No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Geotechnical_Report_250131_v1Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Services Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington for Unico Properties, LLC September 26, 2024 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Services Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington for Unico Properties, LLC September 26, 2024 17425 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 250 Redmond, Washington 98052 425.861.6000 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Services Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington File No. 9061-019-01 September 26, 2024 Prepared for: Unico Properties, LLC 1215 4th Avenue, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98161 Attention: Julia Reeve Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 17425 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 250 Redmond, Washington 98052 425.860.6000 Colton W. McInelly, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer Matthew W. Smith, PE Senior Principal CWM:MWS:nl Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. September 26, 2024 | Page i File No. 26881-001-00 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Scope of Services.......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING ....................................................................... 1 2.1. Field Explorations .......................................................................................................................... 1 2.2. Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.3. Previous Studies ........................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 2 3.1. Geology .......................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2. Surface Conditions........................................................................................................................ 2 3.3. Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................................. 3 3.3.1. Soil Conditions ................................................................................................................... 3 3.3.2. Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................... 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 4 4.1. Summary of Key Geotechnical Issues ......................................................................................... 4 4.2. Earthquake Engineering ............................................................................................................... 5 4.2.1. Seismicity ........................................................................................................................... 5 4.2.2. 2021 IBC Seismic Design Information ............................................................................. 6 4.2.3. Liquefaction Potential ....................................................................................................... 7 4.2.4. Lateral Spreading .............................................................................................................. 7 4.2.5. Ground Rupture ................................................................................................................. 7 4.2.6. Seismic Induced Landslides ............................................................................................. 8 4.3. Temporary Dewatering ................................................................................................................. 8 4.3.1. Dewatering Induced Settlement of Adjacent Improvements .......................................... 8 4.4. Excavation Support ....................................................................................................................... 8 4.5. Augercast Piles .............................................................................................................................. 8 4.5.1. Construction Considerations ............................................................................................ 9 4.5.2. Axial Capacity ................................................................................................................... 10 4.5.3. Lateral Capacity ............................................................................................................... 10 4.6. Foundation Drains ...................................................................................................................... 10 4.7. Floor Slabs ................................................................................................................................... 11 4.7.1. At-Grade Slabs ................................................................................................................. 11 4.7.2. Below-Grade Slabs .......................................................................................................... 12 4.8. Below-Grade Walls ...................................................................................................................... 12 4.8.1. Permanent Below-Grade Walls Against Temporary Shoring ......................................... 12 4.8.2. Other Cast-in-Place Walls ................................................................................................ 13 4.8.3. Drainage ........................................................................................................................... 14 4.9. Site Preparation and Earthwork ................................................................................................. 15 4.9.1. Clearing and Site Preparation ......................................................................................... 15 4.9.2. Sedimentation and Erosion Control ............................................................................... 15 4.9.3. Static Settlement ............................................................................................................. 16 September 26, 2024 | Page ii File No. 9061-019-01 4.9.4. Subgrade Preparation ..................................................................................................... 17 4.9.5. Structural Fill.................................................................................................................... 17 4.9.6. Weather Considerations.................................................................................................. 19 4.10.Excavations and Permanent Slopes .......................................................................................... 20 4.10.1. Temporary Cut Slopes ..................................................................................................... 21 4.10.2. Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes ....................................................................................... 21 4.11.Pavement Recommendations .................................................................................................... 21 4.11.1. Subgrade Preparation ..................................................................................................... 21 4.11.2. New Hot Mix Asphalt Pavement ..................................................................................... 22 4.11.3. Portland Cement Concrete Pavement ............................................................................ 22 4.12.Infiltration Considerations .......................................................................................................... 22 4.13.Recommended Additional Geotechnical Services .................................................................... 23 5.0 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 23 6.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 24 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Overall Site Plan Figure 3 through 5. Site Plan Areas A to C APPENDICES Appendix A. Field Explorations Figure A-1 – Key to Exploration Logs Figures A-2 through A-10 – Logs of Borings Figures A-11 through A-16 – Cone Penetration Test Logs Appendix B. Laboratory Testing Figures B-1 – Atterberg Limits Test Results Figures B-2 and B-3 – Consolidation Plots Appendix C. Exploration Logs from Previous Studies Appendix D. Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use September 26, 2024 | Page 1 File No. 9061-019-01 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of GeoEngineers’ preliminary geotechnical engineering services for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) work associated with the Longacres Campus Master Plan in Renton, Washington. The site is shown relative to surrounding physical features in Figure 1, Vicinity Map, and Figures 2 through 5, Site Plans. 1.1. Project Description Our understanding of the project is based on discussions with, and information provided by Julia Reeve of Unico Properties and review of the conceptual design drawings provided by Coughlin Porten Lundeen. We understand that Unico Properties has started the EIS process with the City of Renton for the Master Plan of the Longacres Campus and a soil analysis is required. Preliminary road and lot locations have been established and at this time up to 16 new lots across the Longacres Campus may be redeveloped with new buildings and other improvements over the next decade or two. Currently, there are three alternatives being considered for building layout, height, spacing, etc. Alternative 1 consists of office buildings that fall under the existing zoning codes, while Alternatives 2 and 3 consist of office and residential buildings that fall outside of the existing zoning codes. Alternatives 2 and 3 allow for more tightly spaced, taller buildings. New buildings are planned to be constructed close to existing grade and some may have partial to one level below-grade basements spread across portions of the building footprint. Basements may extend as low as Elevation 10 feet, which will require excavations ranging from about 6 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. Grades may be raised upwards of 2 to 5 feet around the new buildings as part of the improvements. New hardscape construction is estimated to be extensive and provide vehicular as well as pedestrian access between newly constructed buildings. Building loads, specific dimensions, and construction sequence are not known at the time. 1.2. Scope of Services The purpose of our services is to evaluate soil and groundwater conditions as a basis for developing preliminary design criteria for the geotechnical aspects of the proposed improvements. Our services were performed in general accordance with the scope of services outlined in our proposal dated March 1, 2024. 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 2.1. Field Explorations The subsurface soil and groundwater conditions were evaluated by reviewing existing explorations previously completed in the project vicinity and through a field exploration program that consisted of drilling and sampling nine hollow-stem auger borings (GEI-1 through GEI-9) and performing six cone penetration tests (CPTs) (CPT-1 through CPT-6). Both the borings and CPTs were completed in the vicinity of the planned development sites at the approximate locations shown in Figures 2 through 5. The borings were advanced to depths ranging from about 21½ to 76½ feet below existing site grades. Each of the six CPTs was advanced to a depth of approximately 61 feet below existing grades. Locations of the explorations were determined in the field using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS). A description of the field exploration program and logs of the borings and CPTs are presented in Appendix A, Field Explorations. September 26, 2024 | Page 2 File No. 9061-019-01 2.2. Laboratory Testing Soil samples obtained from the borings were transported to our laboratory and evaluated to confirm or modify field classifications, as well as to evaluate engineering properties of the soil. Representative samples were selected for laboratory testing consisting of moisture content, percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve (%F), Atterberg limits and one-dimensional consolidation testing. The tests were performed in general accordance with test methods of the ASTM International (ASTM) or other applicable procedures. A brief discussion of the laboratory tests and test results are included in Appendix B, Laboratory Testing. 2.3. Previous Studies The logs of selected explorations from previous site evaluations in the project vicinity were reviewed and the approximate location of relevant explorations are shown in Figures 2 through 5. Logs of relevant explorations from previous projects referenced for this study are presented in Appendix C, Exploration Logs from Previous Studies. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1. Geology The project site is located at the northern end of the Green River Valley, approximately half a mile east of the valley wall and the Green River, and over 2 miles south of the south end of Lake Washington. Published geologic information for the project vicinity includes a map titled “Geologic Map of King County” (Booth, Troost & Wisher 2007). Subsurface soils are mapped as recent alluvium, which consists of interlayered fine-grained sand and silt with occasional layers of gravel, organic silt and peat. The alluvial deposits are as much as 150 to 300 feet thick in the central portion of the valley and become less thick near the valley walls. The alluvial deposits have moderate to high liquefaction potential, and often contain moderate to highly compressible layers within the near-surface layers. Glacially consolidated soils underlay the alluvial deposits at depth. Fill from past grading activities overlies the recent alluvial deposits. 3.2. Surface Conditions The main campus area consists of numerous King County Parcels and is approximately 132.9 acres, 88.1 acres of which are designated for development as part of the Master Plan. There are existing developments within the Longacres Campus which include vacant former Boeing buildings with associated parking in the north/northeastern portion of the campus and the Sounders Training Facility in the southeast portion of the campus. The training facility has a large parking area and training fields built adjacent to it. An early childhood development center exists east of Oakesdale Avenue SW near the eastern edge of the campus. Significant hardscape surfaces exist along the west side of the campus consisting of mostly vacant asphalt and gravel surface parking lots associated with the former Boeing buildings. Most of the site is largely undeveloped and currently occupied with vegetation associated with the man- made wetland wildlife area established in the center of the campus. Vegetation consists of grass lawn, small-sized orchard trees, and large-sized deciduous and coniferous trees. Thick vegetation consisting of September 26, 2024 | Page 3 File No. 9061-019-01 brush, small-sized trees, and aquatic vegetation exists throughout the campus. Site grades are generally flat across the Longacres Campus and generally range from about Elevation 16 to 21 feet. Underground utilities consisting of sanitary sewer, storm drain, gas, water, electric, and telecommunications fiber are anticipated throughout the Longacres Campus. 3.3. Subsurface Conditions 3.3.1. Soil Conditions Our understanding of subsurface conditions is based on the results of the borings and CPTs that were recently completed for this project and on our review of existing geotechnical information in the vicinity of the project. The approximate locations of these relevant explorations are presented in Figures 2 through 5. The general subsurface conditions consist of relatively shallow fill overlying alluvium. The following is a summary of the subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations completed at the site: Fill generally consists of very soft to stiff silt with varying amounts of sand, gravel and organic matter and loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt, gravel and organic matter. Fill thickness varies across the site and is up to approximately 6 feet thick. Alluvium was encountered near the existing ground surface or beneath the fill. The alluvium generally consists of very soft to medium stiff silt with varying amounts of sand and organic matter and very loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt, gravel and organic matter in the upper approximately 20 to 25 feet. Thin layers of peat and organic silt were observed at various locations across the Longacres Campus within this upper portion of alluvial soils. Beneath this upper generally fine-grained layer of alluvium, the unit transitions to denser coarse-grained deposits consisting mostly of sand. These deeper coarse-grained deposits generally consist of medium dense to dense sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel. Occasional layers of gravel were observed within the deeper alluvial soils. Some of the sand and gravel layers are very dense. Although not encountered in many explorations, occasional large woody debris such as logs exist within the alluvial soils, and rubble or other debris may be encountered in the fill from previous grading and development activities. 