HomeMy WebLinkAboutWWP273625 (3)KL E/NFEL DER
Bright People Right Solutions
March 19, 2013
Kleinfelder Project No. 00132120.000A
Stantec
11130 NE 33rd Place
Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Mr. Erik Waligorski, P.E.
Subject: Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
Renton, Washington
Dear Mr. Waligorski:
This letter transmits our revised geotechnical engineering report for the proposed
Airport Lift Station Replacement Project in Renton, Washington. This report reflects the
current lift station location, which changed since our initial report was prepared, and
includes information obtained from one additional boring we drilled as well as includes
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project.
Sincerely,
KLEINFELDER, INC.
Marcus B. Byers, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Project Manager
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 1 of 1 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
14710 NE 87`h Street, Suite A100, Redmond, WA 98052 p 1425.636.7900 f 1425.636.7901
Prepared for:
Stantec
11130 NE 33rd Place
Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98004
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
Renton, Washington
Prepared by:
Steven H. Flowers, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
KLEINFELDER, INC.
14710 NE 87th Street, Suite 100
Redmond, Washington 98052
Office: (425) 636-7900
Fax: (425) 636-7901
March 19, 2014
Kleinfelder Project No. 00132120.000A
KL E/NFELOER
Rnghf People, Right Sol.611s.
Marcus B. Byers, P.E., P.Eng
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Project Manager
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
All Rights Reserved
ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC
PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.
KLE/NFELDER
Bright ftopft. ftht Soiw—
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1
1.1 GENERAL..................................................................................................1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION......................................................................... 1
2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ..................................... 2
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION.............................................................................. 2
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING.......................................................................... 4
3 SITE CONDITIONS ............................................ :................................................. 6
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS.......................................................................... 6
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................... 6
3.3 GROUND WATER..................................................................................... 7
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................... 8
4.1 CUT RETAINING WALL............................................................................ 9
4.2 WET WELL AND VALVE VAULT EXCAVATION SHORING ................... 11
4.3 GENERATOR AND CONTROL ROOM FOUNDATIONS ........................ 14
4.4 WET WELL AND VALVE VAULT STRUCTURES ................................... 15
4.5 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK.............................................................. 17
4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS ................................... 17
4.7 PIPELINE TRENCHWORK, BEDDING AND BACKFILL ......................... 18
5 LIMITATIONS.....................................................................................................19
6 REFERENCES................................................................................................... 21
FIGURES
Plate 1: Vicinity Map
Plate 2: Site and Exploration Plan
Plate 3: Recommended Earth Pressures for Temporary Shoring
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Exploration Logs
Appendix B: Field Permeability Testing
Appendix C: Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page i of i March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
LK E/NFELOER
&Kght ftoAv. Right solz;om
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
This report presents the results of Kleinfelder's geotechnical engineering study for the
proposed lift station project to be completed by the City of Renton at the Renton
Municipal Airport in Renton, Washington. The project location is shown on the Vicinity
Map (Plate 1). Our study included field exploration and development of design and
construction recommendations for the pump station and site retaining wall. The general
layout of the project site is shown on the Site and Exploration Plan (Plate 2). Our client
for this project, Roth Hill, has changed company names to Stantec since we issued our
proposal and draft geotechnical report. We refer to them as Stantec for the remainder
of this report.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our understanding of the project is based on conversations with Mr. Erik Waligorski of
Stantec. The project involves construction of a new lift station consisting of a wet well, a
valve vault, a small control room, and a small generator enclosure. The wet well will be
approximately 8 feet in diameter and it will be about 22 feet deep. A retaining wall, with
a retained height of approximately 4 feet or less, will be required along the west side of
the new lift station development. This wall will retain a shallow cut into the toe of the
existing Rainier Avenue embankment. The new force main leaving the new pump
station will extend west to tie into the existing sewer system in Rainier Avenue.
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 1 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELDER
969h, P-A*. R19,, Ww_
2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION
Our subsurface exploration was completed in two phases since the location of the wet
changed after our draft report was issued. Our initial subsurface exploration included a
machine drilled boring, two hand auger explorations, field permeability testing, and
several dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) soundings. Based on the findings of the
initial exploration, we issued a draft geotechnical engineering report dated May 17,
2013. On February 3, 2014 Stantec authorized Kleinfelder to complete an additional
machine drilled boring in the new wet well location. Our exploration program is
summarized as follows:
• On March 12, 2013, we completed one machine -drilled boring, designated KB-1,
and two hand auger borings, designated KHA-1 and KHA-2. KB-1 was located in
the originally proposed footprint of the wet well and KHA-1 and KHA-2 were
located at the north and south ends of the proposed retaining wall, respectively.
• On April 10, 2013 we performed field permeability testing in the KB-1 monitoring
well to evaluate hydraulic conductivity of soils around KB-1.
• On April 12, 2013 we performed five dynamic cone penetration (DCP) tests,
designated DCP-1 through DCP-5 to further classify the subsurface soil
conditions north of the originally proposed wet well location.
• On February 28, 2014 we completed one machine -drilled boring, designated
KB-2, in the revised wet well location.
The Site and Exploration Plan, Plate 2, shows the approximate locations of our
explorations.
Machine -Drilled Boring KB-1: KB-1 was drilled near the proposed wet well structure
on March 12, 2013, by Holt Services, Inc. of Edgewood, Washington operating under
subcontract to Kleinfelder. Disturbed soil samples were obtained at 5-foot intervals by
means of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) in accordance with ASTM D-1586: The
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 2 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KLEINFELDER
A fight Veopk. ft4h, Sal.,;_
SPT consists of driving a 2-inch outside diameter steel split -spoon sampler 18 inches
into the soil at the bottom of the borehole with a 140-pound weight free -failing 30
inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through each 6-inch interval
is counted, and the total number of blows during the final 12 inches is recorded as the
Standard Penetration Resistance, or "SPT blow count", in blows per foot. SPT samples
were advanced using an automatic trip hammer. Boring KB-1 was completed with a 2-
inch PVC monitoring well and a flush -mount monument, to facilitate ground water
monitoring and field permeability testing.
Hand Auger Borings: KHA-1 and KHA-2 were advanced on March 12, 2013 by
Kleinfelder personnel, along the proposed cut wall alignment. These hand explorations
involved dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) soundings followed by hand excavation
and sampling. The DCP is a %-inch pointed steel rod that is driven into the ground with
a 35-pound slide hammer free -falling 15 inches. The penetration resistance, measured
as the number of blows per 4 inches of penetration, provides an indication of the relative
density/consistency of the soil. At KHA-1, the DCP sounding extended to a depth of 10
feet below ground surface. At KHA-2, the DCP sounding met with refusal at 3 feet
below ground surface. Following completion of DCP soundings, we completed hand
borings at both locations. The hand borings were both excavated and sampled to
depths of 7 feet below ground surface using hand equipment (shovel, post -hole digger,
and a hand -auger).
Field Permeability Testing: Failing and rising head permeability testing was performed
by Kleinfelder personnel in the piezometer at KH-1. This testing consisted of monitoring
the ground water level using an electronic pore pressure transducer and data logger.
Falling head testing involves the introduction of a cylindrical displacement element to
quickly raise the water level in the piezometer, and monitoring its return to baseline
level. Rising head testing involves removing the displacement element, which causes
an instantaneous drop in the ground water level, and monitoring the rate at which the
water level returns to its baseline condition. This testing was completed in general
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 3 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KL E NrEL OER
accordance with the method originally outlined by Bouwer and Rice (1976), and
updated by Bouwer (1989).
DCP Soundings: On April 12, 2013, we completed five (5) DCP soundings, at selected
locations to further explore near -surface soil conditions. We designated these as DCP-
1 through DCP-5.
Supplemental Machine -Drilled Boring KB-2: KB-2 was drilled in the footprint of the
new wet well location on February 28, 2014, by Boretec, Inc. of Valleyford, Washington
operating under subcontract to Kleinfelder. Disturbed SPT soil samples were obtained
at 2.5-foot intervals from 15 to 25 feet below the existing site grade and at 5-foot
intervals. SPT samples were advanced using a hammer that was operated by rope and
cathead.
Soil samples collected from K13-1, K13-2, KHA-1, and KHA-2 were field classified, placed
in plastic jars, and transported to our laboratory for further examination and physical
testing.
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory classification and tests were conducted on selected samples to characterize
relevant engineering and index properties of the soils encountered in the borings.
Results are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A. Soil tests included:
• Visual soil classifications were conducted on all samples in the field and on
selected samples in our laboratory. All soils were classified in general
accordance with the United Soil Classification System, which includes color,
relative moisture content, primary soil type (based on grain size), and any minor
constituent soil types.
• Moisture content was determined in accordance with ASTM D2216 on 15
representative samples to aid in identification and correlation of soil types.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 4 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
�i Aright peowe. Right sofu�
• Percent Fines tests indicate the percentage of soil passing the US No.
200 sieve. This test was performed on nine selected soil samples in accordance
with ASTM D422.
• Atterberg Limits, also known as plasticity index, was performed on one fine-
grained cohesive soil sample in accordance with ASTM D4318.
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 5 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
LK E/NFEL DER
Bright Awpk. Rlgh' iotu —
3 SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed lift station is located adjacent to Renton Municipal Airport, along the west
side of the West Perimeter Road in a relatively level landscape area extending parallel
to the road, and about 20 feet wide (in the east -west direction). To the west of this
landscape area, the Rainier Avenue roadway embankment extends up to the west at
approximately 2H:1 V (horizontal:vertica1) with Rainier Avenue about 8 to 12 feet above
the West Perimeter Road.
Vegetation in the area consists of lawn and trees. Overhead communications lines
extend parallel to the road, approximately over the proposed cut retaining wall. There
are numerous buried utilities running both up slope and down slope of the proposed
structures.
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Below about 2 to 3 inches of sod and topsoil, we encountered fill, alluvium, and
weathered siltstone. A general description of the subsurface materials
encountered/interpreted during our exploration program is presented in the following
paragraphs. Boring logs are presented in Appendix A.
FILL: Fill was encountered below the sod/topsoil in KHA-1, KHA-2, and KB-2. The fill
is medium dense and generally consists of silty sand and gravel with cobbles. We
observed cobbles up to 8 inches in diameter in our hand auger explorations. We
interpret this to be Rainier Avenue embankment fill. We expect the fill thickness to
range from approximately 4 to 5 feet along the proposed retaining wall alignment.
ALLUVIUM: Alluvium associated with the former Black River was encountered beneath
the fill in KHA-1 and KB-2. The alluvium consisted of soft dark brown to black silt with
fibrous organic material overlaying loose gray sand containing some silt. Moisture
contents ranged from about 117 percent in the organic material to about 39 percent in
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 6 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(X__�L'EINFELDER
the loose sand. The alluvium increases in thickness from about 10 feet in DCP-5 to 17
feet in KB-2 (generally south to north).
WEATHERED SILTSTONE: We encountered dense to very dense, low plasticity silt
with fine sand below sod/topsoil in KB-1, beneath the fill in KHA-2, and beneath the
alluvium in KHA-1 and KB-2. This unit was relatively easy to penetrate with the drilling
equipment we utilized, and SPT blow counts varied from 36 to over 60 blows per foot.
Based on geologic mapping in the area, we interpret this to be weak weathered siltstone
bedrock of either the Renton or Tukwila Formation. Despite the geologic term
"bedrock," from a construction engineering perspective, the weathered siltstone is
considered as very dense low -plasticity silt and fine sand (i.e., "soil'). KB-2 and our
DCP sounding explorations suggest the depth to the surface of the weathered siltstone
increases to the north. We encountered weathered siltstone at about 17 feet below
ground surface in KB-2, which is near the center of the proposed wet well.
3.3 GROUND WATER
A groundwater monitoring well was installed in KB-1 with its screened zone from 15 to
25 feet below ground surface (i.e., within the weathered siltstone unit and bracketing the
expected 20-foot wet well excavation depth). We measured ground water at a depth of
4.5 feet below top of casing on March 29, 2013. We also observed groundwater
seepage at about 6 feet below ground surface during excavation of exploration KHA-1
on March 12, 2013. Both of these observations correspond to approximate
groundwater Elevation 23 feet.
Groundwater conditions should be expected to vary with season, precipitation, irrigation
and other factors. Regional ground water levels are typically highest from late fall to
late spring during the high rainfall season. Irrigation of landscaped areas on or adjacent
to the site can also cause a fluctuation of local groundwater levels.
001 32120.000A/SEA1 4R01 34 Page 7 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KL E/NFEL DER
a,ynt,4 pk. fthr son,t;au
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of our studies, the project is feasible from a geotechnical
perspective. A brief summary of our conclusions and recommendations is presented in
the following paragraphs. More detailed discussion along with design and construction
recommendations, are presented in subsequent sections.
Retaining Wall: Our explorations indicate the proposed cut retaining wall will be
founded on weathered siltstone at the south end and alluvium at the north end. Based
on settlement and stability considerations along the north end of this wall, the wall
should be settlement -tolerant and should be constructed using precast concrete blocks
or rock filled gabion baskets. Along the northern portion, where alluvium exists, it will be
necessary to excavate and replace at least 2 feet of this material. The excavated
material should be replaced with angular gravel such as Permeable Ballast. Differential
settlement up to 2 inches over 50 lineal feet should be anticipated along the length of
the wall. Detailed cut wall design and construction recommendations are presented in
Section 4.1.
Wet Well and Valve Vault: The proposed wet well and valve vault excavations will
extend about 22 feet and 12 feet below the observed groundwater elevation,
respectively. Temporary shoring could consist of interlocking steel sheet piles or soldier
piles and wood lagging. A sunken caisson could also be used for the wet well
excavation. Design and construction recommendations for temporary shoring and
ground water control are presented in Section 4.2.
Lightly Loaded Structures: Foundations for the small lightweight structures (generator
structure and control room) can be grade -supported using thickened edge slabs on
grade and/or spread footings. Foundation design and construction recommendations
are presented in Section 4.3.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 8 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
Groundwater Considerations: Manhole and buried vaults should be designed to resist
upward buoyancy forces. We recommend assuming that the groundwater is at the
ground surface when designing for buoyancy forces.
Utility Trench Excavations: We anticipate wet soil conditions and/or groundwater will
be encountered during excavation of utility trenches below an elevation of about 25 feet.
Excavated wet silty soil will require drying before re -use as trench backfill material.
Dewatering will likely be needed where excavations extend below the observed
groundwater elevation. Dewatering could consist of sumps and pumps, dewatering
wells, or a vacuum well point dewatering system. Utility trench excavation and backfill
recommendations are presented in Section 4.7.
4.1 CUT RETAINING WALL
At the time of this draft report, site grading plans were not available. However, we
understand a cut retaining wall will be required along the west side of the lift station site.
Based on drawing number C7 from the 90% design drawings, dated August 5, 3013, the
cut wall will be approximately 75.5 feet long. The current site plan shows the wall
roughly coinciding with the existing elevation contour at 30 feet. The plans show the top
of the wall at an elevation of about 30 feet and with a maximum exposed height of
4 feet.
Our exploration KHA-1 encountered alluvium below embankment fill at the north end of
the proposed wall. This material has a low bearing capacity and is prone to immediate
and long-term settlement. Our exploration KHA-2 encountered dense silt and fine sand
which is not likely to settle. We estimate that long-term differential settlements of about
2 inches will develop along this 75.5-foot long wall. Providing such settlement is
tolerable, we recommend the wall be constructed either using segmental concrete
blocks (e.g., Keystone or Ultrablock) or rock -filled gabion baskets (e.g. Hilfiker). Gabion
walls can tolerate greater differential settlement than conventional segmental block
walls. Pre -cast concrete blocks should have a minimum block width depth (measured
00132120.000NSEA14R0134 Page 9 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
v� .,ryhu+lopx- Rynr sm zoo.
perpendicular to the wall) of 18 inches. The segmental wall should have an embedment
depth (below finished site grade) of at least 18 inches
Due to the inclined backslope comprising the Rainier Avenue embankment, this cut wall
should be designed to retain a static equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pounds per cubic
foot (pcf). Because the wall will be less than 5 feet in height, we do not consider it
necessary to include a seismic incremental loading in addition to this static earth
pressure. A wall batter on the order of 6 to 8V:1 H (vertical: horizontal) is recommended
to enhance the stability and long-term appearance of the wall.
Unbalanced lateral loading on the wall will be resisted by friction and passive earth
pressure. Wall friction can be evaluated using an allowable coefficient of 0.4 between
segmental blocks or gabions, and compacted granular material. This includes a factor
of safety of about 1.5. Passive earth pressure will develop along the vertical face of
buried blocks/gabions. However, unless the front of the wall is protected by concrete or
asphalt, passive pressure should be neglected. If the final grade in front of the toe of
the wall is paved, then allowable passive earth pressure may be taken as an equivalent
fluid pressure of 150 pcf. This includes afactor of safety of 2.0.
To reduce the magnitude of differential settlement we recommend excavating native
soils and replacing with at least 2 feet of crushed rock where the existing soft alluvium is
within 2 feet of the bottom of the wall. Identify these soil may require potholing during
construction.
The 2-foot thick pad should consist of 2'/2-inch minus crushed rock, such as Ballast
(specified in Section 9-03.9(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications). The width of
this 2-foot thick gravel pad (in the east -west direction) should be 1 foot beyond the front
face and 1 foot beyond the back face of the blocks or gabion baskets. As an example, if
2'/2-foot wide Ultrablock is used for this wall, the over-excavation/replacement width
should be at least 4'/2 feet. If desired, the ballast may be covered with a
choking/leveling course of 1 %-inch minus crushed surfacing base course (CSBC), as
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 10 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
4ig11[ PkOpIR. RIg11t fN00011i
specified in Standard Specifications Section 9-03.9(3). The finer CSBC choking/leveling
course will help establish a uniform level surface upon which to build the wall.
