Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272972(1) Golder Associates Inc. 4. 18300 NE Union Hill Road,Suite 200 _IF - Golder Redmond,WA 98052-3333 AssocteS Telephone(425)883-0777 Fax(425)882-5498 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED MUNICIPAL PARKING STRUCTURE RENTON,WASHINGTON Prepared for: City of Renton Prepared by: Golder Associates Inc. Redmond,Washington CITY OF RENTON RECOVEP NOV 2 7 nol BUILDING DIVISION Robe . Plum,Principal RT PLG ¢��oF WASff/,t, September 26,2001 h� 013-1579.000 092brlpl.doc 5� 40- P Nag 1 ,0L0 EXP,REs. U d l c�-1Sa OFFICES ACROSS ASIA,AUSTRALASIA,EUROPE,NORTH AMERICA,SOUTH AIAERICA Golder Associates Inc. 18300 NE Union Hill Road,Suite 200 - oldex Redmond,WA 98052-3333 ASsoci tes Telephone(425)883-0777 Fax(425)882-5498 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED MUNICIPAL PARKING STRUCTURE RENTON,WASHINGTON Prepared for: City of Renton Prepared by: Golder Associates Inc. Redmond,Washington 'Robe . Plum,Principal O�tiRT PL wasfr�,ycA f September 26,2001 h� '� z 013-1579.000 092brlpl.doc 0MAL EXPIRES OFFICES ACROSS ASIA,AUSTRALASIA,EUROPE,NORTH AMERICA,SOUTH AMERICA .r i. 1V Vi 11 VV 1i111 YLJ VVL JYLV II JI•II�j\ lyaaU./jhl�.� 19100 / Golder Associates Inc. 78300 NE Union HIII Road.SUtte 200 Redmond.WA a 7 Golder telephone(425)s83-07a3-077 S(�eS Fax(426)882-5498 November 19,2001 Our ref: 013-1579.000 City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 ATTENTION: Mr.Dennis Culp RE: SLAB VAPOR BARRIER DESIGN CRITERIA REVISION PROPOSED RENTON MUNICIPAL PARKING STRUCTURE Dear Dennis: Based on discussions with Mr.David Matthews of LMN and Tom Xia of DCI,we have revised our recommendations for the Use of a slab vapor barrier as presented below. This letter references our report titled` Geotechnical Investigation,Proposed Municipal Parking Structure,Renton,Washington"dated 9/26/01: CURRENT DESIGN The current recommendation in Section 5.4 of our report states: AR slabs should be underlain by a capillary break which consists of at least six inches of sand drainage blanket overlain by plastic sheeting, The drainage blanket should meet the requirements of section 9-03.13(1) of the 1991 Washington State Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction. At the contractor's option, the plastic can be overlain by about two inches of drainage sand. It has been our experience that some contractors feel that the upper sand layer is necessary for proper curing of the concrete. The purpose of the plastic sheeting is to provide a vapor barrier to inhibit moisture migration from the subgrade up to the slab. Without the plastic, moisture can appear around slab cracks and cause problems if'a secondary flooring is placed over the slab. OFFICES ACR:-)SS ASIA_AUSTRALMIA Fi lPnoF NnpTW ANAM111A 4Znl rru AAACnrrA itr tar vi l I .J1 YAA 440 OOL 04eo UUiA)h C AbbWAA ES 10003 November 19,2001 2 003-1579.000 DESIGN REVISIONS We understand that the majority of the slab will parking garage space and minor darkened moisture areas are not a concern. Thus the plastic barrier is not needed under the initial slab_ In addition,the garage has two areas on the east and west which may have retail uses in the.future. Both retail areas will receive a topping slab at such time as retail construction occurs. We understand that the original garage slab and the new retail space topping slab would be separated by a 6-inch capillary break of clean granular soils and a vapor barrier. We concur with these design modification. In addition, the majority of the near surface soils are existing fills consisting of clean sand and gravel. Thus,in most areas,the required 6-inch capillary break will be satisfied by the in-place soils_ The need to excavate any existing finer grained soils to satisfy the capillary break layer will be made during constructions based on the actual conditions encountered_ We anticipate that this will only be required in small,localized areas. We understand that there will have no footing drains as floors will be at or just slightly below the adjacent sidewalk The elevator pit will be designed for the hydrostatic pressure and have a membrane on all;;ides and bottom (dry sump will be in the pit) with no foundation drain. We concur with these design modifications_ If you have any questions or need additional information,please contact us at (42,5)88M777. nce ly, GOLD ASS CIATBS C. Robe Plum,P.E. Principal RLP/LAG 1119rpl.doc CC-_ Torn Xia—DCI Engineers O$ T j'Lr Dave Matthews—LMN Architects CO Golder Associates September 26,2001 i Our ref. 013-1579.000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. FIELD EXPLORATION 2 3. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 4. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4 4.1 Liquefaction Evaluation 4 4.2 UBC Site Class Designation 4 5. GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5 5.1 General 5 5.2 Auger Cast Pile Axial Load Criteria 5 5.3 Lateral Load Resistance 6 5.4 Slab Criteria 6 5.5 Permanent Wall Design Criteria 7 5.6 Drainage Provisions 7 6. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 8 6.1 Subgrade Preparation 8 6.2 Utility Trench Construction 8 6.3 Earthworks 9 6.4 Auger Cast Piles 9 6.5 Construction Monitoring 9 7. USE OF REPORT 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Exploration Plan Figure 2 Liquefaction Assessment LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Borehole Logs • Golder Associates • September 26,2001 -1- Our ref. 013-1579.000 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering study for the proposed parking garage at 2'Avenue and Logan Street in Renton Washington,as shown on Figure 1. We proceeded with our investigation based on your August 10,2001 approval of our July 2,2001 proposal letter. We understand that the structure will consist of a 7- level above parking garage with no below grade levels. Maximum column loads are anticipated to be in the range of 750 to 1,000 kips. The proposed garage will be located adjacent to the new transit center currently under construction as shown on Figure 1. The site is essentially level and is currently partially paved. The purpose of this study was to explore the soil and groundwater conditions at the site and prepare preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed development. Environmental sampling and testing of the soil or groundwater were not within the scope of this study. i • Golder Associates September 26,2001 -2- Our ref.013-1579.000 2. FIELD EXPLORATION The exploration work consisted of drilling five borings in the summer of 2001 to maximum depths of about 50 feet. A standpipe piezometer was installed in boring BH-1 with the screened section sealed at a depth from about 25 to 53 feet. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2 and summary logs are presented in Appendix A. The borings were located in the field by pacing from existing landmarks such as the property corners,roadways,existing structures,and topographic/geomorphic features and should be considered approximate. The borings were drilled,using a Foremost B-59 hollow stem auger rig from Holt Drilling. Disturbed representative Standard Penetration samples were obtained at about 5 foot intervals. All samples were sealed in plastic jars to prevent moisture loss and returned to our laboratory for further examination. The soil samples were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,which is presented in the Soil Description Index in Appendix A. The number of blows to drive the sampler at 6-icn intervals were recorded with the number of blows to drive the sampler between 6 inches and 18 inches penetration recorded as the SPT value. A geologist from our firm examined and logged the soil conditions observed in each of the explorations. Pertinent information including depths,stratigraphy,soil engineering • characteristics,and groundwater occurrence were recorded. The stratification depths indicated on the summary logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. The soil and groundwater conditions were those recorded for the location and dates indicated and may not necessarily represent those of other times or locations. The borings were backfilled with bentonite chips in accordance with WDOE criteria. i Golder Associates September 26,2001 -3- Our ref. 013-1579.000 3. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is underlain by fill and alluvium from the Cedar River consisting primarily of interbeded gravelly sands,sandy gravels,and sands. Specifically,the soil units encountered in our borings consisted: • FILL: The thickness of the fill ranged from about 4 feet in boring BH-1 to about 12.5 feet in BH-13. There did not appear to be any trend in these depths with location on the site. The unit generally consisted of sand with various percentages of silt and gravel. Based on the drilling action and SPT values ranging from about 2 to 10 b/foot,the fill is very loose to compact.Although not encountered in the boring samples,the fill could contain organics and building debris. • Fluvial Alluvium This deposit consisted mainly of a compact to dense interbeded sandy gravel, gravely fine to coarse sands and sand with occasional siltier zones. Boring BH-5 encountered a thin layer of very loose sandy silt at a depth of about 23 feet. Although there was considerable variation in the SPT values,the blow counts trended to increase with depth. The SPT values generally ranged from about 10 to 30 b/ft at depths less than about 25 feet and increased to about 20 to over 40 b/ft below about 25 feet. We have discounted some of the very high values,which likely reflect a high gravel content. All of the borings terminated in this unit at depths of about 50 feet. Groundwater was observed in all of the borings at a depth of about 17.0 ft bgs at the time of our field investigation and in the piezometer installed in BH-1 in the summer of 2001. These levels are likely affected by the water level of Lake Washington. The piezometer should be read periodically over the winter and summer of 2001. Normally the groundwater levels rise slightly during the winter/spring months but due to the lowering of the Lake in the winter,the groundwater level may not exhibit much change. • Golder Associates • September 26,2001 -4- Our ref. 013-1579.000 4. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Liquefaction Evaluation The site is located in an area considered to have a moderate to high liquefaction potential due to the occurrence of thick fills and loose sands/silts of the Cedar River valley. To assess these risks,a liquefaction analyses was performed using standard methods developed by Seed and others. These methods use the results of the SPT,soil type,and sample depth to assess the liquefaction risk for saturated soils below the water table. In general,the method involves calculating a corrected SPT values considering the overburden stress and silt content. Siltier soils are given an increased value due to the lower liquefaction potential. These corrected values are then compared with the values required to resist liquefaction that depends on the design earthquake assumed. We considered three events ranging from a Magnitude 6.5 to 7 with peak ground accelerations ranging from 0.15g to 0.25g. The results are shown on Figure 2 as a plot of N1 versus depth. The lines represent the required values to resist liquefaction at several earthquake levels while the points represent the corrected sample SPT values. As shown on the plot, virtually all of the points he well above the required values for the seismic events considered. Therefore, we conclude that the site has a low potential for liquefaction. 