Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272341(1) IX- GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Renton Chevron South Grady Way and Talbot Road South Renton, Washington ££ Project No. T-3310 ..._ y+l K�Y�R'i AqX�,� cF 4 Terra Associates, Inc. y ,4 L` G k J .:v. Prepared for: Santa Property Development Bellevue, Washington XXX October 19, 1996 SEP 18 1997 3it � to 4 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. ~" r' Consultants iri Geotechnical Engineering, Geology M -, and Environmental Earth Sciences October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 Mr. Mick Santa Santa Property Development 4509 - 116th Avenue SE Bellevue, Washington 98006 Subject: Geotechnical Report Renton Chevron South Grady Way and Talbot Road South Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Santa: As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. Our field exploration indicates the site is generally underlain by compressible alluvial sediments with medium dense to very dense silty sand and silty gravel present approximately 20 feet below existing grades. We observed groundwater at depths ranging from approximately four feet in the western portion of the site to ten feet in the eastern portion. The compressible soils will undergo significant total and differential settlements if subjected to the loads anticipated for the project. Supporting the structures with an augercast pile foundation that transfers the building loads through the loose sediments to the underlying bearing stratum will virtually eliminate the potential for settlements due to load consolidation and, potentially, liquefaction. Alternatively, the settlements may be pre-induced by placing a surcharge fill pad over the building areas for a period necessary to effect primary consolidation of the compressible strata. Once primary consolidation is complete, the structures may be constructed using a standard spread footing foundation. However, some risk of damage will remain since secondary settlements will continue throughout the life of the structure. Moreover, the risk for additional settlements due to liquefaction of saturated soils during a seismic event would still be present. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 Mr. Mick Santa October 19, 1996 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service during the design phase of this project and look forward to working with you during the final design and construction phases. We trust the information presented in this report is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or need additional information,please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATE 1 J9t John C. Sadle OM ' G>�y •o Project Engin e, Geo 2 4 i0-K{-Ellp Theodore J. Schep ALEw Principal Engineer JCS/TJS:ts I EXPIRES 6/18/ + cc: Mr. Hal Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project No. T-3310 - Page No. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Project Description 1 2.0 Scope of Work 1 3.0 Site Conditions 2 3.1 Surface 2 3.2 Soils 2 3.3 Groundwater 3 3.4 Seismic 3 4.0 Discussion and Recommendations 4 4.1 General 4 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading 5 4.3 Surcharge 6 4.4 UST Excavation 7 4.5 Foundations 7 4.6 Slab-on-grade Floors 8 4.7 Drainage 9 4.8 Pavements 9 4.9 Utilities 10 5.0 Additional Services 10 6.0 Limitations 10 Fieures Vicinity Map Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan Figure 2 Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Appendix A (i) Geotechnical Report Renton Chevron South Grady Way and Talbot Road South Renton, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project will consist of a service station. Site improvements will include an approximately 2,400 square foot station building, two separate buildings located to the north and east of the station building, a free-standing pump island canopy, and three underground storage tanks (USTs). A preliminary Site Grading and Storm Drainage Plan by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. shows site grades will be raised by approximately 1.5 to 3.5 feet. The proposed floor elevation of the station building is Elev. 32.5, which is approximately 4.5 feet above the existing ground surface. At this time, we have not been provided with building plans or structural loads. We expect building construction to consist of masonry block or metal framing with brick exterior finish. Floor slabs will be constructed at grade. Based on our experience with similar projects, we expect that perimeter load-bearing walls will carry one to two kips per linear foot. Individual interior columns may carry loads of 30 kips. The recommendations contained in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the above design features. If actual features vary or changes are made, we should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. We should review final design drawings and specifications to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK On August 22 and September 27, 1996, we performed our field exploration at the site using a rubber-tire backhoe and a truck-mounted drill rig, respectively. Using the information obtained