4.2 WET WELL AND VALVE VAULT EXCAVATION SHORING
The proposed wet well and valve vault excavations will extend about 22 feet and 12 feet
below the existing site grade, respectively. The excavations will extend below the
observed groundwater elevation by 22 feet and 8 feet, respectively. We understand the
excavations will require shoring due to the close proximity of existing infrastructure.
Appropriate shoring methods for the wet well and valve vault excavations include soldier
piles with timber lagging, interlocking steel sheet piles, or a sunken steel or concrete
caisson. The principal advantage of a relatively water -tight shoring system such as
interlocking steel sheet piles or a sunken caisson is that construction dewatering may
be accomplished from within the shoring, without significantly lowering the ground water
outside the shoring. Use of a non -water -tight shoring system will require a dewatering
system that will draw down the water table outside the shoring system. Design earth
pressures for an internally braced shoring system after dewatering are presented in
Plate 3.
Based on our explorations and laboratory testing, we conclude that wet well excavations
in the weathered siltstone (i.e., very dense silt and fine sand) can be accomplished
using conventional earth excavation equipment and techniques (augers, excavator
buckets with teeth, digging buckets, and grabs). It may be necessary to utilize relative
large equipment and/or narrow buckets and grabs, and to maintain cutting teeth in good
working order in order when excavating the siltstone.
4.2.1 Interlocking Steel Sheet Pile Shoring
Interlocking steel sheet piles could be utilized to construct a relatively water -tight
shoring system. The sheet piling could be extracted or cut below ground surface and
left in place when the lift station construction is completed and backfilled.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 11 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KLE1NrELD_=R
269ht hopk. Right Solution[
It may be difficult to drive sheet piles into the weathered siltstone underlying the lift
station site. We recommend sheet piling with a minimum web thickness of 1/2-inch be
used. A large vibratory hammer should be used to install the steel sheets. Sheet piling
sections with a web thickness of 3/8-inch or less are prone damage when driving into
the weathered siltstone underlying this site. However, field conditions may still require
pre -drilling be done to facilitate sheet pile installation. The contractor should ultimately
be responsible for the design and the safe/proper installation' of the temporary shoring.
4.2.2 Permanent Sunken Caisson
Temporary shoring could also be completed using the sunken caisson approach. This
approach involves use of cylindrical sections of steel or pre -cast concrete, with
excavation completed from inside the caisson and "in the wet". As the excavation is
completed, using excavator buckets and grabs, the caisson is eased/pushed down.
Additional sections of steel or concrete are added as required. Once the excavation
has reached the target depth, a concrete slab, of the order of 5 feet thick, is tremie-
placed. After the "tremie slab" has cured, ground water is pumped out. The wet well
structure can then be constructed within this permanent structure.
4.2.3 Soldier Pile and Lagging
A solder pile and timber lagging system, combined with construction dewatering wells or
well points, is appropriate for this project. Soldier piles consisting of wide flange beams
would be installed into 24- or 30-inch diameter vertical drilled shafts, and backfilled with
lean concrete. The soldier piles would be installed about 10 feet below the bottom of
the excavation and they would be placed on 6 to 8 foot center -to -center spacing (in
plan) along the shoring perimeter. As the excavation is made, timber lagging boards
would be placed to span horizontally between the soldier piles. Internal bracing would
be added as the excavation proceeds. Once the excavation has reached the design
bottom elevation, a working surface consisting of 12 inches of crushed rock would be
placed, upon which the pre -cast or cast -in -place wet well structure could then be placed
or constructed.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 12 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELDER
Depending how the shoring is constructed, it may be possible to extract the soldier
piles, or they could be cut below ground surface and left in place when the lift station
construction is completed and backfilled.
Because of the high permeability of a soldier pile and lagging system, a construction
dewatering system, consisting of a series of dewatering wells, or possibly well points
would be required to dewater the site area before the excavation begins.
4.2.4 Construction Dewatering and Ground Water Control
If a relatively water tight shoring system consisting of interlocking steel sheet piles, or a
sunken steel or concrete caisson, is employed, ground water can be controlled entirely
within the excavation. With either of these two approaches, excavation can occur "in
the wet." Once the excavation is completed, a concrete tremie slab can be placed.
Once the tremie slab has cured, water within the excavation can be pumped out. The
tremie slab would need to be sufficiently thick (of the order of 5 to 7 feet thick) to resist
the upward hydraulic gradient due to ground water outside of the excavation. Minor
seepage/leakage into the excavation could then be controlled using one or two sumps
and trash pumps. It is necessary to consider the additional shoring depth, excavation
volume, and tremie slab thickness with this approach:
A formal construction dewatering system will likely be required for utility excavations
and would also be required if the contractor elects to install a relatively pervious soldier
pile and lagging shoring system. The system will like require use of wells or well points.
Based on analysis of field permeability test data our piezometer at boring KB-1, we
estimate the weathered siltstone has an average permeability on the order of 1 x10-5
cm/sec. However, we expect the overlying alluvium, which gets thicker to the north, is
more pervious. We anticipate dewatering in the proposed wet well excavation will
require a discharge rate of less than 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm), likely between 2
and 200 gpm. The contractor should retain a dewatering specialist to design and
operate the dewatering system. The contract documents should place the responsibility
for all aspects of any construction dewatering system, on the contractor.
00132120.00OA/SEA14R0134 Page 13 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
�i.�t . �h, sauf�
Groundwater draw -down will potentially induce settlement in alluvial soils at and
adjacent to the site. We estimate potential draw -down induced settlements to be two
inches or less using general soil property correlations. Potential settlement will most
likely be on the order of on inch, and will decrease with increasing distance from the
dewatering wells. Based on the fact that construction of the existing lift station and
associated deep utilities likely required temporary dewatering, soils in the area have
likely been subject to draw -down induced stresses in the past, thereby reducing
settlement potential. The contractor should limit temporary groundwater drawdown to
no more than 4 feet below the deepest excavation to reduce the potential for draw -down
induced settlement.
4.3 GENERATOR AND CONTROL ROOM FOUNDATIONS
Small lightweight generator enclosure and control room structures can be supported on
thickened edge slabs or strip footings, proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of
2,000 psf. This allowable bearing pressure may be increased to 3,000 psf for short-
term transient loading due to wind and earthquakes. Footings should be buried at least
18 inches below adjacent exterior finished grade for frost protection. Strip footings
should be a minimum of 18 inches wide, this will likely control over bearing capacity.
All strip footings and thickened slab edges should be prepared by sub -excavating at
least 2 feet below the bottom of footings, proof -rolling and/or probing, and replacing with
compacted 2'/z-inch minus crushed rock, such as Ballast (specified in Section 9-03.9(1)
of the WSDOT Standard Specifications). If desired, the ballast may be covered with a
choking/leveling course of 1'/4-inch minus crushed surfacing base course (CSBC), as
specified in Standard Specifications Section 9-03.9(3). The finer CSBC choking/leveling
course will help establish a uniform level surface upon which to build the footings.
The width of sub -excavation and replacement should be 12 inches wider than the
footing width in all dimensions. For example, for 18-inch wide perimeter strip footings,
the sub -excavation and replacement should be 24 inches deep and 42 inches wide.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 14 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL DER
8H9hr P"ple. air SatutAoft
Wind and seismic loads on the structures will be resisted by friction and passive earth
pressure. The allowable passive resistance can be taken as 300 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) equivalent fluid weight. The upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected in passive
pressure design computation unless it protected by pavement or slab -on -grade. The
allowable coefficient of friction along footing bottoms can be taken as 0.40. These
passive resistance and base friction values include safety factors of about 1.5, and are
based on the assumption that all footing backfill has been placed and compacted as
recommended in the construction recommendations.
For footings designed and constructed in accordance with the above recommendations,
estimated total static settlement is about 1 inch, and differential settlement is about
'/2 inch.
4.4 WET WELL AND VALVE VAULT STRUCTURES
Below -grade wet well and valve vault structures can be supported on thickened edge
slabs or strip footings, proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. This
allowable bearing pressure may be increased to 2,250 psf for short-term transient
loading due to wind and earthquakes. These values assume that footings will be buried
at least 10 feet below finished grade and bear on prepared subgrade. Strip footings
should be a minimum of 18 inches wide.
We anticipate that wet well footings will likely bear on weathered siltstone; valve vault
footings will likely bear on alluvium. All footings for these structures should be prepared
by sub -excavating at least 1 foot below the bottom of footings and replacing with
compacted 2'/2-inch minus crushed rock, such as Ballast (specified in Section 9-03.9(1)
of the WSDOT Standard Specifications). If desired, the ballast may be covered with a
choking/leveling course of 1 %-inch minus crushed surfacing base course (CSBC), as
specified in Standard Specifications Section 9-03.9(3). The finer CSBC choking/leveling
course will help establish a uniform level surface upon which to build the footings.
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 15 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
1 KLEWrELOER
& gM People. agM SolUVOft
In the event that particularly soft subgrade conditions are encountered, it may be
necessary to increase sub -excavation by an additional 1 to 2 feet as directed by the
Geotechnical Engineer. Where increased sub -excavation is required, the Ballast should
be wrapped in a geotextile fabric conforming to Section 9-33.2(1). Table 3 Soil
Stabilization of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. Four- to eight -inch quarry spalls
may be placed in lieu of ballast and geotextile and should be coked/leveled with CSBC.
Sub -excavation below the wet well and valve vault should extend below the entire
structure footprint and need only extend 12 inches beyond the perimeter footing,
regardless of over -excavation depth.
For footings designed and constructed in accordance with the above recommendations,
estimated total static settlement is about 1 inch, and differential settlement is about
'/2 inch.
Wind and seismic loads on the structures will be resisted by friction and passive earth
pressure. The allowable passive resistance can be taken as 150 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) equivalent fluid weight. The upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected in passive
pressure design computation unless it protected by pavement or slab -on -grade. The
allowable coefficient of friction along footing bottoms can be taken as 0.40. These
passive resistance and base friction values include safety factors of about 1.5, and are
based on the assumption that backfill has been placed and compacted as
recommended in the construction recommendations, or consists of existing native soils.
We recommend below -grade structures be designed to resist an at -rest, buoyant earth
pressure of 30 pcf equivalent fluid weight plus full hydrostatic head of 62.4 pcf, with an
assumed ground water table taken at the ground surface. All buried structures should
be designed to resist hydraulic buoyancy. Ground water should be assumed at the
ground surface for buoyancy resistance calculations.
00132120.000NSEA14R0134 Page 16 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
26ght �. �r � Vo-
4.5 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK
General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet
conditions are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into
the contract specifications.
• Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize exposure to wet
weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed
promptly by the placement and compaction of clean structural fill. The size and
type of construction equipment used may need to be limited to prevent soil
disturbance.
• The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote
run-off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water.
• The ground,surface within the construction area should be sealed by a smooth
drum roller, or equivalent, and under no circumstances should soil be left un-
compacted and exposed to moisture infiltration.
• Excavation and placement of fill material should be undertaken under the
observation of a representative of the geotechnical engineer, to determine that
the work is being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and
the recommendations contained herein.
4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS
The native soils are easily erodible when exposed and subjected to surface water flow.
Surface water runoff can be controlled during construction by careful grading practices.
Typically, these include the construction of shallow earthen berms and the use of
temporary sumps to collect runoff and prevent water from damaging exposed
subgrades. All collected water should be directed under control to a suitable discharge
system.
Erosion can also be limited through the judicious use of silt fences and straw bales. The
contractor should be responsible for control of ground and surface water and should
employ sloping, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures as
00132120.000NSEA14R0134 Page 17 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KLE AfrEL DER
&iOt ft.A*. ft4ht S&ti
necessary to prevent erosion of soils. In this regard, grading, ditching, sumps,
dewatering, and other measures should be employed as necessary to permit proper
completion of the work.
4.7 PIPELINE TRENCHWORK, BEDDING AND BACKFILL
We anticipate that where possible, pipelines will be installed using traditional open
trench construction methods, with trench support provided by trench boxes and
dewatering as necessary.
Pipe zone bedding and backfill should consist of gravel that can be compacted and
shaped to fit the pipe profile and should conform to manufacturer recommendations.
Crushed surfacing base course or top course (CSBC or CSTC) as specified in Section
9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications is generally a suitable material for pipe
zone bedding and backfill.
Some of the onsite soils will be suitable for re -use as trench backfill. However, the
organic rich alluvium expected to be encountered in portions of the trench excavations
along the northern portion of the site, are unsuitable for re -use as trench backfill. A
Kleinfelder geotechnical inspector, or a City of Renton construction manager
knowledgeable in such matters, should evaluate the suitability of on -site soil for re -use
as structural backfill, on a case -by -case basis during construction.
Trench backfill more than 4 feet below finished pavement elevation should be
compacted to at least 90% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density, and trench
backfill within 4 feet of the finished pavement elevation should be compacted to at least
95% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. In landscaping areas, trench backfill
within 4 feet of finished grate should be compacted to 90% of the Modified Proctor
maximum dry density.
00132120.000NSEA14R0134 Page 18 & 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFELOER
969ht Kaye. Right salut-
5 LIMITATIONS
The recommendations contained in this report are based on the field explorations and
our understanding of the proposed project. The investigation was performed using a
mutually agreed upon scope of services, based on common geotechnical standard of
practice. It is our opinion that this study was a cost-effective method to explore the
subject site and evaluate the potential geotechnical concerns. Nevertheless, it should
be noted that the subsurface information used to formulate our conclusions and
recommendations were based on the limited information obtained in the discrete
sampling locations.
It is possible that variations in soil and groundwater conditions exist between the points
explored. The nature and extent of these variations may not be evident until
construction occurs. If soil or groundwater conditions are encountered at this site that
are different from those described in this report, our firm, and the design team, should
be immediately notified so that we may make any necessary revisions to our
recommendations. In addition, if the scope of the proposed project, locations of
facilities, or design loads change from the descriptions given in this report, our firm, and
the design team, should be notified.
Our scope of services did not include evaluations of the potential presence or absence
of hazardous or contaminated soil or ground water on site.
The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety
precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's
methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our
report for consideration in design, or as required by the project plans and specifications.
This report has been prepared for use in design and construction of the subject project
for Stantec and the City of Renton, in accordance with the generally accepted
geotechnical standards of practice at the time the report was written. No warranty,
express or implied, is made.
001 32120.000A/SEA14R01 34 Page 19 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
(KL INFIEL DER
84ght P..Pk. ate, S.Ul-,
This report may be used only by Stantec, the City of Renton, and their sub -consultants,
and only for the purposes stated within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no
event later than one year from the date of the report. Land or facility use, on and off -site
conditions, regulations, or other factors may change over time, and additional work may
be required with the passage of time. Any party other than Stantec or the City of Renton
who wishes to use this report shall notify Kleinfelder of such intended use. Based on the
intended use of the report, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed
and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements
by the client, or anyone else, will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the
use of this report by any unauthorized party. In addition, the client agrees to defend,
indemnify, and hold Kleinfelder harmless, from any claim or liability associated with
such unauthorized use or non-compliance.
It is the responsibility of Stantec, the City of Renton, and their sub -consultants, to see
that all parties to the project including the designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are
made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report
for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor's option and risk. Further
guidelines and information on this geotechnical report can be found in the ASFE
publication entitled: Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report,
enclosed in Appendix C of this report.
00132120.000A/SEA14R0134 Page 20 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
LK E/NFEL DER
AdDhe RROpIR. Rths Solutmon
6 REFERENCES
Bouwer, H., and R.C. Rice, 1976, "A slug test for determining conductivity of unconfined
aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells," Water Resources Research v.
12.
Bouwer, H, 1989, "The Bouwer and Rice slug test — an update", Ground Water 27(3).
WSDOT, 2012, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction,
Manual M41-10.
00132120.00OA/SEA14R0134 Page 21 of 21 March 19, 2014
Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder
0
Ll/ L-/A/CL-/
ins.
a� ion � a.. w� normcxwn sew
\4
• sa.n lx su4 . � �
iy � �sep..a,pin sow
1-4
� 1
Sues :tsn N+a � Sae+l„e ie■I Sm s1lp SDek � r' arltdKf
1 t �tr
ywenura swa:xaa'� i sa..n::m ., sen�tvp n,..� �. • - ' 7 ��i'f R 'y ,,1 '✓� � r... ; w,�®t
i
taa,lw�..
�-
�. ,�n•Inaas.. n ! � , , t�
B.F.
TEIL
E t
y Mouth 31d wen
As j
swnn,pq,_ I rP a �� P !
•e
f' •'e'''„e�� s P. rsooa,�ndst-ee�.
p�srp,, JA? S.wl� lid-
0.vnh `s`y.._"^ _"9�•,',oi.�'a°4. a s - - Fovea. Xe'tt
a,.:. i. '� p ! 3
1d Sue fu seYi
■
NQt to Scal6, 1l .,� �_ ■ -
Tne irforme'iOn ir. IUCed tb,s graphic representation has been corrpded from s ;
varoty of sourcestand R fUbtect to Mange wMout notice Kleinfatder makes no yw ynnYs4
representabons or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy. completeness. s,a
bmNiness, or rights to the use of such information This document a not sntended for
use as a land survey product nor is a designed or intended as a construction design
document The use or MS of the inlamWtron conta'nt on tens gra ph,c
representabon is at the sofe risk of Me party using or misusing ;
the InlOrmatton s p,
■� �' j — P- Reference tree 2013r
PROJECT NO 132120 PLATE
DRAWN BY J S VICINITY MAP
("KLEINFEL DER CHECKED BY S F 1
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE 3a-201a
West Perimeter Road
REVISED Renton Washington
PAGE. 1 of 1
CAD FILE: G:\132120\132120P2.dwg
SLOPE SITE 02% -�
-- TO BACK OF NEW
SIDEWALK
—per' 30—OH�
D29 q
— 28
GRASS
.-
W/ CONCRETE BLO"G
-(40 AT -AS REQ'D.)
f8 10" STEEL CA
1� P
7' x 10'
GENERATOR SET 10'-8" x 8'-8"
(SEE NOTE BELOWCONTROL BUILDING
PLOTTED: 3/7/2014 5:15 PM BY: jeff stewart
W/ CONCRETE BLQCKfN�\_
- --{ROTATE AS REO'D.)