4.2 UBC Site Class Designation Based on the UBC method of estimating the Site Class using the soil conditions,a Site Class Designation D is recommended. i Golder Associates September 26,2001 -5- Our ref. 013-1579.000 • 5. GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General The site is underlain by about 4 to 10 feet of fill overlying compact to dense granular soils. These conditions are considered more favorable than many areas in downtown Renton which tend to be underlain by an upper 10 to 20 feet of loose/soft sands,silts, and organic zones. The soils underlying the fills are suitable for supporting the design foundation loads on spread footings. Alternatively the structure could be supported on driven or drilled piles. Due to the soils being only compact at shallower depths,the allowable bearing pressure would be moderate at about 5 ksf. This would result in relatively large footings. In addition,the fills are unsuitable for bearing requiring that the footings are either placed at depth of 4 to possible over 10 feet or the fill is over-excavated and replaced with structural fill. Based on discussions with the design team,the decision was made to support the building on 18-inch diameter 100-ton capacity auger casts piles. Driven piles were considered to be unacceptable due to the noise and vibration impacts. The first level slab need not be pile supported and can be placed as a slab-on-grade by proof-rolling and compacting the existing subgrade. 5.2 Auger Cast Pile Axial Load Criteria For an 18-inch auger cast pile with an allowable static axial compression load of 100 tons (200 kips),a total penetration below the existing ground surface of 50 feet is recommended for design purposes. To provide design flexibility and consider different design loads,the following table presents allowable loads for 16-inch and 18-inch piles with depths ranging from 40 to 60 feet. Regardless of the load,the minimum depth should be 40 feet. T,..x . 0.1 Altawabt >r3+3pt�1 ' �orripr U i�ft -. p . Case E"iel K� U ..K� s 16-inch Diameter 40 115 70 45 145 85 50 175 105 55 200 125 60 235 150 18-inch Diameter 40 130 75 45 165 95 fit? 20€� 'I20 55 235 145 60 265 170 Golder Associates September 26,2001 -6- Our ref. 013-1579.000 The above table only considers geotechnical criteria. Structural criteria may limit the allowable loads. Typically the maximum loads on 16-inch piles is about 100 tons (200 kips) and for 18-inch piles about 125 tons (250 kips). For short-term transient loads,the above values can be increased by 1/3. If a load factor design is used,the ultimate axial loads can be assumed to be twice the allowable loads. Settlement is expected to be less than%a-inch. 5.3 Lateral Load Resistance Lateral load resistance will be provided through a combination of lateral resistance of vertical piles and passive pressure on the sides of the pile caps. Since the structure will be pile supported,base friction cannot be used. Assuming a nominal allowable lateral displacement of about'/4-inch, the following allowable transient loads can be used for design(assuming all of the lateral loading is transient): • PASSIVE PRESSURE ON SIDES OF PILE CAPS: Based on a fluid with a pressure of 125 pcf, this low value is recommended for strain compatibility with the piles. If needed,this value could be increased to 200 pcf but would require a zone of structural fill be placed against the pile cap. • LATERAL LOADS ON PILES: For 18-inch piles limited to about'/4-inch of lateral movement,an allowable transient load of 20 kips can be assumed for a fixed head condition and 7 kips for a free head condition. For 16-inch piles,an allowable transient load of 17 kips can be assumed for a fixed head condition and 6 kips for a free head condition. These loads can be doubled if an allowable lateral movement of%z-inch is acceptable. • PILE STRESSES: On request,we could provide shear and moment versus depth from the LPILE results. Alternatively,for simplicity, the structural engineer could assume that a "point of fixity" of 12 feet for the free head condition and 9 feet for the fixed head condition. 