to the proposed pavement subgrade level, and

prior to placing fill, the exposed subgrade should be proof-rolled with a tandem axle dump truck or

similar rubber tired vehicle. Soils, which are observed to rut or deflect excessively under the moving

load, should be undercut and replaced with properly compacted fill. The proof-rolling and

undercutting activities should be witnessed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer and

should be performed during a period of dry weather. The pavement subgrade soils should then be

scarified and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density ASTM

D698, in the moisture range of optimum to 4% above optimum, for a depth of at least six (6) inches

below the surface.

After subgrade preparation and observation have been completed, fill placement if required may

begin. The fill may consist of on-site or similar soils. The first layer of fill material should be placed

in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be adequately keyed into the stripped and scarified subgrade

soils. After subgrade preparation and observation have been completed, fill placement if required may




begin. The fill may consist of on-site or similar soils. The first layer of fill material should be placed

in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be adequately keyed into the stripped and scarified subgrade

soils.

Fill materials should be free of organic or other deleterious materials and have a maximum particle

size less than three (3) inches. Fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor

maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Designation D 698. Fill should be placed in maximum

lifts of eight (8) inches of loose material and should be compacted within the range of optimum to 4%

above optimum moisture content value.

Lime stabilization is recommended under the fire lanes/heavy duty pavements. The subgrade

should be lime stabilized with a minimum of six (6) percent (of dry weight) of the hydrated lime.

The actual percentage of lime should, however, be determined at the time of construction (through

laboratory lime series testing procedures) after the pavement subgrade has been graded to final

grade. Lime stabilization should reduce the plasticity index of the on-site soils to below 15. Lime

stabilization should be accomplished in accordance with the applicable provision of NCTCOG

specifications. Prior to lime stabilization, and after the pavement subgrade has been graded to final

grade, the soluble sulphate content of the subgrade soils should be tested. Lime stabilization under

rigid pavement sections for Fire Lanes/heavy duty pavements may be avoided by increasing the

thickness of the concrete section by 1-inch.

The lime stabilized subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry

density as determined by ASTM D 698. The moisture content at the time of compaction should be

in the range of optimum to four percent above the optimum value as defined by ASTM D 698.

Utility trench excavation, construction traffic, desiccation and wet weather conditions may disturb the

pavement subgrade. As such the pavement subgrade should be evaluated at the time of pavement

construction. If subgrade disturbance has occurred, the pavement subgrade should be reworked and

compacted. The pavement subgrade at final elevation should be tested within 72 hours prior to

placement of paving concrete.

4.8.2 Pavement Design

The design thickness of a pavement will depend on the magnitude of axle loads and the number of

load repetitions. Parking and drive areas will be constructed at locations around the buildings. We

understand that the drives and fire lanes will be subjected to maximum average daily traffic (ADT)

of about 300 vehicles per day. A small percentage of the daily traffic may consist of moving vans,

delivery trucks or trash dump trucks and the remainder will consist of passenger automobiles and

pick-ups. The fire lanes may also be subjected to occasional use by City Fire Trucks. The pavement

is to be designed for a life expectancy of 20 years. Light Duty pavement sections are recommended




for passenger vehicle parking areas and the Heavy Duty pavement sections are recommended for

fire lanes and drive areas.

RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN THICKNESS

Light Duty Heavy Duty

Portland Cement Concrete

(3600 psi) 5.0 inches 6.0 inches*

Subgrade or Subbase Lime Stabilized Subgrade as Discussed Previously

Lime stabilization under rigid pavement sections for Fire Lanes/heavy duty pavements may be avoided by

increasing the thickness of the concrete section by 1-inch.

The concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3,600 psi at 28 days. The concrete

should also be designed with 5 1 percent entrained air to improve workability and durability.

Proper finishing of concrete pavements requires the use of appropriate construction joints to reduce

the potential for cracking. Construction joints should be designed in accordance with current

Portland Cement Association guidelines. Joints should be sealed to reduce the potential for water

infiltration into pavement joints and subsequent infiltration into the supporting soils. The design

of steel reinforcement should be in accordance with accepted codes, Minimum reinforcement

consisting of #3 bars placed at 18” centers is recommended.

Large front-loading trash dump trucks frequently impose concentrated front-wheel loads on

pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of the pavement and

ultimately, pavement failures. Therefore, we recommend that the pavement in trash pickup areas and

loading dock areas should consist of a minimum 7-inch thick, reinforced concrete slab.