- p --
REMOVE EX. TREE 8'0 WEL WELL
'P= -2,�.I}, 114AL vnuly DCP-4j
—PP
CONC. CURB &GUTTER.
ON NEW ROITE�
.......
L-1.4,
t r : •e•:: 1.:eoR E:•
C A1pt:...,: : ..:::::..::::...
...................TO
::.:::::::.,: ,� •.
�
EX. RB &GUTTER-�'10
r.•.,�-, „w.:,,w•;�-,•:•:w+:
,•.v.:: ..�..�.,w.: Q�t•..;..f^*I.�tN` •
:;:ffp,T1�}::FI�,l • ••_M-..
�
•
RV1E=14--
S.,L°.J i
���s
_ p
d
A.S11)EWALK5 `Nb`HOLE<
..
CURB --
--+- - --
�-
EX. SSMH 53Q7'071
RIM-26.79 -'
CTR � JElL S=15.$
—
20"OK
PT
AY P -
_ _ W -�-i—W---W----W---- - p - �L-_
—W — — —W —W REPLACE C B &GUTTER SAUT EX. CONC,
— - W REMOVE CURB k GUTTER WITHIN PROTECT A SURFACING 6
LIMITS OF SAW CUTS EXIST. CB ER DETAIL C10 NTH NEW R LLED CURB ' TRAN TION �JENrRQI
- - - - - - - - - - - - PER DETAIL LFF015-1 GUTTER X. CUR'
-SD--- i �S----SD---- SD---- ----SD --LSD-----SD----LSD = --SD- --JSD--SD---- .-SD--
- - -- - - - - --
2% CROSS SLOPE ON - - - - -
SIDEWALK -2TYP.)
RIM=25.9 EX. SSHM 5307 065
BLACK
CRCPI CULVERT NEW 4"CI�23.9 23 20 PERIMETER RQ y '` \ �j CTR CHANNEL= 4.76 -
- — —W— — — — W — — —i—W— - —w- w- - - — —w— — — — —�— � w— — L__
8-INCH PVC j9d
i GRAVITY SEWER
1W Ef W>E Elt-
�� PROPOSED �� RECHANNEL EX. MH
�- CB 4'0 MANHOLE 1 i
PLUG .J STING
RIM=25.89 10-INCH PVC GRAVITYSEWER
VERT CURB IE 12" CONC E-23.89
-- RT CURB-----_�.-.--__ - i ����----__- _ --------------GRAVITY SEWER - -�-- --M- IQEA�L--------
------------------------------------------------------------------�� - +-----------
_ �-- I I
Legend
KB-1* Boring Number and Approximate Location
KHA-1-(> Hand Auger Number and Approximated Location
DCP-1 m DCPT Number and Approximate Location Reference: Base map was taken from ROTH HILL plan LS1, Proposed Lift Station
Preliminary Layout, provided by the City of Renton in March, 2013.
0 10 20
PROJECT NO. 132120 PLATE
SCALE: 1" = 10' SCALE IN FEET \ DRAWN BY: J.S. SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled tram a variety of ('OKL E/NFEL JOER CHECKED BY: S.F. 2
sources and is subject to change without notkA. Klelnfaider makes no representations or Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
anumantles. express o implied, as to accuracy, completeness. timeliness, or rights to the ties
of such information. This document is not intended for use as a lend survey product nor Is it Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3-19-2013 West Perimeter Road
designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the
information contained on this graphic representation is at the ode nsk of the party using or
msusmg Ma information REVISED: 3-7-2014 Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
L
3
m
m
w
J
LL
0
U
EXISTING
GROUND
SURFACE
CONSTRUCTION SURCHARGE LOAD q (PSF)
OUTSIDE
—7 0.25q L
21H
BRACED SHEET PILE OR
SOLDIER PILES OR CAISSON WALL
BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION
H (FT)
D (FT)
130D
Fes— 62.4H �I
SURCHARGE HYDRO STATIC APPARENT EARTH PASSIVE
PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE
Not to Scale NOTES:
1. MAX GROUNDWATER TABLE ASSUMED TO BE AT GROUND SURFACE OUTSIDE
me nmm, .maea "" Im. ur.vn� ev.>°m,mn n,. ee.n wnv�iea n,m . THE SHORING AND BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION INSIDE THE SHORING.
wnlea 2 ALL UNITS IN FEET AND POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT.
a m�n h i t
e,rpm.."Ine,,.ewlbn. rn�. o<.mem mr 3. APPARENT EARTH PRESSURES ACT OVER FULL PILE SPACING
°nn `"", ;v'°am,.e;"n a°"°„ea °r:ne.°ea —.e °d—nA"vae"°. 4 IGNORE PASSIVE RESISTANCE OVER THE UPPER 2 FEET BELOW THE CUT LINE.
The W ne to m
revre..nl,l"n",I lne wN n.M al lne w", gorlm glM "lomiat"n. r 5. PROVIDE AT LEAST 2 FEET OF CATCHMENT AT TOP OF TEMPORARY SHORING.
\ PROJECT NO. 132120 EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM PLATE
DRAWN BY: J.S. FOR TEMPORARY SHORING
rLE/NFELOER CHECKED BY: M.B.3
Bright People. Right Solutions. Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
9 P 9 DATE: 3-29-2013 West Perimeter Road
REVISED: 3-7-14 Renton, Washington PAGE: 1 of 1
ins.
SAMPLE/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS
HAND AUGER SAMPLE
DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION
STANDARD PENETRATION SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
(2 in. (50.8 mm.) outer diameter and 1-3/8 in, (34.9 mm.) inner
diameter)
GROUND WATER GRAPHICS
SL WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)
WATER LEVEL (level after exploration completion)
�y WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)
OBSERVED SEEPAGE
NOTES
report and graphics key are an integral part of these logs. All data
and interpretations in this log are subject to the explanations and
limitations stated in the report.
• Lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate boundaries
only. Actual transitions may be gradual or differ from those shown.
• No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock conditions
between individual sample locations.
• Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point of
exploration on the date indicated.
• In general, Unified Soil Classification System designations presented
on the logs were based on visual classification in the field and were
modified where appropriate based on gradation and index property testing.
• Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity
Chart, and coarse grained soils with between 5%and 12% passing the No.
200 sieve require dual USCS symbols, is., GW-GM, GP -GM, GYV-GC,
GP -GC, GC -GM, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW -SC, SP-SC, SC-SM.
• If sampler is not able to be liven at least 6 inches
a 3 inches diameter by 2.5 inches inch long 60 degree conical point driven
with a 170 rt2 pound hammer dropped 24 20.5 inches.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 2487)
•wq
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
v
CLEAN
GRAVEL
Cuz4 and
1s Ca3
I '
♦
GW
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
LITTLE OR NO FINES
>w
WITH
Cu <4 and/
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
5%
FINES
or 1 Cc>3 )
C
GP
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
LITTLE OR NO FINES
WELL GRAVELS,
i
is
I
GW-GM
-GRADED
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
a,
Cuz4 and �� ��
LITTLE FINES
1sca3
—
—
GRAVELS
•/%
I
GW-GC
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
_
WITH
�����
LITTLE CLAY FINES
5%TO
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
12%
FINES
°
GP -GM
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
Cu<4 and/
0 ll
LITTLE FINES
�
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
c
or 1>Cc>3
GP -GC
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
CLAY FINES
5
LITTLE
�
s
m
-Fh t
I`U
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SILT -SAND
GRAVELS
MIXTURES
—InWITH
>
(rti�
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS,
12%
FINES
�.`
n�C
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES
° (
GC -GM
CLAYEY GRAVELS,
E
C7
j,
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY -SILT MIXTURES
r
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
$
CLEAN
Cuz6 and
. '°°
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
SANDS
1sCa3
-`J
I
LITTLE OR NO FINES
WITH
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
.G
<5%
FINES
C
SP
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
J
O
or 1>Ccn3
:.
LITTLE OR NO FINES
rn
tU
r
SW-SM
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
2
Cua6and�}.
LITTLE FINES
4¢
O
E
1s Ccr3
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
SANDS
SW -SC
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
C
oWITH
LITTLE CLAY FINES
5% TO
SP-SM
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
p
-6
12%
FINES.
Cu<6 and/
or bCo3
`�':�t
:. ,
LITTLE FINES
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
SP-SC
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
_
.>;
LITTLE CLAY FINES
m
SM
SILTY SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL -SILT
MIXTURES
SANDS�'�'
WITH >
CLAYEY SANDS,
p
12%
',.
SC
SAND -GRAVEL -CLAY MIXTURES
Q
FINES
j(
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -SILT -CLAY
N
llll
sC SM
MIXTURES
MIL
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, SILT' OR
INORGANIC
FINE SANDS, SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
—
0
%
j/
CL
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
`m
SILTS AND CLAYS
O C
N E t
(Liquid Limit
j
INORGANIC CLAYS -SILTS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
W `o =
less than SOi
CL-ML
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
GL
ORGAMC SILTS 8 ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF
Z
—
LOW PLASTICITY
rev n
m
I
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
�
MH
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Liquid Limit
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT
CLAYS
LL
greater than 501�
OH
IDRGAMC CLAYS 8 ORGANIC SILTS OF
MEDIUM -TO -HIGH PLASTICTV
\ PROJECT NO.* 132M GRAPHICS KEY PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
rLE/NFELOER CHECKED BY: MB A_
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: W712014 West Perimeter Road
\\ Renton Municipal Airport
�� REVISED: Renton, Washington
DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
Angular
Panicles have sharp edges and relalivey plane
sides with un lishetl surfaces
O
Subangular
artic es are slmllar to angu ar escrlption ut ave
rounded etl es
O
O
O
�q
Partices have neatly plane sitles but have
Subrounded
well-rounded comers and etl es
Rounded
Subrounded Subangular An ular
Rounded
Particles have smocthy curvetl sitles and no edges
DESCRIPTION
SIEVE
SIZE
GRAIN
SIZE
APPROXIMATE
SIZE
Boulders
>12 in. (304.8 mm.)
>72 in. (304.8 mm.)
Larger than basketball -sized
Cobbles
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 nm.)
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)
Fist -sized to basketball-sizetl
coarse
3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)
3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm)
Thumb -sized to fist-sizetl
Gravel
fine
it4 - 3/4 in. (#4 - 19 mm.)
0.19 - 0.75 in. (4.8 - 19 mm.)
Pea-sizetl tothumb-szetl
coarse
#10 - tt4
0.079 - 0.19 in. (2 - 4.9 mm.)
Rock salt -sized to pea -sized
Sand
metlium
it40 - #10
0.017 - 0.079 in. (0.43 - 2 mm.)
Sugar -sized to rock salt -sized
fine
ir200 - #10
.0029 - 0.017 in. (0.07 - 0.43 nm.
Flour -sized to sugar-sizetl
Fines
Passing il200
<0.0029 in. (<0.07 mm.)
Flour -sized and smaller
GRAIN SIZE Munsell Color
NAME ABBR
Red R
Yellow Red YR
Yellow Y
Green Yellow GY
Green G
Blue Green BG
Blue B
Purple Blue PB
_`C►� Purple P
Red Purple RP
ANGULARITY Black N
PLASTICITY MOISTURE CONTENT
REACTION WITH HYDROCHLORG ACID
APPARENT RELATIVE DENSITY - COARSE -GRAINED SOIL CONSISTENCY - FINE-GRAINED SOIL
APPAREhlT MODIFIED CA CALIFORNIA RELATIVE
DENSITY SPT-Ny SAMPLER SAMPLER DENSITY
(# blows/ft) (# blows/ri) (# bl—M) (%)
Very Loose <4 <4 <5 0 - 15
Loose 4-10 5-12 5-15 15-35
Medium Dense 10-30 12-35 15-40 35-65
Dense 30 - 50 35 - 60 40 - 70 65 - 85
Very Dense >50 >60 >70 85 - 100
NOTE'. AFTER TERZAGHI AND PECK, 1948
STRUCTURE CEMENTATION
PROJECT NO.: 132120 SOIL DESCRIPTION KEY PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
KL E/NFEL DER CHECKED BY: MB p,_2
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
` Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 317/2014 West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED: - Renton, Washington
considerable
Y finger pressure
DESCRIPTION
LL
FIELD TEST
A 1/8-in. (3 mm.) threatl cannot be rolletl at
Non- lastic
P
NP
an water content.
The threatl can harey be rolletl antl the lump
Low (L)
< 30
or threatl canna De fumed when doer than the
plastic limit.
The thread is easy to roll and not much time
is required to reach the plastic limit.
Medium (M)
30 - 50
The threatl cannot be rerolled after reaching
the plastic limit. The lump or threatl crumbles
when dder than the plastic limit
It takes considerable time rolling and kneading
to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be
High (H)
> 50
rerolletl several tirres after reaching the plastic
limtt. The lump or threatl ran be formed without
crumbling when dder than the plastic limtt
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
D
Absence of moisture, tlust , tl to the touch
Moist
Damp but no visible water
Wet
�/isible hee water, usually soil is below water table
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
None
No visible reaction
Weak
Some reaction, with bubbles forming slowly
Strong
Molent reaction, with DuDbles fomung immedialey
CONSISTENCY
SPT N�VALUES
Very Soh
0-4
Soft
5 - 8
Moderately Firm
9 - 15
Firm
i6-29
Very Firm
30 - 49
Hard
50+
DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
Stratified
FUtemating layers of varying material or color with layers
at least 1/4-in. thick note thickness
Laminated
Attemating layers of varying material or color with the layer
less than 1/4-in. thick, ncte thickness
Fissured
Breaks along defintte planes of fracture with little resistance
to fractudn
Slickensided
Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes stdaled
Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular
Block Y
lumps which resist further breakdown
Lensed
Inclusion of small pockets of diRerent soils, suU as small lenses
of sand scattered throw h a mass of cl ;note thickness
Homogeneous
Same color and appearance lhroughoN
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight
finger pressure
_Weakly
Moderately
Crumbles or breaks with
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: B-60 Hammer Type -Drop: 140 Ib. Auto - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Mud Rotary
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS .
o
�
d
No Coordinates Available
f
n m1O
u
n
o
w
r m
c m
EApproximate
4!
Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
o
F -y�''
§a
r
_
Z ^
mo
m-
E >
�0
- a
2 0
o
o.i
o.
Surface Condition: Lawn
��
nn
v
o- (j_
i2
Nn
y�
O
w d
wo
a?
�?
n d d
T
m
n
w
m a `8'
"
�?
rUii i,
o
3cJ
r
m m
N'
au
�?
an d
MONITORING WELL'
aw ❑
C7
rnz
rn m�
ern
❑
am
a?
12 inches of sod _
r -t-
Flush -mount
-+
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
SILT with Sand IMLI: trace to some
-
monument
-
coarse rounded gravel, evedence of a
-
y cased in
-
pocket of medium sand, non -plastic,
-
concrete
25
brown, moist to wet, firm
-_ -
5
22.0
72
S1
BC=10
-
15
21�-
_ 2" SCH 40
-
-
Solid PVC
-
-
Riser with
20
Bentonite
Seal
to-
-no evidence in the sample or drilling action
27.6
�{
S2
BC=6
of gravel
117-----------------
,
_
15
Sandy SILT IMLI: fine sand, non -plastic,
-
brawn, moist to wet, dense
-
15-
24.8
70
S3
BC-17
36
15
-I
0
-i
-
SILT IMLI: trace fine sand, non -plastic,
brown, moist to wet, firm to hard
20
29.1
..'.,_
2" SCH 40
S4
BC=7
26
.=�.1
Slotted 0.010
34
:: _�..::
PVC Screen
-
-
with 20/40
5
=1f
Sand Pack
25
-observed iron oxide marbling in the
32.7
95
SS
BC=7
sample
6
23
0
30
26.3
-�-
Bentonile
BC=16
SILT IMLI: trace fine sand, non -plastic,
20
=-
Chips
gray, moist to wet, firm to hard
26
_
-5
- -
PROJECT NO.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-1
PLATE
\
DRAWN BY: SF
KLE/NFEL,DER
CHECKED BY MB
A-3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3r//2014
West Perimeter Road
\\
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of2
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment:
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method:
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter:
FIELD EXPLORATION
o
ts
v y o No Coordinates Available a
m J Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
E o m o
v a
t 'c Surface Condition: Lawn na2 c
nd m E E a n
¢WZ w u
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic, S7
-� gray, moist to wet, firm to hard
The exploration was terminated at
approximately 41.5 ft, below ground
surface. The exploration was backfilled
with a monitoring well installation on March
12, 2013.
B-60 Hammer Type -Drop: 140 Ib. Auto - 30 in.
Mud Rotary
6 in. O.D.
LABORATORY
RESULTS
U�
2
N
n
-
z^
>
E>
`0-
un
>z
r/tnE
`m m
O
9,�
d
mN
'coo
� o
9Z
:9 z
.NZ
o8
m.
`D
�?
i
r1 Urn ,
e
m o
3v
Z
o
d
ri in
m N
o_a
v>
�?
a
a?
MONITORING WELL'
25.8
95
=-{
27
27
—
25
1
12
_25
25
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
'! Groundwater was observed at approximately 4.5 ft. below top of
casing 17 days after drilling completion.
GENERAL NOTES:
'See Laboratory Summary Sheets for additional lab results.