5.4 Slab Criteria The first floor slab can be designed as a normal slab on grade provided the existing subgrade is prepared as discussed in Section 5.6. All slabs should be underlain by a capillary break which consists of at least six inches of sand drainage blanket overlain by plastic sheeting. The drainage blanket should meet the requirements of section 9-03.13(1) of the 1991 Washington State Standard Specifications for Road,Bridge and Municipal Construction. At the contractor's option, the plastic can be overlain by about two inches of drainage sand.It has been our Golder Associates September 26,2001 -7- Our ref. 013-1579.000 experience that some contractors feel that the upper sand layer is necessary for proper curing of the concrete. If needed,the subgrade can be assumed to have a subgrade modulus of 75 kcf. 5.5 Permanent Wall Design Criteria Although no retaining walls have been identified at this time,the following is provide for completeness: • NON-YIELDING WALLS FORMED IN OPEN EXCAVATIONS: Non-yielding walls formed in open excavations with backfill placed against the wall can be designed for an at-rest pressure equal to fluid with a density of 50 pcf. This assumes that the walls are braced with the floors acting as struts. • YIELDING WALLS FORMED IN OPEN EXCAVATIONS: Yielding walls formed in open excavations with backfill placed against the wall can be designed for an active pressure equal to fluid with a density of 35 pcf. This assumes that the walls have not been braced and will yield at least 0.2 percent of the wall height. This condition could occur if some or all of the wall is backfilled prior to placing the adjacent floor slabs or for any cantilever retaining walls. The above recommendations assume no build up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall and that adequate drainage will be installed as discussed below in Section 5.6. The earth pressure values assume a level backfill slope and do not include any surcharge loads. Where traffic loads will occur adjacent to the wall,a uniform surcharge load of 200 psf should be added. 5.6 Drainage Provisions In areas where the final slab grade is below the adjacent exterior grades,we recommend that the walls be positively drained to collect any perched groundwater,water that infiltrates from adjacent ground,and/or from leaky utilities. The drainage system should consist of drainage behind the perimeter walls and footing drains. In addition,any retaining walls should be provided with wall and footing drains. Drainage behind walls can consist of geocomposite drains or a minimum two foot wide zone of clean sand and gravel fill with less than 10 percent passing the No.200 sieve. If required,a footing drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter heavy walled perforated PVC pipe or equivalent. The pipe should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of drainage material as described above. Clean-outs should be provided. • Golder Associates September 26,2001 -8- Our ref. 013-1579.000 6. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Subgrade Preparation Since the structure will be pile supported the existing fills need not be removed. However,the subgrade needs to be stabilized in order to provide adequate support for construction equipment the slab on grade and pavement areas. In general during dry weather,the existing fill subgrade should provide adequate support for construction equipment. The contractor should anticipate that there may be some localized loose/soft unstable areas that may require over-excavation and replacement or a stabilizing layer of fill or ballast. Although the fill is generally relatively clean,during wet weather the contractor should assume that the need for subgrade stabilization to support construction activities will increase. The subgrade in both the slab-on-grade and pavement areas need to be stabilized. This should consist of the following procedures: • PROOF-ROLLING: Areas should be proof-rolled with a fully loaded 10-wheel dump truck at the pavement/slab subgrade elevation. • OVER-EXCAVATION OF UNSUITABLE AREAS: Areas which rut, weave excessively or otherwise appear unsuitable during proof-rolling should be over- excavated and backfilled with compacted structural fill. The depth of the over- excavation depends on the nature of the unsuitable areas with the intent to provide a subgrade that will support a fully loaded dump truck In general, the maximum depth of over-excavation will likely be on the order of 18-inches. • COMPACTION: After proof-rolling and stabilization of the unsuitable areas,the surface should be thoroughly compacted with a heavy vibratory roller to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 1557,Method D. In general,the subgrade should be compatible with minimal over-excavation required. The contract should be set up to allow payment on a cubic yardage basis for any over- excavation required. For budgeting purposes,we suggest assuming that about 20 percent of the areas may require 18-inches of over-excavation. Dry weather construction would minimize the need for over-excavation. 6.2 Utility Trench Construction Unless the utilities are deep,the majority of the trench will be excavated in loose sand and gravel fills. Normal bedding criteria will be acceptable unless very soft, unstable soils are encountered at the pipe invert. Although unstable areas are not anticipated based on the borings,if encountered some over-excavation and placement of a stabilizing fill layer might locally be required. The excavated soils will generally be Ssuitable for backfill above the specified pipe bedding material. Golder Associates September 26,2001 -9- Our ref.013-1579.000 Trench backfill placed in slab and pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 1557,Method D. In general landscaped areas the compaction can be reduced to 90 percent of maximum dry density. 6.3 Earthworks In general mass earthworks will be minimal. Fills placed in areas of pavements and inside the building footprint should be well graded sand and gravel placed in maximum 12-inch thick loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 1557,Method D. On-site excavated soils can generally be used for structural fill provided they can be properly moisture conditioned and contain no organic debris,building debris,or other unsuitable materials. 