The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSWP273635(11) Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit / LID Project Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report Prepared for City of Renton August 2012 CH2MHILL P.O. Box 91500 Bellevue,WA 98009-2050 v , VAL1 of wa � 4' <IV 11 � 'O AL This Report has been prepared under the direction of a registered professional engineer RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHN I CAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT Table of Contents TABLEOF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Authorization...........................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Work...................................................................................................................1 1.3 Project Information.................................................................................................................................I TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS....................................................3 2.1 General Physiography.............................................................................................................................3 2.2 Regional Geology.....................................................................................................................................3 2.3 Near-Surface Soil Conditions.................................................................................................................3 EXISTING GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION ..........................................................5 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM............................................................6 4.1 General.....................................................................................................................................................6 4.2 Boring Explorations................................................................................................................................6 4.3 Test Pit Explorations...............................................................................................................................6 4.4 Infiltration Tests......................................................................................................................................7 4.5 Soil Classification....................................................................................................................................7 4.6 Laboratory Testing.................................................................................................................................7 RESULTS OF THE FIELD EXPLORATION..............................................................9 5.1 Subsurface Conditions............................................................................................................................9 5.2 Groundwater Conditions......................................................................................................................10 INFILTRATION AND HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY .............................................12 6.1 Field Test Values...................................................................................................................................12 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 6.2 Correlations to DJo Values....................................................................................................................13 6.3 Design Infiltration Values.....................................................................................................................13 6.4 Design Hydraulic Conductivity Values...............................................................................................14 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................15 LIMITATIONS.......................................................................................................... 17 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................18 FIGURES.................................................................................................................19 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 1 Introduction This Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report summarizes the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted by CH2M HILL for the City of Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/ LID project in Renton,Washington.The report also recommends infiltration values based on lab testing. 1.1 Authorization This Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report was prepared under the terms of the contract between CH2M HILL and City of Renton. The contract authorizes CH2M HILL to provide geotechnical engineering services associated with the stormwater retrofit project in accordance with the agreement between City of Renton and CH2M HILL. 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Work The purpose of this Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report is to document subsurface soil information for the design of the Project.The scope of work includes the following activities: • Review existing, published geologic and near-surface soils information for the project area, • Drilling 10 exploratory borings, • Excavate 2 test pits, • Perform infiltration tests in 2 borings and 2 test pits • Visually inspect,classify,and log soil samples and stratigraphy during the exploration • Provide infiltration estimates for design,and • Prepare this Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report to summarize these tasks. 1.3 Project Information The City of Renton completed and adopted the Sunset Community Plan and Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement,which included the adoption of the Sunset Area Surface Water Master Plan.The Sunset Area Surface Water Master Plan identifies areas where green connection improvements could be made at locations that fit with existing and planned future land use in the area,and the construction of a sub-regional storm water infiltration facility. The green connection stormwater improvements consist of constructing rain gardens and LID pervious concrete sidewalks primarily along Harrington Avenue NE. The sub-regional stormwater infiltration facility consists of constructing an infiltration/flow 1 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT control facility with a rain garden storm water facility providing water quality treatment and pretreatment. These improvements will retrofit existing storm systems in the area to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of stormwater runoff specifically reduction in total suspended solids and fecal coliform loading,from the existing and future land use within the Sunset Community Plan Area which discharge to Johns Creek and Lake Washington. A portion of the project site is located within Aquifer Protection Area(APA)Zone 2.Water quality treatment is required in this area if the infiltration rate is greater than 2.4 inches per hour. 2 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 2 Topographic and Geologic Conditions The project area is found in Renton,Washington and is located in Section 4,Township 23 North,Range 5 East. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This section summarizes the topographic and geologic conditions of the project site based on published geologic and near-surface soils information. 2.1 General Physiography The Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/ LID project is located in Renton,Washington in King County.The City of Renton straddles the southeast shore of Lake Washington.The project site is located along Harrington Avenue NE near Sunset Boulevard,an upland area a little more than 300 feet above Lake Washington.The stormwater retrofit project includes an area owned by the Renton Housing Authority.The site gradually decreases in elevation from the north to the south. 2.2 Regional Geology The geologic units in the immediate project vicinity,based on a Geologic Map (Washington State Department of Natural Resources,2012) is Vashon Glacial Outwash(Qgo)and Vashon Glacial Till(Qgt).The site is mapped as till in the northern section and outwash in the south (Figure 2),though our exploration indicated a slightly more complex distribution,which is discussed in Section 5. Vashon Glacial Outwash. Chiefly consists of stratified sand,gravel,and cobbles with minor silt and clay interbeds deposited in delta,ice-contact,beach,and meltwater environments (Dragovich,2002). Saturated hydraulic conductivity is generally moderate to high. Vashon Glacial Till. A highly compacted mixture of clay,silt,sand, gravel,and boulders deposited by glacial ice(Dragovich,2002). Saturated hydraulic conductivity is generally low. 2.3 Near-Surface Soil Conditions Surficial soils for the project study area were mapped by the USDA Soil Conservation Service(SCS),now referred to as the Natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS). Typically,the NRCS maps depict conditions within 5 feet of the ground surface,and usually do not indicate representative conditions at greater depths. The surficial soils mapped by NRCS(2012)in the project area consist of Indianola loamy fine sand(InC),Urban land,Ur, Arents Alderwood material(AmC),and Ragnar-Indianola association(RdC).These and adjacent soil units are mapped in Figure 3. Indianola loamy fine sand consists of somewhat excessively drained soils with the parent material being glacial drift.The material is classified with a high capability to transmit water 3 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT (Ksat)with values ranging from 1.98 to 5.95 in/hr.The typical profile is loamy fine sand from 0 to 30 inches underlain by sand to 60 inches. Urban land consists of fill material placed for development. Arents,Alderwood material consists of moderately drained material from basal till.The material is classified with a very low to moderately low capability to transmit water(Ksat) with values ranging from 0.00 to 0.06 in/hr.The typical profile is gravelly sandy loam to very gravelly sandy loam to a depth of 60 inches. Ragnar-Indianola association material consists of a combination of somewhat excessively drained to well drained material formed from glacial outwash and glacial drift.The material is classified with a high capability to transmit water(Ksat)with values ranging from 1.98 to 5.95 in/hr.The typical profile is fine sandy loam and loamy fine sand to a depth of approximately 30 inches underlain by sand and loamy sand to 60 inches. The surficial soils mapped by the NRCS are fairly consistent to the soils encountered during the field explorations.Borings throughout the project site encountered material described as silty sand in the surficial soils,which would correspond to the sandy loam and loamy sand of the NRCS soils described above.The soil encountered was typically finer in the area mapped as Arents,Alderwood material;whereas,typically slightly coarser in the areas mapped as Indianola loamy fine sand and Ragnar-Indianola.However,the majority of the surficial soils encountered throughout the project site contained primarily fine sand with estimated 15 to 30 percent material passing the number 200 sieve.Groundwater found within the project site is well below the surficial soils described in the NRCS.This would account somewhat for the soil units being described by the NRCS as"moderately drained" up to"excessively drained" because the ability of the material to hold water is not influenced by a shallow groundwater table.Field infiltration tests and infiltration correlations based on grain-size show that the surficial soils are most likely not"excessively drained".Further discussion on the infiltration characteristics of the soils are discussed in a later section. 4 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJEcf GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 3 Existing Geotechnical Information Two existing geotechnical reports were available for review before the field exploration.The reports entitled Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development Edmonds and Glennwood Ave(Soil and Environmental Engineers Inc,2011)and Planned Playground Area, Early Childhood Learning Center(Associated Earth Sciences Inc,2011) are included in Attachment B.The reports included boring logs and test pits located near the project limits. Existing borings and test pits from the existing geotechnical information are shown on Figure 1. 5 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJEcr GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 4 Subsurface Exploration Program Borings and test pits were excavated to provide information on subsurface conditions within the project area.This section summarizes the exploration program,including the methods and the soil description/classification method used during the exploration activities. A summary of the results for the subsurface exploration program is provided in Section 4. 4.1 General Explorations were performed by subcontractors under the oversight of CH2M HILL geotechnical engineering staff.The exploration locations were determined in the field based on the proposed facility locations,equipment access,utility interference,and topographical features. The subsurface exploration locations are shown on Figure 1. Boring and test pit logs are found in Appendix A. 4.2 Boring Explorations Borings for this project were drilled from May 29,2012 to June 1,2012 at the locations shown in Figure 1. Geotechnical drilling services for the Project were provided by Gregory Drilling,of Redmond,WA under the oversight of CH2M HILL geotechnical staff. Soil drilling was accomplished using an 8-inch,outside-diameter,hollow-stem auger system with a truck-mounted Central Mine Equipment(CME) 75 drill rig. Utility locates were made by CH2M HILL before work was conducted. Borings were drilled between 15.7 feet and 21.5 feet.Borings were drilled at proposed rain garden locations and possible sites for the infiltration facility in the Renton Housing Authority.Representative disturbed soil samples were obtained from each boring using Standard Penetration Test(SPT) methods.SPTs were generally taken at depths of 0,1.5,3, 4.5,6,7.5,10,12.5,15,and 20 feet below ground surface.Samples were obtained by driving the SPT with an automatic-trip hammer and were performed in general accordance with ASTM D1586-Standard Penetration Test Method for Penetration Test and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils,except that sample liners were not used.Soil samples collected from the SPTs were visually logged and stored in watertight sample bags for laboratory testing. 4.3 Test Pit Explorations Two test pits were excavated on June 17,2012 by Northwest Excavating using a rubber track-mounted Bobcat 335 excavator with a 2-foot bucket.Excavation was overseen by CH2M HILL geotechnical staff. The test pits were excavated at possible locations of the infiltration facility located near the intersection of Harrington Ave NE and Sunset Lane NE as well as near the intersection of Sunset Lane NE and NE 10th St.Both test pit locations were excavated on Renton Housing 6 RENTON SUNSET STORM WATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT Authority property.Specific objectives of the test pits included: (1)investigating the predominant,near-surface soil types, (2)performing infiltration tests,and(3) identifying the existence of subsurface conditions that would best fit the requirements needed for an infiltration facility.Test pits were excavated to 5 feet. 4.4 Infiltration Tests Infiltration tests were performed at two borings (B-1IT-12 and B-3IT-12)and two test pits (TP-1-12 and TP-2-12). The boring infiltration tests were performed by drilling a hole down to 4 feet below ground surface.The augers were removed from the hole and the hole was filled with water up to a depth of 3 feet above the bottom of the hole.Groundwater measurements were taken at regular intervals as it infiltrated into the hole. After approximately 2 hours,the hole was filled with water to 3 feet above the bottom of the hole.Water flow was adjusted to maintain a constant water height in the hole.The flow required to maintain the constant water height was then measured and recorded. The test pit infiltration tests were performed following the guidelines recommended in the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) Modified Pilot Infiltration Test(PIT) Method. The test pit was excavated to approximate dimensions of 5 feet long by 2 feet wide by 5 feet deep.The test pit was filled with water up to a depth of 3 feet above the bottom of the test pit.The test pit was filled using a hose with a screen on the bottom to prevent erosion on the bottom of the test pit. A flowmeter was used to measure flow rates.After filling the test pit with water,a constant water flow was maintained to keep the water height at a consistent depth.Once a constant flow rate was found, the water was turned off and water height measurements were taken as the water infiltrated into the test pit. 4.5 Soil Classification At each exploration location,the soil profile was visually classified in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). Details such as obstructions, identification of soil stratigraphy,and observation of groundwater seepage were also noted. Soil samples were collected from the explorations, visually logged,and stored in watertight sample bags for possible laboratory testing. Copies of the exploration logs summarizing visual field classifications,laboratory results, and test pit photos are included in Appendix A. 4.6 Laboratory Testing Laboratory index and strength testing was conducted on representative soil samples recovered from the field drilling and sampling program to characterize soil properties. Index tests were conducted to confirm the field visual classification of soils. Laboratory testing was performed by HWA Geosciences Inc.of Bothell,WA under subcontract to CH2M HILL. Laboratory tests consisted of the following: • ASTM D 2216-Standard Test Method for Laboratonj Determination of Water(Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass (Percent by Dnj Mass) RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT • ASTM D 422—Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils (Sieve and Hydrometer Analysis) • ASTM D 1557— Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort(Modified Proctor) • ASTM D 2434— Standard Test Method for Permeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head) Complete laboratory test results are available in Appendix A. 8 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 5 Results of the Field Exploration This section summarizes the subsurface conditions based on the results of field exploration. The following subsections describe subsurface soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and test pits. Boring and test pit locations are provided in Figure 1.The exploration logs provide detailed descriptions of the soils encountered in each boring and test pit and are found in Appendix A. Photographs taken during the test pit exploration are also provided in Appendix A. 5.1 Subsurface Conditions 5.1.1 Soil Unit 1 -Surface Soils The soil types encountered in the near surface soils (Soil Unit 1)were loose to dense silty sand (SM),silty sand with gravel (SM),silt with sand (ML),and poorly graded sand (SP). The predominant soil type encountered in Soil Unit 1 was silty sand or silty sand with gravel. The soils typically contained fine to medium sand with 15 to 30 percent non-plastic fines.Gravel content varied from 0 to 20 percent. Neither cobbles nor boulders were observed in this soil unit.Soil Unit 1 appears to be a combination of weathered till and fill material (fill material was typically encountered directly below the pavement).This generally coincides with the NRCS soil map and the geology map as shown in Figures 2 and 3,respectively. In the northern portion of the project from approximately NE 16th St to a few hundred feet north of NE 12th St,the soil was loose to medium dense from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 6 feet where it transitioned to medium dense to dense material that extended to the bottom of the borings at approximately 20 feet(borings B-1IT-12 and B-2- 12). N-values in the upper 6 feet ranged from 3 to 25,and from 6 to 20 feet in depth N- values ranged from 23 to 45. From a few hundred feet north of NE 12th St and then south to approximately NE 12th St, Soil Unit 1 was dense throughout the depth of the boring (approximately 20 feet)with N- values from 29 to 55 (B-31T-12). From NE 12th St south to NE 10th St as well as along the west side of Harrington Avenue between NE 10th St and Sunset Boulevard,Soil Unit 1 was encountered from the surface until depths between 1.0 and 7.5 feet,overlying till.The soils were loose to dense with N- values ranging from 7 to 35 (B-4-12, B-5-12,B-6-12,B-8-12,and TP-1-12). Along the east side of Harrington Avenue between NE 10th St and Sunset Boulevard,Soil Unit 1 was encountered up to a depth of 20 feet.The soil was loose to medium dense to 10 feet with N-values ranging from 3 to 14.Below 10 feet,the soil was medium dense to dense with N-values ranging from 27 to 51.The fines content in the upper 10 feet was slightly higher than found in other borings ranging u1 content from 20 to 50 percent(B-10-12 and TP-2-12). s RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT South of Sunset Boulevard,the Soil Unit 1 depth increased as the project moves south. Boring B-11-12 encountered till at 10 feet while boring B-12-12 encountered till at 20 feet. Soil Unit 1 in this area were very loose to dense in the upper 10 feet with N-values ranging from 1 to 36.Below 10 feet in boring B-12-12,N-values ranged from 18 to 30. 5.1.2 Soil Unit 2-Glacially Overconsolidated Till Glacially overconsolidated till(Soil Unit 2)was encountered at various depths underlying the Soil Unit 1.Soil Unit 2 was encountered at a depth between 1.0 and 7.5 feet between NE 12th St and NE 10th St as well as on the west side of Harrington Avenue between NE 10t"St and Sunset Boulevard.South of Sunset Boulevard,Soil Unit 2 was encountered at 10 feet and 20 feet in borings B-11-12 and B-12-12,respectively. Soil Unit 2 typically consisted of silty sand (SM)or silty sand with gravel(SM)with non- plastic fines content between 15 and 30 percent.Soil Unit 2 is very dense and is manifested by SPT N-values greater than 50.Cobbles and boulders are commonly found in this unit. Boring B-6-12 encountered a boulder at 19 feet where drilling could no longer advance.Two auger teeth were broken in B-4-12 at 15 feet due to the difficulty in drilling in this very dense layer. 