from the subsurface exploration, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Recommendations for import fill material • Site preparation and grading • Foundation suppoYt alternatives October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 • Slab-on-grade support • Excavations • Utilities • Pavements 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The site is located north and adjacent the intersection of South Grady Way and Talbot Road South in Renton, Washington. The location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The site is bounded by South Grady Way to the south, Talbot Road South to the west, and the right-of-way for South 7th Street to the north. Property use in the vicinity of the site is commercial and residential. The site is currently vacant and vegetated with grasses, blackberries, and some large landscaping shrubs. Topography at the site and in the general vicinity is relatively flat. Existing site improvements include a concrete slab foundation in the north-central portion of the site, and several power poles. We understand that the slab foundation was for an electrical substation that formerly occupied the site. 3.2 Soils The soils encountered during our subsurface investigations generally consisted of 1.5 to 8 feet of uncontrolled fill overlying very loose to loose fine-grained sands and silts to depths of approximately 20 feet. Below these depths, the soils generally consisted of medium dense to very dense fine-grained to coarse-grained silty sands and silty gravels. The native soils are interbedded with thin layers of dark brown fibrous peat at various depths. The uncontrolled fill generally consisted of dry silty sand and coal mining tailings. However, we observed fill materials in the western portion of the site that consisted of sand and gravel with several logs up to one foot in diameter. We observed caving and sloughing of the test pit sidewalls in Test Pits TP-1 through TP-5. Sloughing of the sidewalls in Test Pits TP-1 through TP-4 occurred rapidly and inhibited excavation. Minor caving occurred in Test Pit TP-5 below a depth of five feet. Detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs in Appendix A. The approximate locations of the test pits and borings are shown on the Exploration Location Plan, Figure 2. Page No. 2 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington by D.R. Mullineaux (1965) shows that the soils at the site are mapped as modified land (fill), with native younger alluvial sands and silts mapped nearby. The soils encountered at the site are consistent with the published description of these soils. 3.3 Groundwater We observed groundwater seepage in all six of the test pits. Heavy seepage was encountered in Test Pits TP-1 through TP-4 which were excavated in the central portion of the site. The water table at these locations ranged from 4 to 7.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater seepage in Test Pits TP-5 and TP-6 was moderate to heavy below a depth of ten feet. We also observed isolated light groundwater seepage at 6.5 feet in Test Pit TP-6. We encountered water-bearing soils to the termination depth of 39 feet in each boring. Fluctuations in the groundwater levels will occur on a seasonal and annual basis. The groundwater table typically will be at its highest elevation during the wet winter season and shortly thereafter. Given the time of year our investigation was performed, it is our opinion that the observed groundwater levels are representative of the seasonal low levels. 3.4 Seismic The Puget Sound area falls within Seismic Zone 3 as classified by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Based on the soil conditions encountered and the local geology, from Table 16-J of the UBC, a site coefficient of 1.5 should be used. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction,thus eliminating the soil's strength. Coarser grain deposits of sands and gravels, if not isolated and confined, are normally not affected because their hydraulic conductivity allows for drainage or dissipation of these excess pore pressures. Silts and clays are normally not affected because of the cohesive component of their shear strength. The vibration source typically considered in liquefaction analysis is a seismic event or earthquake. Structural damage due to liquefaction can occur in one of three forms: l. Excessive settlements 2. Complete foundation bearing capacity failure 3. Surface rupturing due to lateral spreading Based on the soil and groundwater conditions we encountered, it is our opinion that there is a high risk for liquefaction to occur at this site during an earthquake of Richter magnitude 6.5 or greater. Soils to a depth of 20 feet would likely be affected. Page No. 3 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General Based on our study, it is our opinion that the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. Geotechnical considerations that will impact development as planned include the potentially liquefiable, compressible soils encountered to depths of 20 feet below the existing ground surface and a shallow groundwater table. The very loose and compressible