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout. prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
PROJECT NO.: 132120 BORING LOG KB-1 PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
'n r Wr.=_LOER CHECKED BY: MB A_3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3R12014 West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
z REVISED: Renton, Washington PAGE: 2 of 2
u
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Trailer Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Cathead - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Weather: Sunny, 40 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
w
o 5
a ai
t
10
No Coordinates Available
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
Surface Condition: Lawn
2;
an
m
rnz
a
0
_
a m
w rn
m1aO
n 3
�a
;$
ion
$
r of
2
" Z
0:
cn s
in %
ern
.-.
o
y ---
A o
3C)
c
a
Z
❑
Z
m=
N y
m 1i
am
e
>
�"
.N o
m N
au
w
E
o
,v_ ?
v�
�..,
x;0
ao
m Z
a_.
m
L t
S�
_
,2 inches of topsoil
F)l
-
_I
Silty GRAVEL (GM): brawn, moist,
25
7
medium dense, fine to coarse gravel, some
fine to coarse sand
(
_
- 5
-
— — — — — — — — — — — _
Nluvtum
SILT with Sand (ML): non -plastic, black,
no odor, wet, soft, fine sand, trace organic
,
S1
BC=2
1
6 in.
i
20
----------------
Silty SAND IBM): gray, wet, medium
dense, fine to medium sand
_ 10:I:
16.5
39
52
BC=6
10
n.
8
SILT (ML): non -plastic, brownish gray,
19_I
moist, medium tlense, trace fine sand
26.7
96
S3
BC=7
18
10
------------------
SILT with Sand (ML): gray, at, dense,
fine sand
_
11
18
BC=17
18
in.
12
in.
25.4
74
54
27
S5
- 20
SILT (ML): gray, wet, dense, some fine
sand
,
{
24.2
89
BC=17
24
29
12
in.
8
S6
BC=17
12
_
SILT (ML): non -plastic, brownish gray with
28
in.
red laminations, moist to wet, hard to very
25
hard, trace fine sand, 4 to 8 inch
iterbedded layers of fine sand
_
S7
BC=20
14
27
in.
-
32
0
30—
SB
BC=42
18
,
42
in.
50/6"
5
PROJECT NO.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-2
PLATE
rKLE/MFELZ?ER
DRAWN BY: SF
CHECKED BY: MB
A-4
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions-
DATE: 3f7/2014
West Perimeter Road
\�
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 2
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Trailer Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Cathead - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Weather: Sunny, 40 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
w
y y
o
No Coordinates Available
Surface Elevation 27.5
u
o
8
=
0
E o m.
i4
Approximate (ft.):
p
m
Z'�
...
Z
ce
rn m
Ln
Surface Condition: Lawn
y
a
=a
a rj
i Z
U a
v
o
N o
N o
Z
:C Z
m
a d
m
m E
n
3$
E
0
2^
m
m N
c>
aw o
c7
mz'
w
U m�
a?
inn
�U
o
am
au
�?
a?FJK
SILT (ML): gray, wet, dense, some fine
S9
18
sand
IBC=15
21
n.
23
-10
40—
S10
BC=17
12
20
,
in.
23
-15
The exploration was terminated at GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION
approximately 41.5 ft. below ground 7 Groundwater was observed at approximately 5 ft. below ground
-
surface
lled during drilling.
surface. The exploration was DackfGENE
GENERAL NOTES:
with bentonite on February 28, 2014. The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelderebased Lift
45
s ed b Stoning forthe Con of Rort
Station Replacement, p p y y
dated August 5, 2013..
20
50
25
55—
30
60
35
65
40
PROJECT NO.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-2
PLATE
(KLE1N,=,=-L
DRAWN BY: SF
OER
CHECKED BY: MB
A-4
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3n/2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 2 of 2
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type -Drop: 35 Ib. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hand Auger
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Exploration Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
Z
w a�i
E� 4
0
`'� Y
a y aai
¢w o
3
t
m
(7
No Coordinates Available
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 29.5
Surface Condition: Lawn
d
na
E
inz
o
o
a
w
T m�
ff g
d �a
n u° c
E o g
cn m�
z
'o z
" Z
of
(n a
E
DU)
o
—
m 01
m o
30
3
N
0
r
o
p
z o
_
or. f
an d
o_rn
m-
w o
m N
au
�. 2
E>
�Z
D u
v
m
a
�Z
u
m Z
0.
N
v N
t aEi
OIr
_ -
2 inches of sod
- -
- 29
-
I
= t
Embankment Fill
Silty GRAVEL with Sand (GM): coarse
gravel, file to mdium sand, brown, moist,
_ 1
j
medium dense -
- 28
2
= 27
3 _)r
26
-----------------
-
Alluviu
SILmL): with fibrous organic material
_
_
such as wood chips and small twigs,
- 5—
- -
interbedded with two 1 to 2 inch thick
layers of fine to medium sand, non -plastic,
111.8
S1
_
dark brown, moist to wet, soft
24
-
117.4
S2
23
k
7-
- -
Completed handauger exploration to 7 feet
below grounhd surface. DCPT extended to
22 -
10 feet below ground surface.
8
-21
9—
20
= to-
- -_
19
- -
1�
-
The exploration was terminated at GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION'
approximately10 ft. below ground surface. 'v Seepage was observed at approximately 6 ft. below ground
The exploration was backfilled with surface during drilling.
GENERAL NOTES:
excavated material on March 12, 2013, The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
-
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
- 18 -
Renton.
PROJECTNO.: 132120
HAND AUGER LOG KHA-1
PLATE
rKLEINF-ELJOEf?
DRAWN BY: SF
CHECKED BY: MB
A-5
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
\\ i
DATE: 3n12014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 off
I
t
c
Ha. -Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type -Drop: 35 Ib. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hand Auger
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Exploration Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
No Coordinates Available
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 30.0
o
F 3
o
0
>
E
c
Surface Condition: Lawn
> Z
N a
`m
o� 5
10
as
E E
n
uc
m ;`�'
"�
N E
01
o
O
r
°1
m m
'm o
—
N o
y
nd ai
1w o
rnz
w
<n
0
A_U
a
a?
O�
-
2 inches of sod
-----------
Silty SAND with Gravel (SM): fine to
medium sand. fine and coarse gravel,
brawn, moist, medium dense
29 ,>`
26 2
S1
_'•a"
li
Encountered refusal with DCPT.
.
— --_ —_—
SAND (SP): medium sand, brawn, moist,
loose
SILT with Sand (ML): trace fine sand,
-
non -plastic, black, moist to wet, firm
20.7
77
S2
24 6
_ 23 7—
The exploration was terminated at GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION
_
approximately 7 A. below ground surface. Groundwater seepage was not observed at the time of exploration.
The exploration was Dack(Iletl with GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration
T The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
- -
material on March 12, 2013. estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
22 8
- -
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
21 9-
20 10
19 11
_I
PROJECT NO.: 132120
HAND AUGER LOG KHA-2
PLATE
' \
DRAWN BY: SF
KLE IN, ELOER
CHECKED BY: MB
A-6
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solution.
DATE: 317f2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
EXISTING
GROUND
SURFACE
CONSTRUCTION SURCHARGE LOAD q (PSF)
— OUTSIDE EXCAVATION
BRACED SHEET PILE OR
SOLDIER PILES OR CAISSON WALL
H (FT)
BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION
Ilul�V DESIGN WATER LEVEL
INSIDE EXCAVATION
�1 0.25q F� I \ 2 FEET
I---- 21 H
I---- 62AH
D (FT)
I- 130D
SURCHARGE HYDRO STATIC APPARENT EARTH PASSIVE
PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE
Not to Scale NOTES:
1. MAX GROUNDWATER TABLE ASSUMED TO BE AT GROUND SURFACE OUTSIDE
The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a THE SHORING AND BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION INSIDE THE SHORING.
ariety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder mates no 2 ALL UNITS IN FEET AND POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT.
representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness,
timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for 3. APPARENT EARTH PRESSURES ACT OVER FULL PILE SPACING
use s a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design
document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic 4. IGNORE PASSIVE RESISTANCE OVER THE UPPER 2 FEET BELOW THE CUT LINE.
representation is at the sale risk of the party using or misusing the information. 5. PROVIDE AT LEAST 2 FEET OF CATCHMENT AT TOP OF TEMPORARY SHORING.
PROJECT NO. 132120 EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM PLATE
/^\ DRAWN BY: J.S. FOR TEMPORARY SHORING
KL E/NFEL DER CHECKED BY: M.B. 3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
\ Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3-2s-2013
West Perimeter Road
REVISED: 3-7-14 Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
)ns.
SAMPLE/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS
HAND AUGER SAMPLE
DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION
STANDARD PENETRATION SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
(2 in. (50.8 mm.) outer diameter and 1-3/8 in. (34.9 mm.) inner
diameter)
GROUND WATER GRAPHICS
V WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)
1 WATER LEVEL (level after exploration completion)
WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)
OBSERVED SEEPAGE
NOTES
• The report and graphics key are an integral part of these logs. All data
and interpretations in this log are subject to the explanations and
limitations stated in the report.
• Lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate boundaries
only. Actual transitions may be gradual or differ from those shown.
• No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock conditions
between individual sample locations.
• Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point of
exploration on the date indicated.
• In general, Unified Soil Classification System designations presented
on the logs were based on visual classification in the field and were
modified where appropriate based on gradation and index property testing.
• Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity
Chart, and coarse grained soils with between 5%and 12% passing the No
200 sieve require dual USCS symbols, ie., GW-GM, GP -GM, GW-GC,
GP -GC, GC -GM, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW -SC, SP-SC, SC-SM.
• If sampler is not able to be driven at least 6 inches
a 3 inches diameter by 2.5 inches inch long 60 degree conical point driven
with a 170 ±2 pound hammer dropped 24 ±0.5 inches.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 24871
Cu •4 and
• I'
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
CLEAN
GRAVEL
1-C-3
•
GW
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
LITTLE OR NO FINES
°
WITH
Cu<4 and/
and
o
0
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
N
<5%
4
r
FINES
or 1
o
GP
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
LITTLE OR NO FINES
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
'
GW-GM
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
o
Cu_4 and
•
LITTLE FINES
`m
1 Ccs3
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVELS
GW-GC
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
. o
WITH
•
LITTLE CLAY FINES
U5%
TO
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
w
12%
FINES
°
GP -GM
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
00
Cu<4 and/
o
LITTLE FINES
0
o
or 1>Cc>3
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
N
-
°
GP -GC
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
it
cu
t
o
LITTLE CLAY FINES
c
t
C
0
a)
IR
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SILT -SAND
MIXTURES
$
GRAVELS
m
N
WITH>
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS,
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES
Lu12%
FINES
?
GC -GM
CLAYEY GRAVELS,
16
E
o
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY -SILT MIXTURES
m
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
Y
CLEAN
Cu-6 and
•°
SW
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
SANDS
1`C-13
LITTLE OR NO FINES
$
>>
WITH
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
N
<5%
w
FINES
Cu<6 and/
.:_..:.
SIP
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
O
°
or 1>Cc>3
:.
LITTLE OR NO FINES
U
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
w
�
SW-SM
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
`w
Cu 6 and
°o
LITTLE FINES
E
1 C�3
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
N
w
SANDS
SW -SC
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
y
WITH
LITTLE CLAY FINES
0
5%TO
GRADED SANDS,
U5
12%POORLY
FINES
SP-SM
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
N
Cu<6 and/
::
:'
LITTLE FINES
0
8POORLY
or 1>Cc>3
GRADED SANDS,
o
SP-SC
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
m
LITTLE CLAY FINES
t
t
SM
SILTY SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL -SILT
°
MIXTURES
°
SANDS
WITH >
SC
CLAYEY SANDS,
p
12%
SAND -GRAVEL -CLAY MIXTURES
4
FINES
r
SC-SM
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -SILT -CLAY
y
MIXTURES
MILINORGANIC
SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
CL-
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
J
E m
SILTS AND CLAYS
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
CL-ML
INORGANIC CLAYS -SILTS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
N m
(Liquid Limit
0 0 «
less than 50) -
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
w " m—o air y
—
OIL
ORGANIC SILTS & ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF
a C m N
PLASTICITY
m E #
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
O D
MH
« rn
w - -
SILTS AND CLAYS
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT
Z o
(Liquid Limit
LL g
greater than 50)
CLAYS
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS & ORGANIC SILTS OF
MEDIUM -TO -HIGH PLASTICITY
PROJECT NO.: 132120 GRAPHICS KEY PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
KL E/NFEL DER CHECKED BY: MB A-1
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
\\ Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3/7/2014 West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED: Renton, Washington
GRAIN SIZE
DESCRIPTION
SIEVE
. SIZE
GRAIN
SIZE
APPROXIMATE
SIZE
Boulders
>12 in. (304.8 mm.)
>12 in. (304.8 mm.)
Larger than basketball -sized
Cobbles
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)
Fist -sized to basketball -sized
coarse
3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)
3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)
Thumb -sized to fist -sized
Gravel
fine
#4 - 3/4 in. (#4 - 19 mm.)
0.19 - 0.75 in. (4.8 - 19 mm.)
Pea -sized to thumb -sized
coarse
#10 - #4
0.079 - 0.19 in. (2 - 4.9 mm.)
Rock salt -sized to pea -sized
Sand
medium
#40 - #10
0.017 - 0,079 in. (0.43 - 2 mm.)
Sugar -sized to rock salt -sized
fine
#200 - #10
0.0029 - 0.017 in. (0.07 - 0.43 mm.
Flour -sized to sugar -sized
Fines
Passing #200
<0.0029 in. (<0.07 mm.)
Flour -sized and smaller
ANGULARITY
CRITERIA
ngular
Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane
sides with unpolished surfaces
O Q
Rounded Subrounded Subangular Angular
rDESCRIPTION
bangular
PartiGesare smilar to angular description but have
rounded ed esrounded
PartiGes have nearly plane sides but have011-rounded corners and ed esounded
Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges
PLASTICITY
DESCRIPTION
LL
FIELD TEST
Non -plastic
P
NP
A 1 8-in. (3 mm.) thread cannot be rolled at
any water content.
The thread can barely be rolled and the lump
Low (L)
< 30
or thread cannot be formed when drier than the
plastic limit.
The thread is easy to roll and not much time
is required to reach the plastic limit.
Medium (M)
30 - 50
The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching
the plastic limit. The lump or thread crumbles
when drier than the plastic limit
It takes considerable time rolling and kneading
to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be
50
rerolled several times after reaching the plastic
limit. The lump or thread can be formed without
crumbling when drier than the plastic limit
APPARENT / RELATIVE DENSITY - COARSE -GRAINED SOIL
MODIFIED CA
CALIFORNIA
RELATIVE
APPARENT
SPT-N,
SAMPLER
SAMPLER
DENSITY
DENSITY
(# blows/ft)
(# blows/ft)
(# blows/ft)
N
Very Loose
<4
<4
<5
0 - 15
Loose
4-10
5-12
5-15
15-35
Medium Dense
10 - 30
12 - 35
15 - 40
35 - 65
Dense
30 - 50
35 - 60
40 - 70
65 - 85
Very Dense
1 >50
1 >60
>70
85 - 100
NOTE: AFTER TERZAGHI AND PECK, 1948
STRUCTURE
MOISTURE CONTENT
Munsell Color
NAME
ABBR
Red
R
Yellow Red
YR
Yellow
Y
Green Yellow
GY
Green
G
Blue Green
BG
Blue
B
Purple Blue
PB
Purple
P
Red Purple
RP
Black
N
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
Dry
Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch
Moist
Damp but no visible water
Wet
Visible free water, usually soil is below water table
REACTION WITH HYDROCHLORIC ACID
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
None
No visible reaction
Weak
Some reaction, with bubbles forming slowly
Strong
Violent reaction, with bubbles forming immediately
CONSISTENCY - FINE-GRAINED SOIL
CONSISTENCY
SPTN-VALUES
Very Soft
0-4
Soft
5-8
Moderately Firm
9 - 15
Firm
16 - 29
Very Firm
30 - 49
Hard
50+
DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
Stratified
Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers
at least 1/4-in. thick note thickness
Laminated
Alternating layers of varying material or color with the layer
less than 1/4-in. thick, note thickness
Fissured
Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little resistance
to fracturing
Slickensided
Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes striated
Cohesive sal that can be broken down into small angular
Block y
lumps which resist further breakdown
Lensed
Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses
of sand scattered through a mass of day: note thickness
Homogeneous
Same color and appearance throughout
CEMENTATION
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
WeaklyCrumbles
or breaks with handling or slight
finger pressure
Moderately
Crumbles or breaks with considerable
finger pressure
Strongly
Will not crumble or break with finger pressure
PROJECT NO.: 132120
\
DRAWN BY: SF
KL E/NFEL i0ER
CHECKED BY: MB
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3/7/2014
REVISED:
E5
0
0
a
U)
w
f-
z
0
0
ml
Y
I
a
m
N
�I
}
a
m
JI
z
01
0
of
0
a
I
Y
U
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: B-60 Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Auto - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Mud Rotary
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
Z
Z
^
o
J
No Coordinates Available
p
u
m�
�
a
_
axi .
-0 m
E w
i4
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
0
co
z0
o
N
Z
E
0 d
o
o .� Y
n
Surface Condition: Lawn
0
as
-
`mo
o
a
a
�E
>?
(q a
a3 �
0
o
0)�
o
m-
F o
_j o
0 Z
Z o
.� Z
a T aai
1°
m�
X
m
o c
as z
(�
° o
Z
m .�
m N
2T
m a
MONITORING WELL'
Q w o
c7
(n z
w
rn
mn
X?
n rn
� U
o
o (n
o at
_?
a—
2 inches of sod
Flush -mount
SILT with Sand (ML): trace to some
monument
coarse rounded gravel, evedence of a
cased in
pocket of medium sand, non -plastic,
concrete
25
brown, moist to wet, firm
5
22.0
72
S1
BC=10
15
2" SCH 40
Solid PVC
Riser with
20
Bentonite
Seal
to-
-no evidence in the sample or drilling action
27.6
S2
BC=6
of gravel
11
17
15
Sandy SILT (ML): fine sand, non -plastic,
brown, moist to wet, dense
15
24.8
70
-_
S3
BC=17
36
-
15
-
10
-
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic,
_
brown, moist to wet, firm to hard
-
20
29.1
2" SCH 40
S4
BC=7
26
-
Slotted 0.010
34
-_
PVC Screen
-
with 20/40
5
=
Sand Pack
25
-observed iron oxide marbling in the
32.7
95
S5
BC=7
sample
16
23
0
--
30
26.3
Bentonite
S6
BC=16
—
--
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic,
20
= =
Chips
gray, moist to wet, firm to hard
26
-5
- -
PROJECT NO.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-1
PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
KL E/NFEL DER
CHECKED BY: MB
A_3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
\` Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3m2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 2
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: B-60 Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Auto - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Mud Rotary
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
i
II
>
U
c
X .0
0
No Coordinates Available
a
m�
$
°
o
�_
a 1
E
(Q
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
o
F-
co
N
Z \
a>i
E >
— a
X O ....