5.2 Groundwater Conditions Piezometers were not installed for monitoring groundwater levels.A dry drilling method using hollow stem augers were used in order to more easily identify groundwater in the samples or on the drilling equipment.Groundwater was noted on the boring logs when encountered.Typically,thin perched layers ranging between 1 inch and 6 inches were observed in the samples.Groundwater was encountered in two borings, B-10-12 and B-12- 12,at 20 feet and 15 feet,respectively.Table 1 lists groundwater observations made during the explorations. 10 RENTON SUNSET STORM WATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT TABLE 1 Groundwater Observations during Explorations Boring Groundwater Observation B-1 IT-12 4-inch perched zone at 8 feet B-2-12 2-inch perched zone at8.5feet B-31T-12 Not encountered B-4-12 Not encountered B-5-12 Not encountered B-6-12 Not encountered B-8-12 1-inch perched zone at 15.5 feet B-10-12 Groundwater at 20 feet B-11-12 Not encountered B 12 12 6-inch perched zone at 12.5 feet; groundwater at 15 feet. .j 11 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 6 Infiltration and Hydraulic Conductivity Borings and test pits were excavated to provide information to determine design infiltration values for the design of the rain gardens and infiltration facility.Two field tests were performed in borings and two field tests performed in test pits to estimate infiltration values.Permeability testing was performed in the laboratory on two samples to estimate hydraulic conductivity. Design infiltration values were calculated using both field tests and correlations to Dio values (particle diameter corresponding to 10% finer on the gradation curve)were also used to estimate infiltration rates and hydraulic conductivity). 6.1 Field Test Values The first infiltration estimation was performed using field tests per the modified PIT method as outlined in the SPU Stormwater Manual(2009).The modified PIT method is meant to be performed in test pits,but for the project,this methodology was applied as well for the infiltration tests performed in the borings. Also,the modified PIT procedure calls for a long infiltration test up to a minimum of 17 hours. Due to time restraints,the time to complete one test was approximately 3 hours for the test pits and 2.5 hours for the borings. Borings were drilled to a depth of 4 feet and test pits excavated to a depth of 5 feet to best represent soil conditions at the bottom of the rain gardens and infiltration facility. Infiltration rates for the field tests were calculated based on two measurements: (1) the flow required to maintain a constant head 3 feet above the bottom of the test pit/boring and (2) the water height differential over a certain period of time without water flow into the test pit/boring.The first measurement using a constant head flow was converted to infiltration rates by dividing the flow by the surface area of the bottom of the test pit/boring.The second measurement using a falling head was converted to infiltration rates by dividing the water height differential by the time interval. It was assumed that the last recorded time interval was the infiltration rate.These two measurements,constant head and falling head, were averaged to determine the field infiltration rate.Table 2 shows the uncorrected infiltration rates at each field test boring location. TABLE 2 Field Test Infiltration Rates per Boring Uncorrected Infiltration Rate' Boring (in/hr) B-1 IT-12 12.9 13-31T-12 5.1 TP-1-12 0.8 TP-2-12 10.7 1. Infiltration rates shown are as tested values with no correction factor applied. 12 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT TABLE 3 Design Infiltration Values Uncorrected Field Corrected Field WSDOT Highway Design Test per Modified Test per Modified Runoff Manual Infiltration Soil Unit Pit Method Pit Method' correlation(2011)2 Values3 (in/hr) (in/hr) (in/hr) (in/hr) Soil Unit 1 - 5.1to12.7 0.6to1.6 1.1to1.9 1.2 Surficial Soil Soil Unit 2- 0.8 0.1 1.3 0.1 Till 1. Correction factor of 8 applied to measured values in field. 2. The average of the upper bound and lower bound values as shown in Figure 4-15 of the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual(2011). 3. Design infiltration values for long term design include the correction factors. 6.4 Design Hydraulic Conductivity Values As a lower bound check on infiltration rates determined by agency guidelines,which are discussed in the section above,saturated hydraulic conductivity was determined by laboratory testing and the Hazen (1930) formula. Permeability laboratory testing was performed per ASTM D2434 on two samples. One sample was a bucket sample taken at 4.5 feet at TP-2-12.The other sample was a composite sample between similar soil types throughout the project between depths of 4.5 feet and 7.5 feet.The samples were compacted to a dry density of 90% of the modified proctor. Reported hydraulic conductivity values per the permeability testing are shown in Table 3. The Hazen(1930)formula is an empirical relationship that correlates Dio gradation values to hydraulic conductivity.The formula requires a constant that varies between 1.0 to 1.5. A value of 1.0 was chosen for the constant for this correlation.Values obtained using the Hazen (1930)formula are shown in Table 3 below. TABLE 3 Hydraulic Conductivity Values,k Permeability Laboratory Test Hazen(1930) Design Hydraulic Soil Unit Composite Sample/TP-2-12 Formula' Conductivity, k (cm/sec) (cm/sec) (cm/sec) Soil Unit 1 -Surficial 4.6x10-4/2.9x10-3 1.Ox10-6to 2.5x10-3 1.0x10-3to 1.0x10-5 Soil Soil Unit 2-Till - 6.4x10-7 to 1.6x10-5 1.0x10-5 to 1.0x10-6 1. The constant for the Hazen(1930)formula is assumed to be 1.0. 14 RENTON SUNSETSTORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT The modified PIT method is a short-term condition and needs to be divided by a correction factor to be considered the long-term design infiltration rate.The SPU Stormwater Manual recommends correction factors based on site variability,degree of long-term maintenance, and degree of influent control.A correction factor of 8 was assumed for the infiltration tests accounting for site variability as well as the inconsistencies of applying the modified PIT procedures in a boring rather than a test pit.This correction factor assumes the following correction factors as defined in the SPU Stormwater Manual(Table E-1): • Site variability factor,CFy=4 • Long Term Maintenance factor,CFm=4 • Degree of Influent Control factor,CFi=0. The correction factors were determined based on site and project conditions.The long term maintenance factor(CFm) may be adjusted if a consistent long-term maintenance plan is specified.The degree of influent control factor(CFi)was determined to be zero assuming that the rain gardens will control the influent into the native soils. 6.2 Correlations to Dio Values The second method for obtaining infiltration rates were based off a correlation in the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual(2011)for ponds showing infiltration rates as a function of Dio in western Washington.The WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual provides upper bound and lower bound infiltration values.The averages of these values were assumed for the correlation.Gradation curves were extrapolated to determine the Dio value.One hydrometer was performed which showed a Dio value of 0.009 mm.The hydrometer sample was considered a typical sample of Soil Unit 1.The laboratory testing for gradation samples were focused on depths between 3 and 7.5 feet to best approximate the soils that will be infiltrating water from the rain gardens and infiltration facility. 6.3 Design Infiltration Values Table 3 below shows the ranges and recommended design infiltration values for Soil Units 1 and 2 as described earlier.The infiltration test performed in Soil Unit 2 showed very small infiltration values.The flow meter used for this test could not measure the small flows required to maintain the constant head.As shown in the table below, the infiltration rate for areas in glacial till(Soil Unit 2)should be assumed as less than 0.1 inches/hour.Figure 4 shows the approximate limits of shallow till.The till is considered shallow if it was encountered at 5 feet below ground or higher. If the facilities will be designed for easy maintenance or influent control to limit siltation or bio-buildup,the composite correction factor could be decreased slightly and the design infiltration rate for Soil Unit 1 increased to the low-to mid-range as determined from the Highway Runoff Manual. The recommended design infiltration rate should not be increased in the till(Soil Unit 2);we do not believe that Highway Runoff Manual correlations were meant for these materials and their saturated permeability is very low. 13 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 7 Conclusions and Recommendations The following geotechnical recommendations for the Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project: • The proposed rain gardens are feasible in areas where the surface water will be infiltrated into Soil U ' . • The proposed rain gardens in areas where surface water will be infiltrated into the glacially overconsolidated till(Soil Unit 2)will present challenges as the till has very low infiltration rates. Rain gardens may be feasible if the till is overexcavated and replaced with a granular material to increase the water holding capacity of the rain garden while water infiltrates into the till. • The current proposed infiltration facility location is shown near the intersection of Harrington Ave SE and Glennwood Ave NE.As currently proposed,the infiltration facility would be founded in the glacially overconsolidated till unit.We would recommend the facility be moved to the east near the intersection of NE 10th St and Sunset Lane NE.The top of the glacially overconsolidated till unit is deeper at this location which would allow for infiltration to occur into Soil Unit 1. • The following general preliminary design recommendations apply to stormwater conveyance pipes up to 24 inches in diameter placed within 3 to 10 feet of the existing ground surface;these recommendations should be verified as appropriate for the final design configuration and external loads by a qualified geotechnical engineer: — Pipe bedding and pipe zone backfill material should consist of Gravel Backfill for Pipe Zone Bedding per Section 9-03.12(3) of the Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)Standard Specifications (2012). The bedding should be at least 6 inches thick and the pipe zone should extend at least 6 inches above the pipe.The material excavated from the trench is generally too high in fines to allow easy and consistent compaction around pipes. — Gravel borrow material per WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.14(1)should be used as trench backfill above the pipe zone where the pipes are beneath roadways or sidewalks. Where pipes are located outside of a 2V:1H downward projection from the roadway shoulders or sidewalks,material from the trench excavation may be used for trench zone backfill. — Pipe zone material should be worked carefully under the pipe haunches with hand tamping bars and compacted thoroughly.Pipe zone material should be placed in 6-inch lifts evenly on both sides of the pipe and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction per standard proctor(ASTM D698). 15 RENTON SUNSET STORM WATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT Trench backfill above the pipe zone should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction in 6 inch maximum lifts.Only hand operated plate or pad compactors should be used 3 feet of cover has been placed over the pipe. A design modulus of soil reaction(E')of 1,000 psi may be used if the material and compaction requirements are followed as discussed above. 16 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 8 Limitations This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the CH2M HILL design team and City of Renton for specific application to the Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/ LID Project, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty,express or implied, is made. Any information contained in this report is based on collected data, geologic reports,and subsurface explorations conducted for this project.The boring logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and times indicated and only to the depths penetrated.Subsurface conditions and water levels at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these indicated locations.They do not necessarily reflect strata variations that may exist between such locations.The passage of time may result in a change in the conditions at these locations. If variations in subsurface condition from those described and presented are noted during construction,recommendations in this report must be re-evaluated. In the event that any changes in the nature,design,or location of the facilities are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing by CH2M HILL. CH2M HILL is not responsible for any claims, damages,or liability associated with interpretation of subsurface data or reuse of the subsurface data or engineering analyses without the express written authorization of CH2M HILL. 17 RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT SECTION 8 References Associated Earth Sciences Inc.2011.Planned Playground Area, Early Childhood Learning Center. Memorandum prepared for Renton School District.November 9. ASTM.Annual Book of ASTM Standards.American Society for Testing and Materials.Section Four-Construction.Volume 04.08-Soil and Rock(I): D 420-D 5779.Revisions issued annually. Dragovich,J.D,et al.2002.Geologic Map of Washington-Northwest Quadrant. Washington State Department of Natural Resources,Geologic Map GM-50. Hazen,A.1930."Water Supply."American Civil Engineers Handbook. New York. NRCS 2007. Web Soil Survey. Natural Resources Conservation Service.Web Soil Survey Release 1.1, accessed August 2011. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda. og v/ap2p/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). 2009.Stormwater Manual,Vol 3 Stormwater Flow Control and Water Treatment Technical Requirements Manual.November. Soil and Environmental Engineers Inc.2011.Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development Edmonds and Glennwood Ave.Prepared for Renton Housing Authority.January 10. Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT).2012.Standard Specifications for Road,Bridge,and Municipal Construction.M 41-10. Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT).2011.Highway Runoff Manual. M 31-16.03. November. Washington State Department of Natural Resources.2012. "Washington Interactive Geology Map".Accessed July 2012.hops://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/geologyy/?Site=wigm. 18 Reference: WSDOT DNR (2012) � 6` ^..v--••� Qa QgO d B N Q9Pc ..... r f ✓ �1 EVC(t) S APProx Project Area QgPc , Qgt Qgt }t Qga Qa � � QP � . 1 QgO t ------------ Geology Symbols Figure 2 Qgt- Glacial Till Evc(t) - Tukwila Formation Geology Map Qgo - Glacial Outwash Qp - Peat Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/ LID Qa - Alluvium Qgpc - Glacial Drift Project Qga -Advance Glacial Outwash DRAFT Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report fl 0 19th St m 19th PI 18th St p 18th St 17th PI � . 18Ih St Vl. n 171h P7 *-m 17[h PI ` nm'st a °¢'I i6th SI 15th PI a, 151h St m - r••E"+4Wy a. to 8' 14th St a y D 14th St 13th PI L. .. 4"% 13th St 13th St m� c .a c c ' waiip m. m o • 12th St OJcy 'a a O m 3 O f n is f 10th PI ct 10th PI "L e. 10th SI �m 0ih n ` + m i 9th PI ' p„ "dt 10th St O r PI - a m F m m g 9th SIe_ K c c 4 m dl Q y.� m 81th St ¢ E m 1M t a �I u 61h qr sN P1 FOc� dG� Q. 6th P1 Q � m 2 •s_ �.. Bronson WayAv m• ...�_e .•. • - .. - Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Alderwood material Indianola •. • Indianola •. • Urban l • • 0 oil A � 1#P1*r ib-t IT-12 a .- ' Existing geotechrncal� �I not encountered F" nformation. Till-5 to 10' 14 X i •4' * B 2-12 Till not encountered JI µ T-12 € , V"•e T:'I not encountered tr Existing geotecr nv_31 - 8 information. 3Ti l 4.5' Till-3 to 4' ,r� FJI iW a 1 P-2-12 ` t �, 'Till 1' r ,8-10-12 q Not encountered " ,� :�-. T:il...� F S {-. modggg t I� - '�+..' y♦O ,�. _s Till-20' �' lk 4W IL 3 Figure 4 Estimated area where till is Shallow Till Locations between 1 and 5 feet below the ground surface. Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit / LID Project DRAFT Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report R R r +q py eta • a EB-15 •_B G-. • •EB ii �� c=:.�. N j�Ea.z•Ee 1" .tea EB3 r, ,t 'A�t Y x •EB6� t �: EB-1/fv1W-1 'p x p.... ._EB t "'�'. •hoc a. -1 u B-1 IT-12 'A' r� 121 rt� L(? r�' % -12 fh C W K6, C1W • L--, l .5 Legend Figure 1 • Boring drilled for Boring Map project. Renton Sunset Stormwater • Existing boring. Retrofit / LID Project DRAFT Geotechnical Data and Recommendations Report RENTON SUNSET STORMWATER RETROFIT/LID PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT Figures 19 Appendix A Boring Logs Laboratory Test Results Test Pit Photos PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET 437060.03.31.10 B-11T-12 1 OF 2 L.L SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: NE 16th St&Harrington Ave.WB Lane. ELEVATION DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 trick-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 8' START: 5/29/2012 END:5/2 912 0 1 2 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS o c > z PENETRATION W w rr ¢ TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, =a j > w SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w W W w 2 a 6"-6"-6'-6' INSTRUMENTATION ow i rr z� 0 0 0-0.2':ASPHALT PAVEMENT(2"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.2-0.6':SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM,brown,dry, 8" SS-1 16-4-3 loose,fine to coarse sand,estimated 20-30%fine to coarse (7) gravel,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines. 0.6-0.9':SILTY SAND ISM),brown,dry,loose,fine sand, 1.5 estimated 25-35%non-clastic fines.trace organics. 1.5-1.7%SILTY SAND ISM).same as above. 1.7-2.0%SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL ISM I,brownish gray, 6" SS-2 2-3-3 dry,loose,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-20%non-plash (6) fines. 3 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL.SM,brown,moist,very loose, See SS-3 laboratory test results. fine to medium sand,non-plastic fines,fine gravel. 6" SS-3 1-2-1 (3) 4.5 SILTY SAND ISMI,grayish brown slightly moist,medium 5_ dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic 14" SS41 6-5-7 fines,trace fine gravel,iron oxide in bottom 4",homogeneous. (12) 6 SILTY SAND ISM),similar to above except dense,estimated 20-30%non-plastic fines. 16" SS-5 10-15-20 (35) 7.5 7.5-8.5':SILTY SAND ISMI.similar to above except wet from 8.2-8.5'.(SS-6A) Perched water at approximately 8'. 18" SS-0 13-14-16 8.5-9.0':SILT WITH SAND(MLI.grayish brown,moist,hard, (30) non to low plasticity fines,estimated 15-20%fine sand.(SS- 6B) 9 10 10 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,moist,dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 25-35%non to low plasticity fines. 18" SS-7 10-19-24 (43) 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND(SM),similar to above except trace fine gravel. 18" SS-8 12-14-23 (37) 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-11T-12 1 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater RetrofWLID Project LOCATION: NE 16th St&Harrington Ave.WB Lane. ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc. Redmond Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 8' START: 5/29/2012 END:5/29/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 2 0 STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS y` zQ PENETRATION m a W TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, =a > > W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSRY LL ¢ O 0°w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND o y z Uj z(L 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION 15 15 POORLY GRADED SAND/WELL GRADED SAND P(S /SW),brownish gray,moist,medium dense,fine to coarse 18" SS-9 10-12-15 sand,trace non-plastic fines,homogeneous. (27) 16.5 20 20 POORLY GRADED SAND I WELL GRADED SAND SP[ /SW),same as above. 18" SS-10 16-24-21 (45) 21.5 Bottom of hole at 21.5'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. Infiltration Test Drill new hole-5'from sampled hole. Bottom of hole at 4',Hole diameter 9". 11:04 Begin fill with water. 11:05 End Fill,Water to T above bottom of hole. 11:14 Water at T from bottom. 11:40 Water at 1'6"from bottom. 12:57 Water at 17 from bottom.Fill up water to T from bottom.Hold water flow 25 to maintain constant head. 13:10 Measure flow using 1 gallon bucket. 13:20 End test.Estimated flow is-0.10 gal/min. 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET LL 437060.03.31.10 B-2-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave between 16th St and 12th St,SB Lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammerwith 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 8.5' START: 5/29/2012 END:5/29/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 0 Z z PENETRATION W a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m cU a �++ SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x a > W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND 0 LL U O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w w rL 6 6'-6'-6' INSTRUMENTATION ore z W z 0 0 0-0.2':ASPHALT PAVEMENT(2"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.2-0.7':SILTY SAND(SM),brown,dry,medium dense,fine 6' SS-1 5-5-6 to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,trace (11) fine gravel,one coarse 1.5"diameter gravel. 1.5 1.5-1.8%SILTY SAND ISM).similar to above except loose. 1.8-2.7':SILTY SAND ISM).tan,dry,loose,fine to medium 15" SS-2 2-3-3 sand,estimated 20-30%non-plastic fines. (6) 3 SILTY SAND.SM,tan to grayish brown,dry,medium dense, See SS-3 laboratory test results. fine to medium sand,non-plastic fines,trace fine gravel. 14" SS-3 2-5-6 (11) 4.5 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,moist,medium dense,fine 5 to medium sand,estimated 20-30%slightly plastic fines,trace 15" SS-4 7-10-15 fine gravel,fines are non-plastic in upper 3". (25) 6 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL ISM),same as above. 