3.3.2. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater is present within the alluvial deposits and has been observed at various depths across the Longacres Campus. In the recently completed explorations for this study, groundwater was observed at depths ranging from about 6 to 17 feet below the ground surface, which corresponds to approximately Elevation 0 to 11 feet. In previous studies completed around the campus, groundwater was observed at depths ranging from about 2 to 7½ feet below the ground surface, which corresponds to about Elevation 11 to 16 feet. Groundwater observations during drilling and CPTs are often inaccurate due to the limited time the holes are left open and insufficient time for groundwater levels to stabilize. Groundwater conditions should be expected to fluctuate as a function of season, precipitation, water levels in the man-made ponds in the central portion of the Longacres Campus, water levels in the Green River, which is about ½ mile west of the site, and other factors. September 26, 2024 | Page 4 File No. 9061-019-01 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1. Summary of Key Geotechnical Issues A summary of the geotechnical considerations is provided below. The summary is prepared for introductory purposes only and should be used in conjunction with the complete preliminary recommendations presented in this report. ■ The site is designated as Site Class F, per the 2021 International Building Code (IBC) and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16, because of the presence of potentially liquefiable soils beneath the site. Site-specific seismic response analyses are required for Site Class F. An exception is provided for structures that have fundamental periods of vibration that are less than 0.5 seconds. The need for site-specific seismic response analyses should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis when building designs have progressed to a point where the fundamental periods of vibration can be estimated. GeoEngineers can complete site-specific seismic response analyses if needed. ■ Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate seasonally and may be near the ground surface during the wet season. We understand that new buildings are planned to be constructed close to existing grade and some may have partial to one level below-grade basements spread across portions of the building footprint. The basements may require excavations down to about Elevation 10 feet. Therefore, relatively shallow excavations may be required, and these excavations may go below the groundwater table. Further review of the planned building foundation elevations and utility depths will be required to determine if active dewatering will be required to construct the planned building and associated improvements. ■ Temporary shoring may be required to complete excavations for partial to one level below-grade basements depending on site constraints. Soldier pile walls are considered to be feasible for temporary excavations where temporary cut slopes are not possible. If temporary cut slopes are feasible, then cuts more than 4 feet in height may be inclined at 1.5H:1V in the fill and alluvium. ■ Due to the presence of alluvium, and potentially liquefiable soil beneath the site, we recommend that the new buildings be supported on augercast piles. Augercast piles are typically the most economical deep foundation to support buildings in the Green River Valley. The piles are typically 18- to 24-inches in diameter and often extend up to 70 to 75 feet below existing grades so they are embedded into the dense, non-liquefiable alluvium. Other deep foundations or ground improvement may be feasible, and these options should be considered on a case-by-case basis when the buildings are better defined. ■ At-grade floors slabs of new buildings may be conventional slabs-on-grade if liquefaction-induced settlements can be tolerated (i.e., building slabs are allowed to settle/crack during a design-level earthquake). However, if these settlements cannot be tolerated, at-grade floor slabs should be designed as structural slabs that span between grade beams that are tied into the deep foundations. If a conventional slab-on-grade is used, preloading will be required to pre-induce settlement resulting from the anticipated slab loading. The thickness and duration of the preload should be determined during the design phase once building configurations and loading are further defined. We recommend that at-grade slabs be underlain by a 6-inch-thick capillary break layer. ■ Below-grade floor slabs of new buildings may need to be designed to resist hydrostatic/uplift pressures since they will likely be below the regional groundwater table. In that case, a structural slab will be required for those portions of the buildings. If, however, it is determined that permanent dewatering September 26, 2024 | Page 5 File No. 9061-019-01 can be utilized, then the below-grade slabs can either be conventional slabs-on-grade or structural slabs, depending on whether or not liquefaction-induced settlement can be tolerated. ■ The existing fill and shallow alluvial deposits encountered in the explorations contain a high percentage of fines and are highly moisture sensitive. We expect that operation of equipment on these soils will be difficult during the wet season (typically October through May) and in wet weather conditions. ■ On-site soils free of organics and organic silt may be used as structural fill during dry weather conditions (typically June through September) provided the material is properly moisture conditioned (likely need to be dried) to achieve proper compaction. Organic soils and organic silt should be removed from the site if encountered during grading or used in landscape areas. Site preparation and earthwork should be completed during the drier months to reduce costs associated with these activities. Imported gravel borrow should be used as structural fill during wet weather conditions and during the wet season (typically October through May). ■ Design of the associated improvements, including parking/hardscape and landscaping areas, should consider estimated site settlement because of the underlying fill and alluvium. In addition to being susceptible to liquefaction, the alluvial soils are compressible and are expected to settle statically under new/increased loading conditions. Static settlements will depend on the thickness of new fill placed. GeoEngineers can provide static settlement estimates once the design has progressed and final site grades are known. These geotechnical issues and other considerations are discussed further and preliminary recommendations pertaining to geotechnical aspects of the project are presented in the following sections. 4.2. Earthquake Engineering We evaluated the site for seismic hazards including liquefaction, lateral spreading, fault rupture, and earthquake-induced landsliding. 