soils will not be suitable for support of the proposed structures if unacceptable total and differential settlements are to be avoided. To mitigate this condition, we have considered the following two alternatives: 1. Support structures on augercast piles 2. Surcharge the site A pile foundation will virtually eliminate foundation settlements and potential impacts to the structure from liquefaction of the loose soils during a seismic event. We expect that pile lengths at the site will be approximately 30 to 35 feet below the existing site grades. Resistance to uplift forces may require longer piles. Foundations for Alternative 2 may be conventional spread footings. Surcharging the site with additional fill above that required to establish grade should induce most of the potential primary settlement at the site. However, lesser amounts of secondary settlement will continue throughout the life of the structure. In addition, there would be a risk of additional settlements occurring during an earthquake if liquefaction of the underlying loose soils occurs. If the owner is not willing to accept the risk for secondary post-construction settlements, the building foundations should be supported on piling. Excavations in the central and western portions of the site should be expected to encounter significant groundwater at depths of four to seven feet below the existing site grades. The groundwater elevation in the vicinity of the proposed USTs is approximately four feet below the existing grade. Dewatering will be required to facilitate site excavation, excavation sidewall stability, and construction of the USTs. Depending on the time of year that construction is initiated, groundwater levels may be slightly higher. It will be necessary to provide measures for uplift resistance of the USTs due to the shallow groundwater. The buoyant force acting on the USTs could increase significantly if liquefaction occurs during a seismic event. The following sections provide detailed discussion and recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. Page No. 4 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading To prepare the site for construction, all vegetation, debris, organic surface soils, and other unsuitable materials should be stripped and removed from the areas under construction. To prepare a suitable subgrade surface for paved areas and placement of the building's structural fill pad, we recommend scarifying and recompacting the existing shallow surficial fill at the site. Partial overexcavation and.recompaction of existing deeper fills (Test Pit TP-3 and TP-4) is also recommended. The required extent of overexcavation,both laterally and vertically, will be best evaluated in the field during construction. For planning purposes, a minimum depth of four feet should be considered. In general, the on-site soils contain a significant amount of fines and will be difficult to compact if the moisture conditions cannot be carefully controlled. Extreme care should be taken to ensure that exposed surfaces of the surficial soils do not become disturbed due to weather and construction traffic. Reuse of the existing site soils as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. We recommend that the structural fill required to achieve site grades consist of inorganic relatively free-draining granular soil meeting the following grading requirements: Maximum Aggregate Size 6 inches Minimum Retained on the No. 4 Sieve 25 percent Maximum Passing the No. 200 Sieve 5 percent (Based on the Minus 3/4-inch Fraction) Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soils' maximum density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within about two percent of its optimum, as determined by this same ASTM method. Prior to placing fill, we recommend probing or proofrolling all exposed surfaces to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. A representative of Terra Associates, Inc. should observe all proofrolling operations. We also recommend field evaluations at the time of construction to verify stable subgrades. If excessively yielding areas are observed, they should be cut to a firm subgrade and filled to grade with structural fill. In pavement areas, if the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive, use of geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent in conjunction with structural fill can be considered to limit the depth of removal. In general, a minimum of 18 inches of a clean granular structural fill over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. Page No. 5 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 4.3 Surcharge As previously discussed, support for building foundations and slabs-on-grade can be provided by surcharging the building areas. The surcharge program is necessary to limit building settlements to what may be considered tolerable levels. Our surcharge and settlement analysis is based on a finished floor elevation of 32.5 for the station building. Grades in the vicinity of the two other structures will be raised approximately two feet. Primary Consolidation The site grades should be raised using structural fill as outlined