15" SS-5 10-13-17 (30) 7.5 SILTY SAND(SM),grayish brown,moist,wet from 8.2-8.4', fine to medium sand,fine sand in bottom 2",estimated 15- Perched water at approximately 8.5'. 14" SS-6 10-12-15 25%slightly plastic fines,estimated 25-35%fines in bottom (27) 2". 9 10 10 POORLY GRADED SAND/WELL-GRADED SAND SP! /SWI.grayish brown,moist,medium dense,fine to coarse 18" SS-7 11-11-12 sand,estimated 5%non-plastic fines,one fine subrounded (23) gravel. 11.5 12.5 POORLY GRADED SAND I WELL-GRADED SAND SPI /SW),same as above. 18" SS-8 9-14-18 (32) 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-2-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Storrnwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave between 16th St and 12th St,SB Lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc. Redmond Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 8.5' START: 5/29/2012 END:5/29/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS y z PENETRATION a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE,m v a W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY =a � ' DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w w �a 6^.6-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION om z It zr 15 15 POORLY GRADED SAND/WELL-GRADED SAND (SP/SW),same as above. 18" SS-9 11-19-23 (42) 16.5 20 20 POORLY GRADED SAND I WELL GRADED SAND (SP/SWI,same as above. 14" SS-10 15-20-25 (45) 21.5 Bottom of hole at 21.5'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42nnHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-31T-12 1 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave between 16th Stand 12th St,SB Lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START:5/30/2012 END:5/30/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 0 K E } z PENETRATION W W ' a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m a W SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x¢ > > W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND W j w w j wa 6" OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION om 0 0 0-0.2':ASPHALT PAVEMENT(2"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.2-1.7%SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),brown,dry, 17" SS 1 12-13-16 medium dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non- (29) plastic fines,estimated 15-20%fine gravel. 1.5 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,dry,dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,trace fine gravel, 17" SS-2 9-18-23 iron oxide staining at 2.5'. (41) 3 3-3.8':SILTY SAND ISM),same as above.(SS-3A) 3.8-4.4':POORLY GRADED SAND/WELL GRADED SAND 17" SS-3 15-24-26 ISP/SWI,grayish brown,dry,dense,fine to coarse sand,trac (50) non-plastic fines.(SS-3B) 4.5 SILTY SAND.SM,grayish brown,dry,dense,fine to medium See SS-4 laboratory test results. 5 sand,estimated 15-20%non-plastic fines,trace fine gravel, 17• SS-4 12-19-14 one coarse subangular gravel,from 4.5-5'fines increase with (33) depth with poorly graded sand with sift at 4.5'. 6 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,dry,bottom 2"moist, dense,fine to medium sand,esimated 15-25%non-plastic 17" SS-5 11-18-17 fines,trace fine gravel,trace iron oxide staining. (35) 7.5 SILTY SAND(SM).similar to above except fine to coarse sand. 18" SS-6 10-19-16 (35) 9 10 10 WELL-GRADED SAND WITH SAND(SW-SM),greyish brown,moist,dense,fine to coarse sand,estimated 5-15% 18" SS-7 8-14-20 non-plastic fines,estimated 10%fine gravel,less than 5% (34) fines in bottom 3". 11.5 12.5 WELL-GRADED SAND(SWI.grayish brown,moist,dense, fine to coarse sand,estimated 5%non-plastic fines,trace fine 18" SS-8 8-19-20 gravel. (39) 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-31T-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave between 16th St and 12th St,SB Lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc. Redmond Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 8.5' START:5/30/2012 END:5/30/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 c O STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS O= c y z PENETRATION m v Q¢ w rr TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY I W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL O a)w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w S w �a 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION ❑in Z K Z 15 15 WELL-GRADED SAND(SWI,same as above. 18" SS-9 15-22-20 (42) 16.5 20 20 WELL GRADED SAND(SWI,same as above. 18" SS-10 11-18-37 (55) 21.5 Bottom of hole at 215. Abandoned hole with bentonite. Infiltration Test Drill new hole-5'from sampled hole. Bottom of hole at 4',Hole diameter 9" 9:29 Filled with water to 3'above bottom of hole. 9:58 Water dropped to 2'10". 10:13 Water dropped to 2'9". 10:29 Water dropped to 2'8.5" 10:47 Water dropped to 2'8". 25 11:34 Water dropped to 27".Fill to 3' above bottom of hole and maintain flow to keep constant head. 12:03 End test.Flow estimated at-0.04 gal/min. 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-4-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln west of Harrington Ave. ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START:5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS E y z PENETRATION W W ¢ TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x¢ > > W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND r LL O m W OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w F- w 5 a. 6•-6•-g•-g• INSTRUMENTATION ❑m z W z� 0 0 0-0.3%ASPHALT PAVEMENT(31. Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.3-1.5':SILTY SAND ISM►,dark brown,dry,medium dense, 14" SS-1 12-12-10 fine to medium sand,estimated 10-15%fine gravel,estimated (22) 15-20%non-plastic fines. 1.5 SILTY SAND ISMI,dark brown,dry,loose,fine to medium Poor recovery. sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,trace fine gravel. 2" SS-2 5-4-3 (7) 3 SILTY SAND ISM),dark brown,moist,medium dense,fine to Coarse gravel lodged in shoe. medium sand,estimated 10-15%fine to coarse gravel, 9" SS-3 2-7-19 esimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,iron oxide staining (26) throughout. 4.5 SILTY SAND.SM.dark brown,moist,very dense,fine to See SS-4 laboratory test results. 5 medium sand,non-plastic fines,fine angular to subrounded 18" SS-4 13-28-38 gravel. (66) 6 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. 11" SS-5 19-50/5" (50/5") 7.5 SILTY SAND ISM1,same as above. 11" SS-6 40-50/4" (50/4") 9 10 10 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. 12" SS-7 17-50/6" (5016") 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND ISM),similar to above except fine to coarse Lost 2 auger teeth drilling from 12.5-15'. sand. 15" SS-8 7-30-50/4" (80/10") 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-4-12 2 of 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stonnwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln west of Harrington Ave. ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START: 5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 g STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS za PENETRATION W OfTEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m a w SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x a > > w DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND (L LL w O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w S w Z)0- 8"s"6"�" INSTRUMENTATION om z x z�: 15 15 SILTY SAND(SM),same as above. 9" SS-9 37-50/2" (50/2") 16.5 Bottom of hole at 15.7'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 20 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-5-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Storrnwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammerwith 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START:5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS O c > z PENETRATION W W -' z a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m W a w SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x a > > W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND r W O m W OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w� r- w I)°' 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION O rn z rr z� 0 0 0-0.3%ASPHALT PAVEMENT(3"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.3-1.8%SILTY SAND ISM).grayish brown,moist,medium 18" SS-1 6-8-8 dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 20-30%non-plastic (16) fines,estimated 10-15%fine to coarse gravel,iron oxide staining throughout. 1.5 SILTY SAND(SM),dark brown,moist,medium dense,fine to Coarse gravel lodged in shoe. coarse sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,estimated 10" SS-2 5-8-15 10-15%fine to coarse gravel,iron oxide staining. (23) 3 SILTY SAND,SM,grayish brown,moist,medium dense,fine See SS-3 laboratory test results. to medium sand,non-plastic fines,fine subangular gravel. 8" SS-3 8-10-12 (22) 4.5 SILTY SAND(SM),same as above. 5 18" SS-4 7-11-18 (29) 6 SILTY SAND ISM),similar to above except dense. 18" SS-5 10-17-18 (35) 7.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SMI,similarto above except estimated 15-25%fine to coarse subrounded to angular 18" SS 6 25-37-38 gravel. (75) 9 10 10 SILTY SAND(SMI,similar to above except estimated 10-15% fine gravel. 12" SS-7 21-5016" (50/6") 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. 17" SS-8 27-32-50/4" (82/10") 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42 HILL 437060.03.31.10 B-5-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START: 5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 0 STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 0 x K } z PENETRATION TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m 0 ¢ � ¢ SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY a w Wa OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION W D W Z yy 6"-6"-6"-6" 0 vl z K z F 15 15 SILTY SAND(SM),same as above. 12" SS-9 21-50/6" (50/6") 16.5 17 Very hard drilling at 17'. SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),reddish brown,dry,very dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 25-35%fine to coarse 3" SS-10 50/4" subangular gravel,estimated 15-20%non-plastic fines. (50/4") 18.5 20 Bottom of hole at 173. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CM2 LL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-6-12 1 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Glennwood Ave&Harrington Ave,South parking lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START: 5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine g STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS O= r } z PENETRATION CoLu L) ¢ w rC TEST RESULTS SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, _¢ W > W DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL � O m W OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w Z w 5 a 6"-6"6"-6• INSTRUMENTATION om z X z� 0 0 0-0.3':ASPHALT PAVEMENT(3"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.3-1.0%SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),dark brown,dry, 18" SS-1 11-15-14 medium dense,fine to coarse sand,estimated 20-30%fine to (29) coarse gravel,estimated 15-20%non-plastic fines. 1.0-1.8':SILTY SAND(SM).tan,dry,medium dense,fine 1.5 sand.estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines. SILTY SAND ISM),alternating grayish brown and tan,dry, medium dense,fine sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines, 14" SS-2 6-12-10 trace fine gravel. (22) 3 SILTY SAND(SM),grayish brown,moist,dense,fine sand, one coarse subangular gravel,angular gravels at 6"from 16" SS-3 8-17-18 bottom,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,bottom 4"is fine (35) to medium sand. 4.5 SILTY SAND.SM.grayish brown,moist,very dense,grades See SS-4 laboratory test results. 5 from fine to medium sand to fine sand in top 6",non-plastic 18" SS-4 26-37-46 fines,fine to coarse subrounded gravel. (83) 6 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),similar to above except estimated 15-25%fine to coarse subrounded to subangular 17" SS-5 22-47-50/5" gravel. (97/11") 7.5 SILTY SAND(SM),similar to above except estimated 10-15% fine gravel. 6" SS-6 25-5012" (50/2") 9 10 10 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. Very hard drilling. 12" SS-7 42-50/5" (50/5") 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND(SM),same as above. 3" SS-8 50/6" (50/6") 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-6-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Glennwood Ave&Harrington Ave South parking lane ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc. Redmond Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammerwith 30-inch drop hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START:5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 c o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS g y` z PENETRATION m v a W TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY ( w DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND a f w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w w 5 a 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION o(n z Ix z� 15 15 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. 10" SS-9 39-5014" (50/4-) 16.5 Boulder at 19'.Cannot drill through. Bottom of hole at 19'. Abandoned hole with bentonde. 20 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42MHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-8-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln west of Harrington Ave ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched at 15.5' START: 5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS O K } z PENETRATION w a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m c> a W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY w DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w j w Z)a 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION em z rr zr 0 0 0-0.3%ASPHALT PAVEMENT(31. Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.3-1.5':SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL ISM),dark brown,dry, 15" SS-1 9-12-15 medium dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non- (27) plastic fines,estimated 15-20%fine to coarse subangular gravel,top 4"contains more gravel. 1.5 SILTY SAND(SM),grayish brown,dry,very dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,estimated 18" SS-2 9-23-28 10-15%subrounded to subangular,clean sand lens from 1.9- (51) 2.0'. 3 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT(SP-SMI,grayish brown,dry,very dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 5- 15" SS-3 19-32-37 15%non-plastic fines,estimated 10-15%fine subrounded to (69) subangular gravel. 4.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),grayish brown,dry to 5 moist,very dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 15-20% 15" SS-4 22-34-37 non-plastic fines in top,bottom 2"is 25-35%fines with fine (71) sand,estimated 15-25%fine to coarse subangular to subrounded gravel. 6 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL.SM,grayish brown,moist,very See SS-5 laboratory test results. dense,fine to medium sand,non-plastic fines,fine gravel. 12" SS-5 16-50/6" (5016") 7.5 8.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL ISM),same as above. 12" SS-6 35-50/6" (50/6") 10 10 12.5 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,moist,very dense,fine sand,estimated 35-45%non-plastic fines,estimated 5-15% 12" SS-7 26-50/6" fine angular to subangular gravel. (50/6") 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42M H I LL 111010.03.31.10 B-8-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln west of Harrington Ave ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START: 5/31/2012 END:5/31/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS y' zz PENETRATION TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m v j j w SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND LL rUj r O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w j w yay 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION ❑to z W 2 F 15 15 SILTY SAND(SM),grayish brown,moist to wet,wet from 15. 15.5',very dense,fine sand from 15 to 155,fine to medium 11" SS-8 28-50/5" sand from 15.5 to 15.9',estimated 35-45%non-plastic fines Perched water at 15.5'. (50/5") from 15-15.5',estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines from 15.5- 16.5 15.9',estimated 5-15%fine gravel. 20 20 SILTY SAND(SMI,grayish brown,moist,very dense,fine sand from 20-20.8',fine to medium sand from 20.8-21.4', 171 SS-9 20-34-37 estimated 25-35%non-plastic fines from 20-20.8',estimated (71) 10-15%non-plastic fines from 20.8-21.4',estimated 10-15% 21.5 fine to coarse gravel.. Bottom of hole at 21.5'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET 437060.03.31.10 B-10-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln&NE 10th St ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: 20' START:6/1/2012 END:6/1/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 2 o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 0 c } Q PENETRATION CK TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m a w SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x a > w DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND w j F Ov ?wa 6- -�-�- OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION ow z r z� 0 0 0-0.2%ASPHALT PAVEMENT 12.5"1. Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.2-1.6':SILTY SAND ISM),dark brown and tan,dry,medium 14" SS-1 9-7-4 dense,fine sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,gravels (11) in upper 3",heavy iron oxide staining in bottom 3". 1.5 SILTY SAND ISM),dark brown from 1.5-1.9',tan from 1.9- 2.4',dry,very loose,fine sand,estimated 20-30%non-plastic 11" SS-2 4-2-1 fines,trace fine gravel,some glass shards. (3) 3 3-3.8':SILTY SAND(SM),tan,dry to moist,very loose,fine sand,estimated 20-30%non-plastic fines,iron oxide staining 14" SS-3 42-2 throughout.(SS-3A) (4) 3.8-4.2':POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT(SPSM). grayish brown,dry to moist,very loose,fine to medium sand, 4.5 estimated 10-15%non-plastic fines.(SS-381 SILTY SAND.SM.tan in top,grayish brown in bottom 4",dry See SS-4 laboratory test results. 5 to moist,medium dense,fine to medium sand,non-plastic 16" SS-4 4-8-8 fines,iron oxide staining throughout. (16) 6 SILTY SAND.SM,gray with iron oxide staining,moist, See SS-5 laboratory test results. medium dense,fine to coarse sand,low plasticity fines, 16" SS-5 3-5-8 bottom 4"is sandy sift with non-plastic fines,1"thick sand (13) interbeds spaced approximately 3 to 4"apart. 7.5 SILTY SAND.SM,grayish brown,moist,medium dense,fine See SS-6 laboratory test results. to coarse sand,trace fine gravel. 17" SS-6 3-5-9 (14) 9 10 10 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,moist,very dense,fine to coarse sand,estimated 15%non-plastic fines,trace fine 14" SS-7 9-18-33 gravel. (51) 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND ISM),similar to above except dense,estimated 10-15%fine gravel. 15" SS-8 8-16-16 (32) 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET 40 CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 B-10-12 z of z SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Sunset Ln&NE 10th St ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: 20' START: 6/1/2012 END:6/1/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 c STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS } a PENETRATION Uj TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m< w SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND (L X O m w _ OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY o N ? W z a.a. 8"-6"-6--6 INSTRUMENTATION 15 15 SILTY SAND ISM),similar to above except medium dense, clean sand lens,from 15.5 to 15.7'. 13" SS-9 7-13-14 (27) 16.5 20 20 SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND(GM),greenish gray,wet,very Angular gravel lodged in shoe. dense,fine to coarse subrounded to angular gravel,estimated Sample is wet. 5" SS-10 19-50/2" 20-30%fine to coarse sand,estimated 15-25%low plasticity (50/2") fines. 21.5 Bottom of hole at 20.8'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET CH2nRHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-11-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave,South of Sunset Blvd ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START:5/30/2012 END:5/3012 0 1 2 LOGGER: T.Valentine O STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS o i y a PENETRATION w W TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, CO O a W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x a > > m DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND r LL O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w w a 6"-6"-6"-6" INSTRUMENTATION o n z z 0 0 0-0.6':ASPHALT PAVEMENT(71. Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.6-1.8':SILTY SAND(SM).reddish brown,dry,loose,fine to 14" SS-1 4-5-4 medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,estimated (9) 5-10%fine gravel. 1.5 SILTY SAND ISMI,similar to above except tan,medium dense, 15" SS-2 3-4-17 (21) 3 SILTY SAND ISMI,gray,dry,dense,fine to medium sand, non-plastic fines,fine to coarse gravel. 18" SS-3 9-17-17 (34) 4.5 _ SILTY SAND,SM,same as above. See SS-4 laboratory test results. 5 16" SS-4 11 17 19 (36) 6 SILTY SAND ISMI,similar to above except crushed gravel from 6.8-7'. 18" SS-5 6-24-36 (60) 7.5 SILTY SAND(SM),brownish gray,moist,medium dense,fine to medium sand,estimated 25-35%non-plastic fines, 16" SS-6 9-9-8 estimated 10-15%fine to coarse gravel,trace iron oxide (17) staining in top. 9 10 10 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SMI.brownish gray,dry,very dense,fine to coarse sand,estimated 20-30%fine to coarse 12" SS-7 19-50/6" subangular gravel,estimated 15-20%non-plastic fines. (50/6") 11.5 12.5 SILTY SAND(SMI,similar to above except fine to medium sand,estimated 10-15%fine gravel. 6" SS-8 50/6" (50/6") 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET C*42MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-11-12 2 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave South of Sunset Blvd ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered START: 5/30/2012 END:5/30/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine 3 o STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS zQ PENETRATION m cwi a W TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY u O m DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION w w �yay 6"-6"-6"-6" 0'n K Z F 15 15 SILTY SAND(SM),same as above. 5- SS-9 50/5" (50/5") 16.5 20 20 SILTY SAND ISM),same as above. 