4.2.1. Seismicity The Puget Sound area is located near the convergent continental boundary known as the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ), which extends from mid-Vancouver Island to Northern California. The CSZ is the zone where the westward advancing North American Plate is overriding the subducting Juan de Fuca Plate. The interaction of these two plates results in two potential seismic source zones: (1) the Benioff source zone and (2) the CSZ interplate source zone. A third seismic source zone, referred to as the shallow crustal source zone, is associated with the north-south compression resulting from the northerly movement of the Sierra Nevada block of the North American Plate. Shallow crustal earthquakes occur within the North American Plate to depths up to 15 miles. Shallow earthquakes in the Puget Sound region are expected to have durations ranging up to 60 seconds. Four magnitude 7 or greater-known shallow crustal earthquakes have occurred in the last 1,100 years in the Cascadia region; two of these occurred on Vancouver Island and two in Western Washington. The east- west trending Seattle fault zone is mapped approximately 5 to 8 miles north of the site. The Benioff zone is characterized as being capable of generating earthquakes up to magnitude (M) 7.5. The Olympia 1949 (M = 7.1), the Seattle 1965 (M = 6.5) and the Nisqually 2001 (M = 6.8) earthquakes are considered to be Benioff zone earthquakes. The recurrence interval for large earthquakes originating September 26, 2024 | Page 6 File No. 9061-019-01 from the Benioff source zone is believed to be shorter than for the shallow crustal and CSZ source zones; on average, damaging Benioff zone earthquakes in Western Washington occur every 30 years or so. The CSZ is considered as being capable of generating earthquakes of magnitudes 8 to 9. No earthquakes on the CSZ have been instrumentally recorded; however, through the geologic record and historical records of tsunamis in Japan, it is believed that the most recent CSZ event occurred in the year 1700. Recurrence intervals for CSZ interplate earthquakes are thought to be on the order of 400 to 600 years. 4.2.2. 2021 IBC Seismic Design Information The 2021 IBC references the 2016 version of Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (American Society of Civil Engineers [ASCE] 7-16) for the site class and associated design acceleration parameters. Per ASCE 7-16 Section 20.3.1, the site is Site Class F due to the presence of potentially liquefiable soils. Site response analysis is required for Site Class F sites per ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8. However, ASCE 7-16 Section 20.3.1 provides an exception for structures with fundamental periods of vibration less than 0.5 seconds, whereby the site class is permitted to be determined in accordance with Section 20.3 and the corresponding site coefficients determined per Section 11.4.4. Depending on the final configuration of the planned buildings, the fundamental periods of vibration may be more or less than 0.5 seconds. If the fundamental periods of vibration are larger than 0.5 seconds, then site response analyses will be required. If the fundamental periods of vibration are less than 0.5 seconds, then the exception in Section 20.3.1 applies, and prescriptive design acceleration parameters may be used. Based on the subsurface data from our borings, the site is Site Class E. Table 1 provides seismic design parameters for buildings with fundamental periods of vibration less than 0.5 seconds. The parameters in Table 1 may be used provided the equivalent lateral force (ELF) procedure is used for the design and the value of Cs is determined by Eq. (12.8-2) for all values of T, or where (i) the value of Sai is determined by Eq. (15.7-7) for all value of Ti and (ii) the value of the parameter SD1 is replaced with 1.5SD1 in Eq. (15.7-10) and Eq. (15.7-11). GeoEngineers can complete site-specific seismic response analyses if needed. While these analyses are required for buildings with fundamental periods of vibration over 0.5 seconds, they may also provide reduced seismic demands relative to the parameters in Table 1, depending on the structure configurations and site-specific subsurface conditions. TABLE 1. 2021 IBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS 2021 IBC Parameter1 Value Site Class F Short-period mapped MCER spectral response acceleration, SS (g) 1.449 Long-period mapped MCER spectral response acceleration, S1 (g) 0.493 Short Period Site Coefficient, Fa 1.20 Long Period Site Coefficient, Fv 2.21 Short-period Design spectral acceleration adjusted for site class, SDS (g) 1.159 Long-period Design spectral acceleration adjusted for site class, SD1 (g) 0.728 September 26, 2024 | Page 7 File No. 9061-019-01 Notes: 1. Parameters developed based on latitude 47.4617 and longitude -122.2363 using the Applied Technology Council (ATC) Hazards online tool (https://hazards.atcouncil.org/). 4.2.3. Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction refers to the condition by which vibration or shaking of the ground, usually from earthquake forces, results in the development of excess pore pressures in saturated soils with subsequent loss of strength in the deposit of soil so affected. In general, soils that are susceptible to liquefaction include very loose to medium dense clean to silty sands and some silts that are below the water table. The evaluation of liquefaction potential is a complex procedure and is dependent on numerous site parameters, including soil grain size, soil density, site geometry, static stress, and the design ground acceleration. Typically, the liquefaction potential of a site is evaluated by comparing the cyclic stress ratio (CSR), which is the ratio of the cyclic shear stress induced by an earthquake, to the cyclic resistance ratio (CRR), which is the initial effective overburden stress and the soils resistance to liquefaction. We evaluated the liquefaction triggering potential (NCEER 1998, Youd, et al. 2001; Boulanger and Idriss 2014; NCHRP 2007) and liquefaction-induced settlement (Tokimatsu and Seed 1987; Ishihara and Yoshimine 1992) for soil conditions in each of the CPTs and borings that we completed at the site as well as for some of the previous borings. These methods indicate that there is a potential for liquefaction within the upper alluvial soils that are below the groundwater table. The methods described above predict liquefaction-induced free-field ground settlement of the potentially liquefiable zones ranging from approximately 3 to 17 inches across the site for the design-level earthquake. The magnitude of liquefaction-induced ground settlement will vary as a function of the characteristics of the earthquake (earthquake magnitude, location, duration, and intensity) and the soil and groundwater conditions. It is our opinion that the use of deep foundations and/or ground improvement to support building foundations will effectively mitigate the risk of liquefaction-induced settlement for future structures, provided they are designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report or future reports. 4.2.4. Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading is associated with liquefaction and involves lateral displacements of large, surficial blocks of soil as the underlying soil layer liquefies. Lateral spreading can occur on near-level ground as blocks of surface soils displace relative to adjacent blocks. It also occurs as blocks of surface soils are displaced toward a nearby slope or free-face by movement of the underlying liquefied soil. Due to the topography in the immediate site vicinity, it is our opinion that the risk of lateral spreading occurring at the site is low. 4.2.5. Ground Rupture Because of the thickness of Quaternary sediments below the site, the potential for surface fault rupture is considered remote. September 26, 2024 | Page 8 File No. 9061-019-01 4.2.6. Seismic Induced Landslides Given the site topography, it is our opinion that landsliding as a result of strong ground shaking is unlikely at the site. 4.3. Temporary Dewatering Groundwater measured across the site indicates that the regional groundwater table in the vicinity varies seasonally at the site and is near the ground surface during extended periods of wet weather. Because of the planned basements spread across portions of the building footprints, active dewatering may be needed to complete the excavations for the buildings. Active dewatering may also be needed for utilities, depending on the depth. The need for active temporary dewatering should be further evaluated once the depth of the basements and utilities is known and the time of year that earthwork construction is planned. 