O m L
U
n
Surface Condition: Lawn
N N
as
N
o
_N
n
oa
o
�t
�O
N
> Z
O
C
��
C
N m
O1.-
C (n
'm
JZ
�Z
U
n> n
n N
E E
M 7
g
X
E
M
3 g
0 o
c� 0
NZ
V E
rn >
m O
o
Z
m�
N.-
o°
N o
(UN
n
�>
Z
II
M o-
Z
MONITORING WELL'
Q W
o
fn Z
W
rn
m�
of .�
(n
R U
O
(L(n
a 3k
J .�
d
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non plastic,
S7
BC=14
25.8
95
--
gray, moist to wet, firm to hard
27
25
=-
10
--
S8
The exploration was terminated at
approximately 41.5 ft. below ground
surface. The exploration was backfilled
with a monitoring well installation on March
12, 2013.
18
25
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
2 Groundwater was observed at approximately 4.5 ft. below top of
casing 17 days after drilling completion.
GENERAL NOTES:
'See Laboratory Summary Sheets for additional lab results.
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
PROJECT NO.: 132120 BORING LOG KB-1 PLATE
m
DRAWN BY: SF
G KL E/NFEL DER CHECKED BY: MB A_3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
w Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3r712014 West Perimeter Road
LL Renton Municipal Airport
z REVISED: Renton, Washington PAGE: 2 of 2
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Trailer Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Cathead - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Weather: Sunny, 40 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
Z
2^
'U
^
o
No Coordinates Available
g a
m °
°c
V
°
v
_
a @
E )
(Jp
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
0�
3
of
o
L
Z
j
a
N
O �.
.@
U
N
N
on
p
C
C
0).
�.N
iD O
O
H
o
a
Surface Condition: Lawn
as
`om a
> z
��
u> a
U
tj
N
.N o
a z
.� z
m
E
n� aai
14
m
a E
w (nn
3�
�?
E
�cn
c
�v
o
v
av>
mo
a
>>
�?
ma
a?
L
O�
Qw 0
c9
(nz
inD
2 inches of topsoil
Fill
°
Silty GRAVEL (GM): brown, moist,
medium dense, fine to coarse gravel, some
25
°
fine to coarse sand
Alluvium
SZ 5
SILT with Sand (ML): non -plastic, black,
S1
BC=2
6 in.
no odor, wet, soft, fine sand, trace organic
1
1
20
Silty SAND (SM): gray, wet, medium
dense, fine to medium sand
10
16.5
39
S2
BC=6
10
5
in.
6
15
SILT (ML): non -plastic, brownish gray,
15
moist, medium dense, trace fine sand
S3
BC=7
18
26.7
96
11
in.
18
10
SILT with Sand (ML): gray, wet, dense,
S4
BC=17
12
fine sand
25.4
74
18
in.
27
20
SILT (ML): gray, wet, dense, some fine
24.2
89
S5
BC=17
12
sand
24
in.
29
5
S6
BC=17
12
24
in.
SILT (ML): non -plastic, brownish gray with
28
red laminations, moist to wet, hard to very
hard, trace fine sand, 4 to 8 inch
25
iterbedded layers of fine sand
87
BC=20
14
27
in.
32
0
30
S8
BC=27
18
42
in.
50/6"
-5
PROJECT NO.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-2
PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
("KL E/NFEL DER
CHECKED BY: MB
A-4
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
\\ Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3/7/2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
v
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Trailer Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Cathead - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Weather: Sunny, 40 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
y
a�i ^
0
No Coordinates Available
n
cf
m °
>
c0�
U
°
o
a
�
�
X.V
� m
Y
E w
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
0
co
v
N
z \
a>i
E >
— a
W
.x ,O �.
o m r
U
r
Surface Condition: Lawn
N N
a-
'N
N
n.
oa
0�
O
> z
O
0-0
iu
C
o
O)?�
N
01-
.N o
J O'
a?
O
z
F
m
CL a
d N
m
E E
N 7
o
a
X
E
(0
3g
0
3�
N
V E
(n T
� c
O
w>
No
(6 ry
>>
O-Z
and
Z
L E
N
QW 0
U
(nz
W
(D
in
Z
o:...
Z)(4
�U
o
d(n
d#
�...,
d"
O�
SILT (ML): gray, wet, dense, some fine
S9
BC 21
sand
in8
11
23
10
50
The exploration was terminated at
approximately 41.5 ft. below ground
surface: The exploration was backfilled
with bentonite on February 28, 2014.
S10
20
23
12
in.
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
4 Groundwater was observed at approximately 5 ft. below ground
surface during drilling.
GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on draWng C7, Renton Airport Lift
Station Replacement, prepared by Stantec for the City of Renton,
dated August 5, 2013..
PROJECT NO.: 132120 BORING LOG KB-2 PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
('OKL E/NFEL DER CHECKED BY: MB Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement A_4
w Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3m2014 West Perimeter Road
LL Renton Municipal Airport
z REVISED: Renton, Washington PAGE: 2 of 2
a
U
O
0
In
a
W
zz
E
0
ml
LL
Y
I
Q
ti
Hor.-Vert Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type - Drop: 35 lb. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hand Auger
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Exploration Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
E )
.X O .�
o m
a� aai
aw o
o
U
n
``
CO
No Coordinates Available
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 29.5
Surface Condition: Lawn
N
a�
mE
0z
o
-
o
'�
o
°
w
a
f
N
a
E
in
III
m°
�;
�n
L
38
MD
Z
N
u
y 0
'o z
OW
of?
(n.0
CJE
5cn
o
C
b
@0
�U
�'
o
G
O
o
v
Z
O)�
o
yaai
ain
�j
>
�.N
'� o
uo
aC
2-0
E j
J O
�>
�?
�_
X,O
c a
O
'U
@d
a?
N
F Y
m m
LE
of
2 inches of sod
Embankment Fill
29
°
Silty GRAVEL with Sand (GM): coarse
gravel, fine to mdium sand, brawn, moist,
1
0
medium dense
28
0
2
27
0
3
°
26
0
4
0
25
Alluvium
SILT (ML): with fibrous organic material
such as wood chips and small twigs,
5
interbedded with two 1 to 2 inch thick
layers of fine to medium sand, non -plastic,
111.8
S1
dark brown, moist to wet, soft
24
%6
117.4
32
23
7
Completed handauger exploration to 7 feet
below grounhd surface. DCPT extended to
22
10 feet below ground surface.
8
21
9
20
10
The exploration was terminated at GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
19
i t
approximately 10 ft. below ground surface. Seepage was observed at approximately 6 ft. below ground
The exploration was backfilled with surface during drilling.
excavated material on March 12, 2013. GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
18
Renton.
PROJECT NO.: 132120
HAND AUGER LOG KHA-1
PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
KL E/NFEL DER
CHECKED BY: MB
A-5
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
\` Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE: 3m2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 Of 1
Y
U
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type -Drop: 35 Ib. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Drilling Method: Hand
Auger
Weather:
Cloudy, 50 degrees Exploration
Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
o
Z
0)
0
No Coordinates Available
N
p
',�._
m O
>
$
C
C
°
o
a
N
m
a) --�
�0
w
a�
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 30.0
0
3
Z
Z —
>
>
— a
u N
Eo w
o r
a
Surface Condition: Lawn
a�
a
on
0t
1O
> Z
o
(n11
�
�
0
m�
N a;
0,
.N
�o
a z
Lo
.Q Z
F�
m
nN
N
o
a
c6
0�
dZ
fn E.
>> O
Z'
c0 N
o
NN
QZ
_@Z
N
Q W 0
(D
rn Z
W
fn
inD
._.
(n
> U
0_ (q
W#
J
2 inches of sod
Silty SAND with Gravel ISM): fine to
medium sand, fine and coarse gravel,
brown, moist, medium dense
29 1
28 2
11.8
S1
27 3
. ::
Encountered refusal with DCPT.
26 4
':
SAND (SP): medium sand, brown, moist,
25 5
loose
SILT with Sand (ML): trace fine sand,
non -plastic, black, moist to wet, firm
20.7
77
S2
24 6
23 7
The exploration was terminated at
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
approximately 7 ft. below ground surface.
Groundwater seepage was not observed at the time of exploration.
The exploration was backfilled with
GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
excavated material on March 12, 2013.
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
22 8
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
21 9
20 to —
PROJECT NO.: 132120
HAND AUGER LOG KHA-2
PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
("'KLEINrELDER
CHECKED
BY: MB
A_6
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE:
3/7/2014
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
N
0
0
1
2
3
4
Z 5
s
E
10
DCP-2
Blows/4inch
5 10 15 20 25 0
•I
I'
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
11
I
I
i
;
l
1
I•
l
�
I
I
I
FILL
k
Ill�li
*
DTSTCJRBED
I I
j
I
!
i
�I�IIII
I
t I
WEATHIEREDi
( SI
LTSTONIE
I
I I
II
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
kl
ji
i
I
1
1
Y�
i
i
! II
I H
;
I
DCP-1
Blows/4inch
5 10 15 20 25 0
S
LIT
S�Tl
0 N
El
DCP-4
Blows/4inch
5 10 15 20 25 0
II•i)
!
I!I�
I
l
I
I
��
IIII
FILL
II€jli
iY
/; I
i
DISTI
I I
,R
I
EDP
! l!
I
I
I I
!
I
!
III
WEATHERED
j SILTSTONEI
i i�j
Ilj
j
I
, �
(
(
I
II!II
,ii�i
I
II
i
I
Illi�l
i
it li
I I
I
i
!
! I t
I
I
I
1
i Y;
li
Not to Scale NOTES
The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is 1. INFERRED CONTACTS ARE APPROXIMATED BASED ON DRIVING
subject to change without notice. Weinfelder makes no representadons or warrandes, evress"Imp tiad, RESISTANCE AND COULD VARY.
as to accuracy, completeness. timeliness, or nghts to the use of Such inf-d n. This document is not
"te"dadfor use asaland sumyproduct nor isltdes'gned"i"te"dadaaa`e"atr"ctiondesigndocume"` 2. SEE SITE PLAN FOR EXPLORATION LOCATIONS.
The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic
representation a at the sole
risk of the party
using or misusing the information.
DCP-5
Blows/4inch
5 10 15 20 25 0
IFI«�
AILIUIVIII'MI
SIL
liI
i
I
EA.
T
I T
E�R�E�D'�,
P �Pl 11
11
DCP-3
Blows/4inch
5 10 15 20 25
�
II
I
•
I
I
!
I
I
i_I
I
i
FILL/
i
I
I
�DTSTOR
!
i�
•k!
I
I�
i
I
I
OO;SE/I
toI
ORGANIC
!
SOFT
I ISILTI
I
i
tt�;�tl�
II
,
•
'
(I
!
I
i
I
t
I
1
I
I
`
I
ins.
KLE/NFELOER
Cripnt haute. rtgnr Sohrtbu
APPENDIX B
GROUNDWATER DRAWDOWN AND RECOVERY ANALYSIS
TEST PROCEEDURE AND ANALYSIS
We performed a series of drawdown and recovery tests in the 2-inch monitoring well
installed in KB-1. The purpose of the tests is to estimate the permeability of the soil
surrounding the monitoring wells. The test consisted of bailing the water out of the well
at an approximately consistent rate until the water level in the well reached equilibrium
at the bailing rate. Then we stopped bailing the water from the well and, using a
pressure transducer, recorded water level increase over time at % millisecond intervals.
We repeated the test three times.
We then plotted the results of the tests on the same graph for comparison and analysis.
Plate B-1 shows a linear plot of the test results as well as the logarithmic trend line and
resulting equation used in our analysis. For the three drawdown and recovery tests we
performed, the graph indicates that tests produced consistent, reputable results. We
then used the Bouwer and Rice method to calculate the hydraulic conductivity of the
aquifer. To perform the calculation we assumed that the soil is saturated to a depth of
about 30 feet below the existing ground surface. Based on the results of the calculation
the estimated hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer surrounding KB-1 is between 5X10-5
and 5x 10-6 cm/sec.
DI (ITTCr%- 4/9l11jnIA A -AA AAA QV- inH ef—r
k,mu f ILC: V.1IJL ILVIr IGIC D- 1.4W1�
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
w 7
a
w
c
3 8
0
v
3
co 9
0
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Elapsed Time (seconds)
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
3500
fery Test 1
eery Test 2
iery Test 3
iential Trendline
PROJECT NO. 132120 KB-1 GROUNDWATER DRAWDOWN
DRAWN BY: J.S. AND RECOVERY TESTS
The Wwmation included on Ibis graphic rapresentahon has been compiled hem a variety of CHECKED BY: S.F.
nurces and is iu,lhl l to change vatbout notice. K—folds, makes no represantabons or rKLE/N Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
os enbes, eV ess or implied, as to accuracy, completeness. t—llness. or rights b the use
fasuch nlormanon This document is nni intanded for use as a land survey product nor —1 Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: 3-17-2013 West Perimeter Road
designed or rdendod as a construction design dowrnent. The use or misuse of the
intormabon contained on this graphicne—entabon a;et the sole rsk of the party using or
—s,ng the inform a bon REVISED: Renton, Washington
PLATE
ME
PAGE: 1 of 1
("KL
E/NFEL OER
Bright People. Right Solutions.
May 17, 2013
Kleinfelder Project No. 132120
Roth Hill, LLC
11130 NE 33rd Place
Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Mr. Erik Waligorski, P.E.
Subject: Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
Renton, Washington
Dear Mr. Waligorski:
This letter transmits our draft geotechnical engineering report for the proposed Airport
Lift Station Replacement Project in Renton, Washington. We will be pleased to discuss
any review comments before we finalize our report.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project.
Sincerely,
KLEINFELDER WEST, INC.
DRAFT
Erik O. Andersen, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Project Manager
132120/ SEA13R0221 Page 1 of 1 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
14710 NE 87" Street, Suite A100, Redmond, WA 98052 p 1 425.636,7900 f 1425.636.7901
Prepared for:
Roth Hill, LLC
11130 NE 33rd Place
Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98004
f�\
f KLE/NFELDER
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
Renton, Washington
Prepared by:
DRAFT
Erik O. Andersen, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Project Manager
KLEINFELDER WEST, INC.
14710 NE 87th Street, Suite 100
Redmond, Washington 98052
Office: (425) 636-7900
Fax: (425) 636-7901
May 17, 2013
Kleinfelder Project No. 132120
F:_ t
Steven H. Flowers, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
All Rights Reserved
ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC
PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.
1 KL E/NFEL DER
R;gh, S.I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................
1.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................
2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ..................................... 2
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION.............................................................................. 2
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING.......................................................................... 3
3 SITE CONDITIONS..............................................................................................5
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS.......................................................................... 5
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................... 5
3.3 GROUND WATER..................................................................................... 6
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................7
4.1
CUT RETAINING WALL............................................................................ 8
4.2
NEW LIFT STATION WET WELL............................................................
10
4.3
GENERATOR AND CONTROL ROOM FOUNDATIONS ........................
13
4.4
BUOYANCY AND UPLIFT.......................................................................
14
4.5
WET WEATHER EARTHWORK..............................................................
14
4.6
DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS ...................................
14
4.7
PIPELINE TRENCHWORK, BEDDING AND BACKFILL .........................
15
5 LIMITATIONS.....................................................................................................17
6 REFERENCES................................................................................................... 19
FIGURES
Plate 1: Vicinity Map
Plate 2: Site and Exploration Plan
Plate 3: Recommended Earth Pressures for Temporary Shoring
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Exploration Logs
Appendix B: Field Permeability Testing
Appendix C: Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report
132120/SEA13R0221 Page i of i May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KLKL E/NFEL OER
Mqh, ft , . Pugh, sor,6-
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
This report presents the results of Kleinfelder's geotechnical engineering study for the
proposed lift station project to be completed by the City of Renton at the Renton
Municipal Airport in Renton, Washington. The project location is shown on the Vicinity
Map (Plate 1). Our study included field exploration and development of design and
construction recommendations for the pump station and/siNt6 retaining wall. The general
layout of the project site Is shown on the Site and Exploration Plan (Plate 2).
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our understanding of the project is bas
Roth Hill, LLC. The project involves coi
well, a valve vault, a small control
will be approximately 12 feet in di
wall, with a retained height of approxir
west side of the new I�station develop
toe of the existing(Rainier Avenue emb
pump station will ext ne west to'ti�e.into
room, and a small
a eteerr and it will b
the
conversations with Mr. Erik Waligorski of
on of a new lift stations Mr,,
of a wet
gene ator enclose The wet well
about 20 feet deep. A retaining
5feet or I s, will be required along the
This all.wi I Lain a shallow cut into the
,nr The w force main leaving the new
'sting sewer system in Rainier Avenue.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 1 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
/fLE/NFELOER
Mghf Veopk. Rlghr Sofurio
2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION
Our subsurface investigation included a machine drilled boring, two hand auger
explorations, field permeability testing, and several dynamic cone penetrometer
soundings. Exploration locations are indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan
(Plate 2). On March 12, 2013, we completed one machine -drilled boring, designated
KB-1, and two hand auger borings, designated KHAN-1�d KHA-2 at the approximate
locations indicated on Plate 2.