5" SS-10 50/6" (5016") 21.5 Bottom of hole at 20.5'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET 411010.03.31.10 1 B-12-12 1 OF 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater RetrofULID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave,North of 12th St ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond,Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Groundwater at 15'.Perched at 125. START: 5/30/2012 END:5/30/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS c K > z PENETRATION a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, 0°cwi a w SOIL NAME,COLOR MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY x¢ > > w DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND u O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w w M a 6•�•�•�• INSTRUMENTATION o n z Cr z 0 0 0-0.3%ASPHALT PAVEMENT(3"). Begin drilling with hollow stem auger. 0.6-1.5':SILTY SAND ISM),tan,dry,medium dense,fine to 14" SS-1 14-9-7 medium sand,estimated 20-30%non-plastic fines,estimated (16) 5-10%fine gravel,trace organics. 1.5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT(SP-SM),tan,dry, loose,fine to medium sand,estimated 10-15%non-plastic 12" SS-2 5-4-4 fines. (8) 3 SILTY SAND ISM),tan,dry,loose,fine sand,estimated 15- 25%non-plastic fines,trace fine gravel. 17" SS-3 2-2-3 (5) 4.5 SILTY SAND.SM.similar to above except moist,no gravel. 5 16" SS-4 2-2-2 (4) 6 SILTY SAND,SM,similar to above except top 2"is dark See SS-5 laboratory test results. brown. 12" SS-5 1-0-1 (1) 7.5 SILTY SAND ISMI,tan,moist,loose,fine sand,estimated 15- 25%non-plastic fines,trace iron oxide staining in bottom 2". 18" SS-6 1-3-6 (9) 9 10 10 SILTY SAND ISM),tan,moist,medium dense,fine sand in upper 2",fine to medium sand below,estimated 15-25%non- 18" SS-7 4-7-11 plastic fines,fine gravel in bottom 4",iron oxide staining (18) throughout. 11.5 Driller reports:gravel at 11.5'. 12.5 SILTY SAND ISM),tan to dark brown,12.5-13'is wet,13-14' Perched water at 12.5'. is moist,medium dense,fine to coarse sand in upper 6",fine 18" SS-8 8-13-17 to medium sand below,from 13-13.2'is sandy silt lens (30) estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines throughout. 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: SHEET 40 CH2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 B-12-12 2 of 2 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retroft/LID Project LOCATION: Harrington Ave,North of 12th St ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Gregory Drilling Inc.,Redmond Washington DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: CME 75 truck-mounted rig,140-lb auto-hammer with 30-inch drop,hollow stem auger. WATER LEVELS: Perched water at 12.5' START:5/30/2012 END:5/3 012 0 1 2 LOGGER: T.Valentine STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS o c = y z PENETRATION a TEST RESULTS DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, m v j j w SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND (X O m w OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY w= W �a 6"-e-6.6• INSTRUMENTATION our z W z�: 15 15 SILTY SAND ISM),grayish brown,wet,medium dense,fine tc Groundwater at 15'. coarse sand,,alternating 2"lenses of silty sand and poorly 18" SS-9 7-11-10 graded sand with silt,iron oxide staining,estimated 20-30% (21) non-plastic fines,estimated 5-10%fine gravel. 16.5 20 20 SILTY SAND ISM1,grayish brown,wet,very dense,fine to coarse sand,estimated 10-15%fine to coarse gravel, 17" SS-10 22-33-38 estimated 25-35%non-plastic fines. (71) 21.5 Bottom of hole at 21.5'. Abandoned hole with bentonite. 25 30 PROJECT NUMBER: Test Pit Number: SHEET 437060.03.31.10 TP-1-12 1 OF 1 Test Pit Log PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater Retrofit/LID Project LOCATION: SW comer of Glennwood and Harrington Ave ELEVATION: CONTRACTOR: NW Excavating EXCAVATION EQUIPMENT:Bobcat 335-2'Wide bucket with teeth DATE EXCAVATED: 6/14/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered LENGTH: 5 ft WIDTH: 2.4 ft DEPTH:5 ft SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS w DIFFICULTY IN EXCAVATION,RUNNING GRAVEL CONDITION, 3 a w SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY COLLAPSE OF WALLS,SAND HEAVE,DEBRIS ENCOUNTERED, O a OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY WATER SEEPAGE,GRADATIONAL CONTACTS,TESTS, w INSTRUMENTATION m w x 0 Surface is grass. Begin excavating at 8:15 am.Orientation is north/south. SILTY SAND(SM),dry,loose,fine to medium sand,estimated 25-35% _no11:001f'Sflrlg3,io9IP:---------------- 1 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SMI,brownish gray,dry,very dense, fine to medium sand,estimated 15-25%non-plastic fines,estimated 15 2 25%fine to coarse subrounded gravel up to 5"in diameter.(TILL) Difficulty excavating in till. 3 GB-1 4 5 Bottom of test pit at 5'. Side walls standing vertical. Test pit is dry. 6 Infiltration Test: West wall collapsed while draining water after infiltration test. Hose with screen at bottom placed in bottom of hole.Flow meter used to measure flow. 8:53 Begin filling of test pit with water. 9:25 End fill.Water at 3'above bottom of test pit.244 gallons to fill test pit. 9:45 Water at 2.9'above bottom of test pit. 9:55 Filled with water back up to 3'above bottom of test pit.Try to 8 maintain constant flow rate. 10:55 Shut off water.Water infiltrating too slow to be able to get an accurate flow reading(<0.01 gal/min).Water at 3.2'above bottom of 9 test pit. 11:40 Water at 3.1'above bottom of test pit. 12:00 Water at 3.06'above bottom of test pit.End test.Pump water out of hole. 10 11 12 13 14 15 PROJECT NUMBER: Test Pit Number: SHEET CN2MHILL 437060.03.31.10 1 TP-2-12 1 OF 1 Test Pit Log PROJECT:Renton Sunset Stormwater RetrofiVLID Project LOCATION: 80'west&50'south of Sunset Ln and NE 10th St ELEVATION: CONTRACTOR: NW Excavating EXCAVATION EQUIPMENT:Bobcat 335-2'Wide bucket with teeth DATE EXCAVATED: 6/14/2012 LOGGER: T.Valentine WATER LEVELS: Not Encountered LENGTH: 5 ft WIDTH: 2.1 ft DEPTH:5 ft SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS w DIFFICULTY IN EXCAVATION,RUNNING GRAVEL CONDITION, Ov W SOIL NAME,COLOR,MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY COLLAPSE OF WALLS,SAND HEAVE,DEBRIS ENCOUNTERED, LL a OR CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY WATER SEEPAGE,GRADATIONAL CONTACTS,TESTS, w INSTRUMENTATION m(n # 0 Surface is grass. Orientation of test pit is east1west. SILTY SAND ISMI,brown,dry,loose,fine sand,estimated 20-30% _non plprjic fins rosjs jhroughqyt.____________ 1 SANDY SILT.ML,brown and grayish brown,dry,firm,non-plastic fines,fine to medium sand,sift with sand interbedded in thin layers throughout. 2 - Stiff to Very Stiff 3 4 GB-1 See GB-1 laboratory test results. 5 Bottom of test pit at 5'. Side walls standing vertical. Test pit is dry. 6 Infiltration Test West wall collapsed after infiltration test. Hose with screen at bottom placed in bottom of hole.Flow meter used to measure flow. 13:05 Begin fill of test pit. 7 13:15 Fill test pit to T above bottom of test pit.236 gallons to fill test pit. 13:17 Trying to maintain constant flow rate. 14:05 Begin flow of 1.7 gal/min. 14:30 Constant flow of 1.7 gal/min maintaining water depth.Stop 8 constant flow test. 14:34 Remove hose.Water at 3.0'above bottom of test pit. 14:49 Water at 2.68'above bottom of test pit. 9 15:04 Water at 2.44'above bottom of test pit. 15:19 Water at 2.24'above bottom of test pit. 15:34 Water at 2.08 above bottom of test pit. 15:44 Water at 2.0'above bottom of test pit.End test.Begin to pump 10 out water. 15:55 Completed pumping water out of test pit. 11 12 13 14 15 U 01 July 5,2012 HWA Project No. 2012-026-23 Task 200 CH2M Hill, Inc. 1100 112th Avenue NE, Suite 400 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Attention: Todd Valentine, P.E. Subject: Materials Laboratory Report Soils Index Testing Renton Sunset Project#437060-2000 Dear Mr. Valentine; As requested,HWA GeoSciences Inc.(HWA)performed laboratory testing for the subject project. Herein we present the results of our laboratory analyses, which are summarized on the attached Figures. The laboratory testing program was performed in general accordance with your instructions and appropriate ASTM Standards as outlined below. SAMPLE INFORMATION: The samples were delivered to HWA by CH2M Hill personnel on June 21,2012. The samples were in sealed plastic bags,and one 5-gal bucket. Several samples were mixed together, as requested by the client, to make a composite sample for hydraulic conductivity testing. MOISTURE CONTENT OF SOIL: The moisture content of selected soil samples(percent by dry mass)was determined in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. The results are shown on Figures 1-5. PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS: The selected samples were tested to determine the particle size distribution in general accordance with ASTM D422. Most of the samples were tested using only sieve analysis; one sample was tested using both sieve and hydrometer analysis. The test results are summarized on the attached Particle Size Analysis of Soils reports,Figures 1 through 5, which also provide information regarding the classification of the samples and the moisture content at the time of testing. LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS OF SOIL(.PROCTOR TEST): Two samples were selected for one-point tests at the"as-received"moisture content, in general accordance SE with ASTM D 1557(Modified Proctor) Method B. The test was performed on the 21312 3t"�'s Suite ite r 10 portion of the sample passing 3/8-inch, as required by the test procedure. Bothell,WA 98021.7010 Tel: 425.774,0106 Fax: 425.774.2714 www1wageo.com July 5,2012 HWA Project No.2012-026-23 The maximum dry density and the "as-received" moisture content were not corrected for the amount of oversize material because the sample was to be used in permeability testing without the oversized material. The test results are summarized in the following table. Table 1. One-Point Modified Proctor Test Results ASTM D M Sample ID Wet Density Moisture Content Dry Density c % c Composite Sample 140.5 11.2 126.4 TP-2-12 G13-1 119.4 22.0 97.9 PERMEABILITY OF GRANULAR SOILS(CONSTANT HEAD METHOD): The coefficient of permeability (also commonly referred to as hydraulic conductivity) of the material was measured in general accordance with method ASTM D2434. The sample was placed in the test apparatus in five lifts. Each lift was compacted in order to achieve an overall final soil dry density of approximately 90% of the value obtained in the One-Point Modified Proctor test(see above). The samples were vacuum saturated and ran until 4 consecutive readings were within f 25% of the average. The results are summarized on the attached hydraulic Conductivity Test Reports, Figures 6 and 7. O • O Lab Report 2 HWA GeoSciences Inc. July 5,2012 HWA Project No.2012-026-23 CLOSURE: Experience has shown that test values on soil and other natural materials vary with each representative sample. As such, HWA has no knowledge as to the extent and quantity of material the tested samples may represent. HWA also makes no warranty as to how representative either the samples tested or the test results obtained are to actual field conditions. It is a well established fact that sampling methods present varying degrees of disturbance that affect sample representativeness. No copy should be made of this report except in its entirety. We appreciate the opportunity to provide laboratory testing services on this project. Should you have any questions or comments, or if we may be of further service,please call. Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. ll c� Harold Benny Benny George Minassian,Ph.D.,P.E. Materials Laboratory Manager Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Figures 1-5 Particle Size Analysis of Soils Figures 6-7 Hydraulic Conductivity Test Report Lab Report 3 HWA GeoSciences Inc. GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 3" 1-1/2" - 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100 I 17, I I I I I I 1 I I I 90 I 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I 80 = 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I 70 W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I cn 60 I I I I I I I I I W 50 I I I I I I I I I I Z 1 I I I I I I 1 F— 40 I I I I I I I I I 1 Z I I I I I t I I 1 I W I I I I I I I I I I U 30 W I I I I I I I I I I W a I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 10 ( I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 0 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH(ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL-ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name %MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines 0 B-10-12 SS-4 4.5-6.0 (SM)Light olive brown,silty SAND 12 0.7 81.0 18.2 ■ B-10-12 SS-5 6.0-7.5 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 19 2.7 50.7 46.6 A B-10-12 SS-6 7.5-9.0 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 15 6.5 55.0 38.4 PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS go! Labratory Testing for CH2MHILL OF SOILS tMGMSCIENCESINC. Renton Sunset METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 20 1 2-026 T200 FIGURE: HWAGRSZ 2012-026T200.GPJ 6129/12 v-ti GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 3" 1-1/2" 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100� I I I I I I I I II I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 = I I I I I I I I I 70 W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m 60 I I I I I I I I I W 50 I I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I U_ I I I I I I I I I I F— 40 I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I 1 I I W I I I I I I I I U 30 W I I I I I I I I I aW. I I I I I I I I 20 I 1 1 I I :�I_L 10 I I I 1 -I 0 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH(ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL-ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name %MC LL PL pl Gravel Sand FiOnes • B-11-12 SS-4 4.5-6.0 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 6 10.6 68.5 20.9 ■ B-12-12 SS-5 6.0-7.5 (SM)Dark yellowish brown,silty SAND 11 1.1 81.7 17.2 B-I IT-12 SS-3 3.0-4.5 (SM)Dark brown,silty SAND with gravel 12 21.7 62.2 1 16.1 UWA PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS Labratory Testing for CH2MHILL OF SOILS EN%GEOSCE NCESINC. Renton Sunset METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 20 1 2-026 T200 FIGURE: 2 HWAGRSZ 2012-026T200.GPJ 6129/12 GRAVEL SAND I SILT CLAY Coarse I Coarse Medium Fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 3" 1-1/2" 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 80 = I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 70 W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I p}p 60 I I I I I I I I I I W 50 I I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I I I ILL I I I I I I I I I I— 40 1 I I I I I I I I Z 1 I I I I 1 I I I W I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I U 30 Lu I I I I I I 1 I I W a I I I 1 I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH(ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL-ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name %MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines • B-2-12 SS-3 3.0-4.5 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 11 10.0 68.2 21.8 ■ B-31T-12 SS-4 4.5-6.0 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 8 11.4 63.4 25.1 B-4-12 I SS-4 4.5-6.0 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 19 10.3 163.5126.3 PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS Labratory Testing for CH2MHILL OF SOILS HMGEOSCIENCES INC. Renton Sunset METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 2012-026 T200 FIGURE: 3 HWAGRSZ 2012-026T200.GPJ 6/29/12 GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 3" 1-1/2" . 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100 I j I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 80 H 1 I I I I I I I I = 1 I I I I I I I 70 W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m 60 I I I I I I I I I I W 50 I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I I ILL I I I I I I I I I E— 40 I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I I W I I ( I I I I I I I C) 30 W I I I I I I 1 I I W a I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH(ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL-ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name %MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines • B-5-12 SS-3 3.0-4.5 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 11 8.6 51.2 40.2 ■ B-6-12 SS-4 4.5-6.0 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND 9 11.4 59.5 29.1 B-8-12 I SS-5 6.0-7.5 (SM)Olive brown,silty SAND with gravel 1 7 1 15.4 58.7 25.9 PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS Labratory Testing for CH2MHILL OF SOILS HMGEOSCIENCES INC. Renton Sunset METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 20 1 2-026 T200 FIGURE: 4 HWAGRSZ 2012-026T200.GPJ 6/29/12 GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fini7d U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 3" 1-112" - 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 = I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 W I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m 60 I I I I I I I I I I W 50 I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I I I ILL I I I I I I I I I I F— 40 I I I I I I I I I I Z I I I t I I 1 I I I W I I I I I I 1 I I I U 30 W I I I I 1 I I I I I W I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I 10 0 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH(ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL-ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name %MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines TP-2-12 GB-1 4.5-4.6 (ML)Olive brown,sandy SILT 22 0.4 47.2 52A PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS Labratory Testing for CH2MHILL OF SOILS HMGEOSCIENCES INC Renton Sunset METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 20 1 2-026 T200 FIGURE: 5 HWAGRSZ 2012-026 T200.GPJ 6/29112 Hydraulic Conductivity(a.k.a. Permeability) Test Report R, Method ASTM D2434 U • HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Project: Renton Sunset Client: CH2M Hill Project number: 2012-026 Assumed Specific Gravity 2.65 Maximum Gradient 1.2 Date: 7/5/2012 Initial Sample Area(cm2) 81.03 Initial wet unit wt.(pcf) 126.1 Technician: HB Initial Sample Length(cm) 10.83 Initial dry unit wt.(pcf) 113.6 Sample number: Composite Initial Sample Volume(cc) 877.8 Initial void ratio 0.456 Sample depth: 4.5-7.5 Initial moisture(%) 11.0 Initial porosity 0.313 Sample description: Gray silty SAND with gravel(SM) Maximum Running %Deviation Hydraulic Average of from Average Conductivity 4 Readings (should be less Run No. (cm/s) (in/hr) (cm/s) than 25%) 1 3.9E-04 0.6 n.a. 2 3.2E-04 0.4 n.a. 3 2.9E-04 0.4 n.a. 4 4.6E-04 0.7 3.7E-04 27.0% 5 4.6E-04 0.7 3.8E-04 24.4% 6 4.7E-04 0.7 4.2E-04 31.2% 7 4.6E-04 0.7 4.6E-04 1.0% Final 4.5E-04 0.6 4.6E-04 1 2.6% Hydraulic Conductivity Effluent Volume(ml) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1.0E-01 II � 1.0E-02 - --r- -- a a i f c i 0 1.0E-03 - I ; 1.0E-04 Reviewed by: Figure 6 Hydraulic Conductivity(a.k.a. Permeability) Test Report R� Method ASTM D2434 V HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Project: Renton Sunset Client: CH2M Hill Project number: 2012-026 Assumed Specific Gravity 2.65 Maximum Gradient 0.5 Date: 7/5/2012 Initial Sample Area(cm2) 81.03 Initial wet unit wt.(pcf) 108.9 Technician: HB Initial Sample Length(cm) 10.66 Initial dry unit wt.(pcf) 88.5 Sample number: TP-2-12 GB-1 Initial Sample Volume(cc) 864.2 Initial void ratio 0.869 Sample depth: 4.5 Initial moisture(%) 23.0 Initial porosity 0.465 Sample description: Olive brown sandy SILT(ML) Maximum Running %Deviation Hydraulic Average of from Average Conductivity 4 Readings (should be less Run No. (cm/s) (in/hr) (cm/s) than 25%) 1 3.4E-03 4.8 n.a. 2 2.9E-03 4.1 n.a. 3 2.9E-03 4.1 n.a. 4 2.8E-03 4.0 3.0E-03 12.9% 5 3.1 E-03 4.3 2.9E-03 5.0% Final 3.0E-03 4.2 2.9E-03 4.8% I Hydraulic Conductivity Effluent Volume(ml) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1.0E-01 1.0E-02 - N � i I o I i U 1.0E-03 1.0E-04 (}-- Reviewed by: Figure 7 Test Pit Photos Beginning excavation at TP-1-12 I f �a X TP-1-12 iA ^: "a '+r ��Va k ii g < W N r-I r-1 a H E 0 w �o v E v N a� rI > rl u U 1— w +� � ��4 "�� b��"r,y+1 � r ids- ✓� yµi �_ 15 v a r y M r a Y 4 41 We, a ,r r N ri d � N (-4 r-1 r-I CL D N d CU V) ~ N 4+ 7 C +� C O N O 41 4 J L C � N � x ems• a ��pw� �� x F r, tAl All s a1� a�lrete zzSaiiwlfi iii{ft 3 z1 � '� g ma 's' Fr 4 U Begin excavating at TP-2-12. a r i t , ate" e 34 A @s, � `: { TP-2-12. 4� 1 g N N N N d C. H F— ¢ d "FMB KV ti. t n AN who itiV V"t. iaka pf " �5x Excavated material from TP-2-12. six �n ai * ; " r. AT ,K $ Water in TP-2-12 immediately `�^ �` ter•;,. �, ,�. `'�€ a � before pumping. 77, 711 ^^ as w si Appendix B Existing Geotechnical Information 1 . Proposed Residential Development Edmonds and Glennwood Ave 2. Planned Playground Area, Early Childhood Learning Center i I i REPORT OF GEOTECHMCAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EDMONDS AND GLENNWOOD AVE NE RENTON,WA S&EE JOB NO, 1010 JANUARY 10,2011 1 I I I i lolorpr S&EE I I . i ......._......._.... S&-EE SOIL&ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS,INC. 16625 Redmond Wn Suite.M 224,Redmond Washington 98052.(425 861 8-58 --- January 10,2011 Mr.Mark Gropper(mrg@rentonitousing.org) Renton Housing Authority Renton,WA CC: Mr.Joel Ing(Joeli@shciterresotircesine.com) Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development Edmonds and Glennwood Ave NE Renton,Washington Dear Mr.Gropper: We are pleased to present herewith our Report of Geotechnical Investigation for the referenced project. Our services were authorized by Mr.Joel Ing on August 26,2010,and have been provided in accordance with our proposal dated August 16,2010. During the course of our investigation,the design added the multi family building at the southwestern portion of the site. Since this building may include one to two levels of underground parking,we suggested a supplemental exploration program which includes 2 soil test borings. i This additional work was approved by you on September 20,2010. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services. Should you have any question regarding the contents iof this report or require additional information,please call. i O G Very truly yours, �a SOIL&ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS,INC. zat as� �—/D -• // `` tONAi, � C.J.Shin,Ph.D.,P.E. President �_�voy• 2 a!Zr] S&EF, tolocpt i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section P" age 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................i 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES......................... ...........................,................,..........................................................2 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS.........................I.,...............................................................................................................2 3,1 SURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................................................................................2 3.2 PUBLISHED GEOLOGIC INFORMATION....................................................................................................3 3.3 TEST PIT AND BORING FTNDINGS ...................................................................................3 3.4 GROUNDWATER.................................. ..,..........,.....,......,............,.........................,........4 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..:..........................................................................................5 4.1 GENERAL........................ ...,............................,,.........,..,........,...........I...................5 4.2 FOUNDATION SUPPORT............................................. .................................................... ........................ 4.3 EXCAVATION SI4ORING.............................................................................................................................. 4A LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ON PERMANENT RETAINING WALLS................................................ 8 4.5 SITE PREPARATION,STRUCTURAL FILL AND DRAINAGE.................................................................... 10 It 4,6 SLAB-ON-GRADE.-..................................... ....... . ................................................................................ 1I 4.7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT..............................................................................................................I................. I 4.9 TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EXCAVATIONS...................... ............. 12 4.9 SEISMICCONSIDERATIONS..................... .....,....................................,................................................ 12 4.10 ADDITIONAL SERVICES...................... ............._..............................,................................... 13 FIGURE l:SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2:SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 3:WALL AND FOUNDATION DRAINS FIGURE 4:LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES FOR CANTILEVER SHORING WALLS i FIGURE 5:CALCULATION OF SURCHARGE LOADS ON SUB-SURFACE WALLS FIGURE 6:UNDER-SLAB DRAIN APPENDIX A: FIELD EXPLORATION,LOGS,SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART AND KEY TO BORING LOGS i I I 1010rp1 i S&EE I REPORT OF GEOTEC14MCAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT EDMONDS AM)GLENN WOOD AVE NE RENTON,WASHINGTON For Renton Housing Authority 1.0 INTRODUCTION We present in this report the results of our geotechnical investigation for the project. The site is located between Edmonds Avenue NE and Glennwood Avenue NE in Renton. A site location map is shown in Figure 1 which is included at the end of this report. We understand that the project will have the following elements and they may be constructed in phases. 1) A multifamily building in the south-western portion of the site. The building will be a 3 or 4- story, wood-framed structure with one or two levels of underground parking. This basement will required a maximum excavation of about 10 to 20 feet below the current site grade. Basement excavation will likely be achieved with a combination of open cut and excavation shoring. 2) A multifamily building in the mid portion of the site. The building may be a 4-story, wood- framed structure and have one level parking basement daylighting to the west. The basement will required a maximum excavation of about 10 feet below the current site grade. Basement excavation i will likely be achieved with open cut. 3) Two townhome buildings (3 and 5 units) and surface parking in the eastern portion of the site. The buildings will be 3-story, wood-framed structures. No basement is proposed and cut-and-fill is expected to be minimal, 4) Anew access road connecting Edmonds Avenue NE and Glennwood Avenue NE. Based on our experience with similar buildings,we anticipate that the maximum column and wall loads will be on the order of 75 kips and 5 kips per lineal foot,respectively. i 2.0 SCOPE OIL SERVICES The purpose of our study is to develop geotechnicat recommendations regarding site development and foundation support. Specifically,our services included; 1, Exploration of soil and groundwater conditions underlying the site by the excavation of 6 test pits and the drilling of two soil test borings. 2. Recommendations regarding type of foundation support. 3. Recommendations regarding construction shoring_ 4. Recornmundations regarding active and at-rest earth pressures to be used for the design of any retaining structures. 5. Recommendations regarding passive soil resistance and coefficient of friction for the resistance of lateral loads. i 6. Recommendations regarding temporary and permanent cut slopes. Ii 7. Recommendations regarding support for slab-on-grade. 8. Recommendations regarding pavement design. 9. Recommendations regarding type of soil for seismic design. 10. Recommendations regarding site preparation,including removal of unsuitable soils,suitability of onsite soils for use as fill,fill placement techniques,and compaction criteria. I 1]. Five copies of a written geotechnicat report containing a site plan, exploration logsi a description of subsurface conditions,and our findings and recommendations, i 3.0 SPTE, CONDITIONS 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located in a residential area. A rockery wall, about 10 to 12 feet in height,flanks the western site boundary along Edmonds Avenue NE. From the top of this wall eastward,the site grade rises with j about 10-to 15-percent slopes to the mid portion of the site. From there to Glennwood Avenue NE,the 1010[pt 2 S&EE Situ grades rise gently at about 5 to 10 percents. At the time of our field exploration, an existing townhome occupied the southeastern portion of the site and the rest of the areas are vacant. Site surface is covered with sparse trees, brushed and grass lawn. 12 PUBLISHED GEOLOGIC INFORMATION Published geologic information(Geologic Map of The Renton Quadrangle,King County, Washington by D.R Madlineaux, 1965)indicates that the site area is underlain by glacially deposited recessional outwash (Qpa). According to the ntap,the material consists chiefly of sand and gravel. 3.3 TEST PIT AND BORING FINDINGS The soil conditions underlying the site were explored by the excavation of 6 test pits,TP-1 through TP-6 on August 27,2010 and the drilling of 2 soil test borings,B-1 and B-2 on October 28,2010. The approximate locations of these explorations are shown on Figure 2 which is included at the end of this report. Details of the exploration program and the logs are included in Appendix A.The subsurface conditions are described in the following paragraphs: cr Area of the Proposed East Townhome Buildings(TP-1 and TP-6) The area is covered with about one foot of topsoil mixed with loose fill soil. The soil is underlain by a surficial layer that consists of a brown silty sand with trace amount of gravel and cobbles. The layer is about 2 to 3.5 feet thick and the material is loose to medium dense. I The surficial layer is in turn underlain by a silty sand with gravel and cobbles. This soil is cemented and is dense to very dense. Based on its appearance and density, we believe this is glacially deposited till or commonly term hardpan. Both TP-1 and TP-6 were terminated in till. Area of the Proposed Multifamily Building in Mid-Portion of Site(TP-2 to TP-5 The subsurface conditions here are similar to the above except that the surficial layer is about 2 feet thick and a sandy soil was found below the till layer at TP-3. This sand is dense and includes silt lenses. I roiorpr 3 S&EE I i Area of the Proposed Multifamily Building in Southwestern Portion of Site(B-l and B-2) The subsurface conditions here include a 1.5-foot thick topsoil layer over a surficial layer that is 1.5 to 6.5 feet in thickness, This layer is medium dense to dense and overlies very dense glacial till. The till is in turn underlain by a stiff to very stiff silt at depths from 15 to 25 feet below the ground surface. Both borings encountered very dense glacial till below the silt. The borings were terminated at a depth of 30 feet in till. 3.4 GROUNDWATER Only minor(about 1/100 gallon per minute) groundwater seepage was encountered in TP-3. The seepage occurred at a depth of 10 feet and appeared to perch over the relatively impermeable silt . lens. Wet soils were also encountered just above the silt layer in Boring B-1. Based on our experience with the similar soil conditions,we believe that groundwater may perch on the relatively impermeable silt in the wet winter months. The depth of the perched groundwater table may vary j i with season and precipitation. i II 1 i L. I I I , totorpt 4 S&EE II i I 4.0 COINCLUSIONS AI D t '!COMM.ENDA'I IONS 4.1 GENERAL i. Based on our investigation, we recommend_ that the proposed buildings be supported by conventional spread footings. Please note that loose to medium dense silty soils are present near the ground surface. If these materials are exposed at the rooting subgrade, it must be properly prepared prior to concrete pour. Also,the soils near the ground surface are generally loose and very silty. These soils will lose their strength when wet and become muddy when disturbed. Therefore, earthwork wilt be difficult in the wet winter months as wet soil cannot be used for backfill,export of wet soil will be expensive,and erosion control will be difficult. 2. Minor groundwater seepage was encountered at a depth of 10 feet at TP-3. Based on this, we believe that the need of construction dewatering is unlikely, however,some localized wet zone may be exposed by basement excavation. For planning purposes,we recommend that under-slab drains be considered for basements. The purposes of these drains are to provide a stable work base and prevent future wet floor. 3. Except for the existing fill soil, the onsite soils are suitable for use as structural fill material. However,most of the soils are silty in nature and will require moisture-conditioning prior to use. Details of our recommendations are presented below. i 4.2 FOUNDATION SUPPORT i j We recommend that the proposed buildings be supported by conventional spread footings which must penetrate the existing fill and be founded on at least medium dense native soils or re-compacted onsite soils. Recommendation details are presented below. i Footing Construction 1. Prior to re-bar and concrete placement,all footing bearing surfaces must be cleaned of loose soils. Except for glacial till, the upper 12 inches of the footing subgrade soil should be re-compacted to at least 95%of its maximum dry density as determined using ASTM D-1557 test procedures. ! S&EE iotomt 5 I i 2. All existing fill, wet, soft and organic soils encountered at footing subgrade should be over- excavated. The over-excavation should be backtilled with structural fill, concrete or compacted crushed rock. The criteria of structural fill are presented in Section 4.5 of this report. 3. All exterior footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the adjacent finished grade to provide protection against frost action, and should be at least 18 inches in width to facilitate construction. 4. All footing bearing surfaces must be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to re-bars and concrete placements. The engineer should confirm the bearing capacity of the subgrade soil, and provide recommendations regarding repair,if necessary. Allowable Bearing Loads We recommend the following allowable bearing pressures for the footing designs: Footings at depths less than 5 feet from final grade:3,000 pounds per square foot(psf) Footings at depths greater than 5 feet from final grade:4,500 pounds per square foot(psf) The above bearing capacity values include a factor of safety of at least 3,and can be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loads. II, Settlement Interior column footings designed in accordance with the above recommendations are expected to experience approximately 1/2 inch of settlement. Continuous wall footings should experience settlement of about 1/4 to 1/2 inch. Differential settlement between adjacent footings is expected to be about 1/4 inch. The settlement will occur rapidly,essentially as the loads are applied. i Lateral Resistance Lateral resistance can be obtained from the passive earth pressure against the footing sides and the friction at the contact of the footing bottom and bearing soil. The former can be obtained using an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot(pef),and the latter using a coefficient of friction of 0.5. These values include a safety factor of 1.5. I t oiorpr 6 S&EE I 4.3 EXCAVATION SHORING Excavation for basements may be achieved with a combination of temporary cut slope and shoring. The temporary cut should be no steeper than IHAV (Horizontal to Vertical). We recommend that the shoring be consisted of cantilever soldier pile with timber lagging. The soldier piles will consist of steel H-bearns in drilled and grouted holes. As the excavation proceeds, timber lagging is installed between the H-beams. The voids behind the lagging must be filled with sand or pea gravel the same day lagging is installed. Un- filled voids may result in ground settlement behind lagging and thus severe damages to the neighboring buildings and properties. A permanent wall should be constructed in front of the temporary shoring wall. Drainage is provided by the installation of a geotextile drain mat attached to the shoring wall. The drain mat should be footing drain by 2-inch diameter weep pipes that are spaced at 5 hydraulically connected to an interior feet on center. (See Figure 3 for details) LATERAL LOADS AND RESISTANCES I Figure 4 shows.our recommended earth pressures for the design of cantilever shoring walls. Additional lateral earth pressures will result from foundation loads adjacent to the excavation; surcharge loads by jtraffic,storage and slopes next to the excavation. The lateral earth pressure due to foundation loads can be estimated using the method presented in Figure 5. Traffic and storage surcharges can be accounted for by j increasing the effective height of the wall by 2 feet. Slope surcharges can be accounted for by increasing the effective height of the wall to equal 1/2(one-half)of the height of the slope. LAGGING DESIGN For shoring areas that are not adjacent to existing buildings,lagging can be designed using 50 percent of the lateral earth pressures presented above. Such stress reduction is due to the anticipated soil arching effects. No reduction should be used for shoring adjacent to any neighboring building. SHORING MONTTORING I A shoring monitoring program should be installed to verify the performance of the shoring system and to j evaluate any possible excavation effects on the adjacent buildings and properties. Prior to the excavation, 7 S&E rororpt E i I the existing conditions of the adjacent buildings and properties should be photographed and recorded. After the installation of the soldier piles and before mass excavation, a base line survey should be conducted. Once excavation begins, the vertical and horizontal movements of every other pile should be surveyed on a weekly basis. The weekly survey should continue until the bottoms of excavations are reached. Depending on the shoring performance and the construction season,the geotechnical engineer may choose to relax the survey frequencies. All survey results should be transmitted to the office of the project geotechnical engineer within 24 hours after they are obtained. 4.4 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ON PERMANENT RETAINING WALLS Lateral earth pressures on permanent retaining walls, underground vaults or utility trenches/pits, and resistance to lateral loads may be estimated using the recommended soil parameters presented in the following table. 7 i r T CACII Coe : Etiii nt Fluid U�tt Weight(PC")F) � of - n: -'.x r4 .. .__xei - _ s assive• - re t_,- c e'. � G Structural fill and 40 50 300 0.5 native soils Note:Hydrostatic pressures are not included in the above lateral earth pressures. The at-rest case applies to unyielding walls, and would be appropriate for walls that are structurally restrained from lateral deflection such as basement walls,utility trenches or pits. The passive earth pressure and coefficient of friction include a safety factor of 1.5. The active case applies to walls that are permitted to rotate or translate away from the retained soil by approximately 0.002H to 0.0044,where H is the height of the wall. SURCHARGE INDUCED LATERAL LOADS 1) Additional lateral earth pressures wHI result from surcharge loads from floor slabs or pavements for parking that are located immediately adjacent to the walls. Vie surcharge-induced lateral earth tatorpt 8 S&EE I I pressures are uniform over the depth of the wall. Surcharge-induced lateral pressures for the"active" case may be calculated by multiplying the applied vertical pressure (in psf) by the active earth pressure coefficient (Ka). The value of Ka may be taken as 0.4. The surcharge-induced lateral pressures for the "at-rest"case are similarly calculated using an at-rest earth pressure coefficient(Ko) of 0.5. For surcharge loads that are not adjacent to the wall, the induced lateral earth pressure will depend on the magnitude of the surcharge and the distance from the wall. Such induced lateral load can be estimated using the equations shown on Figure 5. 2) The slope-induced lateral earth pressure can be accounted for by increasing the effective height of the wall by one-half the slope height. For back slope continues beyond a horizontal distance equal to the of slope-rise within this horizontal distance should be consider height of the wall,only the parted. 3) The traffic-induced lateral earth pressure can be accounted for by increasing the effective wall height by 2 feet. SEISMIC INDUCED LATERAL LOADS Seismic induced lateral loads can be assumed to act at 0.7 H above the wall base and the magnitude can be calculated using the following equation: Pe =3/8*y*H2*a Where Pe = seismic-induced lateral load Y = soil density—130 pcf H = wall height a = horizontal acceleration j i BACKFILL IN FRONT OF RETAINING WALLS 1 - Back ill in front of the wall should be structural fill. The material and compaction requirements are presented in Section 4.5 of this report. The density of the structural fill can be assumed to be 130 pounds per cubic feet. BACKFILL BEHIND RETAINING WALLS Backfill behind the wall should be free-draining materials which are typically granular soils containing less than 5 percent fines(silt and clay particles)and no particles greater than 4 inches in diameter. The density 101 Orpt 9 S&EE I . ..........................._....._.. i of the backtill material can be assumed to be 125 pounds per cubic feet. The backtill material should be placed in 6 to 8-inch thick horizontal lifts and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in accordance with ASTM D-1557 test procedures. In the areas where the fill will support pavement,sidewalk or slabs,the top two feet of the backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum density. Care must be taken when compacting backtill adjacent to retaining walls, to avoid creating excessive pressure on the wall. DRAINAGE BEHIND RETAINING WALLS Rigid, perforated drainpipes should be installed behind retaining walls. Drainpipes should be at lint 6 inches in diameter,covered by a layer of uniform size drain gravel of at least 12 inches in thickness,and be connected to a suitable discharge location. An adequate number of cleanouts should be installed along the drain line for future maintenance. 4.5 SITE PREPARATION,STRUCTURAL FILL AND DRAINAGE Site should begin with proof-rolling subgrades using heavy construction equipment. Areas preparation which are found to be wet, soft, or organic should be over-excavated. The geotechnical engineer should observe the proof-rolling to provide subgrade evaluation and over-excavation requirement,if needed. i After stripping,over-excavation and excavation to the design grade,the top 12 inches of exposed subgrade soils should be re-compacted to at least 95%of their maximum dry density as determined using ASTM D- I l 1557 test procedures(Modified Proctor test). Structural fill can then be placed in the over-excavation and fill areas. I The structural fill materials should meet both the material and compaction requirements presented below. i Material Re uirements: Structural fill should be free of organic and frozen material and should consist of hard durable particles, such as sand, gravel, or quarry-processed stone. Except for the existing fill,the on-site soils are suitable for structural fill. Due to their silty nature,these soils are moisture-sensitive and should be moisture-conditioned to +(- 2% from their optimum moisture contents prior to use. Please note that the use of this material in wet seasons may be difficult. i Suitable imported structural fill materials include silty sand, sand, mixture of sand and gravel i (pitrun),and crushed rock. lolorpt 10 S&EE i All structural fill material should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to use Placement and Compaction Requirements; Structural Fill should be placed it, loose horizontal lifts not exceeding a thickness of 6 to 12 inches,depending on the material type,compaction equipment, and number of passes trade by the equipment. Structural till should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined using the ASTM D-1557 test procedures. SITE DRAINAGE The site surface should be graded so that surface water is directed away from the structural areas. Standing water should not be allowed. Final site grades should be sloped away.from the building unless the area is paved. Otherwise,yard drains should be installed to collect surface runoff. 