4.3.1. Dewatering Induced Settlement of Adjacent Improvements Settlement of adjacent buildings, streets, utilities, and other infrastructure caused by increases in effective stress as groundwater levels are lowered by temporary dewatering is possible given that potential groundwater drawdown will occur in the fill and alluvium. Based on the explorations for the site, the soils that are considered to be prone to dewatering-induced settlement consist primarily of the upper fine- grained alluvium and fill, particularly organic-rich soils and peat. During the design phase of the buildings, an assessment of potential settlement impacts to adjacent improvements should be completed taking into consideration the base of excavation elevation, the type of shoring system (if used), the type of dewatering system used, and the soil characteristics in the vicinity. 4.4. Excavation Support We understand that planned below-grade basements for the buildings will require excavations to about Elevation 10 feet. Given the sufficient space at the site and the relatively shallow excavations required to reach this elevation, we anticipate that temporary cut slopes may be used to reach foundation elevations provided that the recommended inclinations are maintained between adjacent structures/walls and the base of the excavation. Cantilever soldier pile or diaphragm-type shoring may be required for certain excavations if site constraints do not allow for temporary cut slopes or if dewatering is found to induce unwanted settlement of adjacent improvements. The need for temporary shoring should be evaluated once information for the buildings (finish floor elevations, footprints, etc.) is known. Temporary cut slope recommendations are provided in Section 4.10.1. 4.5. Augercast Piles Unsuitable soils consisting of fill and alluvium exist below the campus. Based on the explorations completed in and around the campus, the alluvium extends at least 75 feet below existing site grades. Estimated liquefaction-induced settlement from the design-level earthquake will impact the proposed buildings if they are not pile-supported. Static settlement due to compression of the fill and alluvium will also impact the proposed buildings if they are not pile-supported. In our opinion, augercast piles are the preferred foundation support option for the building. Augercast piles are constructed using a continuous-flight, hollow-stem auger attached to a set of leads supported by a crane or installed with a fixed-mast drill rig. The first step in the pile casting process consists of drilling the auger into the ground to the specified tip elevation of the pile. Grout is then pumped through the hollow September 26, 2024 | Page 9 File No. 9061-019-01 stem during steady withdrawal of the auger, replacing the soils on the flights of the auger. The final step is to install a steel reinforcing cage and typically a center bar into the column of fresh grout. One benefit of using augercast piles is that the auger provides support for the soils during the pile installation process, thus eliminating the need for temporary casing or drilling fluid. Augercast piles supporting buildings in the Green River Valley are typically 18- to 24-inches in diameter. Installation of augercast piles produces nominal noise and ground vibrations, which may be beneficial for the project, especially if building construction is sequenced such that the buildings will be constructed at different times. Other deep foundations and ground improvement may be feasible and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for the buildings. Normally, however, augercast piles are the most economical option in the Green River Valley. 4.5.1. Construction Considerations The augercast piles should be installed using a continuous-flight, hollow-stem auger. Given the contrast in stiffness between the fill and upper loose to medium dense alluvium and the underlying dense non- liquefiable alluvium, and the need to develop pile capacity from these soils, it is important that the piles achieve a consistent embedment into the dense alluvium. In order to confirm that the piles are consistently embedded into the dense alluvium, we recommend that the contractor use drilling equipment instrumented to measure and display crowd speed, crowd force, and/or drill pressure during augercast pile installation. These measurements can be used as an indication of the transition from softer fill and alluvium to denser alluvium, which can be used to estimate pile embedment in the dense alluvium. Production piles located in close proximity to the geotechnical explorations completed for this project and previous projects should be installed at the beginning of pile construction to calibrate the typical resistance measured for the fill, upper loose to medium dense alluvium, and lower dense alluvium. This process will provide the required information to determine whether the piles have been installed to an appropriate length and may eliminate the need for static pile load testing. This approach has been used successfully on previous projects in the Puget Sound area that GeoEngineers provided construction observation for. As is standard practice, the pile grout must be pumped under pressure through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. Maintenance of adequate grout pressure at the auger tip is critical to reduce the potential for encroachment of adjacent native soils into the grout column. The rate of withdrawal of the auger must remain constant throughout the installation of the piles in order to reduce the potential for necking of the piles. Failure to maintain a constant rate of withdrawal of the auger should result in immediate rejection of that pile. Reinforcing steel for bending and uplift should be placed in the fresh grout column as soon as possible after withdrawal of the auger. Centering devices should be used to provide concrete cover around the reinforcing steel. The contractor should adhere to a waiting period of at least 12 hours between the installation of piles spaced closer than 8 feet, center-to-center. This waiting period is necessary to avoid disturbing the curing concrete in previously cast piles. Grout pumps must be fitted with a volume-measuring device and pressure gauge so that the volume of grout placed in each pile and the pressure head maintained during pumping can be observed. A minimum grout line pressure of 100 pounds per square inch (psi) should be maintained. The rate of auger withdrawal should be controlled during grouting such that the volume of grout pumped is equal to at least 115 percent September 26, 2024 | Page 10 File No. 9061-019-01 of the theoretical pile volume. A minimum head of 10 feet of grout should be maintained above the auger tip during withdrawal of the auger to maintain a full column of grout and to prevent hole collapse. The geotechnical engineer of record should observe the drilling operations; monitor grout injection procedures; record the volume of grout placed in each pile relative to the calculated volume of the hole; and evaluate the adequacy of individual pile installations. 4.5.2. Axial Capacity Axial pile load capacity at this site is primarily developed from side friction and end bearing in the dense alluvium. Uplift pile capacity will also be developed primarily from side frictional resistance in these soils. Piles in the Green River Valley often extend up to 70 to 75 feet below existing grades so they are embedded into the dense, non-liquefiable alluvium. Axial capacities should be assessed during design phase of the buildings in coordination with the structural engineer. 