5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

It is recommended that Terradyne be retained to provide observation and testing of construction

activities involved in the foundations and pavements, earthwork, and related activities of this project.

Terradyne cannot accept any responsibility for any conditions, which deviated from those, described

in this report, nor for the performance of the foundations and pavements if not engaged to also provide

construction observation and testing for this project.

The upper fine-grained soils encountered at this site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by

construction traffic and changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the

moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities.

In addition, soils, which become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of

grading and compaction activities. It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform earthwork and

foundation construction activities during dry weather.

Due to the plastic nature of on-site soils, some of which may be left in place, consideration should be

given to these soils to reduce their shrink/swell potential. Simply stated, clays expand or shrink by




absorbing or losing moisture. Controlling the moisture content variation of a soil will therefore reduce

its variation in volume. During construction, a positive surface drainage scheme should be

implemented to prevent ponding of water on the subgrade. The pavement subgrades should not be

allowed to dry out during construction. Drainage from the building’s roof/gutter system should not

be allowed to drain and/or pond behind the pavement curbs.

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from

the fourteen borings drilled at the site. This report may not reflect the exact variations of the soil

conditions across the site. The nature and extent of variations across the site may not become

evident until construction commences. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-

evaluate our recommendations after performing on-site observations and tests to establish the

engineering significance of any variations. The project geotechnical engineer should review the

final plan for the proposed building so that he may determine if changes in the foundation

recommendations are required. The project geotechnical engineer declares that the findings,

recommendations or professional advice contained herein have been made and this report prepared

in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of

geotechnical engineering and engineering geology. No other warranties are implied or expressed.

This report is valid until site conditions change due to disturbance (cut and fill grading) or changes

to nearby drainage conditions or for three (3) years from the date of this report, whichever occurs

first. Beyond this expiration date, Terradyne shall not accept any liability associated with the

engineering recommendations in the report, particularly if the site conditions have changed. If this

report is desired for use for design purposes beyond this expiration date, we highly recommend

drilling additional borings so that we can verify the subsurface conditions and validate the

recommendations in this report.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for the specific application to the

proposed The Residences at Alsbury located on SW Alsbury Blvd. and Ridgehill Drive in

Burleson, Texas.

APPENDIX

*Terradyne drill rigs are equipped with a GPS tracking system which provides us with latitude and longitudinal co-ordinates of sites.

Site Location

Proposed Assisted Living The

Residences at Alsbury, Alsbury Boulevard & Ridgehill Drive

Burleson, Johnson County, Texas

TERRADYNE EULESS, TEXAS

Prepared By: CMT

Scale: See Scale Bar

Project # D191241

Verified By: Google Earth

Date: April 2019

Figure # 1-A

*Boring locations are approximate.

Boring Location Plan

Proposed Assisted Living The

Residences at Alsbury, Alsbury Boulevard & Ridgehill Drive

Burleson, Johnson County, Texas

TERRADYNE EULESS, TEXAS

Prepared By: CMT

Scale: Not to Scale

Project # D191241

Base Plan By: JGR Architects

Date: April 2019

Figure # 1-B

B-1

B-2

B-3

B-4

B-5

B-6 B-7

B-8

B-9

B-10

B-11

B-12

B-13

B-14

Project: Proposed Assisted Living The Residences at

Project Location: Alsbury Boulevard, Burleson, Johnson County, Texas

Terradyne Project Number: D191241

Log of Boring B-1

Date(s) Drilled August 29, 2019

Drilling Method Continuous Flight Auger

Drill Rig Type B-34

Groundwater Level and Date Measured Not Encountered

Borehole Backfill Natural Soils

Sampling Method(s) Auger, SPT, THD

Location See Figure 1-B

Total Depth of Borehole 33 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation Existing Ground Surface

PL,

%

18

PI,

%

35

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

76

REMARKS AND OTHER TESTSG

raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

9

22

19

14

16

16

13

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

FAT CLAY WITH SAND, hard, moist, brown (CH)

FAT CLAY, hard, moist, brown (CH)

WEATHERED MARL, light brown

MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE, due to auger refusal at 33'

LL, %

53

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=39

N=35

N=65

N=55

N=50/1"

N=50/0.5"

T=3"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 2

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-2



Drill Rig Type B-34



Sampling Method(s) Auger, SPT, THD, Tube




PL,

%

20

PI,

%

47

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

95


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

14

18

18

18

18

21

12

12

8

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf



FAT CLAY, very stiff to hard, moist, brown (CH)


MARL, gray


LL, %

67

PP

(ts

f)