4.6 SLAB-ON-GRADE All slabs can be soil supported. We envision that the soil at the subgrade will be disturbed and loosened by construction activities at the time of slab construction. We therefore recommend that the subgrade be proof-rolled or probed prior to pour. Any wet and loose areas should be over-excavated and backfilled with structural fill. We recommend that slab-on-grade be underlain by a 15-mil. vapor barrier over at least 4-inch think free- draining gravel. t excavation may encountered perch groundwater and under-slab As previously mentioned, basemen drains may be necessary to avoid future wet basement.. The under-slab drain includes a trench with a '11. A cross-sectional view of the drains is shown in Figure 6. The perforated drain pipe and gravel backf drain lines are typically spaced at 15 to 20 feet on center. We recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineer observe the building subgrade and provide drainage details at the time of construction. i 4.7 FLBXIBLE PAVEMENT We recommend that the subgrade for flexible pavement be prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.5. Based on the subsoil conditions,we believo that the prepared I lotorat l i S&EE i i subgradc will have a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of at least 12. We therefore recommend the following flexible pavement sections for light and medium traffic conditions: I. Light traffic(Daily EAL=5 or less): 2 inches asphaltic concrete over 6 inches base course Medium traffic(Daily EAL=20 to 80): 3 inches asphaltic concrete over 8 inches base course The base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557 test method. The material should meet WSDOT aggregate specification 9-03.9(3)and have the following gradation: 'Sieve Size Percent Passim 1 '/n-inch 100 5/8-inch 50-80 1/4-inch 30-50 US No.40 3-18 US No.200 7.5 max. %Fracture 75 min. i 4.8 TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EXCAVATIONS k may be excavated vertically. For I i For temporary excavations less than 3 feet in depth, the cut ban y Y excavation deeper than 3 feet, the slope should be cut no steeper than IH:IV. The slope should continue from top to bottom (without a vertical bank at the bottom). Flatter slope cuts may be required if seepage occurs. Temporary cut should be protected from weather during the time of construction. All permanent slopes should be-no steeper than 2H:1V. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slope. Also,all permanent slopes should be seeded with the appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and maintain the slope stability. 4.9 SEISMIC_CONSIDERATIONS We recommend that site class C.as defined in the 2006 IBC be considered for the seismic design. The site is underlain by dense glacial till. As such,the liquefaction potential is negligible. i ►otomt 12 S&EE i I 4.10 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services may be required during the design and construction of the project. We envision that these additional services may include the following: 1. Review excavation, foundation,and drainage(temporary and permanent)plans to confirm that our recommendations are properly interpreted and utilized in the design. 2. Monitor shoring installation and mass excavation. We will confimt thatthe contractor's equipment and procedures are adequate, and provide recommendations regarding dewatering and sidewall i stabilization,if needed. 3. Monitor building subgrade conditions. We will evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions and i provide recommendations regarding subgrade preparation and under-slab drains,if needed. j 4. Monitor foundation subgrade preparation. We will confirm the bearing capacity of the subgrade soils,and will assist the contractor in.evaluating the protection and over-excavation requirements,if l any. 5. Monitor the placement and compaction of structural fill. We will confirm the suitability of the fill 1 materials, perform field density tests, and assist the contractor in meeting the compaction requirements. i 6. Monitor the installation of subsurface drains. We wili ensure these drains are installed in accordance with our recommendations. I { 7. Monitor site drainage and erosion control. i i 8. Other geotechnical issues deemed necessary. I 1 l 161 orpt 13 S&EE j i I 5.0 CLOSURE The recommendations presented in this report are provided for design purposes and are based on soil conditions disclosed by field observations and subsurface explorations. Subsurface information presented herein does not constitute a direct or implied warranty that tine soil conditions between exploration locations can be directly interpolated or extrapolated or that subsurface conditions and soil variations different from those disclosed by the explorations will not be revealed. The recommendations outlined in this report are based on the assumption that the development plan is consistent with the description provided in this report If the development plan is changed or subsurface conditions different from those disclosed by the exploration are observed during construction, we should be advised at once so 'that we can review these conditions,and if necessary,reconsider our design recommendations. I ' 1 I ; I ! I i lotorpt 14 S&EE l I '�- t3?i!}5 ! 'i y .y' { t 7'n``-rF`^+ [Y'! �3H7r3.r'u°'s--�• -�i di4 `' �q� � s:j F � , .:.t V% 5!. FAC[o� �'�,lz ti'"C.. '�i 1`�iYy,. .,5'• lag 4�@rta t +618fK1 ti /r. Nawporl t� }_i�t! -ci rf. t�. y�a�••'!(ttti �E ?I✓ �omaroel, � �;:•e,, -,�" en• Co 'yw,yci �•N��`` �7 M,_• 15 i ,t ^t etiq�"s•dv ,<;tr). � �� ,�t , •to d 5 ��l - . • !^.� �sx • '�,� `•• . COoI(Croek r ;5 r a r rt x47 = 60lcnppst snvard. Polk ;t. JPa,k q Y Ago", , jtglt�St4\�, y iT tWk }lu +`A��t 1 ... .tQ ' .l{ 'S'F't ��. [�^4�1 Df 8�' ti i f'�y�''. .ar{fi51Pt;'•� HunyPark{ i! y�ltii D ki F' Novlcasil@.yst<1t�j�#�kn�3 r!5 °�8ttyhton ?4�- ":�•��t I>� � ( is ,� `t .'1F` y'T�'�'f t��' ! 11•t�n�- (}��'9�A 3• �� 1 -0r f f r G q ✓Z htamtnin! b qf: IAt 1(L NNr F x `��,;. i A ,y.,•` � - � L K t•, it I��y� � SS~ 1. � �P I'/�•� �(��!>-•t�t��-R� n Rd �� t Yi `� 1? I Ct q•; it �.�r3. 1 ��!`' -t ,Rnlrtier • Moy�C t i 7' k �} s , }�5 Beacn �•:�:: 'Y t Aark.�: �4�� `r��k� � fi��z ��'�ai 5 it > �( _5 �jl+v �. `;: i 5 9A `N,;: "•" :�:h.# 1=` - ti •7•tS-Sri f'.,, ';4�_w `ra , - T �� r 5 �. .(4 '-I a�3 r- "�•-�.--,lac. "Hp `,.f. 47 b,��,' S'@'plt Y `� •_.,t ainiar V1eW rt `<tl:'i `£l t;k..A ,d,< ttYPk::..- '�'.•"•.'•'t� 'P Y rY�;�ic'�!nYitkrr r A } r T t f\ y � ' �.� Yf i 4 t,:•.�':;s .:�. 9Z! .R_., �... v ix, I� r r5.. s��y'r tpVa �\ - �`r 900 __'�rv•, t t r ! �'}- tt 1 r ��ptyi] t . `Mu'hloip¢lit r '� z d East Renton �4�J Ij Htghlunds'.r,sF't 50f f Roc �� 1C r t5�f[• A�` �;5 -r`� �4. R9/�OI1 �r •sy,�, ,v SR,y.. .r�, t, _ _rT.,+ e _ ` Mm f ' G i"S�-':.:a t TU:tku S nLY l'a,.Acl s'b+-'r.f f rt .t 7`-.,'F`.{'i!<<}< .��' �:';F.•e'.•:t_j: t-.;>^is« rAuP-a roHuro�Aoyd":Cc lnurna^..l{f "a. s ;-.-ts t#:fi'-t,[.:...•�`T-• �•r'j1 I ``.=s:, 516 _ -z--• :';�-tl-..%,;tc•:: �' •�::�.;;t.<,.-':'" ��<•- #::.=.,: �vYbtwyRus t88��ea.Y„is�,,•`.,t e. ,tom. _ "it' 'S '�� -�:: �-�:�' .-'1°.-=""uit'•' l.t`a_" 51 r` .ai _. ,<, o d. <+� :I:>j;{ja;:'r; uc_t.•"i:;' �:.::' Mspl 9:_• L �l j Y' K R•. }; _F.i;!Pi"r.,.:; Ca code, o Fbinrod Go(L: g f rvio9d. H@I hlstske I]`"fit;.per: •�; � -^��'• t - _ - ,<:.• �,.randtCcunby.Q!Yh: Desli@� •.I>�='^,.••16 .. t1 . ;; .jry•:_�S. _ •-! '�•��:�r•: t�. '.�, _.:�i �y:;>� _'-;sue.:; o levartl: ona(! ,e,: fit, - i._.I: / t - -}• ::Lao Im . [} t = F .5. `;4 ^^"".•.:�`:mow fit:SE414 $t-?'` �-Z'f I V149 t19 v IP+si•1961a 9l'+f'�::s..-.;:.t! ,.. '`•:` _tiu•`a:«ga� __ `•?' dL0 a �� : - •`i->..��,:� w:�.•. _.�_� ��: �.;:-.��;,�f •�?��'_;,c;•.•,�°��- "'H"o �t •�p p da'ta�®ao le- i I - Figure 1 & E Site Location Map j ns a7a _]�L_ 121 336 _sse am 3 ` 71 --� 1 r•A•�, ` au sle lnl 7-`14 .'..i . r -•eq'. . n j ` Tp-2 €: open space uses :• 1 TP 1 B-1 •,�y; T ; E .� .. TP-1 7 LU ;.' .•32] 4. 1 ]W PdQ por✓tiie y,�yr F • 1.. 1 I ;.f 1 • ''L J I LLJ ; -=' V l •'i s O Q 1-,'.-' O r _—1•y_l: __ ! I' TPb e' `�._ r7—E U.I ]a0 r. a •1 Or:l, .t.p� 1 k 8 i'�A. i Iva{ 'Y„ � .... ' �a•:- 1 j '41 ,. �`!�- ram �-�....�� Lr - c Access Orive 216 r - /� p JU �. c:s.. 2PI Y B-2 `1�a 332 •, t •� 1.0'• __••_�1"� EdmaadsAveNE al' ]ld ala s3o ]l7 "—ate res " zo 7 aa. 3m North Site Pion S pt-[dmonds Glenwood Mf eplcmber 10,2010 B-1 Boring number and locatlon S&EE 1010 Figure 2 ® T?-1 Test pit number and iocation Reference: BUMGARONER SiteAnd Exploration Flan Drainage Mat (Place fabric side against lagging) Lagging Permanent Wa Footing Drain Gravel Geotextile (12"overlap) ,. _.._. v ,0 CD CO '. 0 8 0 8 6 Min. .' 0 Coo 0 0D 00 i 2"D1A. PVC Pipe at 5'O.C. i �i o CO 0 0 o CD O �10 oB0Q \ -"Min. �, oa'oo 0m q 4"DIA.PVC,Perforated Prefabricated Grate or Boot Drain Pipe to Discharge 18"Min. S&EE Figure 3 Wall And Foundation Darins i Soldier Pile with Lagging Notes: Surcharge-induced lateral load must be added in the design, The magnitude can be estimated using equations shown in Figure 5. H T% Lateral Earth Pressure above base of excavation < 2 =40 pcf acting over pile spacing Ignore top two feet Passive Earth - Lateral Earth Pressure Pressure=300 pcf below base of excavation acting over 2 =40(H)psf acting over pile diameters < one pile diameter �x (NOT-TO-SCALE) Notes: I 1)Traffic and storage surcharges can be accounted for by increasing the effective height of the wall by 2 feet. 2)Slope surcharge can be accounted for by Increasing the effective height of the wall by 112(one-half)of the slope height. _ I 3)Passive pressure Includes a safety factor of 1.5. 4)Allowable vertical pile capacity:Skin Friction = 1,000 psf; End Bearing=15,000 psf(safty factors=at least 2.0) 5)Subgrade reaction modulus 200 pci(pounds per cubic inch) Figure 4 S&EE Lateral Earth Pressures Job no.1010 Cantilever Wall Shoring System o - r��-o.1 i zzz o.z 0.2 m=0.6 m=0,5 1 m=D• 04 04 m=0,3 s „ m=0.4 LL N C / u C o p'6 m R 0.0.6 m PHts R W J 0,2 .78 .59 H y / 0.3 ,OH y 0,4 78 .59H 0.8 0.5 .56H 08 0.6 .45 .48H 0,7 .48H I.00 .2 .4 .6 .8 Lo Ip0 .5 1.0 H2 1.5 VALUE OF °•H (ZF) VALUE OF aH (�) POINT LOAD Qp x=mH Q P Z=nH pH LINE LOAD QL FOR m < 0.4 J qr Q H p 20 H H R FOR M., H(Z I'(0.16 H2 O,28n2 z=nH PM% 0-"QL �I(�)_ (0.16�_ FOR m>0.41 FOR m >0.4: H 2 2 1.77m2n2 d.H( 7L 1.28m2n2 kmH H (-UP )-((T124 n2)3 R L (m2tn ) 0.64QL -Hz-HCos2(1.18) RESULTANT Ply' (m2+1)PRESSURES- FROM LINE LOAD QL a(BOUSSINESO EQUATION MODIFIED BY EXPERIMENT) 3 i SECTION A-A PRESSURES FROM POINT LOAD Op (BOUSSINESQ EQUATION MODIFIED BY EXPERIMENT) I jReference. Foundations and Earth Structures, Calculation of Surcharge Loads Design Manual 7.2,Department of the Navy, May 1982 on Subsurface Walls I Figure 5 i i SLAB �— Vapor Barrier 4" BLANKET DRAIN (free-draining crushed rock) 5"Min. 4" DIA,PVC,PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE 0 0 ° BACKFILL TRENCH WITH 1" ° DRAIN GRAVEL ° ° oC' 0 .'0 - Q ,0_j oo� 100 C 3"Min. o ° 0° 00 ° 0 0 0 ° 12"Min. �H (NOT-TO-SCALE) i GENERAL NOTES: 1. DRAIN PIPE SHOULD BE CAPPED AT THE BEGINNING OF LINE, 2. INSTALL ADEQUADE NUMBER OF CLEANOUT FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE. i 3. DO NOT WRAP DRAIN PIPE WITH FILTER FABRIC, I Figure 6 S&EE UNDER SLAB DRAINS (NOT TO SCALE) i I APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LOGS The soil conditions underlying the site were explored by the excavation of 6 test pits,'rP-1 through TP-6 on August 27, 2010 and the drilling of 2 soil test borings, B-1 and B-2 on October 28, 2010. The approximate locations of these explorations are shown on Figure 2 which is included at the end of this report. The test pits ware excavated with a Kubota 080 excavator. . A representative front S&EE was present throughout the exploration to excavate the pits and log the subsurface soil conditions. The soil test borings were advanced using a track-mounted drill rig. A representative from S&EE was present throughout the exploration to observe the drilling operations, log subsurface soil conditions, obtain soil samples,and to prepare descriptive geologic logs of the exploration. Soil samples were taken at 2.5-and 5-foot intervals from the borings with procedures in accordance with ASTM D-1586, "Standard Method } for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils" (1.4" I.D. sampler). The penetration test involves driving the samplers 18 inches into the ground at the bottom of the borehole with a 140 pounds hammer dropping 30 inches. The numbers of blows needed for the samplers to penetrate each 6 inches are recorded and are presented on the boring logs. The sum of the number of blows required for the second and third 6 inches of penetration is termed the"standard penetration resistance"or the"N-value". In cases where 50 blows are insufficient to advance it through a 6 inches interval the penetration after 50 blows is recorded. The blow count provides an indication of the densijy of the subsoil, and it is used in many empirical geotechnical engineering formulae. All test pits were backfilled with the excavated soils which were placed in 2-foot thick lifts and compacted with the excavator's bucket. Please note that if these test pits are located at the future footing locations,the top 4 feet of the backfill in the test pits should be removed,and the pits be backfilled with structural fill. 1 All boreholes were backfilled with bentonite chips. f The exploration logs are presented in this appendix. A chart showing the Unified Soil Classification System is included at the end of this appendix. I l 1o1o1pc S&EE I j TEST PIT TP-1 v p Soil Desodpgon a s Topsoll with grass roots gM park brown silty sand with bricks(dry)(loose)(fill) sM Brown,light brown and gray silty very fine sand,trace fine to coarse gravel, trace cobbles(dry)(loose to medium dense) III 2s( III -a pocket of brown fine to medium sand at 3.5 to 4.5 feet sM Gray and dark gray silty fine to coarse sand with fine to coarse gravel,trace cobbles ( ; (moist)(dense to very dense)(cemented)(giacial till) III III � -very dense and difficult digging below 6 feet I Excavation terminated at a depth of 6,5 feet, No caving occured during excavation. No groundwater encountered. 10, Client: Renton Housing Authority Exploration Method: Kpbota q80 Excavator Exploration Date: August 27,1010 Figure A-'I S&EE NE Ave d Gl NE Ave d t Ed t l D eveo men at and Jab No.1010 Proposed � � ' i i TEST PIT TP-2 N j Soft Description -TM- Topsoll with roo s I I snn Brown and gray silty fine sand with trace fine to coarse gravel(dry)(medium dense) I I I I 1 sM Gray and dark gray silty fine to medium sand with fine to coarse gravel (most)(dense to very dense)(cemented)(glacial till) 1 III 1 i i j III I ; I I sandy below 10 feet ' 1 I 1 I III I 1 I 1 1 F-xcavatlon terminated at a depth of 12 feet. No groundwater,no caving encountered during excavation. 1 1 i C I 151 I I I I I t 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 7 1 Client: Renton Housing Authority Exploration Method: Kubota 080 Excavator Exploration Date: August 27,1010 Figure A-2 J �Sob f&o.fo,E proposed Development at Edmonds Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE I . i TEST PIT TP-3 a SoU DescdpUon SM Topsoil with roots'and fill(silty sand with gravel and trace bricks) � I SM Brown and gray silty fine sand,sandy silt and thin lenses of fine sand (dry)(medium dense) 1 , I SM Gray and dark gray silty fine to medium sand with fine to coarse gravel (nnoist)(dense to very dansa)(cennented)(glaeial till) SPJ Brown slightly silty fine sand with thin lenses of hard silt 1 � SM (slightly cemented)(moist to damp)(dense) 1 , I groundwater seepage(about 11100 gpm)at 10 feet 1 , I Excavation terminated at a depth of 12 feet. ' No caving encountered during excavation, Groundwater seepage encountered at 10 feet. I 1 1 ' Client: Renton Housing Authority Exploration Method; Kubota 080 Excavator Exploration Date: August 27,1010 Figure A-3 5��0 Proposed Development at Edmonds Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE I TEST PIT TP-4 U j soil oesciiptlon 0 5M Topsoil wit roots snn Brown and gray silty fine sand and sandy silt(dry)(nnedium dense) _ � f III Light gray to gray silty fine sand with fine to medium gravel (dry to moist)(dense to very dense)(cemented)(glacial till) I1 -very dense and difficult digging below 6 feet Exoavation terminated at a depth of 8 feet. No groundwater, no caving encountered during excavation. i i 20 ------ Client: J--- --'-- I Renton Housing Authority Exploration Method: Kubota 060 Excavator Exploration Date: Auggst 27,1010 Figure A-4 SUE iolProposed Development at Edmonds Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE 0. TEST PIT TP-5 4 U j Soil DescripUan u sM Topsoil with roots I_ t sM Brown and gray silty fine sand with some fine gravel(dry)(loose to medium dense) , �Wm Gray and dark gray silty fine to medium sand with fine to medium gravol, occasional cobbles(dry to moist)(dense to very dense)(comented)(glacial till) one boulder at 5 feet -very dense and difficult digging below 6 feet —10 III III III Excavation terminated at a depth of 12 feet. ' No groundwater,no caving encountered during excavation. 15, , Client: Renton Housing Authority Exploration Method: Kubota 080 Excavator Exploration Date: August 27,1010 Figure A-rJ SUE Job No.1010 A p Proposed Develp meet at Edmonds Ave NE and Glenwood Ave NE i i TEST PIT TP-6 � a U m N � Soil Descnpflon o sM Topsoil with fill(dark brown silty sand with burned ash)(dry)(loose) I , 1 I I sM Brown,light brown and gray silty very fine sand,trace fine to coarse gravel, 1 trace cobbles(dry)(loose to medium dense) I _ IIII I sM Gray and dark gray silty fine to coarse sand with fine to coarse gravel,trace cobbles I (moist)(dense to very dense)(cemented)(glacial till) ' 1 III Excavation terminated at a depth of 6 feet. No caving occured during excavation. No groundwater encountered. 1 , I I I I 1 I I Client: Renton dousing Authority Exploration Method: Kubota 080 Excavator Exploration Date: August 27,1010 Figure A-6 S&EE Proposed Development at Edmonds Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE i BORING B-1 q �� _ U Soil Descrip0on 0 ' 2 18 i Sp Topsoil with roots 3 ito 2PIN i SM Brown and gray silty fine sand, sandy silt and thin lenses of fine sand (damp)(medlum dense) � 111 6 ; ; 4 ;18 � III 111 SM Gray silty fine sand with some fine to medium gravel(damp)(very dense)(glaclal till) ,01 21 � 12i III 501 '12 ® IIII -wet at 15 feet 15: 24 18 V Brown silt with lenses of fine sand(very stiff)(moist) 22' 14 ML 23' 1 i , i I i (Boring log continues on Figure A-7b) Client: Renton Housing Authority Drilling Method: 3"-1 D HSA advanced by track-mount Diedrich D-50 Drill Rlg Sample Method: SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer Drill Contractor. October 28,2010 Drill Date: Holocene Drilling Figure A-7a I SHE Proposed Develpment at Edmonds Ave and Glennwood Ave Job No.1010 r i �v Q BORING B-1 I �, oa (Continued) vv Q Soll Description 20 40 5T �� SM Gray silty fine sand with some fine to medlum gravel(damp)(very dense)(glacial till) III 26 1 I , 3U' ;5or ' 5 ®' Baring terminated at a depth of 30 feet. 5„ s I I No groundwater encountered during drilling. I I I 1 1 I i I I , 1 I 351 - I I 1 1 40 I Client: Renton Housing Authority Drilling Method: T-ID NSA advanced by track-mount Diedrich D-50 Drill Rig Sample Method: SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer Drill Contractor: October 28,2010 Drill Date: Holocene Drilling Figure A-7b I SUE Proposed Develpment at Edmonds Ave and Glennwood Ave JobNo.1010 I I y v BORING B-2 oc4 ° $' -t 0 a Soil Descnptlon 0 1 ,to 1 ,12 sM Topsoll with roots sM Brown and gray silty fine sand with trace fine gravel(damp)(medium dense to dense) SM Gray silty fine sand with some fine to medium gravel(damp)(very dense)(glacial till) IIII b i 1s :17 I I I l 501 , IIII � II23 119 25 i e IIII IIII � IIII 46; a ; 16 ML Brown sandy silt with lenses of wet fine sand(stiff)(molst) 13 201__!__-__!__ (Boring log continues on Figure A-8b) i Client: Renton Housing Authority Drilling Method: W4D HSA advanced by track-mount Diedrich D-50 Drill Rig Sample Method: SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer Drill Contractor: October 28,2010 Drill Date: Holocene Drilling Figure A-8a S&EE Proposed Develpment at Edmonds Ave and Glennwood Ave Job No.f010 0° BORING B-2 o� (Continued) & soil Descrfpf)on 20 ML Brown sandy silt(molst)(very stlffj , 1 , I 26 77 ;+z sM Gray silty fine sand with some fine to medium gravel(damp)(very dense)(glacial till) wi iz 11H 30; 68r 5 ;®' Boring terminated at a depth of 30 feet. 6° 5 ; ; No groundwater encountered during drilling. 