in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Once grade is achieved, an additional three feet of fill should be placed as a surcharge in the vicinity of the station building and the other building location. This surcharge fill does not need to meet any special requirements other than having a minimum in-place unit weight of 125 pounds per cubic foot(pcf). However, it may be advisable to use a good quality fill that could be used to raise grades in other portions of the site, such as parking and driveway areas, if necessary. We recommend that the surcharge pad extend a minimum of five feet beyond the building perimeter and then slope down at an inclination of 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). The estimated total primary settlements under the recommended surcharge range from three to five inches. These settlements are expected to occur 8 to 12 weeks following full application of the surcharge loading. The actual period for completion of the primary settlements will be governed by variations in subsurface conditions at the site. To verify the amount of settlement and the rate of movement, the surcharge program should be monitored by installing settlement markers. A typical settlement marker installation is shown on Figure A-10. The settlement markers should be installed on the existing grade prior to placing any building or surcharge fills. Once installed, elevations of both the fill height and marker should be recorded daily until the full height of the surcharge is in place. Once fully surcharged, readings should continue weekly until the anticipated settlements have occurred. It is critical that the grading contractor recognize the importance of the settlement marker installations. All efforts must be made to protect the markers from damage during fill placement. It is difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate the progress of the surcharge program if the markers are damaged or destroyed by construction equipment. As a result, it may be necessary to install new markers and to extend the surcharging time to ensure that settlements have ceased and building construction can begin. Post-construction Settlements Primary consolidation of compressible soils at the site will be achieved upon completion of the preloading. During secondary consolidation, you should expect maximum post-construction total settlements of 1 to 1-1/4 inch and differential settlements of 1/2 to 3/4 inch. These values represent expected settlements over 50 years. However, we anticipate that most of these settlements will occur within one to two years after completion of the structure. Page No. 6 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 The surcharge program will not significantly reduce the liquefaction potential of the loose saturated silty sand layers at the site. Additional total settlements of three to five inches could occur during a moderate earthquake (magnitude 6.5 or greater). If the owner is not willing to accept the risk for these potential settlements, the buildings should be supported on pile foundations. 4.4 UST Excavation Due to the shallow depth to groundwater observed in the vicinity of the USTs, dewatering prior to excavation will be required. To accomplish this, we recommend using a well point system. For design, the permeability of the coarse-grained soils encountered in the area of the USTs can be taken as 0.1 centimeters per second(cm/s). With excavation depths potentially reaching 10 to 12 feet below the ground surface, a single-stage well point system should be adequate to dewater the excavation. Adequate dewatering of a deeper excavation may require a multiple-stage well point system. We do not recommend using deep pumping wells for dewatering because they have the potential to cause settlements across a much broader area than a well point system. The dewatering contractor should develop details of the dewatering system. Side slopes for an adequately dewatered excavation should be laid back at a minimum inclination of 1.5:1. The excavation side slopes should be covered with durable reinforced plastic sheeting that is securely staked in place. This plastic sheeting will prevent erosion of the slope and will contain any loose slope soils that slough off or are dislodged from the slope face due to isolated seepage conditions. The UST's will need to be anchored to resist buoyant forces. To account for potential increases in buoyant forces during an earthquake, we recommend designing for a groundwater level at the surface plus three feet. 4.5 Foundations Spread Footing Following the successful completion of the surcharge program, if the estimated post construction settlements are considered tolerable, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should be at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below final exterior grades. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). For short-term loads such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity can be used. With the anticipated loads and bearing stresses,the estimated total settlements are as discussed in the previous section. Page No. 7 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.4 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the side of the footing and buried portion of the foundation stem wall can also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pcf. We recommend not including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent fill soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. The recommended passive value includes a safety factor of 1.5. Augercast Piles If deep foundation support is selected,we recommend using augercast piling. Augercast piles should be advanced to achieve a minimum penetration of five feet into bearing stratum consisting of the dense to very dense silty sands and silty gravels. This will require pile tip elevations of 30 feet below existing site grades. Actual pile depths and corresponding lengths will vary in the field due to variations in depth to bearing stratum. At this depth, allowable end-bearing and lateral pile capacities for varying pile diameters are as follows: Pile Diameter Allowable End-Bearing Capacity (inches) (tons) 14 20 16 30 18 40 The above allowable capacities are provided with a safety factor of two. These allowable capacities also account for negative downdrag loading on the pile due to consolidation of the adjacent soils caused by fill loads or liquefaction. All piles may be designed for the full load-carrying capacities recommended above, provided they are spaced at least four pile diameters apart. Settlement of piles extending into the medium dense to very dense soils is expected to be less than 1/4 inch for individual piles. Additional load-carrying capacity and resistance to uplift forces will be provided by soil friction along the pile shaft. We recommend using a value of 500 psf over the surface area of the pile for this purpose. The upper 20 feet of soil should not be considered in this design due to the potential for liquefaction during a seismic event. Liquefaction will also eliminate lateral soil support within the upper 20 feet. With this considered, resistance to lateral loads should be provided by battered piles. 4.6 Slab-on-grade Floors If potential post-construction settlements are considered tolerable, then slabs-on-grade may be supported on the structural fill subgrade prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four-inch thick capillary break layer of clean free-draining sand or gravel that has less than three percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Page No. 8 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, a durable plastic membrane should be placed on the capillary break layer. The membrane should be covered with one to two inches of clean, moist sand to guard against damage during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. 4.7 Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building areas at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeter, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of one percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. Subsurface We recommend installing a continuous drain along the outside lower edge of the perimeter building foundations. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. 4.8 Pavements Pavements should be constructed on subgrades prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Regardless of the degree of relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. Proofrolling the subgrade with heavy construction equipment should be completed to verify this condition. The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subjected. We expect moderate to heavy traffic loading. With a stable subgrade prepared as recommended, we recommend the following pavement sections: • Three inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) • Three inches of AC over four inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) The paving materials used should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for Class B asphalt concrete and CRB surfacing. Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. Page No. 9 October 19, 1996 Project No. T-3310 4.9 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) or City of Renton specifications. At minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. If buildings are pile supported, utility connections to the structures should be capable of sustaining differential movements of up to three inches. 5.0 ADDITIONAL'SERVICES Terra Associates, Inc. should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the project design. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications,and recommendations. This will also allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. 6.0 LIMITATIONS This report is the property of Terra Associates, Inc. and was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is intended for specific application to the Renton Chevron project and for the exclusive use of Santa Property Development and their authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon data obtained from the on-site test pits and borings. Variations in soil and groundwater conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with construction. Page No. 10 iJ 1 REN ON Cad 406 a t . � I N N N SITE N J VICINITY MAP TERRA RENTON CHEVRON ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No.3310 Date 10/96 Figure 1 Ix ME I "IT ��i+KT7C06-- �,• 1 a SpNI MI+•76.!