4.5.3. Lateral Capacity Lateral loads can be resisted by passive soil pressure on the vertical piles and by the passive soil pressures on the pile cap. Because of the potential separation between the pile-supported foundation components and the underlying soil from settlement, base friction along the bottom of the pile cap should not be included in calculations for lateral capacity. Lateral capacities should be assessed during the design phase in coordination with the structural engineer. 4.6. Foundation Drains We recommend perimeter foundation drains be installed around the at-grade portions of the proposed buildings. The perimeter drains should be installed at least 18-inches below the adjacent slab-on-grade elevation. The perimeter drains should be provided with cleanouts and should consist of at least 4- inch- diameter perforated pipe placed on a 4-inch bed of, and surrounded by, 6 inches of drainage material enclosed in a nonwoven geotextile filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N (or approved equivalent). The drainage material should consist of “Gravel Backfill for Drains” per Section 9-03.12(4) of the 2024 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications. We recommend the drainpipe consist of either heavy-wall solid pipe (SDR-35 polyvinyl chloride [PVC], or equal) or rigid corrugated smooth interior polyethylene pipe (ADS N-12, or equal). We recommend against using flexible tubing for footing drainpipes. The perimeter drains should be sloped to drain by gravity, if practicable, to a suitable discharge point, preferably a storm drain. We recommend the cleanouts be covered and placed in flush-mounted utility boxes. Water collected in roof downspout lines must not be routed to the footing drain lines. Below-grade portions of buildings as of now are planned to have a finish floor at about Elevation 10 feet, which means they will likely be below the regional groundwater table, at least for part of the year. Further groundwater monitoring should be completed during the design phase of each building to determine the design groundwater table elevation. Depending on that elevation, the below-grade portions of the building may be required to be designed to resist hydrostatic/uplift pressures. An alternative option may be considered, which could consist of installing below-grade drainage below the groundwater and permanently September 26, 2024 | Page 11 File No. 9061-019-01 dewatering around those below-grade portions of the building. However, as discussed previously, this could have settlement impacts to the surrounding area and will need to be analyzed. 4.7. Floor Slabs 4.7.1. At-Grade Slabs As discussed in Section 4.2.3, the alluvium located beneath the water table is susceptible to liquefaction during the design-level earthquake. Liquefaction-induced free-field ground settlement of these potentially liquefiable soils is estimated to be on the order of 3 to 17 inches during the design-level earthquake. The deep foundations that the buildings will be supported on will effectively mitigate the risk of liquefaction- induced settlement to the superstructure of the buildings, provided the deep foundations are designed correctly. If it is determined that liquefaction-induced settlements can be tolerated (i.e., slabs are allowed to settle/crack during a design-level earthquake), the floor slabs do not need to be designed as structural slabs, and conventional slab-on-grade floors may be used. However, if these settlements cannot be tolerated, the floor slabs should be designed as structural slabs that span between grade beams that are tied into the deep foundations. In the event that conventional slabs-on-grade are used, a preload program will be required to pre-induce the static settlement from the design slab loading. The thickness and duration of the preload will be determined during the design phase once the building configuration and loading are further defined. 4.7.1.1. Subgrade Preparation The exposed subgrade should be evaluated after site grading is complete. Probing should be used to evaluate the subgrade. The exposed soil should be firm and unyielding, and without significant water. Disturbed areas should be recompacted if possible or removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. 4.7.1.2. Design Parameters If conventional slab-on-grade floors are used, we recommend the slab be founded on a 2-foot-thick layer of properly placed and compacted structural fill. For slabs designed as a beam on an elastic foundation, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 75 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for subgrade soils prepared as recommended. The subgrade will require evaluation during construction. If structural slab-on-grade floors are used, they should be structurally connected to grade beams that are tied into deep foundations. A 2-foot-thick layer of properly placed and compacted structural fill is not necessary below structural floor slabs. We recommend that concrete floor slabs (conventional or structural) be underlain by a 6-inch-thick capillary break layer of 1-inch minus clean crushed gravel with negligible sand and silt (WSDOT 9-03.1(4)C, Grading No. 67) should be placed to provide uniform support and form a capillary break beneath the slabs. If water vapor migration through the slabs is objectionable, the capillary break gravel layer should be covered with heavy plastic sheeting at least 10-mil thick to act as a vapor retarder. This will be desirable where the slabs are in occupied spaces or will be surfaced with tile or will be carpeted. It may also be prudent to apply a sealer to the slab to further retard the migration of moisture through the floor. The contractor should be made responsible for maintaining the integrity of the vapor barrier during construction. Additional waterproofing measures that may be needed should be evaluated during design. September 26, 2024 | Page 12 File No. 9061-019-01 4.7.2. Below-Grade Slabs As discussed previously, the below-grade portions of buildings are planned to be located at Elevation 10 feet, which means they will likely be below the regional groundwater table for at least part of the year. If that is the case, the below-grade portions of the building may need to be designed to resist hydrostatic/uplift pressures. In that case, a structural slab will be required for those portions of the buildings. If, however, it is determined that permanent dewatering can be utilized, then the below-grade slabs can either be conventional slabs-on-grade or structural slabs, depending on whether or not liquefaction-induced settlement can be tolerated (as discussed in Section 4.7.1). 4.7.2.1. Design Parameters Conventional below-grade slabs may be designed as discussed in section 4.7.1.2, with the addition of underslab drainage. This can be accomplished by installing a 4-inch-diameter, heavy-wall perforated collector pipe in a shallow trench placed below the capillary break layer. The trench should measure about 1.5 feet wide by 2 feet deep and should be backfilled with clean ⅜-inch pea gravel. Locations of the underslab drains should be coordinated with the civil engineer during design phase of the buildings. For structural below-grade slabs designed to resist hydrostatic/uplift pressures relief drains are recommended to be installed at the design groundwater elevation (should be determined during the design phase) and typically consist of a series of weep holes located along the permanent exterior below-grade wall at a constant elevation. These weep holes are connected to a collector pipe and directed to a suitable discharge point. The benefit of the relief drain system is that it will limit the hydrostatic pressure that the building will need to be designed for and will reduce the risk to the building associated with unanticipated fluctuations in the groundwater table elevation. The design groundwater elevation may be modified based on the structural aspects of the building and location of the floor levels. This may be desirable to keep the relief drain collection pipe from becoming damaged by vehicles in the below-grade parking garage. The ideal location for the collector pipe is typically just below an elevated building