6.4 Auger Cast Piles Auger cast piles are particularly sensitive to the installation methods and contractor experience. Poor equipment and/or inexperienced contractors can result in piles that are improperly installed and,in the worst case,piles that are completely"necked" providing essentially no significant resistance. Thus,it is essential that auger cast piles be installed by qualified,experienced contractors with the full time construction monitoring of experienced geotechnical field engineers. General monitoring requirements include the auger down pressure,identification of cuttings,grout pressure,the rate of auger withdrawal,and grout take. It is also recommended that as a minimum one small rebar is placed full depth into the grout after auger removal as a check on hole "necking". If the rebar cannot be installed full depth,the pile should be rejected. 6.5 Construction Monitoring Critical geotechnical aspects of construction should be monitored by a qualified geotechnical field engineer. This includes pavement and slab subgrade preparation, placement and compaction of structural fills,construction of wall and footing drains (if required),and installation of the auger cast piles. Golder Associates September 26,2001 -10- Our ref. 013-1579.000 7. USE OF REPORT This report has been prepared exclusively for the use of the City of Renton and their consultants for specific application to this project. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the explorations accomplished for this study and conversations regarding the proposed development of the site. Once the site project plans are finalized,we recommend that we be given the opportunity to review the plans and specifications to verify that they are in accordance with our recommendations. The integrity and performance of the auger cast pile foundation system and the development of a suitable pavement/slab subgrade depends greatly on proper construction procedures. Therefore,it is recommended that a geotechnical engineer be retained to provided geotechnical services during the critical aspects of the project. The Golder field borings were performed in general accordance with locally accepted geotechnical engineering practice to provide information for the areas explored. There are possible variations in the subsurface conditions between the borings and variations with in the groundwater conditions with time. We recommend that a contingency for unanticipated conditions be included in the construction schedule and budget. a Golder Associates %kii" FIGURES Golder Associates I......... .............. .......... LOGAN AVENUE 4. '4- EsH-2 BH-4 3 M 11MEMEMEME,yj -1 ij r I &BH-3 AN........... is PRO )I OSEOSE GARAGE I 1 w W C\j F, T a BH-5 BH-1 EEO -H .............. J ............. ................................... BURNETT AVENUE ............ LEGEND 0 20 40 41N &BH-1 BORING LOCATION FEET FIGURE SITE PLAN SOURCE: BASE PROVIDED BY LMN ARCHITECTS,8/13/01. RENTON PARKING GARAGEMA bclark]K:\Projects\2001\0131579\000\96169.dwglg-27-1 2:25jx:Xr-Basej1:- Golder Associates • Figure 2 Liquefaction Assessment 50 45 40 35 30 — N U 25 z • 20 15 ♦ - - -- - --- - - -- - 10 5 _ - 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Depth (feet bgs) Blow Count Required to Resist Liquefaction M =7; a =0.3 - - - - - -M =7; a = 0.25 M =6.5; a = 0.25 ♦ Corrected Field Blow Counts D Cb 4 k' D i APPENDIX A BORING LOGS Golder Associates Unified Soil Classification System Component Definitions by Gradation Soil Classification Component Size Range Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Names Generalized Group Descriptions Boulders Above 12 in. SE—GRAINED SOILS GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW well—groded Gravels Cobbles 3 in. to 12 in. More than 50% More than 50% of Less than 5% fines retained on coarse fraction GP Poorly—groded grovels No. 200 sieve retained on Grovel 3 in, to No. 4 (4.76mm) No. 4 Siave Grovel and Sift GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Mixtures Coarse grovel 3 in, to 3/4 in. More than 12% fines ravel and Clay Fine grave: 3/4 in. to No. 4 (4.76mm) GC Mixtures Sand No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 200 (0.074mm) SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW well—groded Sands 50% or more of Less than 5% fines Coarse send No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 10 (2.Omm) coarse fraction SP Poorly—graded Sands I Medium sand No. 10 (2.Omm) to No. 40 (0.42mm) posses No. 4 Sieve Fine sand No. 40 (0.42mm) to No. 200 (0.074mm) SANDS WITH FINES SM Sand and Sift Mixtures More than 12% fines Sift and Cloy Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm) Sc Sand and Clay Mixtures FINE—GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND CLAYS CL Low—plasticity Cloys 50% or more posses Liquid limit INORGANIC Low— the No. 200 sieve less than 50 ML Non—plastic and Low— Plasticity silt: Samples Non—plastic and Low— ORGANIC OL Plasticity Organic Clays Non—plastic and Low— SS SPT Sampler (2.0' OD) Plasticity Organic Silts HO Heavy Duty Split Spoon SILTS AND CLAYS CH High—plosticity Clays SH Shelby Tube Liquid limit INORGANIC P Pitcher Sampler greater than 50 MH High—plasticity Silts B Bulk High—plasticity ORGANIC OH Organic Clays C Cored High—plasticity Organic Silts Unless otherwise noted, drive samples advanced with 140 lb. hammer