Machine -Drilled Boring KB-1 was drilled on=: March 12, 2043�near the proposed wet
well structure. The boring was drilled by I Services, Inc. of E gewood, Washington
operating under subcontract to Kleinfelder. Disturbed soil sampleswere obtained at
5 foot intervals by means of the, Standard Penetration/Test (SPT) in accordance with
ASTM D-1586. The SPT consist of d Ir wing a 2-i inch gutside diameter steel split -spoon
sampler 18 inches into the soil at them : bottoof-the borehole with a 140-pound weight
free -falling 30 inches The number of blows required`to �drive-the sampler through each
6-inch interval is counted, nd t e totanumber f blows the final 12 inches is
recorded as the Standard Pe netration R sistance, or "SPT blow count", in blows per
foot. SPIam: ple were advanced`u g,an automatic trip hammer. Boring KB-1 was
completed with a 2 2-inch- onitorinwell:-and a flush -mount monument, to facilitate
ground water monitoring and field permeability testing.
N7
Hand Auger Borings KHA-1 and KHA-2 were advanced on March 12, 2013 by
Kleinfelder personnel, aloongthe proposed cut wall alignment. These hand explorations
involved dynamic cone peetrometer (DCP) soundings followed by hand excavation
and sampling. The DCP is a %-inch pointed steel rod that is driven into the ground with
a 35-pound slide hammer free -falling 15 inches. The penetration resistance, measured
as the number of blows per 4 inches of penetration, provides an indication of the relative
density/consistency of the soil. At KHA-1, the DCP sounding extended to a depth of
10 feet below ground surface. At KHA-2, the DCP sounding met with refusal at 3 feet
below ground surface. Following completion of DCP soundings, we completed hand
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 2 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KLKL E/NFEL OER
��� uynnropr . ftht soro—
borings at both locations. The hand borings were both excavated and sampled to
depths of 7 feet below ground surface using hand equipment (shovel, post -hole digger,
and a hand -auger).
Field Permeability Testing: We returned to the site on April 10, 2013 to perform field
falling and rising head permeability testing in the piezometer at KH-1. This testing
consisted of monitoring the ground water level using, -an electronic pore pressure
transducer and data logger. Falling head testing :involves the introduction of a
cylindrical displacement element to quickly raise the wat r level in the piezometer, and
monitoring it's return to baseline level. Rising head testing involves removing the
displacement element, which causes an instantaneous drop in the ground water level,
and monitoring the rate at which the water -,level returns to its baseline condition. This
testing was completed in general accordance tithit with/the/method orgi a)ly outlined by
Bouwer and Rice (1976), and updat d by Bouwer(41998 ).
Supplemental DCP Soundings: On Apr`il 12, 20'13Jwe completed five (5)
supplemental DCPsoun gs at selected\locatio s t further urther explore near -surface soil
conditions. We designated th seas DCP�1" though DCP-5.
Soil s{ample olfected from-,KB-1 andKHA-2 were field classified, placed in
\' ` and transpo ted t sur laboratory for further examination and physical
plastic bars, p ry p y
testing. \\ \\\
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory classification and/tests were conducted on selected samples to characterize
relevant engineering and index properties of the soils encountered in the borings.
Results are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A. Soil tests included:
• Visual soil classifications were conducted on all samples in the field and on
selected samples in our laboratory. All soils were classified in general
accordance with the United Soil Classification System, which includes color,
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 3 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E MIEL DER
o.gnaeopre, wynswrow
relative moisture content, primary soil type (based on grain size), and any minor
constituent soil types.
• Moisture content was determined in accordance with ASTM D-2216 on 11
representative samples to aid in identification and correlation of soil types.
• Percent Fines tests indicate the percentage of soil passing the US No.
200 sieve. This test was performed on five (5) selected soil samples in
accordance with ASTM D 422.
• Atterberg Limits, also known as plasticity index, was performed on one fine-
grained cohesive soil sample in accordance th``ASTM D 4318.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 4 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL DER
Niglu Plupk, Rig>, Snl-b-
3 SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed lift station is located adjacent to Renton Municipal Airport, along the west
side of the West Perimeter Road in a relatively level landscape area extending parallel
to the road, and about 20 feet wide (in the east -west direction). To the west of this
landscape area, the Rainier Avenue roadway embankment extends up to the west at
approximately 2HAV (horizontal:vertical) with Rainier Avenue about 8 to 12 feet above
the West Perimeter Road. / :`C
Vegetation in the area consists of lawn and trees. Overhead communications lines
extend parallel to the road, approximately o � the proposed c retaining wall. There
are numerous buried utilities running both p slope and downs p\of the proposed
structures.
3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - \n
Below a thin veneer of and top Gil, �,we
siltstone. A general�descrp ion of the`s b
during our exploration�program is -presented
are presented -in ppendix,A.
: countered fillJalluvium, and weathered
ace ,u materials encountered/interpreted
in the following paragraphs. Boring logs
FILL: Fill was encountered below 'the sod/topsoil in KHA-1 and KHA-2. The fill is
medium dens\and gene ally consists of silty sand and gravel with cobbles. We
\` X }. 1
observed cobbles up to 8 inches in diameter in our hand auger explorations. We
interpret this to be Rainier Avenue embankment fill. We expect the fill thickness to
range from approximately-4 to 5 feet along the proposed retaining wall alignment.
ALLUVIUM: Recent alluvium associated with the former Black River was encountered
beneath the fill in KHA-1. The alluvium consisted of dark brown silt with fibrous organic
material. The alluvium was soft and wet with moisture contents ranging from 112% to
117%. The range of thickness of the alluvium is unknown since it extended to the
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 5 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
(KL E/NFEL DER
Lrynt P wt.. IU9nt Sofutb`¢
bottom of excavation in KHA-1. We infer from DCP-3 and DCP-5 that the alluvium
extends at least 10 feet below ground surface in the northern portion of the lift station
site.
WEATHERED SILTSTONE: Directly below sod/topsoil in KB-1, and beneath the fill in
KHA-2, we encountered dense to very dense, low plasticity silt with fine sand. This unit
was relatively easy to drill with tri-cone mud -rotary drilling equipment used, and SPT
blow counts varied from 36 to 60 blows per foot. Based on geologic mapping in the
area, we interpret this to be weak weathered siltstone�bedrock of either the Renton or
� e .
Tukwila Formation. Despite the geologic'" term "bedrock," from a construction
engineering perspective, the weatheredfsiltstone is consid red, as very dense low -
plasticity silt and fine sand (i.e., "soil'). Our DCP soundings a plorations suggest that
the surface of the weathered siltstone dives down steeplyyto the north
3.3 GROUND WATER
A groundwater monitoring�well was installed m,KB'1 with its-screenedzone from 15 to
25 feet below ground surface,(i.e , within t\he.,weathere�,�dtone unit and bracketing the
y
expected 20-foot etwell excavation depthl. 4e measured ground water at a depth of
4.5 feet below. -top of casingon, arch
seepage at --a o t� f et b low g ound'su
on March�12, 2013. Both of these
ground aw ter Elevation 23 feet.
013. We also observed groundwater
luring excavation of exploration KHA-1
;rvations correspond to approximate
Groundwater conditions shouldrbe expected to vary with season, precipitation, irrigation
and other factors. Regional ground water levels are typically highest from late fall to
late spring during the high rainfall season. Irrigation of landscaped areas on or adjacent
to the site can also cause a fluctuation of local groundwater levels.
132120/SEA13R0221 Page 6 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL DER
bight Pwpk. Right Solution&
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of our studies, the project is geotechnically feasible. A brief
summary of our conclusions and recommendations is presented in the following
paragraphs. More detailed discussion along with design and construction
recommendations, are presented in subsequent sections.
Retaining Wall: Our explorations indicate the p
underlain by weathered siltstone at the south end v
the north end. Based on settlement and stability o
this wall, the wall should be settlement -toles t and
concrete blocks or rock filled gabion bask.
loose/soft organic rich alluvium exists, it wil benec
at least 2 feet of this material. T1' e sub-excanatio
gravel such as Permeable Ballast: Differential sett
the length of the wall. Detailed cut wall design and
presented in Section 4.1
? V.
ropgsed cut retaining wall to be
ery soft/loose organic silt alluvium at
n d`e\tions along the north end of
should constructed using precast
Along the northern portion, where
essary to sub- xccaate and replace
nshould be replaced with angular
lem nt should be anticipated along
construction recommendations are
Wet Well: The proposed wet well excavation will extend about 15 feet below ground
water. Tempo ry shor g' could corn st-of a�sunken caisson, interlocking steel sheet
piles, for soldier p I ,and wood, lagging recommend construction dewatering. be
accomplished from within the temporary shoring to reduce settlement of surrounding
infrastruct rue , Design and construction recommendations for temporary shoring and
ground water controkare presented in Section 4.2.
Lightly Loaded Structures: Foundations for the small lightweight structures (generator
structure and control room) can be grade -supported using thickened edge slabs on
grade and/or spread footings. Foundation design and construction recommendations
are presented in Section 4.3.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 7 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL OER
\\ ' Sight Fe pk. Night SO -
Groundwater Considerations: Manhole and buried vaults should be designed to resist
upward buoyancy forces. Ground water should be assumed to rise to the ground
surface for design of such structures.
4.1 CUT RETAINING WALL
At the time of this draft report, site grading plans were not available. However, it is
anticipated that a low cut retaining wall will be required,,along the west side of the lift
%
station site area. The cut wall will be approximately 35"feet long. The current site plan
shows the wall to roughly coincide with the Elevati��>+30\feet contour. With top of wall
assumed at approximate Elevation +31 feet,and, ssuming�,bottom of wall will coincide
Z
with the roadway Elevation +27 feet, the wall will have an exposed height averaging
4 feet.
s
Our exploration KHA-1 encounter d se/soft organic silt below embankment fill at the
north end of the proposed wall. This matenal�has a low bearing capacity and is prone to
immediate and long -term -settlement. Our exploration KHA-2 encountered dense silt
and fine sand inferred to be, weathered; slltstone, whl� is not likely to settle. We
estimate that long -t rrn`differe\nti�l settlements f about 2 inches will develop along this
\\ �eel.
35-foot long -wall. Providing/such, settlement ,is tolerable, we recommend the wall be
construed a er sing \gm,etal concrete blocks (e.g., Keystone or Ultrablock) or
rock-filled`gabion baskets ,(e.g. Hilfiker). Gabion walls can tolerate greater differential
settleme\th n convent o al\segme tial block walls. Pre -cast concrete blocks should
have a minimum block width"d'epth (measured perpendicular to the wall) of 18 inches.
The segmental al should ha/e an embedment depth (below finished site grade) of at
least 18 inches. \/
Due to the inclined backslope comprising the Rainier Avenue embankment, this cut wall
should be designed to retain a static equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pounds per cubic
foot (pcf). Because the wall will be less than 5 feet in height, we do not consider it
necessary to include a seismic incremental loading in addition to this static earth
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 8 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KLE/NFEL DER
pressure. A wall batter of the order of 6 to 8V:1 H (vertical: horizontal) is recommended
to enhance the stability and long-term appearance of the wall.
Unbalanced lateral loading on the wall will be resisted by friction and passive earth
pressure. Wall friction can be evaluated using an allowable coefficient of 0.4 between
segmental blocks or gabions, and compacted granular material. This includes a factor
of safety of about .1.5. Passive earth pressure will develop along the vertical face of
buried blocks/gabions. However, unless the front of thewall is protected by concrete or
asphalt, passive pressure should be neglected. If etif nal grade in front of the toe of
the wall is paved, then passive earth pressure may betaken as an equivalent fluid
pressure of 300 pcf.
Where the bottom of wall exposes existing loose/soft ° g nic-rich alluvium, and where
the bottom of wall is within 2\feetof_ this material, a 2-foot over -excavation and
replacement with crushed rock is
contract pressure on
settlement
The 2-footfthil
Permeabl �'�B
Specifications)
should be 1 f i
gabion basks`.
needed. The purpose of this is to reduce the
�iu an reduce the magnitude of differential
�.a y
2'/2-inch minus crushed ledge rock, such as
'ied in Secty 9�03.9(2) of the WSDOT Standard
of this2-foot thick gravel pad (in the east -west direction)
front a and 1 foot beyond the back face, of the blocks or
imple, if 2'/2-foot wide Ultrablock is used for this wall, the
over-excavation/replacement width should be at least 4'/2 feet. If desired, the
permeable ballast may e covered with a choking/leveling course of 1'/-inch minus
crushed surfacing base course (CSBC), as specified in Standard Specifications Section
9-03.9(3). The finer CSBC choking/leveling course will help establish a uniform level
surface upon which to build the wall.
j should, cor
last �(si
The i
beyond
\As an
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 9 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KLL ElMFEL OER
fright People. Right Sehrtlonf.
4.2 NEW LIFT STATION WET WELL
The wet well structure will be approximately 20 feet deep and about 12 feet in diameter.
The excavation will extend about 15 feet below ground water. We recommend a
relatively water -tight shoring system, such as interlocking steel sheet piles or a sunken
steel or concrete caisson, be used. Design earth pressures for an internally braced and
internally dewatered shoring system are presented in Plate 3.
The principal advantage of a relatively water -tight shoring system is that construction
dewatering may be accomplished -from within the�horing,ywithout significantly lowering
the ground water outside the shoring. Constructi n de aw tering outside the limits of the
shoring will cause the existing loose/soft alluvium in the northern portion of the lift
station footprint to settle, which couldVd' mage existing buried utilities and other
infrastructure. �\
Based on our explorations and laborato -testis conclude that wet well excavations
P rY 9, we \
in the weathered siltstone-(.i.e., verydense silt and ine sand) can be accomplished
using conventional.,. earth excavation equipment and,fiechniques (augers, excavator
buckets with teeth, digging buckets, and grabs.).
4.2.1 //lhte`rlocking tee/ Sheet P� el Shoring
Inter) eking steel sh pilescould be utilized to construct a relatively water -tight
shoring y t m. The she t piling uld be extracted or cut below ground surface and
left in place when :the lift stationticonstruction is completed and backfilled.
It may be difficult to dri�sheet piles into the weathered siltstone underlying the lift
station site. We recommend sheet piling with a minimum web thickness of %2-inch be
used. A large vibratory hammer should be used to install the steel sheets. Sheet piling
sections with a web thickness of 3/8-inch or less are prone damage when driving into
the weathered siltstone underlying this site. However, field conditions may still require
pre -drilling be done to facilitate sheet pile installation. The contractor should ultimately
be responsible for the design and the safe/proper installation of the temporary shoring.
132120/SEA13R0221 Page 10 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFELDER
Wigh, ftop . Nigh ior.-
4.2.2 Permanent Sunken Caisson
Temporary shoring could also be completed using the sunken caisson approach. This
approach involves use of cylindrical sections of steel or pre -cast concrete, with
excavation completed from inside the caisson and "in the wet". As the excavation is
completed, using excavator buckets and grabs, the caisson is eased/pushed down.
Additional sections of steel or concrete are added as required. Once the excavation
has reached the target depth, a concrete slab, of the order of 5 feet thick, is tremie-
placed. After the "tremie slab" has cured, ground water is pumped out. The wet well
structure can then be constructed within this Perm anenNstructu re.
4.2.3 Soldier Pile and Lagging
A solder pile and timber lagging system, combined wi
could be considered for this project. How endue
li
alluvium, and the site's proximity,toLake Washington,
approach, in our opinion. We request a\m�eeting wit
to discuss the potential-risks,and potential construction
approach.
i constructidn\dewatering wells,
!,;,the presence ofcompressible
its approach is the least favored
loh,�Hilll and the City of Renton
:ostsa.,vrngs associated with this
Soldier piles-consistingof`wide flange bearY swould be installed into 24- or 30-inch
diameter ert al'drilled h, a ftsnd ckfilled`with lean concrete. The soldier piles
would Cbe-installed aiboout '0 fe t,below the bottom of the excavation and they would be
placed on 6 t ,,8 foot cente t -ce t \pacing (in plan) along the shoring perimeter. As
the excavat on\is'_made, timber lagging boards would be placed to span horizontally
between the soldier piles. Ir�tecnal bracing would be added as the excavation proceeds.
Once the excavation has reached the design bottom elevation, a working surface
consisting of 12 inches of crushed rock would be placed, upon which the pre -cast or
cast -in -place wet well structure could then be placed or constructed.
Depending how the shoring is constructed, it may be possible to extract the soldier
piles, or they could be cut below ground surface and left in place when the lift station
construction is completed and backfilled.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 11 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
(KL E/NFEL DER
&ighc P.;*, Nlgh, Sotub..
Because of the high permeability of a soldier pile and lagging system, a construction
dewatering system, consisting of a series of dewatering wells, or possibly well points
would be required to dewater the site area before the excavation begins. Construction
dewatering outside of the limits of the excavation will induce settlements in the
loose/soft alluvium; such settlements could damage existing buried utilities and
pavements. We request feedback from the City of Renton as to their desired level of
risk versus potential cost savings associated with leaving means and methods to the
Contractor.
4.2.4 Construction Dewatering and Groundwater Control
If a relatively water tight shoring system consisting of interloc ing`steel sheet piles, or a
sunken steel or concrete caisson, is emp oyed, ground water can controlled entirely
within the excavation. With either of these \Nvo approahes, exca ati �can occur "in
the wet." Once the excavation�is,` 6 pleted, concrete tremie slab can be placed.
Once the tremie slab has cured, water within -the excavation can be pumped out. The
tremie slab would need -.to -be sufficiently thick (of the order\bf-'.5 to 7 feet thick) to resist
M
the upward hydraulicgr d nt due to ground wat �ide of the excavation. Minor
seepage/leakage to the excavation could then be controlled using one or two sumps
and trash pumps. It inecessary .consid r th\e additional shoring depth, excavation
volume.nd"tr mi I b thickness ckn se s with thh app ach.