diaphragm. The structural slab should be designed to resist the hydrostatic uplift force. The uplift force acting on the proposed structure can be estimated by multiplying the volume of the structure located below the design groundwater elevation, in cubic feet, by the unit weight of water, 62.4 pcf. We assume that resistance to the uplift force will be provided by the weight of the structure. If necessary, tiedown anchors can be used to resist the hydrostatic uplift pressure acting on the structural mat foundation. Tiedown anchors for this application may consist of micropiles. Permanent below-grade walls that extend below the design groundwater table should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures. 4.8. Below-Grade Walls 4.8.1. Permanent Below-Grade Walls Against Temporary Shoring As discussed previously, we anticipate that temporary cut slopes will be utilized to excavate for building basements given the sufficient space at the site. Therefore, temporary shoring may not be needed. If temporary shoring is needed, then lateral earth pressures can be provided for permanent basement walls cast against temporary shoring. This will include seismic and traffic surcharge loads as well as hydrostatic September 26, 2024 | Page 13 File No. 9061-019-01 pressures (if the basements are designed to resist hydrostatic pressures). This should be further evaluated during the design of each building. 4.8.2. Other Cast-in-Place Walls Conventional cast-in-place walls may be necessary for small retaining structures located on-site or for interior building walls where temporary shoring is not used. The lateral soil pressure acting on conventional cast-in-place subsurface walls will depend on the nature, density and configuration of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement that can occur as backfill is placed, and whether hydrostatic pressures are included or not. 4.8.2.1. Walls with Drainage/Permanent Dewatering For walls that are free to yield at the top at least 0.1 percent of the height of the wall, soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as wall stiffness or bracing. Assuming that the walls are backfilled and drainage is provided as outlined in Section 4.8.3, we recommend that yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 35 pcf (triangular distribution), and that non-yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 55 pcf (triangular distribution). For seismic loading conditions, a rectangular earth pressure equal to 7H psf should be added to the active/at-rest pressures. Other surcharge loading should be applied as appropriate. Lateral resistance for conventional cast-in-place walls can be provided by frictional resistance along the base of the wall and passive resistance in front of the wall. Frictional resistance may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.4 applied to vertical dead-load forces. The passive pressure can be estimated using an equivalent fluid density of 300 pcf (triangular distribution) for foundations that are poured directly against/surrounded by properly placed and compacted structural fill and are above the groundwater table. The above soil pressures assume that wall drains will be installed to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls, as discussed in the paragraphs below. 4.8.2.2. Walls without Drainage/Permanent Dewatering If the walls are designed to resist hydrostatic pressures, then we recommend that yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 18 pcf with the addition of the hydrostatic pressure of 62.4 pcf for a total design pressure of about 80 pcf (triangular distribution). Non-yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill should be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 30 pcf with the addition of the hydrostatic pressure of 62.4 pcf for a total design pressure of about 92 pcf (triangular distribution). For seismic loading conditions, a rectangular earth pressure equal to 7H psf should be added to the active/at-rest pressures. Other surcharge loading should be applied as appropriate. Lateral resistance for conventional cast-in-place walls can be provided by frictional resistance along the base of the wall and passive resistance in front of the wall. Frictional resistance may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.4 applied to vertical dead-load forces. The passive buoyant passive pressure can be estimated using an equivalent fluid density of 150 pcf (triangular distribution) for foundations that are poured directly against/surrounded by properly placed and compacted structural fill and are below the groundwater table. September 26, 2024 | Page 14 File No. 9061-019-01 4.8.3. Drainage 4.8.3.1. Permanent Walls Cast Against Temporary Shoring Drainage behind permanent below-grade walls cast against temporary shoring is typically provided using prefabricated vertical drainage board attached to the temporary shoring walls. The prefabricated vertical drainage board should extend down to a couple of feet below the design groundwater table. Weep pipes that extend through the permanent below-grade wall should be installed around the perimeter of the building at the design groundwater elevation. The weep pipes should have a minimum diameter of 2 inches. The weep pipes should be considered as a safety valve that is activated only when groundwater builds up to the weep pipe elevation. The weep pipes should be connected to a collector pipe and directed to a suitable discharge location. The weep pipes should be spaced approximately 20 feet on center or less. Prefabricated vertical drainage material, such as AQUADRAIN 15X, should be used where drainage material is required as full coverage drainage panels located between the temporary shoring wall and the permanent below-grade walls. The drainage material should be installed on the excavation side of the temporary shoring wall with the fabric adjacent to the temporary shoring wall. 4.8.3.2. Other Cast-in-Place Walls Positive drainage should be provided behind cast-in-place retaining walls that are not designed to resist hydrostatic pressures by using free-draining wall drainage material with perforated pipes to discharge the collected water. Wall drainage material may consist of Gravel Backfill for Walls per WSDOT Specification 9- 03.12(2). The zone of wall drainage material should be 2 feet wide and should extend from the base of the wall to within 2 feet of the ground surface. The wall drainage material should be covered with 2 feet of less permeable material, such as the on-site silty sand that is properly moisture-conditioned and compacted. A geotextile separator, such as Mirafi 140N, should be placed between the wall drainage material and native cut or backfill zone and over the top of the wall drainage material prior to backfill being placed. Alternatively, walls may be backfilled with sand and gravel meeting the requirements of Gravel Borrow per WSDOT Specification 9-03.14(1), with the exception that they contain less than 5 percent fines. For this condition, a geotextile separator is not required between the native cut and the backfill, but full face vertical geocomposite drainage board should be installed against the wall and terminate against the drain at the base of the wall. A 4-inch-diameter perforated drain pipe should be installed near the base of the retaining wall and surrounded by a minimum of 6 inches of Gravel Backfill for Drains per Section 9-03.12(4) of the WSDOT Specification. The drainage material should be wrapped with a geotextile separator, such as Mirafi 140N. We recommend using either heavy-wall solid pipe (SDR-35 PVC) or rigid corrugated polyethylene pipe (ADS N-12, or equal). We recommend against using flexible tubing for the wall drain pipe. The pipes should be laid with minimum slopes of one-quarter percent and discharge into the storm water collection system to convey the water off-site. The pipe installations should include a cleanout riser with cover located at the upper end of each pipe run. The cleanouts could be placed in flush-mounted access boxes. Collected downspout water should be routed