witn HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and 30 in. drop. organic odor PT Peot Relative Density or Consistency Laboratory Tests Utilizing Standard Penetration Test Values Test Designation Cohesionless Soils(a) Cohesive Soils (b) Moisture (t) Density D ( ) ) Relative (c) Undrofned (d) Grain Size G 7nsity cN, blos/ft.a Dnsity Consistency N, blows/ft. Shea rF trengthsf Hydrometer H Atterberg Limits (1) oose 0 to 4 0 — 15 Very soft 0 to 2 <250 Consolidation C Loose 4 to 10 15 — 35 Soft 2 to 4 250-500 Unconfined U Compact 10 to 30 35 — 65 Firm 4 to 8 500-1000 UU Triax UU Dense 30 to 50 65 — 85 Stiff 8 to 15 1000-2000 CU Triax Cu Very Deroe over 50 >85 Very Stitt 15 to 30 2000-4000 CO Triax CD Hard over 30 >4000 Permeability P (a) Soils consisting of grovel, sand, and silt, either separately or in combination, possessing no characteristics (1) Moisture and Atterberg Limits of plasticity, end exhibiting drained behavior. plotted on log. (b) Soils possessing the characteristics of plasticity, end exhibiting undroined behavior. (c) Refer to text of ASTM D 1586-84 for a definition of N; in normally consolidated cohesionkss soils Relative Density terms are bosed on N values corrected for overburden pressures. (d) Undrained shear strength 1/2 unconfined compression strength. Silt and Clay Descriptions Typical Unified Description Designation Descriptive Terminology Denoting Component Proportions silt ML (non—plastic) Clayey Silt CL—ML (low plasticity) Descriptive Terms Range of Proportion Silty Clay CL Clay CH Trace 0-55 Plastic Silt MH Little 5-12% Organic Soils OL. OH. Pt (o) Some or Adjective 12-30% And 30-50% (a) Use Gravelly, Sandy or Silty as appropriate. Golder Associates Figure SOIL CLASSIFICATION/LEGEND 73-1064/FORM 573 RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-1 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/16/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Northeast corner of site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed 0 SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O BLOW S/It■ 1: NOTES QLu. =O ELEV. m w BLOWS G to zo 3o ao WATER LEVELS p v Z DESCRIPTION ? O = per 6 in N U WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) GRAPHIC DEPTH Z 1401b hammer Wo W w, don (It) 30 inch drop 0 0.0-0.1 0.1 Cement seal As hal t and flush 0.1-2.5 mount ^ •' Road base fill � a•• monument `r 22.5 2.5 1_0 Compact,Pale blue 5B 6/2 moderate olive 1 SS 17-18-12 30 1 5 brown 5Y 414,massive gravelly SAND with 21.0 sill moist_jfll)1SP-SM� - 4.0 4.0-23.0 of�o 5 Compact light olive grey interbedded L�JJ gravelly SAND to SANDY gravels,moist subrounded to rounded(FIUVIAL ALLUVIUM)(SP-GP) o cy: Gravel Zone @5-6' ' o (. Q 2 SS 4-10-16 26 0 4 o.30 1.5 o D. t 0 Q. o 3° QD q cy 3 SS 11-12-9 21 1_5 SP-GP p .p 1.5 Q 15 0 Q0. Gravel Zone > l). Q ('30 o D a Q 4 SS 8-8-7 15 1_5 o30 1.5 � i o D. 20 p Q O - ,30 Bentonite e °lJJ chips with 1' PVC pipe Q - o n 2.0 1_5 Heaving Sand Zone-@ 22.5' _ __ _ 23.0 5 SS 9-18-12 30 1 5 23.0-31.0 0 Dense,moderate yellow 10yr 514 dar C50 yellow brown 10 YR 412 interbedded fine to .p �. 25 medium SAND with gravelly coarse to Q. medium SAND zones,wet (FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM)(SP-GP) o D. SP-GP Q.... 0 3 o. . LLJJ 6 SS 15-22-22 44 1_5 o p' 1.5 0 Q 30 u(�+--•�o. o -6.0 31.0-34.5 -. _--. . . 31.0 Dense,moderate,yellow brown 10YR 5/4 o Qo N SANDY GRAVEL subrounded,wet o+ (FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM)(GP) GP O D 0 Q 7 SS 11-20-25 45 1" (7 o Qo ■ 3 -9.5 34.5-42.5 - -- 34.5 0 35 Compact,moderate yellow brown IOYR 5/4 interbedded,gravelly coarse to fine SAND, trace to little silt,wet(FLUVIAL a ALLUVIUM)(SP-SM) m SP-SM 8 SS 15 19-14 33 1_5 1.5 Lu 40 w Log continued on next page w 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF Golder o DRILLER: Ray DATE: 08121/2001 (Associates m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-1 SHEET 2 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/16/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Northeast comer of site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed ITO SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/ft■ NOTES ELEV. 10 20 30 40 WATER LEVELS v =a O m a perr 6 in N'WS BLC < WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) GRgpHIC DESCRIPTION En Q O g vDEPTH Z 140 lb hammer Wwo6�'W, (ft) 30 inch drop 00 40 34.5-42.5 Compact,moderate yellow brown 10YR 5/4 interbedded,gravelly coarse to fine SP-SM SAND, trace to little silt,wet(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM)(SP-SM)(Continued) -17 5 42.5-43.5 — — — - 42.5 Loose,medium gray(N5),massive,fine to SP -18.5 9 SS 9-3-47 1_0 SAND wet FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM(SP)_ J 43.5 1.5 ■ 43.5-52.5 Very Dense,Moderate yellow brown and 45 medium gray interbedded fine to coarse 20/20 Silica SAND trace gravel,with small fine sand sand filter = lenses,wet(fluvial alluvium)(SP) pack and O slotted PVC O pipe v SP 10 SS 19-4346 >50 1_5 1.5 » 50 _ -27.5 Boring completed at 52.5 ft. 52.5 1_5 11 SS 19-29-29 >50 1.5 55 60 65 70 0 N 0 r� >Q> >I 0 75 a v 80 w of W 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF Golder o DRILLER: Ray DATE: 08/21/2001 &Associates m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-2 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/16/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Southwest Comer of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O = BLOWS/ft■ a Z rn =O ELEV. m w BLOWS < to zo 3o ao NOTES WATER LEVELS o V z 4 DESCRIPTION y O per 6 in N U WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) a: O O DEPTH Z 1g01bhammer W We. eW w, m (n) 30 inch drop 0 0.0-0.1 0.1 A h 0.1-2.0 Road base fill 23.0 2.0-5.0 ———— —— —— — 2.0 Compact,loose,moderate brown 5yr5/6 to pale yellow brown 10YR6/2 interbedded 1 SS 0-1-1 2 1_5 silty fine to medium SAND with sandier SM 1.5 ■ lenses with iron staining and mottling (FILL)(SM) 20.0 5 ——— — — Gravel Zone 5.0-39.0 Compact,moderate yellow brown 10 YR 5/4,interbedded gravelly fine to coarse SANDS and SANDY GRAVELS sub angular to sub rounded,wet(FLUVIAL Q' 1_5 ALLUVIUM)(SP/GP) 0.._ 2 SS 2-6-3 9 1.5 10 D 0 .Q 3 SS 6-13-12 25 1-5 1.5 ■ a :Q' 15 a.fl o.