If the contractor elects to install a `relatively pervious soldier pile and lagging shoring
1
system, a formal construction` dewatering system using wells or possibly wellpoints will
be required. Ba ed\on analysis of field permeability test data our piezometer at boring
KB-1, we estimate the weathred siltstone to have an average permeability of the order
Of 1 x10 5 cm/sec. However, the overlying loose/soft organic silt alluvium is expected to
be significantly more pervious than this. The contractor should retain a dewatering
specialist to design and operate the dewatering system. The contract documents
should place the responsibility for all aspects of any construction dewatering system, on
the contractor.
132120/SEA13R0221 Page 12 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
LK E/NFEL DER
"h: ftwk. �, �:
4.3 GENERATOR AND CONTROL ROOM FOUNDATIONS
Small lightweight generator enclosure and control room structures can be supported on
thickened edge slabs or strip footings, proportioned for an allowable bearing pressure of
2,000 psf. This allowable bearing pressure may be increased to 3,000 psf for short-
term transient loading due to wind and earthquakes. Footings should be buried at least
18 inches below adjacent exterior finished grade for frost protection. Strip footings
should be a minimum of 18 inches wide, this will likely control over bearing capacity.
All strip footings and thickened slab edges should be`prepared by sub -excavating at
least 2 feet below the bottom of footings, proof=rolling andh; probing, and placement of
compacted structural fill. The width of subncavation and replacement should be
12 inches wider than the footing width in all dimensions. For example, for 18-inch wide
� \
perimeter strip footings, the excavation and replace�ment,should be 24�inches deep and
32 inches wide.
Wind and seismic loads-on,the structures will be resisted\b�y_.,,friction and passive earth
pressure. The allonbl p s e resistance
/can,,be taken -as 300 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) equivalent fluid weight. The upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected in passive
pressure
design-con
esign-computationunless It,protected by pavement or slab -on -grade. The
allowable°: coefficient of friction\alofootingbottoms can be taken as 0.40. These
passive'
assive nistance and"base friction ng values include safety factors of about 1.5, and are
based on t\assumptio\that all footing backfill has been placed and compacted as
recommended`in the construction recommendations.
Settlement: For footingsigned and constructed in accordance with the foregoing,
estimated total static settlement is about 1 inch, and differential settlement is about
inch.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 13 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL DER
\\ ' aright Pwpk. Right golufloft
4.4 BUOYANCY AND UPLIFT
All buried vaults and manhole structure should be designed to resist hydraulic
buoyancy. Ground water should be assumed at the ground surface for buoyancy
resistance calculations.
4.5 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK
General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet
conditions are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into
the contract specifications.]
• Earthwork should be performed ino,small areas to rriinimizze` exposure to wet
weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil '"hould be followed
promptly by the placement. and compactionof clean structural fill'. The size and
type of construction equipment,' may\need to be limited to prevent soil
disturbance.
• The ground surface within\theonstruction;;g area should be graded to promote
run-off of su ace t ar nd to pre ent the' o ding of water.
• The ground surface within' the construction area should be sealed by a smooth
drum roller--, or equivalent;—and`unde\no\\circumstances should soil be left un-
,,-co„pa d asexp sed to mo sure fl ation.
• E C vation and `pal ceen�of fill material should be undertaken under the
observation of a r p sentati'v of the geotechnical engineer, to determine that
thew et s being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and
the recom entio dans contained herein.
4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATIONS
The native soils are easily erodible when exposed and subjected to surface water flow.
Surface water runoff can be controlled during construction by careful grading practices.
Typically, these include the construction of shallow earthen berms and the use of
temporary sumps to collect runoff and prevent water from damaging exposed
132120/SEA13R0221 Page 14 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E NrEL DER
BrIyM peek. w9h, Wu'bo
subgrades. All collected water should be directed under control to a suitable discharge
system.
Erosion can also be limited through the judicious use of silt fences and straw bales. The
contractor should be responsible for control of ground and surface water and should
employ sloping, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures as
necessary to prevent erosion of soils. In this regard,, grading, ditching, sumps,
dewatering, and other measures should be
completion of the work.
4.7 PIPELINE TRENCHWORK, BEDDIN
We anticipate that where possible, pipelin
trench construction methods, with
trench
dewatering as necessary.
Pipe zone bedding and-.backfill should\cor
V.
shaped to fit the
sho
necessary to permit proper
,ND BACKFILL
will be installed uE
pport provided by
traditional open
boxes and
vel\that can be compacted and
ufacturer recommendations.
Crushed surfacing bas \ urse or top course (CSBC or CSTC) as specified in Section
9-03.9(3) of the-WSDOTNStandard Specifications is generally a suitable material for pipe
zone bedding a d backfill.
Some of th \ite soils will be suitable for re -use as trench backfill. However, the
organic rich alluvium expected to be encountered in portions of the trench excavations
along the north e n p rtion ofi the site, are unsuitable for re -use as trench backfill. A
Kleinfelder geotechnical. inspector, or a City of Renton construction manager
knowledgeable in such matters, should evaluate the suitability of on -site soil for re -use
as structural backfill, on a case -by -case basis during construction.
Trench backfill more than 4 feet below finished pavement elevation should be
compacted to at least 90% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density, and trench
backfill within 4 feet of the finished pavement elevation should be compacted to at least
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 15 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
E NFEL DER
95% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. In landscaping areas, trench backfill
within 4 feet of finished grate should be compacted to 90% of the Modified Proctor
maximum dry density.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 16 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
KL E/NFEL DER
erfgM hoph•. Nght SCWUOw
5 LIMITATIONS
The recommendations contained in this report are based on the field explorations and
our understanding of the proposed project. The investigation was performed using a
mutually agreed upon scope of services, based on common geotechnical standard of
practice. It is our opinion that this study was a cost-effective method to explore the
subject site and evaluate the potential geotechnical concerns. Nevertheless, it should
be noted that the subsurface information used to ,formulate our conclusions and
recommendations were based on the limited information obtained in the discrete
sampling locations.
It is possible that variations in soil and grourl
\
explored. The nature and extent of the
construction occurs. If soil or gifoundwater co
are different from those described\m, this' "repo
be immediately notified so that wee m
recommendations/lb additron, if the • s
facilities, or design\loads changetfrom the de:
rater conditions exist b tween the points
a\varia�tions may not -'be evident until
\/. / X
nditions are encountered`at this site that
rt, o r<fp and the design team, should
•hake any necessary revisions to our
oft eh -,p necessary
project, locations of
;ptionsgi en in this report, our firm, and
the design team, should, be notified-,
oified-,
Our scope of services did not include evaluations of the potential presence or absence
of hazardous or contaminated soil` ground water on site.
The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety
precautions and ourecom endations are not intended to direct the contractor's
methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our
report for consideration in design, or as required by the project plans and specifications.
This report has been prepared for use in design and construction of the subject project
for Roth Hill LLC and the City of Renton, in accordance with the generally accepted
geotechnical standards of practice at the time the report was written. No warranty,
express or implied, is made.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 17 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
ffL E/NFEL..OER
"ht P.J*_ ftht S.Wi n
This report may be used only by Roth Hill LLC, the City of Renton, and their sub -
consultants, and only for the purposes stated within a reasonable time from its
issuance, but in no event later than one year from the date of the report. Land or facility
use, on and off -site conditions, regulations, or other factors may change over time, and
additional work may be required with the passage of time. Any party other than Roth Hill
LLC or the City of Renton who wishes to use this report shall notify Kleinfelder of such
intended use. Based on the intended use of the reportNKleinfelder may require that
additional work be performed and that an updated r p rt be issued. Non-compliance
with any of these requirements by the client, or,Z;hyon<e',\,eIse, will release Kleinfelder
from any liability resulting from the use of th s, port �any unauthorized party. In
addition, the client agrees to defend, inden fy; and hold Kle nfe der harmless, from any
claim or liability associated with such unauthorized use or non-com pliance.
v
It is the responsibility of Roth Hill LLC the City of Renton, and their sub -consultants, to
see that all parties to the project i clu g,t -desig r ontractor, subcontractors, etc.,
are made aware of this -report in its entirety. The use of`info mation contained in this
report for bidding purposes should be doneat the contractor's option and risk. Further
guidelines and information on this geotech cal report can be found in the ASFE
publication,entitled: Important Infoation About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report,
enclose'A p nd x G,of thisa repo
rt.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 18 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
(KL�ENFEL DER
"h:� ":wu:�
6 REFERENCES
Bouwer, H., and R.C. Rice, 1976, "A slug test for determining conductivity of unconfined
aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells, "Water Resources Research v.
12.
Bouwer, H, 1989, "The Bouwer and Rice slug test — an update", Ground Water 27(3).
WSDOT, 2012, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction,
Manual M41-10.
132120/SEA13RO221 Page 19 of 19 May 17, 2013
Copyright 2013 Kleinfelder
R
ons.
ewl
J 4=*
Rehbs„a,
lk
P
P 14,
P Ik5
4JTE
T
V-3
9,ee,
P North ird street
P Ilk
P P
k P P
P
Ring�
Ir
&
VNT
3
P la
"Jim P
P
r
P P P
Not to Scale
The nformab
on tic uded
on ,,s nrepresentation as been —pled hom
reN bjeC to change wthout notice KI—felde, makes no
epresentabons or —antes excess or mphed as to accu—y paleness
col
men
bmehness or -ni tights to the as of such Th,s document no, led to
se land survey product — no, t designed or tencled as a const,,cbon de.gh document
The use or misuse of the informabon contained on this graphic
representation ,, sole mi
susing
p�
fa,
References OpenStreeftp, 2013:
PROJECT NO 132120 PI A,T P
0000w (
DRAWN BYJ S VICINITY MAP
KL EWrFEL DERCHECKED BY S F Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE 3-19-2013 West Perimeter Road
REVISED Renton. Washington PAGE 1 of 1
CAD FILE: GA132120\132120 Plates.dwq
PLOTTED: 5/17/2013 11:34 AM BY: jeff stewart
RAINIER AVE. N. R/W LINE
--- --- — - F:M.- TO GRAVITY IN RAINIER
35'
is
-A PPROX---5' EfAIWNG-WAtL--- --------
l-K
— --- ------ y
HOOT Bb5�---
.... .......
M. 6' 4'
CONTROL�-R,Dd
HAND HOLDS
Z.R 22IJI�DCP-4
-2
!�KBr 10, X 8,
Cal an hanammeadva 00000114 0
C',
12' WELL
<
0,11 Tw"W-.' —.a .0,00291100 ano.on.a. .0 ...e a a a a air
FVALVE VAULT
I.-T 0600680
DCFa-3 I
DC*P--5---- a CV
------ SS ap
--Z.- - 5 '§-ICFEWALK-.
k�4
REPLACE CURB & CUTTER
WITH NEW ROLLED CURB
it
It
i ms---ss
Legend----
Kg-i* Boring Number and Approximate Location
KHA-1-(> Hand Auger Number and Approximated Location
DCP-1 S DCPT Number and Approximate Location Reference: Base map was taken from ROTH HILL plan LS1, Proposed Lift Station
0 10 20 Preliminary Layout, provided by the City of Renton in March, 2013.
PROJECT NO. 132120 PLATE
SCALE: 1" = 10' SCALE IN FEET DRAWN BY: J.S. SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
'0 E
The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of CHECKED BY: S. F.
sour ces and is subject to change without nobce. Klenifelder make, no representations or Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement 2
,art. nti as express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness or rights to the use
of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it Bright People. Right SolutfonS. DATE: 3-19-2013 West Perimeter Road
designed r intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the
into, mabon contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or
misusing the information. REVISED: Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
EXISTING
GROUND
SURFACE
CONSTRUCTION SURCHARGE LOAD q (PSF)
--I 0.25q L
DESIGN WATER LEVEL
OUTSIDE EXCAVATION
Imo- 62AH -----I
L 19H
BRACED SHEET PILE OR
SOLDIER PILES OR CAISSON WALL
H (FT)
BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION
DESIGN WATER LEV
INSIDE EXCAVATION
D (FT)
400D
SURCHARGE HYDRO STATIC APPARENT EARTH PASSIVE
PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE
Not to Scale
The information included on this graphic representation has been compled Irom a NOTES:
eariety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Klein/elder makes no
presentanons of warranbes, express or mpied, as to accuracy, completeness, 1. MAX GROUNDWATER TABLE ASSUMED TO BE AT GROUND SURFACE OUTSIDE
timeliness, or rights to the use such information, This document is not intended for THE SHORING AND BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION INSIDE THE SHORING.
a land survey product noo r is it designed or intended as a construction design
document. The use
a of the information contained on this graphic 2. ALL UNITS IN FEET AND POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT.
representation is at Me sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.
PROJECT NO. 132120
DRAWN BY: J.S.
EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM
FOR TEMPORARY SHORING
PLATE
("KLEINF-EL DER
CHECKED BY: E.A.3
Bright People. Right SOlUt(ORS.
DATE: 3-29-2013
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
West Perimeter Road
REVISED: 5-16-13
Renton, Washington
PAGE: 1 of 1
M,
Dns.
KLE/NFELOER
�1 �
APPENDIX A
EXPLORATION LOGS
[DRAFT
a
SAMPLE/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS
Hand Auger Sample
STANDARD PENETRATION SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
(2 in. (50.8 mm.) outer diameter and 1-3/8 in. (34.9 mm.) inner
diameter)
GROUND WATER GRAPHICS
WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)
1 WATER LEVEL (level after exploration completion)
WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)
OBSERVED SEEPAGE
NOTES
1. The report and log key are an integral part of these logs. All data
and interpretations in this log are subject to the explanations and
limitations stated in the report.
2. Lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate
boundaries only. Actual transitions may be gradual or differ from
those shown.
3. No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock
conditions between individual sample locations.
4. Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point
of exploration on the date indicated.
5. In general, Unified Soil Classification System designations
presented on the logs were based on visual classification in the field
and were modified where appropriate based on gradation and index
property testing.
6. Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity
Chart, and coarse grained soils with between 5% and 12% passing
the No. 200 sieve require dual USCS symbols, ie., GW-GM, GP -GM,
GW-GC, GP -GC, GC -GM, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW -SC, SP-SC, SC-SM
7. If sampler is not able to be driven at least 6 inches, 50/X indicates
number of blows required to drive the identified sampler X inches with
a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches.
UNIFIED
SOIL
CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM II
D 2487)
CLEAN
I
�� and
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
��
GW
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
m
GRAVEL
1`Cc-3
LITTLE OR NO FINES
>m_
WITH
c5%
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
FINES
Cu -4 and/
°
GP
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
t
or 1,Cc>3
o
LITTLE OR NO FINES
m
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
'
GW-GM
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
Cua4 and
LITTLE FINES
W
1sCcs3
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
c
GRAVELS
'
GW�3C
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
o
WITH
LITTLE CLAY FINES
5% TO
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
°
12%
FINES
°
GP -GM
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
Cu a4 arid/
LrrTLE FINES
D
°
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,
r
or 1-Cc-3
OP43C
GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES WITH
o
LITTLE CLAY FINES
is
°
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SILT -SAND
P
0
C
MIXTURES
2M
GRAVELS
WWITH
>
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS,
>
12%
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES
FINES
GC -GIN
CLAYEYGRAVELS,
E
fill
0
GRAVEL -SAND -CLAY -SILT MIXTURES
t
EAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL
$
SANDS
U�3d
MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES
WITH
j
ZA
g
<5%
FINES
C 6a
SP
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
inin
m
or 1
LITTLE OR NO FINES
£
w
m
SW-SM
WELL -GRADED SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL
MIXTURES WITH LITTLE FINES
zCu4
and
s
1sCc_,3
w
'E"
SANDS
y,qC
WELL -GRADED SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL
a
WITH
MIXTURES WITH LITTLE CLAY FINES
Co
5°k TO
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
12%
v
FINES
SP-SM
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
Cu <6 and/
-::
LITTLE FINES
or 1-Cc-3
POORLY GRADED SANDS,
c
SPSC
SAND -GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH
m
LITTLE CLAY FINES
t
SM
SILTY SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL -SILT
MIXTURES
2
SANDS
C
WITH>
SC
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -GRAVEL -CLAY
12%
MIXTURES
z
FINES
SCSM
ui
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -SILT -CLAY
MIXTURES
ML
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, SILTY OR
J
CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
SILTS AND CLAYS
C'L
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
y E
(Liquid Limit
INORGANIC CLAYS -SILTS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
CL-ML
13,6 m
less than 50)
CLAYS. SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
Z m d o
—
OL
_
ORGANIC SILTS d ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS
N
—
OF LOW PLASTICITY
IM
MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
E
�L� t
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT
? p
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Liquid Limit
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY.
fL
greater than 50)
FAT CLAYS -
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS 8 ORGANIC SILTS OF
MEDIUM -TO -HIGH PLASTICITY
PROJECT NO. 132'20 GRAPHICS KEY PLATE
DRAWN BY:
("KLEINF'ELDER CHECKED BY: A-1
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: West Perimeter Road
Renton, Washington
REVISED:
GRAIN SIZE
Munsell Color
O
O
0
ANGULARITY
PLASTICITY
MOISTURE
CONTENT
REACTION
WITH HYDROCHLORIC ACID
APPARENT I RELATIVE
DENSITY - COARSE -GRAINED SOIL CONSISTENCY
- FINE-GRAINED SOIL
NOTE. AFTER TERZAGHI AND PECK. 1948
STRUCTURE
CEMENTATION
PROJECT NO.;
132120
SOIL DESCRIPTION KEY
PLATE
DRAWN BY:
KL
E/NFEL DER
CHECKED BY:
A-2
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE:
West Perimeter Road
Renton. Washington
REVISED'
DESCRIPTION
SIEVE
SIZE
GRAIN
SIZE
APPROXIMATE
SIZE
Boulders
>12 in. (304.8 mm.)
>12 in. (304.6 mm.)
Larger than basketball -sized
Cobbles
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)
3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)
Fist -sized to basketball --sized
Gravel
coarse
3l4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)
314 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)
Thumb -sized to fist -sized
fine
#4 - 3!4 in. (#4 - 19 mm.)