(1- [!-fINC M•31.1� [ 7!'EIIIIC w-7606 11.46- Ct KA/[r V4VC 6'Cxl•I+DCD� [YRINI( x 6'r+•r.C-71„•a } �:•.''`d �//•>� S). += .e Xa~earr) { +• i•7 i+ll I'is se 76.00 x W DEL 2(=5G10 •�_3 T ' y... N pDe SR II 'CC t - - ,. , o [7f CMS:Sf.?16- a A v r•• �a"•:o 766t.1M' r ,, . ... Cr SATIN•;C11N---. }�, SEC III lME �' .-. �. , " 7•r.' ,I.' a A�, • I ,• , wAIU w_ iw sr.•, +••u'm^(mtor/50se•E N69 7:K• - -{ t µ,. .t •r, 6 SSPIT�SE i7f.YY .p�o• ��- _ - '�. r _ �- - •o, ! SO O 0 7t l ,r 1T [ te'ouC N-a.•y ___.,c._____._. ll_3..__. e € - ........... -- _ _____ - - M EQ\;, r ?� ft IE CCONC SE•7/.7S ..qg. •. 1{ + �(■ i[[V+M"-s , �;._________ __iS t!t�' S0 5.2J7G t0E 3C.SD OJE% 1_.__� t _. - •• y t— II y M: {1t NAIE►YAE r- -._ - t' ? * I, a s+mAE sox "s ,. ♦. :r?�"• •, ' • Ez yr _ �— S s- -7� 5 • , r ,.•' � ,}........... ..- 1 1 j <Ex CAS wiEK -- - i ` — TP 6 -' e:•� •�ti.: 11`e A- �`� IC-teaO•- �[t P vE Nlr.+x { s.:: :w: :�+.-.�i: Tl •�+�? :j �• �YJr ...':.._. Y- _ - -- -- - -------------------- I EB'FLOTt[ _______ /� //J�� .:• �-_� ? '�r;t:..• ' f I serarsd6 -�• 1.D.7M .-. .- �.''�� ir'Rr-.rr"io -_--- � - — -- -- � •_• l�1 Lf� � -''�" ,�.'iMt' -_11 J•:�I.t •ft.1 1 •�,' - Ex Co Ntu.7667 w Lwlar. ~7J U F, C!1 __ 102 .lr;so 0.1x �0 �J SD i 1 %` J +,t• •'.1.+•••••-{x SC rE!W� -L L I.wmu Set �• ! t!e ?• ,? ram" - -•7•eI ACCESS aAw O SO• a7t } 6 " `rt - IS EV TEL VWAT a. T P-3 - : . - w ? -.c `•. ! ,(,Z: ■ 0 (x 6�Jr �~4• \� KOM as IIAN V 6 III,�t'•f ty�:! 3�.� r\n eo.[N nac .,� ~ .�!if tY• � •►.`,ne \ 1• .`?�. f !� .cm (�•`+ ,`p �6ffss Wit .,Y• En f•(1WEN rat '1; ® - SO 6 0.4% �' t ✓,. •Jo Cf.IY •1/ c•�% ,I W7111 J l awls ' � /t, r I ',�! 1+ �i j: /i �' - - ?� •�A •' v�4 ' tom ' �0 ® •�-� / !' • 4 `1 I�r`Y Alt w.1 , �f r a .'r ! • e6w OJS2VT Mm ° X i ' ` f F�325 •, y I:-3771.71 t •...r VIA 14, -Ott\ � ' T P_2 :i�at E_ 7es.w' {1\\\ -N�M •Lit - ' t tJ,t;y r,•y,y•�Tz..rCL +x' �1."• >ns i a ,,. ,'s' 61• a t'.'f! l` I,u1.o S��N C _ •y.1.1';,�"�'R.r'StY7 .1/'�Ci r+.,, I• �.�.t.,•p�-- - - ------ • .� s •C �I' !!T' 1 `.� ••'\C� ,�} � k? Tv:�yr- r= • Sl �■. Nl aII •'� .1 r i:_ C •Ne+• :•*a \f- CAS r-Kf! •t J7r ; t , _ l� a/OrFa �. •` i nw:' :y Wn(k to PC wwy¢rtt\\]] S - 'y } 1 'y •: t. I t I .ti i i ! {, `\. 'b•• IFso f O.4f 50 lFl 17 50 0 04k CB/y ' t-{,r ! ' �.ti�j A.- t �bw1+ .•1`tt� J•�/;.. i__ ,r..y■Pr(.. -.� � :_ i� '`" 'e1•.[t Sr..NAE BOx 'f' d' •rA �•t, ,':aY iJf ,i r.`: _ a >.,q tt r� M1 III e, o A37. '� \sL �\+ t "i' :a ��;I11'l�t•.t v� ' `•x-- — _ � .. d .�' .�1 � ` .?. \l r[ .,+y n;� A �_Q .�lM +�fir,.. o • }A+ o .t � '_... s� i,+ `` + :� •'•,._ -'t A f. I � i� +� _ • 1 Ex¢¢.J-sox \ • M`, �:1;•\' D , •.4�!Y, �.AC�ZC a � a " e',i ' O _ � •�Lr. i ,sl t..�r4,�;;h'ry - `d L{ o - i f / �P " ' •l�.• ` r. J.fe ;>Z *�..r ,,1.. 40 80 feet T � -� {' ;:• {' - ," 'P0J` APPROY,IMATE SCALE P- 1 Yam. \ ,,`••,,,� I !r� f 5 `Fj .e�` \�' \�r�`; :®. }' r.,, ' �• 40 0 i �� ,•S�'r t f; ?t,, 1 -,.) .�y LEGEND: 3 tie- • r •• "� APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION a �. ..1•\. ;. 111 .BVS S70V-. ..ir. \ i F/ (4 _\ _ i •,C i_'�??, Cz 5Cw1 J-oorCS LL l R` APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION AI PE W. REFERENCE: GRADING AND STORM PLAN PREPARED BY jr \ � BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., `;/"'EL JOB No. 5734, SHEET C4 OF 10, DATED 8/12/96_ t rat . EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN `""°' ' TERRA RoGeotechnical RENTON CHEVRON ASSOCIATES �` RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants Proj. No.3310 Date 10/96 Figure 2 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Renton Chevron Renton,Washington On August 22 and September 27, 1996, we performed our field exploration at the site using a rubber-tire backhoe and a truck-mounted drill rig, respectively. We excavated six test pits to a maximum depth of 14 feet below existing grade and two borings to a maximum depth of 39 feet. The approximate locations of the test pits and borings are shown on Figure 2. The Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-6. An engineering geologist from our firm conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit and boring, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits and borings were placed in sealed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the test pit logs. Grain size analyses were performed on six of the soil samples, the results of which are shown on Figures A-7 through A-9. We determined the Atterberg limits of five samples. The results of this analysis are shown on the Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs. Project No. T-3310 MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER GRAPH TYPICAL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL SYMBOL GRAVELS Clean GW O Q; .• Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little a� Gravels �.Q•q• •. or no fines. (less than • • • • .