�' s Q 4 SS 7-11-13 24 1_5 1.5 ■ z0 o a 0 0 SPG G 5 SS 12-12-11 23 1.5 1_0 O. C� 25 Gravel Zone @ 25-27' 0: 6 SS 7.12-13 25 10 1,5 ■ Q 0 . 30 °iis . 0 N .Q ° Gravel Zone @ 32-36' a d:, 7 SS 14-22-50/5.5 5015.5 15 C� 0 35 p`Q J o_ io Q 8 SS 12-25-23 48 1.5 14.0 ■ GP-GM 39.0 0,40 0 w Log continued on next page w 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK '� ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF Golder ISDRILLER: Ray DATE: 08/21/2001 �ASSOCiTteS m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-2 SHEET 2 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/16/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Southwest Comer of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O BLOWS/ft■ x Lu a y = ELEV. m a BLOWS a 10 zo 3o ao NOTES WATER LEVELS o z DESCRIPTION C O M y per 6 in N v WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) O (� DEPTH Z ~ 1401b hammer of wo' 'w� m 30 inch drop 40 39.0-45.0 Dense,moderate yellow brown 10YR4/2, o massive,SANDY GRAVEL trace to little silt(GP-GM)(Continued) o GP-GM 1_5 0 9 SS 23-27-19 46 1.5 y x 0 20.0 45 0 - - - - — — 45.0 o 45.0-50.0 c:.. :. `v Dense,light brown 5YR5/6,interbedded SANDY GRAVEL with Gravely fine to o fl medium SAND,sub angular to sub rounded,wet(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) (GP/SP) SPG 0`;0 10 SS 13-8-31 39 1-5 1.5 o. _ -25.0 —50 Bor ng completed at 50.0 ft. 50.0 55 60 65 70 Q N C, 0 Q 3 0 75 a OF 80 w w 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF Golder o DRILLER: Ray DATE: 08/21/2001 Associates ra RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-3 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/17/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Center of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed 00 SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCEIRnS TANCE BLOW= w 9 ELEV. Cr OWS to 20 3o ao NOTES w r, cNi (L m a per 6 in N ¢ WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) WATER LEVELS p Z DESCRIPTION y Q O O x CO, DEPTH Z t401b hammer IX LU W' I eW 4 W, m (11) 30 inch drop 0 0.0-0.1 0.1 A h R 0.1-2.0 Road base fill 23.0 2.0-4.0 -- - - - - - - 2.0 Loose,dark gray(N6)interbed fine SAND with charcoal @3.5'becoming moderate SM 1 SS 2-2-3 5 0_5 brown fine sand with silt,moist(FILL)(SM) 21.0 1.5 ------- - --4.0-12.5 4.0 5 Very loose grey(N5)Cark yellow orange 10YR6/6 mottled,interbedded fine to medium SAND with SAND trace to little SILT iron staining and charcoal present (FILL)(SP-SM) SP-SM 2 SS 1-1-1 2 1_5 1.5 IN 10 Gravel zone @ 10.5-12" 12.5 12.5-14.0 - -- - - -- - --- 12.5 0_5 Compact dark yellow brown 10YR 4/2, GP o Q° 3 SS 11-13-13 26 1.5 massive,SANDY GRAVEL sub angular to 11.0 rounded,moist(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) _ -- 14.0 _(GP)--- _._ -- - -- --I o Q° 15 14.0-25.0 Compact,Moderate yellowish brown fine to O p coarse SAND,trace to little silt and gravel, Q wet(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM)(SP) o Qo Z a o � 11_8 Qo 4 SS 4-5-7 12 1.5 � o = SP o 0 z0 o O 0 o Q° O� o Q° 1_5 o D 5 SS 3-9-12 21 1.5 Q 0 0 0.0 25 -- -- - 25.0-48.0 25.0 Compact,dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/4 o Qo bedded sandy GRAVEL with Gravelly SAND trace silt,wet(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) o (GP) O 6 SS 14-13-16 29 0_5 O 1.5 C) o Qo 30 C) 0 o&ro rn GP o 0 7 SS 12-23-47 >50 1_0 p 1.5 O o Q° E 3 o D 0 35 Q J o Q° 0 a o r Q � o 0 8 SS 5 8-12 20 1_0 Qb 7.5 o UJ 40 L continued on nextpage w _ W 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF . Golder o DRILLER: Ray DATE: 08/21/2001 ASSOClateS m RECORD OF BOREHOLE B-3 SHEET 2of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 08/17/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Center of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE 0 BLOWS/ft■ x a ZLU y = ELEV. w w BLOWS io zo 3o ao NOTES O O a 0 m a. per 6 in N < WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) WATER LEVELS o v Z DESCRIPTION Q O 0 > a > w Wp I F0 I W, 0 0 DEPTH Z 140 lb hammer w m (ft) 30 inch drop 40 25.0-48.0 Compact,dark yellowish brown 101YR 5/4 o Q° bedded sandy GRAVEL with Gravelly SAND trace silt,wet(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) o D (GP)(Continued) C) o Q° 1_5 o D 9 SS 12-14-9 23 1.5 ti GP C x Q45 ° ° O < > o Qo o Dr48.0 1_5 48.0-50.0 10 SS 17-19-20 39Dense,moderate yellow brown 10YR 5/4, GP-GM° massive,SANDY GRAVEL,sub roundedto subangular trace to little silt,wet o 50 (FLUVIAL ALLUVI-UM)AGP_GM-- — _ Boring completed at 50.0 ft. 55 60 65 70 0 i° rn O C� 0 75 0 'a 0 80 w _ w 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: GJK ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF Golder o I DRILLER: Ray DATE 08/21/2001 &Associates m RECORD OF BOREHOLE BH-4 