1 1 1 1 , I 1 ' I I I I I I ' , 1 I I I 401---` --'-- --'---' Client: Renton Housing Authority Drilling Method: YAD HSA advanced by track-mount Diedrich D-50 Drill Rig Sample Method: SP7 samplerdriven by 140-lb auto hammer Drill Contractor: October28,2010 Drill Date: Holocene Drilling Figure A-Sb SUE Proposed Qevelpment at Edmonds Ave and Glennwood Ave ,lob No.1010 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS i WELL GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, CLEAN GW LITTLE OR NO FINES GRAVELS U) GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, (LITTLE R w gk! _3 p LITTLE OR No FINES _ O V SILTY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND-SILT GRAVELS C< cM MIXTURES WITH FINES cr) sg W y CLAYEY GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY (APPRECIABLE Q pS GC MIXTURES µtOUNT OF FINES] Z C� z SW WELL-GRADED SAND OR GRAVELLY SANDS, CLEAN Fp t I LITTLE OR NO FINES o�� E� Lu DS �� w SANDS zo ` POORLY-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, (LITTLE OR °zZ a 5 SP LITTLE OR NO FINES NO FINEsy 0D ��u Q O o ° III SM SILTY SANDS,SAND-SILT MIXTURES SANDS Q (u U w WITH FINES Him iE (APPRECIABLE U N SC CLAYEY SANDS,SAND-CLAY MIXTURES AMOUNT of FINES) ° INORGANIC SILTS,VERY FINE SANDS,ROCK FLOUR,SILTY OR ML CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY J CL INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY,GRAVELLY SILTS &CLAYS p o CLAYS,SANDY CLAYS,SILTY CLAYS,LEAN CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 V) ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILT-CLAYS OF LOW p o OL W $ w PLASTICITY z INORGANIC SILTS,MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE ~ ! MH SANDY OR SILTY SOILS,ELASTIC SILTS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY,FAT SILTS &CLAYS UJ CH CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 LL x g ON ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS PT PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS i i KEY TO SAMPLES !Z DEPTH OF GROUNDWATER DURING DRILLING ® INDICATES DEKHOFVANDARD PENETRATION"By SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART j AND KEY TO BORING LOG S&EE lSALL_Q-Lny/ ry LT L .. L � — _'/ydYi'.. Yt11T 1I -a F J -..... .. ._ - .' i i 0 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ray' `E W1 Serving the Pacific Northwest Since i981 November 9, 2011 Project No. KE100287A CITY OF REN70N Renton School District R E C I V c/o Greene Gasaway, PLLC MAR 0 6 201Z P.O. Box 4158 Federal Way, Washington 98063 BUILDING DIVISION Attention: Mr. Calvin Gasaway Subject: Summary of Additional Borings in Planned Playground Area Early Childhood Learning Center 1800 Index Avenue NE Renton, Washington Dear Mr, Gasaway: This letter summarizes supplementary exploration borings in the proposed new playground area associated with tl�e above-referenced project. This work is supplementary to our earlier work on- site, which has included completion of subsurface explorations and preparation of a geotechnical engineering report dated November 18, 2010, completion of supplementary exploration borings on the north part of the site summarized in a letter dated August 17, 21011, and completion of infiltration rate testing to support site storm water design. This letter should be considered supplementary to our earlier geotechnical engineering report and addenda. BACKGROUND Our earlier subsurface exploration program on-site identified subsurface conditions generally characterized by lodgement till that was typically on the order of 8 to 14 feet thick, underlain by .advance outwash sediments that will be used as the storm water receptor. During our initial subsurface exploration program, we identified one location on the north part of the site where exist filbyas present. We later completed a supplementary exploration program on the north part of the site to delineate existing fill, and identified existing fill at several locations ranging up to 8 feet below existing grades. - Construction of a new playground complex was recently added to the project. The new playground vrill occupy portions of the ekisting school site, as well as the adjacent park. The purpose of the additional subsurface explorations summarized in this letter is to provide subsurface information for design of the new playground. The borings also provide additional confirmation Kirkland Everett Tacoma 425-827-7701 425-259 0522 253-722-2992 www.aesgeo.com Early Childhood Learning Center Summary of Additional Borings in Renton, Washington Planned Playground Extension to Delineate Existing Fill of the depth to the planned storm water infiltration receptor horizon, which is a valuable confirmation of stratigraphy that affects infiltration system design. ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS We completed two additional subsurface exploration borings for this phase of work labeled EB-16 and EB-17. Attached with this letter are a "Vicinity Map," Figure 1, showing the site location, and a "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 2, which depicts all of the explorations completed on- site to date, Logs of the additional subsurface exploration borings completed for this phase of work are also attached. One should refer to our earlier reports for logs of previously completed explorations. In general, the additional exploration borings encountered very dense lodgement till and lodgement till/advance outwash transitional sediments at shallow depths, underlain by advance outwash sediments at depths of approzi rely Meet below the ground surface. At the location of exploration boring EB-16, the native soils were covered by a layer of existinglill approximately4 feet thick. A surficial layer of sod and topsoil was encountered at each of the additional borings completed during this phase, with observed topsoil thickness of approximately 8 inches. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Playground Areas We anticipate that the planned plyjroun.,structure will impose relatively light foundation loads on the subsurface soils. We recommend that existing play chips, grass, and topsoil be removed from planned construction areas. The area should be excavated to p�lamed-gu-bgrade erevation as needed. Once stripping any required excavation to subgrade elevation has been completed, we recommend that the existing fill be addressed. We recommend that the subgrade be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck or other suitable equipment. If satisfactory proof-rolling results are observed, no further preparation is necessary, in our opinion. Any soft, rutting, or yielding areas may require additional preparation. Additional preparation will likely include removal and replacement of all or a portion of the yielding materials. Once the recommended site preparation procedures have been completed, we recommend that foundation and fill subgrades be compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density, and to a firm and unyielding condition. Structural Fill, as defined in our comprehensive geotechnical engineering report for the project, may then be placed to raise grades, as needed, to meet project goals. Areas prepared as described may be assumed to support allowable foundation loads of up to 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) with 1 inch of allowable settlement. Higher November 9, 2011 ASSOCIAMD EARTH SCIENCES, INC. BWC/tl)-KE100287A9-Pro/ects1201002871KEIWP Page 2 Early Childhood Learning Center Summary of Additional Borings in Renton, Washington Planned Playground Extension to Delineate fxisting Fill foundation soil bearing pressures are possible, but are not expected to be needed for the project as proposed. We should be allowed to offer situation-specific recommendations if higher foundation pressures are needed. Play Area Paving Below any playground paving, we recommend completing stripping and excavation to paving subgrade elevation. The resulting surface should be proof-rolled and compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Any soft, yielding, or organic areas should receive additional preparation, as dictated by field conditions at the time of construction. The paving sections recommended in our comprehensive geotechnical engineering report can then be constructed as planned. If the pavement areas will not be subjected to wheeled vehicles or maintenance equipment and will be used for playground purposes only, it would be possible to reduce the planned pavement section to 2 inches of Class 1/2 inch Hot Mix Asphalt above 4 inches of Crushed Surfacing Top Course if desired. CLOSURE We appreciate the opportunity to submit this letter and hope that it meets your needs. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington Bruce W. Guenzler, L.E.G. Project Geologist Ar Kur . Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer Attachments: Figure 1 - Vicinity Map Figure 2 - Site and Exploration Plan Subsurface Exploration Logs EB-16 and EB-17 November 9, 2011 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC, BWG/tb-KE100187A9-Projects 1201002871KEI WP Page 3 .,1,t', r q I I I I• I ,.J ft�>.. � ,li III • •• '\ `t -�\ i 'I f, t �!`�Jrl �rl � � {� � I�I 1'r 1! ,•,li� � w . �• • ,. {q�,�„fn !I I i p�+ � .. � � �� ` If f - ! .,I ' I� ryry f �It�.. f 'rtr� r�•••- .r \ ��l,•t {./•1...-....-�:� • �.�',�..r• :J„", � �'.,� t ' 'y�' I .�, �. r ` • I\4, ti �il. _ h `s:�� I' + �, I . -� .t 1� i'ij� •. r�t , rd- ;.a•f,)I` -�/. c'�6 I f.. ( ,( `` 1 li �.�- f •� �' yi I� ,`y •. JZ- i "`' .\ 1 �'c;�`"""v q I' •. ,J" 'L ;'S --ram --.. \ Gl�me�t ,s II, I• , e: :,—y— rNs- a AO i�� i \ .a�l� ^�+.• , tii l ti�k1 1 z 1.1 t- � ,. r Ke n da"rr G+ rl9 '•'�' d� y; �rl-L 13. Q P tk , r ;� ,;; �•G•,`.\ �� ,�t�' \ ,f arkPil•.1.. o �. ib Polltt `SITE' �� , �f,l , }��. ; ,d: , ► ' ' i It;ti.A• , 'it'. t �I KN `�� pl rk '� !1, 1'4, '�,, - rt• ' - �.!f i�Grilbr�Ir3d,F1' r .> ''ll _�• -; rl `\ _ _ v ,r 1i• b ' -\ ) S •t yt1 + ¢ .l li�'•.f�G r i 1 1.{' A" t. .111�`1'rr�A�,� I�UWQP��I _t ,r:'t `;�. r.-\;.- ':' '.1�51:,.�. Nf' -� r...i+r ( �, Ri , t �� +Y; , ♦I' rot, • 'r�` .l ,.,_ ,• Qli`f FlO1S -� -`a.I�H`i�'Q+t - / �j, i (� r �1� �1'` � _ a �-� �,. Pa (��Y; _(_ 1 :•a - NA NWIM74%, �-.�._t. i,-4"_S"P t -�I�" ` sr�� ,t .Jhst 1 d l t! t b �• '°. ;/`�' � �I i . dd t - V' I lion C L 'fonk• I II ,\�• Ightld28 �. I ` ( ! , , ,Y'le•I I t,}' ubst r \\I pt,rk � _ \ v,f r . l .iy it r;��N►� u+, 1, i l (`� fj�' %< , I 't' 17 ,s4zt .�t 7� -. ft t. .;�At T A ill 41-',.. c orr a;.. -- �. J• , rear � L��_ � �� Yni N Z AX `.n °i'�tr► _ w III I; ` �iru�riwiPo ' . I IT+ r v,, I \\� /7 R .TC. _.w.... ... it�;�.., " I,�i N k_ , L,i � 1 'f='u' f' w , r! T. �» .M- p.11�rn`,\YI. � � tI�:�`:ac4 .G� 11 �� 3 1."" _ { i v N V. Par loll t k 'r#. �� ,' + ,. A/ }�l r ttd 1 Ij�J� a � % }rare yK tMt�UIIYt+� i, Pht� (pfni i ;;Z j it 1;.• 1 f �� I ,atks3 •s ,wit i� . �� r� SSr (jl� 0 1000 2000 r••f �:«...).�� -. it .i € .,1' r t '"t�, •- ._.- '"�`� - -' ! " er .:,! rlw'.�r.4�`x-- MIA FEET REFERENCE: USGS TOPOI o m. Associated Earth Sciefices, I11e. VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER DATE 11/11 s PROJ.NO, KE100287A $ fir± €�"� RENTON WASHINGTON nEw, aV'. s ,P � +"uL._ — T ^+�i '<"rt'¢ r hN ..� �fr„� "P a :;a£ •}' *'v{{ig r ,. g '� '`•"'i3'�• A� „b� rw +'1 �'�h'et4 '0.''.� "� a+ 'r� * .,R.w.�' + j �� Ti '}e{I�-^ 3� a � r es: r r f"�' JA �4..:,M A Y_•;c ' - P.: >I'�9 }tti '�"f M y,� s-:Y • �J Sx A xx'F ,. �n ^... '. 9 ex+.�x,y^�ti,�'x s: ,4'�r+ � y � .:�,".._ 7.� x? `'"a�Y�g%4A� .m r." •�.� F � J c .,::g.w r d?' -dS� '+.. ."� ,,.r�e,� .rJt n;� a{a., �. �.: '�.;XI( $� TbsS " 7i Vie- ✓ 6` x, •PD=3A EB-8 ".EB 4„K �, EB'9 p. 4" �EB-7 EB-1 Q 4 1=B-15 ' ® ®EB r fa' r � 4 EB-13 19 y `4 'l,'"'_•-scene. ". r A =77 J PD-1 ®E,B-3 .aTa.-wu'&' '1 _. S74',.l.W�r ° }^ Ytl'�.n �y �a 'ir" &g ®EB-6 'emu`* ✓ fa f"� i � APPROXIMATE LOCATION *1 OF PIT DRAIN-TYP kc F P . iI,A r ®EB-4 - -- EB-- ®EB 5 x ti y PD-4 p 16 F*ug '� ► ' �r� r APPROXIMATE LOCATION . EB-17 g � OF EXPLORATION BORING -TYP_ '"`Aya < MW"INDICATE$MONITORING WELL ii{h .o . " �:, r�. � r M .: 7Sy' a „�,:: r.�r� °� � fr;✓�- + fty� :> h +��Awr Yf �r ivi, rw��i� � y`r 3+£s.� ..a - ,, .0 Sl s .�g. 4t 'r v"' �." _ ....sue �. .. w. :�. ro.-- �+ � N r 0 REFERENCE: GOOGLE EARTH No SCALE 0 s Associated Earth Sciences,Inc- SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 2 EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER DATE 11111 RENTON, WASHINGTON PPvOJ.NO. !Cl=100287A °Oo'0 Well-graded gravel and Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency w go$o OW gravel with sand,little to Density SPT(2)blows/foot W ° o no fines Coarse- Very Loose 0 to 4 0 Poorly-graded gravel Grained Soils Loose 4 to 10 a>i ° N°°o 0 o Medium Dense 1010 30 05 U 00000 C'P and gravel with sand, Dense 301050 Test Symbols °v 000000 o° little to no fines G—Grain Size o c °°°°o Very Dense >50 N p z °0 0 0 0 f2) M=Moisture Content z° 0 o , o>0 Consistency SPT blows/foot A-Atterberg Limits Silty gravel and silty Very Soft 0 to 2 C—Chemical o .0,0 OM gravel with sand Fine- Soft 2 to 4 DD®Dry Density o .5 Grained Soils Medium Stiff 4 to 8 K=Permeability I0) W ye Stiff 8 to 15 Clayey gravel and Very Stiff 15 to 30 ec clayey gravel with sand Hard >30 �e Component Definitions Mo Well-graded sand and Descriptive Term Size Range and Slave Number spy sand with gravel,little Boulders Larger than 12' `o LL to no fines Cobbles 3'to 10 o . Poori raded sand Gravel 3"to No.4(4.75 mm) > Lo .: ': y-g Coarse Gravel 3 to 3/4 rn c� vtt SP and sand with gravel, Fine Gravel 3/4"to No,a(4.75 mm) CD 5 c v little to no fines° Sand No.4(4.75 mm)to No.200(0.075 mm) z Coarse Sand No.4(4.75 mm)to No. 10(2.00 mm) Silty sand and Medium Sand No.10(2.00 mm)to No.40(0.425 mm) SM silty Sand with Fine Sand No.40(0.425 mm)to No.200(0.075 mm) D e n t` gravel Silt and Clay Smeller than No.200(0.075 mm) 0 sc Clayey sand and (3)Estimated Percentage Moisture Content MM clayey sand with gravel Percentage by Dry-Absence of moisture, PH, Component Weight dusty,dry to the touch Slit,sandy silt,gravelly silt, Trace <5 Slightly Moist-Perceptible w ML silt with sand or gravel Few 5 to 10 moisture > Little 15 to 25 Moist-Damp but no visible in M With -Non-primary coarse water N cc 0 Clay of low to medium constituents: >15% Very Moist-Water visible but z° v plasticity; silty,Sandy,or Fines content between not free draining E c!. gravelly clay,lean clay 5%and 15% Wet-Visible free water,usually N — from below water table ti Organic clay or silt of low Symbols c = OL plasticity Blows/6"or M Sampler portion of 6° Cement grout � — TYPe surface seal Elastic silt,clayey silt,silt 2.0^OD / Sampler Ty2e with micaceous or b Description Bentonge MH Split Spoon A (A) seal ° dilaiomaceous fine sand or Sampler 3.0"OD Split-Spoon Sampler ;, Filter pack wilh y c Clay of high plasticity, (SPT) 3.25"OD Split-Spoon Ring Sampler (,) . blank casing ° � Bulk sample section ° CH sandy or gravelly clay,fat 3.0'OD Thin-Well Tube Sampler Screened casing clay with sand or gravel Grab Sam le (including Shelby tube) :'with Hylterp with tiller pack rn'3 p C End cep ti /i/�rrr Organic clay or slit of Portion not recovered OH medium to high (t) Percentage b d we! ht plastic/ g y ry g t41 Depth of ground water r,ri ty t2) (SPT)Standard Penetration Test ATD=At time 0f drilling (ASTM D-i 58fi) static water level date •� N Peat,muck and other (s) In General Accordance with (date) o [1� PT highly Organic soils Standard Practice for Description ffii Combined USCS symbols used for and Identification of Soils(ASTM D-2488) fines between 5%and 15% 0 Classificatlons of soils in this report are based on visual field and/or laboratory observations,which Include denalty/consistency,moisture condition,grain size,and plaslichy estimates end should net be ennetrued to imply geld or laboratory testing unless presented herein.Visual-manual and/or laboratory classifica+Jon omethods of ASTM D•2487 and D-2488 were used as an Identification guide for the Unified Sog Classification System. } s Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Y�i R EXPLORATION LOG KEY FIGURE Al Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Loci IT] Project Number Exploration Number Sheet ''�1 E KE100287A EB-16 I 1 of 1 Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Finlsh 1008/11,10198111 Hammer Welght/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(In) R inrhac c ar L —v Blows/Foot a S E �� E p T o mIG DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 ° Grass 8 Inches. Hand dug 2 feet. Fill Loose,very moist,mottled brown,fine to medium SAND,little silt,little fine 7 t - -S-1 gravel(SM). 3 A8 Lodgement Till 3 5 Very dense,very moist,mottled gray,fine to coarse SAND,with silt and 18 S 2 fine gravel(SM). 31 A 675 44 10 Becoming gray with less mottling. 18 S-3 25 52 27 ---------------- - Advance Outwash 15 Very dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few slit and fine gravel(SP). 25 S-4 Gradational stratification. 27 A L57 30 Bottom of exploration boring at 17 feel 20 25 30 35 b N E E m 0 z a Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) n No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG o m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Q Water Level() Approved by, co w ® Grab Sample © Shelby Tube Sample g Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) M Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Loci Project Number Exploration Number Sheet 0 0 M KE100287A EB-17 1 of 1 Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) NIA Location Renton, WA Datum NUA Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Flnish 10/2 11'10198/11 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) R inrha. c N a E J 3 Blows/Foot Q T N L > 3 E o s N DESCRIPTION m 10 20 30 40 ° Grass and topsoil 8 inches. Hand dug 2 feet. Lodgement Till/Advance Outwash Transitional Sediments Dense,moist,brownish gray,fine to medium SAND,few silt,few fine 16 S-1 gravel(SP). 20 39 19 5 Very dense,moist,fine to coarse SAND,little to with slit(varies),little fine 40 S-2 gravel(SP-SM). Gradational stratification. 0/ " 60/ " 10 Dense,very moist,gray,fine to coarse SAND,with silt to few silt(varies), 12 S-3 little fine gravel, 16 49 33 --———— - ———— -- Advance Outwash 15 Very dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few silt,trace fine gravel(SP). 19 S-4 27 A 64 37 Bottom of exploration boring at 17 feet 20 25 30 35 0 N E E d 0 z a Q Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) 0 No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG o m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Q Water Level() Approved by: ca ® Grab Sample ® Shelby Tube Sample T Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Z EN NJ 0 0- u ekra6n Over25 Years q f S'ert ice August 17, 2011 Project No. KE100287A Renton School District c/o Greene Gasaway, PLLC P.O. Box 4158 Federal Way, Washington 98063 Attention: Mr. Calvin Gasaway Subject: Summary of Additional Borings to Delineate Existing Fill Early Childhood Learning Center 1800 Index Avenue NE Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Gasaway: This letter summarizes supplementary exploration borings to delineate existing fill oil the northeast portion of the site. This work is supplementary to our earlier work on-site, which has included completion of subsurface explorations and preparation of a geotechnical engineering report dated November 18, 2010. This letter should be considered supplementary to our earlier geotechnical engineering report. BACKGROUND Our earlier subsurface exploration program on-site identified subsurface conditions generally characterized by lodgement till that was typically on the order of 8 to 14 feet thick, underlain by advance outwash sediments that would be used as the storm water receptor. One boring, EB-7, identified existing fill to a depth of approximately 7 feet above the native sediments on the northeast part of the site. Review of available historic information showed that the northeast portion of the site had previously been occupied by houses that were demolished. We speculated that existing fill observed at EB-7 may have been related to the previous houses in this area. We proposed to complete additional subsurface explorations in the vicinity of EB-7 to further explore the limits of the existing fill. This report summarizes the results of those additional exploration borings. ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS We completed a total of eight additional subsurface exploration borings. Attached with this letter are a "Vicinity Map," Figure 1, showing the site location; a "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 2, which depicts all of the explorations completed on-site to date; and "Enlarged Site and Kirkland Everett Tacoma 425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992 www.aesgeo.com Early Childhood Learning Center Renton, Washington Summary of Additional Borings to Delineate Existing Fill Exploration Plan," Figure 3, which depicts explorations in the vicinity of EB-7 at a larger scale. Figure 3 also displays the depth of observed existing fill at each exploration boring location. In general, the additional exploration borings identified an area of existing fill that extends north and south of EB-7. The existing fill appears to extend beyond the limits of the previously existing houses in this area, and therefore may not be directly related to the previous residential development. In general, the existing fill is of similar gradation and appearance as the native site soils,but is looser. Our exploration borings did not encounter substantial quantities of deleterious materials such as organic material or demolition waste in the existing fill. Detailed descriptions of the conditions observed in each exploration boring are included on the interpretive subsurface exploration logs included with this letter. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We do not recommend that new foundations be constructed above existing fill. We recommend that below foundation elements the existing fill be removed, and the planned foundation grade restored, as needed, with structural fill as defined in our earlier geotechnical engineering report. New foundations can then be constructed with an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) above the new structural fill. If desired, slab-on-grade floors may be underlain by existing fill capped with 2 feet of new structural fill. If this approach is selected, we recommend that the existing fill be excavated as needed to allow placement of at least 2 feet of new structural fill below the planned floor and capillary break materials. The resulting surface should be proof-rolled and compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Any soft, yielding, organic, or otherwise unsuitable soils should receive additional preparation as dictated by field conditions at the time of construction. Following subgrade preparation, 2 feet of new structural fill should be placed. This approach will result in floor slabs constructed above existing fill. This approach will result in cost savings as compared to removing all of the existing fill as previously described for areas below new foundations, and will also result in risk of some additional floor slab settlement if undetected unsuitable fill remains below the floors. This risk is difficult to quantify, and settlement of floor slabs in the finished building could be challenging to repair. If the risks of larger than normal floor slab settlement are not acceptable, all existing fill should be removed from below floor slabs. Below paving, we recommend completing stripping and excavation to paving subgrade elevation. The resulting surface should be proof-rolled and compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Any soft, yielding,or organic areas should receive additional preparation, as dictated by field conditions at the time of construction. The paving sections recommended in our comprehensive geotechnical engineering report can then be constructed as planned. This approach will result in considerable cost savings as compared to removing all of the existing fill below paving, but will result in somewhat higher risks of paving settlement. Paving areas are generally easier and less expensive to repair than previously described for floor slabs. if the August 17, 2011 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. KDMIlb-KE100287A5-Projects 1101002871KEIWP Page 2 Early Childhood Learning Center Renton Washington Summary of Additional Borings to Delineate Existing Fill potential for larger than normal total and differential settlement of paving areas is unacceptable, all existing fill should be removed from below planned paving. Below grade sensitive buried utilities, such as gravity drains, we recommend that at least 1 foot of the existing fill be removed. The subgrade should be proof-rolled and compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Any soft, yielding, or organic areas should receive additional preparation as dictated by field conditions at the time of construction. One foot of new structural fill should be placed to reach planned grade for pipe bedding materials. This approach will result in some additional risk of settlement as compared to removal of all of the existing fill. It may be appropriate to increase drainage gradients of utilities constructed above existing fills such that some settlement can be tolerated while still maintaining planned flow directions and positive gradients in the pipes. CLOSURE We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and hope that it meets your needs. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington 4 P'4A'-' Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Principal Engineer Attachments: Figure 1 - Vicinity Map Figure 2 - Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3 - Enlarged Site and Exploration Plan Subsurface Exploration Logs August 17, 2011 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. KDM7th-KE100287A5-Profecl l201002871KENP Page 3 or p la'' ;, ' I 5�, ``,`� 't'r� '....`..R,.....""` �� 'l} � I I � Ir;, 1 1� ��.M f,' '4 I�I�'3 �.- � `y'.� •�� + �� [ 41 lof( ale L rit 1•.G /�*t91difP'1 c f i 1 1 Y E t �'�lbtnyat Pns t tt Point c s �{ �~ iu ,M — v `- 1y_I '_. r — w X, sle+tstHei!t6ts Keafnycfulcl+ nr PUItC � It i., 1�` c • — T to �,Y'cyi tt�ll .vl'rot t, F(r'�iy tddle ,._ J �c T lit f .- r „1� i1;t' �.;; } ,. � ! 1 ', f � � nt �! ra y,i, "''•I+� .,1 I .�'. .r� •r. �. ff t , r ` 1° (4 ; \ ♦ 1 t {VUlTi1 fl 1 Cl �Snf'It� c. H. i •t?k TER "I GF t JJ 01 h'lit If st� • 0 r ' ofIwo( �r/•I I AWN I a- I, I x31. •` t - si! {> '. ``�. i t�:y 2 ,L. ffiri, yt /""};,i 1 • c,1 9S1 �'(nnk..41 :SKt 26l. 1... • d ,j L �,l : -.,ku ',-\,l ,t3, tit r• i , :(' ^, _ If N. _. i p'cJTfetr 1 l S ;�.� pI: is I :,\ �"t i , F � �,�t' ` ft r�� c'`� F�{s�'._ ! S'» � • d,'.,_ �t �':, ,-•t,'• `,� I, ,$C� :`;�;}'� �(?�' A � �" ,�1�1 ,� �t,' �� { �'�.�A�,(r .7 � !' Gra nwndr�.,_�__ � 4•- I d �, tax t r { E `Mr 'it i' 3'} � 14.'• � �tEllU�'��8pol�s7� -.s� �- I V �•`. Poo '$ & ICE ':r"'•.>"��d--._",�-.:....-_�.,..A 1"-� .: _r - ��.s� �I A""" �. _ � _. �� ;i. t-I{ n, 1 _ }` �' •I �12 Ap'jf,' {: f tttrtn� f{I a(r / f atk.,. M >/yiel�; Pro i N 1000 2000 _ I . 0 :1ANvop:.�g „�..t. REFERENCE: USGS TOPOI FEET Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. VICINITY MAP i FIGURE 1 �• EARLY RENTONI, WASGH NGTGN CENTER PROS,NO. K 100287A Y IMM ka ♦ 'j r 'S-' ^ ,'�Nt ♦•I r b, ."t �Y� yc ��_� i M^�� a�4YL�. � rh`'� � p, �ar.K Ni r i � 'M ��'?'�n'C;e,,a^��+�`°�"b'` :� wY• �G�+ ;1 o r. a�4� @7 �✓ ,,, ci k. M1 r y 1ry � ✓+ btu 7 (� , �� `r � � '�, �',�1 j � 9 �,Yirx�{r� �y„ , r�X � ✓nl�f�y}�,� �7 N f�(.� 'j2!rh'' �! �., � �� t1R+.t';� �x -tr •S tr f I }. c rri AP. F XI R [ytA- ' CAY rah rp r � 1"t, -,."f i' e+" �+/ i t - rS' r :P"� yk•`` t. L y T�k OWN� r ++Yir 1� [CitAV. NIt• n � f r �rt.,t `A s _ p aR �r Li , ddieY. dw 24j�4yk 5'�', » 'I�t � '1 0'S� \;. F ,r w_• t' � ,4 t Y A nl Yt"r,ly�.' �'�'-t1r' , �p'•�((r� �`p��'. �3y,� .N 4� �^�� i,4 �4 *, w ,-r. � _ii;��': r � r:.''-.."f� (�A �f 1'� •'9 1°aW fr �1y^,5'�.' y`�..�U Y w 'Y F ',Yq �'q � '�+��j�'� •.it 1 :�K ',i s .,.,FrF� S�c. Yt ,��* e f� ;..,:��., H r Y4 N a REFERENCE: GOGGLE EARTH NO SCAL= 0 t a Associated Earth Sciences,Inc SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 2 a W EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER DATE 7111 RENTON, WASHINGTON PRQ1_NO. KE100287A I 'c I ti9 °axu ni I I Z I �O Jam_ 'l` � �i/ "'n„�,tee ze•�n a �ir_',�r�tii APPROXIMATE LOCATION >'}� \ r \ \ ��✓ OF EXPLORATION BORING WITH DEPTH OF OBSERVED FILL(FT)-lYP % EB3 1 os y EB-14 / EB-910 H 0'/Jam? i•nH�2_ EB-7 92°a .�cO�Pa 7 0 EB-10 k N. \. 90 ti\ 9 �P ®EB-15 / O EB-11 Zol .it fACV GLN� ss �. p, EB-13 EB 3 I \ 0' ;ems• N - EB-6 A 0' N - � REFERENCE: GOOGLE EARTH FEET 'n i 8 Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. ENLARGED SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 3 EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER DATE 8/11 ' T RENTON,WASHINGTON PROJ.NO- KE100287A Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Geolo iC & Monitorino Well Construction Lop 19 a � y 1 0 Project E10 8 er WellNumber tee Y' t�ia. � KE100287A EB•1 1 1 of 2 Project Name Early Childhood Center Location Renton WA Elevation(Top of Well Casing) N/A _ Surface Elevation(ft) Water Level Elevation Dale SIarUFinish 11/t i/10 i/i 1/ifl Drllling/Equipment Boretec/Track Hole Diameter(In) 7 Inches _ Hammer WeighUDrop 140##/30" t U O W 3- n E _o(0 2 >' WELL CONSTRUCTION T m DESCRIPTION Flush monument Grass and topsoil. Concrete 2 to 0 feet Lodgement Till Hand dug to 2 112 feet. 10 18 inches recovery. Dense,very moist,mottled,gray and brown, t2 One to coarse SAND,little silt,little fine gravel(SW-SM). No t8 stratification or structure. 5 Bentonile chips 47 to 2 feet 8 18 Inches recovery. Becomes medium dense,mottled brown 12 Subtle gradational stratification. t is Advance Oulwash 10 1 1/4-inch PVC blank l0 20 18 inches recovery. Very dense,very moist,brown,fine to coarse surface 33 SAND,little to with silt,little fine gravel(SM). 30 15 20 18 Inches recovery. Very dense,moist,brownish gray,One SAND, 32 few silt, Subtle gradational stratification(SP). 38 20 35 18 Inches recovery Grades with trace fine gravel 34 29 Weak seepage zone(perched) 25 18 inches recovery- Very dense,moist to wet varles gray,One to t a ry- ry ( ),9 Y, 32 coarse SAND,few sill,Interbedded with brown,One SAND,with sill 50 (SP with SM). Weak seepage above brown,fine sand 30 Y8 18 Inches recovery Very dense,moist,gray,fine to medium SAND, 35 trace to few silt(SP). 43 0 �0 35 28 As above. 35 0 28 LLA 0 w a Sampler Type(ST): 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) Q No Recovery M - Moisture Logged by: BWG 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) D Ring Sample V Water Level() Approved by: s a Grah Sample O Shelby Tube Sample T Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Geologic & Monitorino Well Construction L Pro Number Well Number o r IE t�+ R721 2 KE100287A EB-1 1 2 of 2 Project Narne Early Childhood Center Location Renton WA Elevation(Top of Well Casing) N/A Surface Elevation(ft) Water Level Elevation DaleSIart/Finlsh 11/11/10 S11/11/1(1 Drilling/Equipment Boretec/Track _ Hole Diameter(in) 7 1ncl1e _ Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/30" t > uo 3= E WELL CONSTRUCTION T co �� DESCRIPTION 34 18 inches recovery. Trace fine gravel concentrated In zones 1-Inch 3e thick. 45 I 45 28 18 inches recovery. Trace gravel becomes more evenly distributed. 35 38 Colorado ft10-20 60 to 47 feet 50 = 24 18 inches recovery. Grades without gravel 40 1 1/4-Inch PVC screen 50 0.020-inch slot 60 to 50 feet r 5' 26 18 inches recovery as above 41 Ifr 50 G0 28 18 Inches recovery. Gradation as above Well Tag#BBB 965 32 34 Boring terminated at 61 V2 feel on 11/11110 65 - 70 0 a 75 u z, 0 0 m a' — t9 Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) Q No Recovery M - Moisture Logged by: BWG 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: ® Grat,Sample Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log Project Number ExploraEoBn Number l of heat 1 KE100287A Project Name _Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA _ Datum -pl/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Dale Start/Finish 11/11/tn I1/11/1f1 Hammer Weighl/Drop _140#/30" _ Hole Diameter(In) 7 inrha� c d- U— W v t;F; v A Blows/Foot 1— o. S E ` 5 E°%° c v T ro (D u) o ro on ° DESCRIPTION 0 10 20 30 40 ° Grass and topsoil. Lodgement Till Hand dug to 2 feel % ---' \ 18 Inches recovery- Dense,moist,mottled,gray,(fine to coarse SAND)) 13 S-1 with silt,little fine gravel ISM). No stratification- h---- 17 A34 17 5 18 inches recovery. Gradation as above 13 S_2 22 49 27 - 10 10 Inches recovery Becoming gray and less motlled 16 1 S-3 35 50/" o/ Advance Outwash 15 18 Inches recovery. Dense,moist,brownish gray,fine SAND,little fine 13 S-4 gravel and silt(SM) Gradational strallficatlon 16 �3 20 - 20 18 Inches recovery Very dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few sill(SP). No Is S-5 stratification 25 55 --------- ------...-- 30 Bottom of exploration boring at 21 1/2 feet 25 30 0 35 0 ri b Sampler Type(ST): 2"OD Spilt Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG 0 W .3"OD Spilt Spoon Sampler(U&M) Ring Sample SL Water Level O Approved by: Grab Sample � Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) 0 - Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log a Project Number ExploraEB 3umber Sheet t�. " KE100287A 1 of 1 Project Name a ChIIdh00d Qentar — Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA Datum NI/A Driller/Equipment Rclretec/Traok Date SIarUFinlsh 1-I M 111 fl 11/1 1/in Hammer Weight/Drop 140#1 30" Hole Diameter(In) 7 In hips c N u— m 'J(o a�i N �5 Blows/Foot S E r12 rn E �m L ° T `� DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 O -- 2 inches asphalt paving Lod-- --^_ ._.... - ..._............. -.... — gement Till 18 inches recovery Very dense,moist,mottled,gray,fine to coarse 24 S-I SAPID,little tine gravel(SM). No stratification. 36 72 36 5 18 Inches recovery Gradation as above. Becoming brown. 17 S-2 27 57 30 10 18 inches recovery. Vo dense,moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,few 14 S-3 fine gravel,trace sill(SR No stratifcalion 26 Ga 38 (Weak seepage zone) I5 Very dense,very moist to wet,brown,fine SAND,with silt(SM). No 17 S-4 stratification 27 5a 27 20 Very dense,moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,trace silt and fine gravel 17 S-5 (Sp) No stratification. 24 51 27 Bottom of exploration boring at 21 112 feet 25 - 30 o- 35 0 N 1p G E v. 0 L 2 ti Sampler Type(ST). o m 2"OD Spill Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG o 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: w ® Grab Sample Z Shelby Tube Sample y Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) a Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet �d ra,y ' ' � ., KE100287A EB-4 1 of 1 _ Project Name Earlv Childhood a Ground Surface Elevation(it) NIA Location Ren on WA Datum M/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track __ DaleStarUF!nish 11/11/1tl 11/11/10 Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) _ZJaGi>as m O > to N L n n E Q a Blows/Foot 2 o T n (9 rn ° ro m t DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 ° 1 1/2 inches asphalt paving. • Lodgement Till 18 Inches recovery. Very dense,moist,brown,fine to coarse SAND,with 22 S-1 silt,little fine to coarse gravel(SM). No stratification- 38 Loa 50 5 S-2 2Inches recovery. Blowcounl overstated Gradation as above based on 01 501 recovery and cuttings I � - 10 18 Inches recovery Grades to with flne to coarse gravel(SM). 12 S-3 32 72 40 Advance Outwash 15 18 Inches recovery. Veryry dense,moist,brown,fine SAND,few silt,trace 29 8-4 fine gravel(SP). Gradallonai stratification,primarily of gravel fraction 40 00 40 20 18 Inches recover To 21 feel gradation as above. Below 21 feet dense, 1s S-5 moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,trace silt(SP). 22 A 7 25 Bottom of exploration boring at 21 1/2 feel 25 - 30 0 35 0 I G C 'o Z a C7 _ Sampler Type(ST) 8 mmm 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) 0 No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG 0 LU 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample SZ Water Level() Approved by: 57,m t Grab Sample Q Shelby Tube Sample - Water Levoi at time a drilling . Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log ❑ � M , y Project Number Exploration Number Sheet :>-; r' {'"{` KE100287A EB-5 1 of 1 Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA Datum NIA — Date Start/Finlsh 1 ill 11/i.1/1O_ Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track 4 Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) 7 inrhas c d o > ' .26 — `V? Blows/Foot r"- a S E 2>' E": o T rn DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 ° Grass and topsoil•_ - Lodgement Thl 14 inches recovery Very dense,moist,mottled,brown,fine to coarse 11 S-1 SAND,with sill and fine to coarse gravel(SM). No stratification 29 G2 33 5 18 inches recovery. Gradation as above. 16 S-2 30 72 42 Advance Oulwash 10 18 inches recovery Very dense,moist,brown,fine SAND,few silt(SP). 15 S 3 Significant gradational stratification 26 55 29 15 18 inches recovery. Gradation as above,but without stratification. 13 S-4 21 G4 25 - 20 18 inches recovery. As above 16 S-5 23 52 29 Bottom of exploration boring at 21 112 feel 25 30 0 35 0 ro N `u E v 0 n� w Sampler Type(ST): e m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: 8WG o m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: Water Level at lime of drilling(ATD) Grab Sample /� Shelby Tube Sample-- B_ Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. _ Exploration Log t , Project Number Exploration Number Sheet I -i KE100287A EB-G 1 of 1 Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) NIA Location Renton,WA Datum N/A DrillerlEqulpment BoreteclTrack Date Start/Flnlsh 1 ill 1/1 0 11111.110 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) 7 inrhaa 0 w 3 " "— "D Blows/Foot L� J " ii w S E 12 �o mM L T �� rn DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 O Grass and topsoil.._— --`_- J Lodgement Till 18 inches recovery. Dense,moist,mottled,brown,fine to coarse SAND, 13 S-1 with slit,little fine to coarse gravel(SM). No stratification. 13 30 17 5 S-2 18 Inches recovery. Gradation as above. I I 21 42 21 van 10 adcefwas Ouh ---- - - - - S 3 18 inches recovery. Dense,very moist,brown,fine SAND,few sill-silt 24 A43 stringer 11 to 11 2 feet(SP with ML). 19 15 18 Inches recovery Becomes very dense. Grades with[race fine gravel 22 S-4 Significant stratification(SP) Ito 87 47 - 20 18 inches recovery. Gradation as above,but minimal stratification(SP). 18 S-5 24 54 30 Bollom of exploration boring at 21 112 feel 25 30 0 35 0 e a Samplar'rype(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ❑ Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: rn m Q 0 Shelby Tube Sample T- Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) a Grab Sample __-_., Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log ❑ Project Number Exploration Number Sheet — - fS KE100287A EB-7 1 of 1 _ Project Name Early Childhood erltef Ground Surface Elevation(it) NIA Location Renton. l�lA Datum �/A DrillerlEquipment Boretec/Track Hole Diameter ish 7 inrh i(1 1 1/L111_Il Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" — Hole Diameter(in) 7 inr.�.g N J ul i g a E —y a v o Blows/Foot 5. S E 12T �E L m m (�n o co tz ° T O DESCRIPTION L) � 10 20 30 40 . Grass and topsoil. __�_.._..-.__._-.—•------------.....--_- - Fill 14 Inches recovery. Loose,very moist,brown,fine SAND,with sill,few 6 S-1 fine gravel(SM). 3 5 6 inches recovery. Gradation as above 3 S-2 4 e 5 Advance Oulwash 10 18 inches recovery. Dense,moist,brown,fine SAND,few silt.Irace fine p S-3 gravel(SP) Gradational stratification 14 30 16 15 6 Inches recovery. Disturbed cuttings resemble S-3. 10 S 4 23 53 30 20 No recovery. 9 Da4 S-5 i7 Dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few sill(SP) No stratification. g A3 S-6 14 _.. -- -...... _.. 21 25 Bottom of exploration boring at 24 feet 30 0 35 0 ry n F 0 a' U t Sampler Type(ST): 8 m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG SZ o � 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ❑ Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: m { Water eve ter Level al time of drilling(ATD) C Grab Sample © Shelby-tube Sample — a Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Log � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE100287A EB-8 1 of 1 Project Name Early ChildhoodCenter Ground Surface Elevation(ft) �1/A Location -Renton.WA Datum NIA Driller/Equipment Boretar/TraGk Date Start/Flnish 7/94/11.7194111 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) c d '4 o >° L n m� _ Blows/Foot t- a a m o CL DESCRIPTION 3 10 20 30 40 -Grass and to_psotl-5.inches, Lodgement Till Hand dug 1 1/2 feet. Medium dense,very moist,light brown,fine SAND,with silt,little fine gravel S-1 Very de ),moist,light brown with mottling,fine to medium SAND,with jq 60 dense, slit,little fine to coarse gravel(SM);no stratification. 41 5 Very dense,moist,gray,fine to coarse SAND,with sill,few fine to coarse 20 S-2 gravel(SM);no stratification. 41 A 501" Bottom of exploration boring at 6 1/2 feet 10 15 20 25 30 35 N N 0. t7 Sampler Type(ST'): o m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) Q No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG © 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample _V Water Level p Approved by: ® Grab Sample ® Shelby Tube Sample-T Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Loa Project Number Exploration Number Sheet 0 ?' KE100287A EB-9 1 of 1 Project Name Ea' od Ground Surface Elevation(ft) NIA Location Ren on WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Finish 7/94/11.7/94/11 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(In) o > afD n 8 a` Blows/Foot CL S � Win. 3E 200 $ DESCRIPTION 10 20 30 40 0 Grass and topsolL____ ____ 6 S-1 Lodgement TIII 10 A 19 Medium dense,moist,light brown,fine SAND,with silt,few fine gravel 9 (SM);no stratification. S 2 Dense,moist,brown,fine to medium SAND,with silt(SM). 155 49 30 5 Very dense,moist,gray,fine to coarse SAND,with slit,little fine gravel 25 S-3 (Slut);no stratification. Sample smeared with material from above. 36 0/ -- - - -- - - - ----------- Advance Outwash Cuttings become gray,with less silt. 10 Very dense,moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,few to little slit(varies),few 15 S-4 fine gravel(SP-SW);gradational stratification. 24 A 653 ----- - -- ----- ------------ - 29 Bottom of exploration boring at 11 112 feet 15 20 25 30 35 0 N N Q a' Sampler Type(ST): S [D 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) E] No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG o m 3"OD Spllt Spoon Samplar(D&M) ® Ring Sample $Z Water Level 0 Approved by: ® Grab Sample Z Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc, EX loratiotl LO r Project Number Exploration Number Sheet El El 0 � t l* KE100287A EB-10 1 of 1 Project Name E ter Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Ren On WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Finish 719411 1 17/94/1 1 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(In) o c a .8 =y m inBlows/Foot 1 o T M C3 rn �'E DESCRIPTION 10 20 30 40 ° S 1 _Grass and topsoil. -- — --------------- 5 Fill 7 ♦12 Medium dense,moist,light brown,fine SAND,little to with slit,trace coarse 5 sand/fine gravel,trace organic(topsoil)(SM)- S-2 7 ig 12 5 Loose,moist,light brown,fine SAND,with silt,few fine gravel/coarse sand, 3 S-3 trace organic(topsoil)(SM). 2 g 7 Advance Outwash 10 Dense,moist,brown,fine SAND,few silt,trace fine gravel/coarse sand g S-4 (SP);no stratification. 13 ♦2 13 15 S 5 Becomes very moist,with thin(1/4-Inch)silty stringers(SP)- 12 2 13 Bottom of exploration boring at 16 112 feet 20 25 30 35 a' c� Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) Q No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG [0 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D 3,M) I] Ring Sample 5Z Water Level(j Approved by: Grab Sample Z Shelby Tube Sample$ Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration LO Project Number Exploration Number Sheet L=rJ Eil r O K 1 � KE100287A EB-11 1 1 of 1 Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Finish 7/94/1 1 17/9411 1 Hammer Welght/Drop 140#(30" Hole Diameter(in) c m S a a F Q`3 Blows/Foot oCL E T % (9 Cn m L DESCRIPTION `� 10 20 30 40 S _Gress and topsolL_ ____ - _ _ _____ - S-t - ----- ------ 8 Fill 14 Medium dense,moist,mixed brown and gray,fine to coarse SAND,with B slit,few fine gravel(SM). Loose,moist,brown and dark brown,fine SAND,few to little slit,trace fine b S-2 gravel(SP-SM). 5 9 4 5 - --- --- - Lodgement TIII- - - - S-3 Dense,moist,gray,fine to coarse SAND,with slit,little fine gravel(SM);no g straliflcation. 17 40 23 Smoother drilling. 10 S-4 Becomes very dense. 28„ A 676 Bottom of exploration boring at 11 feet i5 20 25 30 35 N ll. Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG n 103"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Water Level() Approved by: ® Grab Sample Z Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associaled Earth Sciences,Inc, Exploration LO y Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE100287A EB-12 1 Of 1 0 0 ` Project Name Early Childhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton.e Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Date Start/Finish 7/94/11.7194111 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) c w °—�� a 3 3 Blows/Foot a:13 S E f E g o �S DESCRIPTION os o T t7 m 10 20 30 40 S-1 Grass and topsoil___ 4 Lodgement Till 7 12 5 Very dense,moist,gray,fine to medium SAND,with silt,few fine gravel 12 S-2 (SM);no stratification- 16 ee 50 Advance Outwash - - - ---- - S-3 Veryry dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few silt,trace coarse sand/fine gravel 2840 (SP)• 01 . Bottom of exploration boring at B 112 feet 10 15 20 25 30 35 VI 5 a l9 Sampler Type(ST): m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) ❑ No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: BWG $ m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample SL Water Level() Approved by: ® Grab Sample ® Shelby Tube Sample V- Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) Associated Earth Sciences,Inc. Exploration Loa 0 ,;. Project Number Exploration Number Sheet ?' � Ez M KE100287A EB-14 I 1 of 1 Project Name Ea rly�hjldhood Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) N/A Location Renton WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Boretec/Track Dale Start/Finish 7/94/11.7/94/11 Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Hole Diameter(in) c ai 19 L a a�F v Blows/Foot a S E e rn �o mm G p T M DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40 Grass and toQs11. _ _ , 5 S-1 — —--—Fill --- 11 20 Medium dense,moist,light brown,fine SAND,with silt,few fine gravel 9 (SM). S 2 Loose,moist,brown,fine SAND,with silt,trace fine gravel(SM). 4 A5 1 5 Loose,moist,gray,fine SAND,few silt,few coarse sand/Flne gravel(SP). 4 S-3 4 9 5 _ ---- Advance Oulwash 10 Very dense,moist,gray,fine SAND,few silt and fine gravel(SP). 35 50/1 Bottom of exploration boring at i 1 feet 15 20 25 30 35 0 N "l G a' cv m Sampler Type(ST): S m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: 13WG ® 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) ® Ring Sample Water Level Q Approved by: ® Grab Sample ® Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)