• Poorly-graded ravels J ai More than o GP • • • • • • gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little — N 5/ fines) or no fines. O 50% of coarse fraction is GM ' • Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non- e a> > larger than No. Gravels plastic fines. z4 sieve. with flues GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic • fines. Q o 00 .. 0 c� Clean C'J SANDS Ian Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or 0 Sands SW no fines. uwj m Z (less than More than a Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little +� c o 5/ fines) SP 50% o or no fines. aCa f coarse O m c fraction is U o " smaller than SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. No. 4 sieve. Sands with flues SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or (n N clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. J_ LO O '� > CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly m W Liquid limit is less than 50% clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. E wp o No 0 L i i i i i i i Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. < m z Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine O SILTS AND CLAYS MH sandy or silty soils, elastic. Co w 1' z 0 Liquid limit is greater than 50% CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. L m 0H Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT ^ Peat and other highly organic soils. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS J Standard Penetration T 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT LU Density Resistance in Blows/Foot I SPOON SAMPLER Very loose 0-4 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER Loose 4-10 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER ° Medium dense 10-30 P SAMPLER PUSHED 0 Dense 30-50 * SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED Very dense >50 ZZ WATER LEVEL (DATE) Ci WATER OBSERVATION STANDPIPE Standard Penetration C TORVANE READINGS, tsf r Consistency Resistance in Blows/Foot qu PENETROMETER READING, tsf vVery soft 0 2 W MOISTURE, percent of dry weight o Soft 2-4 pcf DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot J Medium stiff 4-8 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 PI PLASTIC INDEX Hard >32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TERRA RENTON CHEVRON • ;' • ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-3310 Date 10/96 Figure A-1 Test Pit No. TP-1 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 28.0 Date: 8/22/96 Depth USCS/ W �ft'� Graph Soil Description % (4 inches sod and topsoil) 25 FILL: Gray to black silty SAND and coal mine tailings, dry. CH Mottled gray-brown CLAY, stiff, moist. qu=1.0 tons/ft2 39 LL= 56 PI = 28 Rusty brown SAND with gravel, fine to coarse grained sand, SP ' 10 5 ?> fine gravel, medium dense,waterbearing. Gray SAND with gravel, fine grained, sand, fine gravel, medium SP € dense,waterbearing. 11 Test pit terminated at 8 feet due to sloughing of side walls. 10 Heavy groundwater seepage below 4 feet. 15 Test Pit No. TP-2 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 27.5 Date: 8/22/96 Depth (ft ) USCS/ W Graph Soil Description °� 0 ° ML SM (8 inches sod and topsoil) Gray-brown SILT to silty SAND fine grained, medium dense moist. Mottled rusty brown SAND with gravel, fine grained sand, fine 10 SP .>:'•:••`• gravel, medium dense, moist to wet. Gray SAND with gravel to GRAVEL with sand, fine to medium grained sand, fine gravel, medium dense,waterbearing. Test pit terminated at 7 feet due to sloughing of sidewalls. Heavy groundwater seepage below 4.5 feet. 10 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA RENTON CHEVRON -' - ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON . . •- Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-3310 Date 10/96 Figure A-2 Test Pit No. TP-3 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 29.0 Date: 8/22/96 (ft.)h USCS/ W Graph Soil Description /� o (4 inches sod and topsoil) FILL: Gray silty SAND, minor debris (wood and glass). zi" FILL: Mottled rusy brown SAND, fine grained, medium dense, SP :: moist to wet, 2.5 foot diameter log at approximatley 3 feet. z: ;•v FILL: Gray SAND with gravel to GRAVEL with sand,fine to medium grained SP GP sand,fine gravel,medium dense,waterbearing,1 foot diameter log at approximately 6.5 feet. plasticity,with highly decomposed peat. 82 Gray, elastic SILT,very soft,wet, moderate to high ILL= 53 10 PI 17 MH = Test pit terminated at 10 feet due to sloughing of side walls. Heavy groundwater seepage below 6 feet. 15 Test Pit No. TP-4 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 28.5 Date: 8/22/96 Depth (ft.) USCS/ W Graph Soil Description FILL: Crushed gravel, gray silty SAND, and minor debris. 111 Mottled gray brown sandy SILT, fine grained, medium stiff to ML stiff, moist to wet. (Possible Fill) qu=1.0 tons/ft2 LL= 46 43 PI =15 5 "`"'`•`•?' Gray SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet to waterbearing. 30 10 ML Gray clayey SILT, very soft to soft, wet. qu<0.5 tons/ft2 Test pit terminated at 11 feet due to sloughing of sidewalls. Heavy groundwater seepage below 7.5 feet. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA RENTON CHEVRON ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-3310 Date 10/96 FFigure A-3 Test Pit No. TP-5 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 30 Date: 8/22/96 Depth(ft.) S /Graph Soil Description W FILL: Gray silty SAND, coal mine tailings, dry. Gray sandy SILT, fine grained, soft,wet to waterbearing, [j interbedded with gray fine sand below 13 feet. qu<0.5 tons/ft2 ML 10 41 15 Test pit terminated at approximately 14 feet. Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage below 10 feet. Minor caving below 5 feet. Test Pit No. TP-6 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 30.5 Date: 8/22/96 Depth (ft.) Graph Soil Description W 0 FILL: Gray silty SAND, coal mine tailings, dry. Gray sandy SILT, fine grained, soft to medium stiff,with a few 5 wood timbers at various elevations. qu<0.5 tons/ft2 ML 10 Test pit terminated at 11 feet. Light groundwater seepage at 6.5 feet, moderate below 10 feet. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA RENTON CHEVRON PON ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants proj. No. T-3310 Date 10/96 Figure A-4 Boring No. B-2 Logged by: JCS Date: 9/27/96 Approximate Elev. 30 a) Graph/. Relative Depth 0- (N) Water qu Lab E USCS Soil Description Density (ft-) Blows/ Content tons/ Test foot ft2 U) Fill. 6 23 2.75 Gray silty SAND, fine grained,wet. Loose M ----------------------------------------------- -------------------- 5 Gray SILT, low to medium plasticity, wet, with thin lenses of brown Very Soft I 2 80.4 <0.5 fibrous peat. Ll — 107 Gray SILT, low to medium plasticity, - wet,with thin lenses of brown Medium Stiff - 5 37.8 o.5 LL=35 fibrous peat and thin lenses of fine - PI = 9 to medium grained sand — 15 Gray silty SAND, fine grained, waterbearing. I 2 28.3 SM F Very Loose 20 As above. T 0 283.8 T --D-a rk-b-rown-P EAT,wet-------------------- ----Very-Soft------ 25 ............... SAND to SAND with Gray silty ........... 58.4 0.5 ... 21 silt, fine grained, waterbearing, SM interbedded with thin lenses Medium Dense of dark brown peat. 30 As above. 42 6.3 I Gray silty GRAVEL with sand, fine to • coarse grained sand,fine gravel, Dense 35 • GM waterbearing. As above, fine to coarse gravel. Very Dense I 74 6.0 0.5 Boring terminated at 39 feet. Groundwater encountered at approximately 10 feet during drilling. BORING LOG ,—,.... ..�477771 TERRA RENTON CHEVRON .................. ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-3310 � Date 10/96 � Figure A-6 SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD I GRAIN SIZE IN MM \\ \\\\ \ N .ja 01 O O N cn P. W N N�s ?co N co A a+ O O O O O O O) _F_ C4 IJ 00 01 .y. W N ♦,: 100 0 90 10 CD O CD � m 80 20 (n ;U m c� O D n 70 30 m 0 T m � 60 40 c7 � _ O N Z 50 50 cn m C0 40 60 v m o. 30 - 70 m _ _ G-) z � _ o � 20 80 F7 ;:U C-) m�;U ;;U 10 90 zmDiL o d Z Z O L7 0 _ _ 100 Z (�J W N 0 0 O O O 00 Q� W N Co O> W N OOo O O 0 0 O 0 0 O >= m S S g GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS m (n � � $ CO � � W N D z� D COBBLESDIUMINE FINES r— i=z U) Z C/) Boring or Depth Moisture Key Test Pit (ft.) USCS DescriptionCD Content N LL PL • TP-1 4.0 SP poorly—graded SAND with gravel 0 TP-1 7.0 GP poorly—graded GRAVEL with sand SIEVE ANALYSIS m M., OPENINGSIZE OF ► ��_��..f1■._ice ��`�� ...���..■■■._i,� • ----.._.._- — -Lis E.----......--- MI.■C__�■■■■.._i,= . .. t��1.1;�9���CI�<d�Z•�►������I�Il�L!��iW� Description poorly—graded SAND with silt • • • silty SAND MEN SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM L" O O O O� �a O N O O N Q1 .A .aA N? � IV OO .A ? O CD t. 100 0 '-� 90 10 (D 7 IT s U) m 80 20 (n X m m O x m ;:a o n D n 70 30 m E m En o rn z 60 40 c7 Cn D z 50 50 cam/) m 40 60 a) � m � 30 70 m z —f G-) o = —i w 20 80 0 m 10 90 m o p Z CD Z O Cn 0 _ _ LEE11100 (D C z �f 8 O O CO O O O O O 00 O W N f bo � � C"� N O O O O O O O O O O p CD >= m O O GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS W N co 0) � w N O = IN MEDIUM Z m D COBBLESFINES z r- p z C/) Z C/) Boring or Depth Moisture Key Test Pit (ft.) USCS DescriptionCD Content (%) LL PL a • B-2 18.5 SM silty SAND 0 B-2 28.5 SM silty SAND STEEL ROD PROTECTIVE SLEEVE :.. HEIGHT VARIES SURCHARGE (SEE NorEs) :. SURCHARGE : OR FILL OR FILL NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1. BASE CONSISTS OF 1/2" THICK, 2'x2' PLYWOOD WITH CENTER DRILLED 5/8" DIAMETER HOLE. 2. BEDDING MATERIAL, IF REQUIRED, SHOULD CONSIST OF CLEAN COARSE SAND. 3. MARKER ROD IS 1/2" DIAMETER STEEL ROD THREADED AT BOTH ENDS. 4. MARKER ROD IS ATTACHED TO BASE BY NUT AND WASHER ON EACH SIDE OF BASE. 5. PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURROUNDING MARKER ROD SHOULD CONSIST OF 2" DIAMETER PLASTIC TUBING. SLEEVE IS NOT ATTACHED TO ROD OR BASE. 6. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF STEEL ROD CAN BE CONNECTED WITH THREADED COUPLINGS. 7. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE CAN BE CONNECTED WITH PRESS—FIT PLASTIC COUPLINGS. 8. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 6" ABOVE TOP OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE. 9. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 1" ABOVE TOP OF FILL SURFACE. TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL P#Geotechnical TERRA RENTON CHEVRON ASSOCIATES RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants Proj. No. 3310 Date 10/96 Figure A-10