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 09/05/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Northwest Comer of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O BLOWS/ft■ 2 IL F 2 rn = ELEV. Cr w BLOWS ¢ 10 40 NOTES WATER LEVELS wo— Z DESCRIPTION N a 0 M a per 6 in N O WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) � 0 J DEPTH Z 140 lb hemmer co W.I AW w, cco (ft) 30 inch drop 0 0.1 A h It 1" 0.1-10.0 Very loose to compact,reddish brown (10YR 4/3) massive SILTY SAND trace little fine gravel moist(fill)ISM) S-1 SPT 3118" 3/18" 0_3 1.5 5 SM S-2 SPT 2/18" 2/18" 1_0 1.5 S-3 SPT 3.6-6 12 1_2 1.5 ■ 10 15.0 1 0.0-17.0 10.0 10 Loose to Compact,moderate olive brown S-4 SPT 2-5.7 12 _ (5Y4/4)well gradded SAND little fine 1.5 ■ gravel trace SILT moist,becomming wet @ 17' FS- SPT 4-4-3 7 1_5 SP 1.5 ■ 15 0 8.0 1 a -22.0 Co 17.0 Compact reddish brown(5Y 4/1)sandy °Qo GRAVEL,wet(GP)(Fluvial ALLUVIUM) S-6 SPT 5-5-10 15 0_5 o D 1.5 ■ Q = GP Qo 20 p ° 0 o D Q ° 0 3.0 22.0-27.5 22.0 Compact to dense,brown silty sandedy • • _ GRAVEL,wet(GW)(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) . , S-7 SPT 22-18-11 29 1 0 53 25 GIN •'• �' 27.0-52.5 _ -2.5 Compact to very at depth interbedded o o brown(IOYR 3/3),Sandy Garavel < S-8 SPT 5-7-7 14 "00 intebedded with with dense sandy o D 1.5 ■ .grav_elwet fGPI(ALLUMUML 30 °bo Q0 o °�o a o D ° ~o Q S-9 SPT 11-9-11 20 -5 1. t7 GP Qo a 3 o D 0 35 Q °Qo c� a o D � Q °Bo 1_0 O D S-10 SPT 11-17.19 36 1.5 ■ Prj\l U 40 w I I Loq continued on next page �.- 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: MDH f� ° DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF ( .��Golder Lu o DRILLER: John DATE: 09/20/2001 �( Associates a) RECORD OF BOREHOLE BH-4 SHEET 2of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 09/05/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Northwest Corner of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O x BLOWS/ft■ w v ELEV. Cr 10 20 30 q0 NOTES ~a rn x 0 m w BLOWS WATER LEVELS p v Z DESCRIPTION y a 0 E a- per 6 in N ¢ WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) �J U O DEPTH Z 1g01bhammer Lu w,1 eW VV m (h) 30 inch drop 40 27.0-52.5 Compact to very at depth interbedded 0 Qo brown(10YR 3/3),Sandy Garavel intebedded with with dense sandy o gravel,wel,(GP)(ALLUVIUM)(Continued) Q S-11 SPT 5-9-15 24 1_0 Q O p 1.5 rn 45 O 0 Qo e o GP Q 0 Qo Q 0 Q° S-12 SPT 31-33-19 >50 1_5 O � 1.5 » 50 Q 0 Qo oQ D -27.s Boring completed at 52.5 ft. 52.5 5-13 SPT 13-22-19 41 1_ 1.5 55 60 65 70 ia io N rn O C� Q �i 0 75 i.9 a' c? 80 w o: 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: MDH (?Associates DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPFGolder 16DRILLER: John DATE: 09/20/2001 0 m RECORD OF BOREHOLE BH-5 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 09/05/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Sotheast Cmer of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/ft■ W ELEV. to 20 30 4o NOTES Luc O v a U wm w BLOWS a WATER LEVELS o Z DESCRIPTION O a per 6 in N WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) gJ U O U DEPTH Z 1401b hemmer W w, w W� m (ft) 30 inch drop 0 0.0-0.2 0.2 A halt " Q° 0.2-10.0 ° Compact,Dark brown olive(10YR 3/4), o p nonstartified,gravely SAND,trace to I;iftle Q silt,moist(GP)(Fill) &O 0.5 rS-2 SPT 4a1-4 8 .5 ■ Q 5 GP o Q° o l) SPT 6-13-15 28 0_5 Q C 1.5 ■ o bo o 0_5 QC° S-3 SPT 6-10-13 23 15 ■ 0 10 - — - -- -- - - o D 15.0 10.0-22.5 0 .Y. 10.0 0_5 Compact to dense,yellow brown(10YR S-4 SPT 10-35-38 >50 4/3),sandy gravel to gravely SAND,trace a.: 1.5 » silt,moist,wet @ 17'subangular to subrounded(SP/GP)(FLUVIAL ALLUVIUM) o 008 S-5 SPT 11-13-16 29 _ 0 .Q 1.5 a 15 0 SP/GP o Q o ° D: S 6 SPT 5 8-15 23 15 ■ i a ©: z0 0 Q 0 e 0 Q 2.5 22.5-210 MUCL 1 1 1 2.0 1_0 Very Soft,grey(N5)interbedded sandy 23.0 S-7 SPT 2/18" 2/18" 1.5 SILT,with silty clay, wet(MUCL)(Fluvial Alluvium)_ 23.0-32.5 25 Dense,Grey(5Y 413)interbedded fine silty fine SAND,with yellow orange brown silty sand with little gravel,wet(SM)(Fluvial Alluvium) SM 1_0 S-8 SPT 9-25-13 38 15 ■ 30 0 _Q -7.5 ° 32.5-52.5 �.�. 32.5 0_5 p Dense,Brown(tOVR 3/2)interbedded S-9 SPT 9-15-15 30 1.5 O gravels with sand,wet(SW-GW) 35 o , J V' �,•, ,• W-G ,• . . x•u 2 ;; S-10 SPT 6-12-22 34 5 ■ 0- 40 a•IFJ.� w Log continued on next page 0: 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: MDH DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF &Associates Golder m0 DRILLER: John DATE: 09/20/2001 m RECORD OF BOREHOLE BH-5 SHEET 2 of 2 PROJECT: City of Renton Garage DRILLING METHOD: 4"HSA DATUM: Local ELEVATION: 25 PROJECT NUMBER: 013-1579 DRILLING DATE: 09/05/2001 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Sotheast Cmer of Site DRILL RIG: B-59 COORDINATES: not surveyed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O BLOWS/ft■ x = w O ELEV. io 20 so 4o NOTES IL c 2 W x O . m W BLOWS ¢ WATER LEVELS p v Z DESCRIPTION N a p M a per 6 in N O WATER CONTENT(PERCENT) J O DEPTH Z 140 lb hammer W W.I eW W co (ft) 30 inch drop 40 32.5-52.5 Dense,Brown(10YR 3/2)interbedded t. . . gravels with sand,wet(SW-GW) •°•:© (Continued) •t7j�. o•.Y. 5-11 SPT 6-12-21 33 1.0 1.5 x 'c 45 •••' O .p•. o W-G ' .t7'. o�.Y. S-12 SPT 18-23-18 41 1.5 50 •'�' -27.5 Boring completed at 52.5 ft. 52.5 1_5 S-13 SPT 11-28-32 >50 1 5 55 60 65 70 0 N W O (7 Cr 75 C� 'a c� 12 m v 80 w W 1 into 5 ft LOGGED: MDH m DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt CHECKED: DPF (Associates x DRILLER: John DATE: 09/20/2001 Associates m