4.5+

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=21

N=59

N=80

N=50/3"

T=4"

T=3"

T=2"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 3

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-3



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

PI,

%

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

13

20

17

18

17

21

13

11

11

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf





MARL, gray


LL, %

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=35

N=46

N=71

N=79

N=83

N=50/1"

T=5"

T=2"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 4

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-4



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

21

PI,

%

49

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %98


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

13

21

23

19

19

20

13

10

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf



FAT CLAY. hard, moist, brown (CH)


MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

70

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=12

N=34

N=61

N=67

N=75

N=50/1"

T=3"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 5

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-5



Drill Rig Type B-34



Sampling Method(s) Auger, SPT




PL,

%19

PI,

%

35

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

97


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

11

15

17

19

19

20

13

10

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf





MARL, gray


LL, %

54

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=21

N=24

N=36

N=46

N=50/4"

N=50/1.5"

T=4"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 6

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-6



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

20

PI,

%

53

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

77


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

17

23

17

18

18

10

10

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf


FAT CLAY WITH SAND, stiff to very stiff, moist, brown (CH)

LEAN CLAY, hard, moist, brown (CL)


MARL, gray


LL, %

73

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=14

N=16

N=46

N=90

T=4"

T=2"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 7

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-7



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

16

PI,

%

29

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %93


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

12

11

12

23

15

15

10

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf



LEAN CLAY, hard, moist, brown (CL)


MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

45

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=33

N=54

N=47

N=50/1"

N=50/3"

T=4"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 8

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-8



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

15

PI,

%

26

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

49


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

10

13

15

18

19

12

8

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf


CLAYEY SAND, dense, moist, brown (SC)



MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

41

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=50

N=25

N=41

N=80

T=6"

T=4"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 9

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-9



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

18

PI,

%

46

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %59


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

13

12

15

19

14

10

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf


FAT CLAY WITH SAND, very stiff, moist, brown (CH)

SANDY FAT CLAY, very stiff, moist, brown (CH)


MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

64

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=26

N=17

N=29

N=50/5"

T=4"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 10

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-10



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

17

PI,

%

52

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

83


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

15

16

18

19

15

14

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf


FAT CLAY WITH SAND, very stiff to stiff to very stiff, moist, brown (CH)


MARL, gray

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

69

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=18

N=15

N=25

N=50/4"

T=4"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 11

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-11



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

18

PI,

%

37

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

97


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

12

19

19

24

17

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf




END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

55

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=23

N=60

N=32

N=50/5"

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 12

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-12



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

16

PI,

%

41

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %

85


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

12

12

15

17

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf




END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

57

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=22

N=39

N=43

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 13

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-13



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

17

PI,

%

27

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

7

14

15

18

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf


CLAYEY SAND, very dense, moist, brown (SC)

FAT CLAY, hard, moist, light brown (CH)

END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

44

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=50

N=23

N=58

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 14

Sheet 1 of 1




Log of Boring B-14



Drill Rig Type B-34







PL,

%

PI,

%

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

16

15

14

19

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf




END OF BOREHOLE

LL, %

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

N=17

N=20

N=31

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure 15

Sheet 1 of 1




Key to Log of Boring

PL,

%

PI,

%

UC

, tsf

Pas

sing

#20

0 S

ieve

, %


raph

ic L

og

Wat

er C

onte

nt, %

Dry

Uni

t Wei

ght,

pcf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL, %

PP

(ts

f)

Dep

th (

feet

)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

N=

blow

s/ft

(SP

T)

T=

inch

es/1

00 b

low

s (T

HD

)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS

1 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface.2 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval

shown.3 N=blows/ft (SPT) T=inches/100 blows (THD): N: Number of blows

to advance SPT sampler 12 inches or distance shown, ORT:Penetration in inches of THD Cone for 100 blows

4 PP (tsf): The Relative Consistency of the soil, measured by PocketPenetrometer in tons/square foot

5 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface materialencountered.

6 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered. May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptivetext.

7 Water Content, %: Water content of the soil sample, expressed aspercentage of dry weight of sample.

8 Dry Unit Weight, pcf: Dry weight per unit volume of soil samplemeasured in laboratory, in pounds per cubic foot.

9 Passing #200 Sieve, %: The percent fines (soil passing the No.200 Sieve) in the sample.

10 LL, %: Liquid Limit, expressed as a water content11 PL, %: Plastic Limit, expressed as a water content.12 PI, %: Plasticity Index, expressed as a water content.13 UC, tsf: Unconfined compressive strength.14 REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations

regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel.