0.19 - 0.75 in. (4.8 - 19 mm.)
Pea -sized to thumb -sized
coarse
#10 - #4
0.079 - 0.19 in. 2 - 4.9 mm.
Rock salt -sized to pea -sized
Sand
medium
#40 - #10
0.017 - 0.079 in. (0.43 - 2 mm.)
Sugar -sized to rock saN-sized
fine
#200 - #10
.0029 - 0.017 in. (0.07 - 0.43 mm.
Flour -sized to sugar -sized
Fines
Passing #200
<0.0029 in. (<0.07 mm.)
Fbur-sized and smaller
DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
Angular
Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane
sides wRh un olished surfaces
-�-
O
O
Rounded Subrounded Suban ular Angular
Subangular
artic s are semi 'toangular description but ave
rounded edges
Subrounded
Particles have Heady plane sides but have
well-rounded comers and edges
Rounded
Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges
DESCRIPTION
LL
FIELD TEST
Non -plastic
NP
A 1/Ban. (3 mm.) thread cannot be roped at
any water content.
The thread can barely be roped and the lump
Low (L)
< 30
or thread cannot be formed when drier than the
plastic limit.
The thread is easy to rot and not much time
is required to reach the plastic limit.
Medium (M)
30 - 50
The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching
the plastic limit. The lump or thread crumbles
when drier than the plastic limit
It takes considerable time ruling and kneading
to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be
High (H)
> 50
re
APPARENT
MODIFIED CA
CALIFORNIA
RELATIVE
SPT-N.
SAMPLER
SAMPLER
DENSITY
DENSITY
(# bkrws/tt)
(# ttfays/fl)
(# blowslft)
(%)
Very Loose
<4
<4
<5
0 - 15
Loose
4 - 10
5-12
5 - 15
15 - 35
Medium Dense
10 - 30
12- 35
15 - 40
35 - 65
Dense
30 - 50
35 - 60
40 - 70
65 - 85
Very Dense
>50
>60
>70
85 - 100
NAME
ABBR
Red
R
Yellow Red
YR
Yellow
Y
Green Yellow
GY
Green
G
Blue Green
BG
Blue
B
Purple Blue
PuleRed
1PE
Pule
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
D
Absence of moisture, dusty, d to the touch
Moist
Damp but no visible water
Wet
Visible free water, usually soil is below water table
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
None
No visible reaction
Weak
Some reaction, with bubbles funning sbwly
Strong
Natant reaction, with bubbles funning immediately
CONSISTENCY
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH t]u s
CRITERIA
Very Soft
< 1000
Thumb will penetrate soil more than 1 in. (25 mm.)
Soft
1000 - 2000
Thumb will penetrate soil about 1 in. 25 mm.
Firm
2000 < 4000
Thumbwill indent soil about 1/4-in. (6 mm.)
Hard
4000 < 8000
Thumb will not indent soil but readily indented with thumbnail
Very Hard
> 8000
Thumbnail will not indent soil
DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
Stratified
Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers
at least 1/4-in. thick note thickness
Laminated
Alternating layers of varying material or color with the layer
less than 1/4-in. thick, note thickness
Fissured
Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little resistance
to fracturing
Slickensided
Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes striated
Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular
Blocky
lumps which resist further breakdown
Lensed
Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses
of sand scattered through a mass of clay: note thickness
Homogeneous
Same color and appearance throughout
DESCRIPTION
FIELD TEST
Weakly
y
Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight
finger pressure
Modest �'
Crumbles or breaks with considerable
finger pressure
Strongly
Will not crumble or break with finger prrapure
Date Begin - End: 312'2013 Drill Company: Holt Drilling BORING LOG KB-1
Logged By: S. Flowers Drill Crew: Derek
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: B-60 Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Auto - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Exploration Method: Mud Rotary
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter: 6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY
RESULTS
MONITORING WELL'
Z211
d ami
o
No Coordinates Available
o
n�
m°
d
u
n
v
x.Y
0)m
Eo
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 27.5
2:1
Z
'
d
x
Condition: Lawn
o z
n
y
.N
in o
zSuace
S2 z)
(D
1
m Dm
ou
a
a
o
�o
mmco?zQw
o
�>.2
?o
o
0
cnz
n
Ern
U
o
a,
2 inches of sod
Flush -mount
SILT with Sand (ML): trace to some coarse
monument
rounded gravel, evedence of a pocket of
cased in
25
medium sand, non -plastic fines, brown, moist to
concrete
wet, firm
-
Si L BC=10
15
21
no evidence in the sample or drilling action of S2 BC=S
gravel 11
17
15 Sandy SILT (ML) fine sand, non -plastic fines,
brown. moist to wet. dense
�-10
ML
22.0
72
27.6
15-{ gg gC 36 ML 24.6 70
is
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic fines,
brown, moist to wet, firm to hard
2" SCH 40
Solid PVC
Riser with
Bentonite
Seal
20
S4
BC=7
29.1
1111 2" SCH 40
26
Slotted 0.010
34
PVC Screen
with 20/40
5
Sand Pack
25
-observed iron oxide marbling in the sample
ML
32.7
95
S5
BC=16
23
0
30
26.3
Bentonite
S6
BC=16
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic fines,
20
26
Chips
gray, moist to wet, firm to hard
_a
-5
PROJECT NC.: 132120
BORING LOG KB-1
PLATE
rKLE/NFEL
DRAWN BY: SF
DER
CHECKED BY:
A_ `3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions.
DATE:
West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED:
Renton, Washington
PAGE 1 of 2
0
m
Date Begin -End: 3/12/2013 Drill Company:
Holt Drilling
BORING LOG KB-1
Logged By:
S. Flowers Drill Crew:
Derek
Hor.-Vert. Datum:
Not Available Drill Equipment:
B-60
Hammer Type - Drop: 140 lb. Auto - 30 in.
Exploration Plunge:
-90 degrees Exploration Method:
Mud Rotary
Weather:
Cloudy, 50 degrees Auger Diameter:
6 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
T
MONITORING WELL*
y ai Z-
o
J
No Coordinates Available
a
m°
o
U
a
v
o
3
_T
X U
a
a)
CO
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.). 27.5
�;
e
_'
Z r
>
'E j
c a
.X w
o t
U
n
Surface Condition: Lawn
a�
a
?�
o z
a
N
C
m
C in
.N
J Z
9
U Z
a> n
a_ m
@
E E
m
E
a
3°
o�
u�
mZ
U E
u> >
m e
o
N
w a>i
o
m
°n
it
c7>
and
cw 0
0
v1z
rn
mD
X_
Z)cn
�0
5
a(r)
axt
__
Z
a Z
SILT (ML): trace fine sand, non -plastic fines, S7 BC=14
ML 25.8 95 --
gray. moist to wet, firm to hard
25
— — -
--to
—
40
_
S8
-- —
IBC=12
758
2
--_
--15
The exploration was terminated at
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
approximately 41.5 ft. below ground surface.
7 Groundwater was observed at approximately 4.5 ft. below top of
The exploration was backfilled with a monitoring
casing 17 days after drilling completion.
well installation on March 12, 2013.
GENERAL NOTES:
See Laboratory Summary Sheets for additional lab results.
45
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1. Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout. prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
—•2D
rKLEINF-ELDER
PROJECTNO.: 132120 BORING LOG KB-1 I'LATE
DRAWN BY. SF
CHECKED BY A-3
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People Right Solutions. DATE West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED: Renton, Washington PAGE 2 of 2
Date Begin - End: 3/12/2013
Logged By: S. Flowers
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees
-21
-19
-18
0
it
Drill Company: Kleinfelder BORING LOG KHA-1
Drill Crew: S. Flowers
Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type - Drop: 35 Ib. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Method: Hand Auger
Exploration Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION LABORATORY RESULTS
31
N-VALUE based on m V x
> c N y ..-
No Coordinates Available
a
U,
• correlated DCPT blows
Approximate Surface Elevation (ft.): 29.5
Hyy
�blOWSfft�
_
v
Z -
>
E >
d
�3
�O
y
C
��
Off
V)
J O
O
Surface Condition: Lawn
a
n
°
A Water Content Plot
m Z
rn
am
c
c
Z
S2 Z
E E
E
ic°�
(%)
vX
V E
S
4? c
U
0
m>
uyip>>
C"
j 2
ya
a Z
rn Z
U)
m�
10 20 30 40
?
rn
OL in
ti
2 inches of sod
6
Embankment Fill
•
6
Silty GRAVEL with Sand (GM) coarse gravel.
•:
fine to mdium sand, brown, moist. medium
6
dense
•
5
10 :
•
13
15
11:
•
24
23
•
22
•
13
•
8
6
SILT (Ill with fibrous organic material such •
as wood chips and small twigs, interbedded with 2
two 1 to 2 inch thick layers of fine to medium S1 ;• 111.8
sand, non -plastic fines, dark brown, moist to • 111.8
wet, soft 8
S2 5 117.4 117.4
•
5
•
14
Completed handauger exploration to 7 feet 10
Wow grounhd surface. DCPT extended to 10 •
feet below ground surface. 10
The exploration was terminated at
approximately 10 ft. below ground surface. The
exploration was backflled with excavated
material on March 12, 2013.
11
fa
9:
6
5
•
7
it:
•
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
w Seepage was observed at approximately 6 ft. below ground
surface during drilling.
GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfelder based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
\ PROJECT NO.: 132120 BORING LOG KHA-1 PLATE
DRAWN BY: SF
KL EINFEL DER CHECKED BY A-4
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE: West Perimeter Road
Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED: Renton, Washington
PAGE. 1 of
Date Begin - End: 3/12/2013 Drill Company: Kleinfelder BORING LOG KHA-2
Logged By: S. Flowers Drill Crew: S. Flowers
Hor.-Vert. Datum: Not Available Drill Equipment: Hand Auger Hammer Type -Drop: 35 Ib. DCPT - 15 in.
Exploration Plunge: -90 degrees Exploration Method: Hand Auger
Weather: Cloudy, 50 degrees Exploration Diameter: 8 in. O.D.
FIELD EXPLORATION
LABORATORY RESULTS
N-VALUE based on
m a�i
o
No Coordinates Available
°
��
• correlated DCPT blows
o
n
v,
x
v
D
Approximate Surface Elevation ^): 30
m 3
(blowslft)ill
y
Z --
>
>
c d
x v
r
Surface Condition: Lawn
as
Q
$
A Water Content Plot
m Z
y
a�
��
v Z
' 2 z
ny a
E E
E
3�
M)
Oilro
uIr
U E
Z)
ra C
o
v
wo
�a
�>
�
�d
cn z
<n
m�
20 ao ao 80
?
rn
0
a in
0- �
?
a ?
2 inches of sod _ _
— --
Silly SAND with Gravel (Sill fine to medium
10
sand, fine and coarse gravel, brown, moist,
•
medium dense
—29 1-
5
•
—28 2
S1
13011.8 I
11.8
19
•
—27 3— t "'
Encountered refusal with DCPT.
—26 4
—25 5 SAND (SP): medium sand, brown, moist, loose
SILT with Sand (ML): trace fine sand,
non -plastic fines, black, moist to wet, firm
The exploration was terminated at
approximately 7 ft. below ground surface. The
exploration was backfilled with excavated
material on March 12, 2013.
—20 1
S2 I . 20.7'
ML 120.7 I I I 77
GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:
Groundwater seepage was not observed at the time of exploration.
GENERAL NOTES:
The exploration location and elevation are approximate and were
estimated by Kleinfekier based on drawing LS1, Proposed Lift
Station Preliminary Layout, prepared by ROTH HILL for the City of
Renton.
rKL�EINF-EL
PROJECT NO. 132120 BORING LOG KHA-2 PLATE
DRAWN BY' SF
DER CHECKED BY A-5
Renton Airport Lift Station Replacement
Bright People. Right Solutions. DATE West Perimeter Road
A. Renton Municipal Airport
REVISED Renton, Washington PAGE. 1 of 1
DCP-2 DCP-1 DCP-4 DCP-5 DCP-3
Blows/flinch Blows/flinch Blows/4inth Blows/4inth 81ows/41inch
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
0
J •• i I I L
i 1
g=or`woU�.�
-
'i.il.lItIIl ,.�IlI., -°oI. '•�W,Ii°••s
IIIiIlII
.��ifiII
•►I{IfIlti
••iI
`lji1IIII�IIIlII
l,FTlIlI��IlIII�iI
�IIII!
'II!
'•IliIIII
LIiIIlII
LII�II�
IIIIliIUI,IIIIIIIiII
/,,IIII
IIIII
II
!I�II
!IjIIliiI�I
WIIiIIIIIj�II'Il
iII�
IIIII
•II
•IIII
i!
•iII
'T
•IO
'II
IEI�'II
'IW•I!II.
S
NII�OI
Ei��I
'
'IllIiIIj
I'SIlliIIj�,
lI(
!'II
ii''II(II
�'•i
•-•{;II(ij'II'II�
ons.
KLKL E/NFEL OER
B.qn� hop.. aqM Soa.uors
APPENDIX B
GROUNDWATER DRAWDOWN AND RECOVERY ANALYSIS
TEST PROCEEDURE AND ANALYSIS
We performed a series of drawdown and recovery tests in the 2-inch monitoring well
installed in KB-1. The purpose of the tests is to estimate the permeability of the soil
surrounding the monitoring wells. The test consisted of bailing the water out of the well
at an approximately consistent rate until the water level in the well reached equilibrium
at the bailing rate. Then we stopped bailing the water from the well and, using a
pressure transducer, recorded water level increase over time at'/ millisecond intervals.
We repeated the test three times.
We then plotted the results of the tests on the same graph for comparison and analysis.
Plate B-1 shows a linear plot of the test results as well as the logarithmic trend line and
resulting equation used in our analysis. For the three drawdown and recovery tests we
performed, the graph indicates that tests produced consistent, reputable results. We
then used the Bouwer and Rice method to calculate the hydraulic conductivity of the
aquifer. To perform the calculation we assumed that the soil is saturated to a depth of
about 30 feet below the existing ground surface. Based on the results of the calculation
the estimated hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer surrounding KB-1 is between 5x10-5
and 5x10"6 cm/sec.
DRAFT-',
ons.
LK E/NFELOER
"ht A w*. ftht sw,wm.
APPENDIX C
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
r-- - - Geolechnical Engineering Report --)
Geotechnical Services Are Performed for
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Ge&,hnica, engineers slructure trieir services to meet the specific needs of
their clients A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi-
neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another
civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each
geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No
one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without
first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
— not even you — should apply the report for any purpose or project
except the one originally contemplated.
Read the Full Report
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical
engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary
Do not read selected elements only.
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on
A Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors
Geatecn;u;,al engineers consider a number of unique, protect -specific fac-
tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the
client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences, the general
nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration. the location of
the structure on the site, and other planned or existing site improvements,
such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the
geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth-
erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was:
• not prepared for you,
• not prepared for your project,
• not prepared for the specific site explored, or
• completed before important project changes were made.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical
engineering report include those that affect:
• the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a
parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant
to a refrigerated warehouse.
• elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the
proposed structure,
• composition of the design team, or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes —maven minor ones —and request an assessment of their impact.
Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems
that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which
they were not informed
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
editions that existed at
the time the study was performed Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer-
ing report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of
time. by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site:
or by natural events, such as floods. earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua-
tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report
to determine it it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis could prevent major problems.
Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
Opinions
Site expjwation identries subsurface cond,wris only at those points where
subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi-
neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional
judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the
site Actual subsurface conditions may differ ---sometimes significantly —
from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer
who developed your report to provide construction observation is the
most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated
conditions.
A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final
Do not overrely on the consr, in recor-c , Jations in ,. Ltd in your
report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi-
neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical
engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical
engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or
liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform
construction observation.
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to
Misinterpretation
inner nes.gn lean-� men�oers nus�derprelaRon GI geoleinl,;cal eng�n�ring
reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo-
technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the resign team after
submitting the report. Also main your geotechnical engineer to review perti-
nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can
also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report Reduce that risk by
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction
conferences, and by providing construction observation.
Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs
s prepare boring and testing logs based upon
their Interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should
never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings.
Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk
Give Contractors a Complete Report and
Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what
they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con-
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a
clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the
report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical
engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to
conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they
need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sine contrac-
tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you
be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you,
while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities
stemming from unanticipated conditions
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
_I 1lients, design � 'essionals, and recognize that
geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci-
plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that
have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk
of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of
explanatory provisions in their reports Sometimes labeled `limitations"
many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi-
bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities
and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical
engineer should respond fully and frankly
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
i i;nnel used to perform d ;; r, on -
mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical
study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually
relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations,
e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or
regulated contaminants Unanticipated environmental problems have led
to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen-
vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man-
agement guidance f1:,, nrll rp/v on renq'' prepared for
someone else.
Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
u , �. _ a:. .__ :F p , during be ,. n, construe, J
operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from
growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be
devised for the express purpose of mold prevention. integrated into a com
prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional
mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or
moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num-
ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry.
While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been
addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings
are conveyed in this report, the geotechnica! engineer in charge of this
project is not a mold prevention consultan' none of the services per-
formed in connection with the geotechnical engineers study
were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven-
tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed
in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from
growing in or on the structure involved.
Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial
Engineer for Additional Assistance
v1�nl er�hip in ASFE%tlit, Bol Ft iij:u u_I Ldrtl: expuses gtiolechnical
engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of
genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer
with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information.
ASFE
the test Peehte em rsrth
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone:3011565-2733 Facsimile:301/589-2017
e-mail: info®asfe org www.asfe.org
copyright 2004 by ASFE. Inc Duplication reproduction, or copying of this document. in whole or in part. by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with ASFE's
specific written permission. Excerpting quoting. or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only for
purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other
firm individual. or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation.
IIGER06045 OM