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS

SPT: Standard Penetration TestTHD: Texas Dept. of Transportation Cone Penetrometer TestLL: Liquid Limit, percent

PL: Plastic Limit, percentPI: Plasticity Index, percentPP: Pocket PenetrometerUC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf

TYPICAL MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Fat CLAY, CLAY w/SAND, SANDY CLAY (CH)

Lean CLAY, CLAY w/SAND, SANDY CLAY (CL)

Marl

Clayey SAND (SC)

Weathered Marl

TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Grab Sample

Rock Core

2-inch-OD unlined splitspoon (SPT)

THD Cone

Shelby Tube (Thin-walled,fixed head)

OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Water level (at time of drilling, ATD)

Water level (after waiting)

Minor change in material properties within astratum

Inferred/gradational contact between strata

? Queried contact between strata

GENERAL NOTES

1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may begradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests.2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representativeof subsurface conditions at other locations or times.

C:\U

sers

\Suk

anta

Cha

krab

orty

\Des

ktop

\TO

DO

\D19

1241

Pro

pose

d A

ssis

ted

Livi

ng T

he R

esid

nece

s at

Als

bury

-Bur

leso

n T

X-J

ones

Gill

am-J

effr

ey G

illam

\D19

1241

.bg4

[Ter

rady

ne2.

tpl]

Figure B-1

Sheet 1 of 1

STANDARD REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS

I. Sampling & Testing Symbols or Abbreviations:

II. Correlations of Penetration Resistance to Soil Properties:

Relative Density of Sand and Sandy Silt Consistency of Clay and Clayey Silt

Relative Density SPT N-value Stiffness SPT N-value

(qualitative measure)

Unconfined Compressive Strength

(tsf)

Very loose 0 to 4 Very soft 0 to 3 Under 0.25

Loose 5 to 10 Soft 4 or 5 0.25 – 0.5

Medium dense 11 to 30 Medium stiff 6 to 10 0.5 – 1.0

Dense 31 to 50 Stiff 11 to 15 1.0 – 2.0

Very Dense > 50 Very stiff 16 to 30 2.0 – 4.0

Hard > 30 4.0 – 8.0

III. Unified Soil Classification Symbols:

GP - Poorly Graded Gravel SP - Poorly Graded Sand ML - Low Plasticity Silt GW - Well Graded Gravel SW - Well Graded Sand MH - High Plasticity Silt GM - Silty Gravel SM - Silty Sand CL - Low to Medium Plasticity Clay GC - Clayey Gravel SC - Clayey Sand CH - High Plasticity Clay OH - High Plasticity Organics OL - Low Plasticity Organics

IV. Rock Quality Designation index (RQD): V. Natural moisture content: “Dry” No apparent moisture, crumbles easily

RQD: Description of Rock Quality: “Moist” Damp but no visible water (if all natural fractures) “Wet” Visible water 0-25 % Very poor 25-50 % Poor 50-75 % Fair 75-90 % Good 90-100% Excellent

VI. Grain size terminology: VIII. Descriptive terms or symbols:

Cobble: 3-inches to 12-inches “Mottled”: occasional/spotted presence of that color

Gravel: #4 sieve size (4.75 mm) to 3-inches “- […]”: identifies change in soil characteristics

Coarse sand: #10 to #4 sieve size LL: Liquid Limit (moisture content as % of dry weight)

Medium sand: #40 to #10 sieve size PL: Plastic Limit (moisture content as % of dry weight)

Fine sand: #200 to #40 sieve size WOH: Weight of hammer

Silt or clay: smaller than #200 sieve size “with […]”: item identified within that sample only

“REC”: Rock core recovery %

VII. Descriptive terms for soil composition: IX. Plasticity of cohesive soil:

(function of PI and clay mineral types)

“Trace” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 to 9% Plasticity Index (PI): Plasticity:

“Some” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 to 29% 0 to 20 Low

(with suffix –y, e.g. sandy, clayey …) . . . . 30 to 49% 20 to 30 Medium

30 + High

ST Shelby Tube

SS Split-Spoon Sampler

RC Rock core

A Auger

SPT Standard Penetration Test

PT Percussion Tube

TC Texas Cone

Figure 16

Geotechnical Engineering Services Report Proposed Assisted ... · Proposed Assisted Living - The...

Documents

Transcript of Geotechnical Engineering Services Report Proposed Assisted ... · Proposed Assisted Living - The...