to appropriate discharge points in separate pipe systems. September 26, 2024 | Page 15 File No. 9061-019-01 4.9. Site Preparation and Earthwork Based on the subsurface soil conditions encountered in the explorations, we expect that the soils at the site may be excavated using conventional construction equipment. The materials anticipated to be encountered in planned excavations include very soft to stiff and loose to medium dense fill and alluvium. The on-site fill and alluvium contain significant fines (particles passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve) and are highly moisture-sensitive and susceptible to disturbance, especially when wet. Ideally, earthwork should be undertaken during extended periods of dry weather (June through September) when the surficial soils will be less susceptible to disturbance and provide better support for construction equipment. Dry weather construction will help reduce earthwork costs and increase the potential for reusing the existing fill and native soils as structural fill. Trafficability on the site is not expected to be difficult during dry weather conditions. However, the fill and native soils will be susceptible to disturbance from construction equipment during wet weather conditions and pumping and rutting of the exposed soils under equipment loads may occur. 4.9.1. Clearing and Site Preparation Construction of the proposed improvements will require clearing and stripping. We expect that there will be site demolition of existing hardscape and utilities. Concrete and asphalt material should be removed from the site along with other construction debris. Areas to be developed or graded should be cleared of surface and subsurface deleterious matter including debris, shrubs, trees and associated stumps and roots. Graded areas should be stripped of organic materials, roots, and topsoil. Based on our explorations, we estimate that stripping depths will be on the order of 6 inches to remove topsoil within existing field and lawn areas. Deeper stripping depths and grubbing will be required where larger trees and denser vegetation exist on the site. The stripped organic soils can be stockpiled and used later for landscaping purposes or may be spread over disturbed areas following completion of grading. If spread out, the organic strippings should be placed in a layer less than 1-foot-thick, should not be placed on slopes greater than 3H:1V (horizontal to vertical) and should be track-rolled to a uniformly compacted condition. Materials that cannot be used for landscaping should be removed from the project site. 4.9.2. Sedimentation and Erosion Control In our opinion, the erosion potential of the on-site soils is low. Construction activities including stripping and grading will expose soils to the erosional effects of wind and water. The amount and potential impacts of erosion are partly related to the time of year that construction actually occurs. Wet weather construction will increase the amount and extent of erosion and potential sedimentation. Effective methods of erosion control at construction sites include efficient surface water management, minimization of the size of disturbed areas, and erosion-resistant slope covers. Erosion and sedimentation control measures should include proper channeling of surface water runoff into lined diversion ditches that incorporate energy dissipaters, and use of straw bales and geotextile silt fences, as appropriate. Surface water must not be directed toward the top of slopes or onto slopes. September 26, 2024 | Page 16 File No. 9061-019-01 Management of surface water runoff during construction is the responsibility of the contractor. Grading must be completed in a manner that avoids concentrated runoff onto fill areas, cut or fill slopes, natural slopes, or other erosion-sensitive areas. Erosion and sedimentation control measures may be implemented by using a combination of interceptor swales, straw bale barriers, silt fences and straw mulch for temporary erosion protection of exposed soils. Disturbed areas should be finish graded and seeded as soon as practicable to reduce the risk of erosion. Erosion and sedimentation control measures should be installed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the approved project plans and specifications. 4.9.2.1. Erosion Control To reduce potential erosion and to help establish permanent vegetation on existing and newly created slopes, we recommend that erosion protection of the slopes include hydroseeding in conjunction with installation of an erosion control blanket. We recommend that the erosion control blanket be staked to disturbed slopes to help reduce the risk of erosion during wet work periods and after the work is completed. We recommend that the erosion control blanket consist of Curlex 1, manufactured by American Excelsior Company, or SC150, manufactured by North American Green. We recommend that the erosion control blanket be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and that the installation and stapling methods be observed during construction. Hydroseeding and installation of the erosion control blanket should occur as soon as possible and prior to the wet winter months. Hydroseeding should occur to allow proper germination before the winter. We also recommend that the hydroseed mix include a tackifier to increase adhesion between the hydroseed mixture and the fine-grained native soils. 4.9.3. Static Settlement Based on our experience in the site vicinity and on similar projects, as well as the results of the recently completed and existing explorations in the site vicinity, there is a potential for large total and differential static settlements at the site. The upper fine-grained (silt and clay) alluvium, peat and organic-rich soils that underly the site are highly compressible and have variable depths and thicknesses. These soils experience primary consolidation and secondary compression under new applied loads (such as new buildings or placement of fill) or from changes in effective stress. Peat settles differently than silt and clay. The peat compresses not only in response to applied surface loads (such as new fill) or when stress conditions change but also as a result of decaying organic matter located within it. Clay will consolidate when new loads are applied or when stress conditions change, such as fluctuating water levels which impact the effective stresses. The rate at which the organic material decays within the peat depends on numerous factors, including but not limited to the depth below the ground surface, the amount of oxygen the material is exposed to, and whether the material is below the groundwater table. Primary consolidation begins when a load is applied and continues as excess pore pressures that are caused because of the applied load slowly dissipate over time. After primary consolidation is completed, which can take years, secondary compression occurs. Secondary compression is deformation of soil due September 26, 2024 | Page 17 File No. 9061-019-01 to the reorientation of the soil structure and typically occurs in fine-grained and organic soils. Secondary compression occurs at a much slower rate than primary consolidation and can take decades to fully settle. Existing grades will be changed around the building footprints and may be changed in other areas for hardscape and other improvements. The amount of settlement will depend on factors such as the loading from building elements, thickness of new fill, thickness of the compressible layers, and groundwater levels at the time the new loads are implemented. An assessment of potential static settlement impacts resulting from additional loads or changing groundwater conditions (i.e. temporary dewatering) should be completed when design progresses. 4.9.4. Subgrade Preparation Prior to placing new fills, pavement base course materials or structural fill below floor slabs, subgrade areas should be evaluated by proof rolling or probing to locate zones of soft or pumping soils. Prior to proofrolling or probing, unsuitable soils should be removed from below building footprints and new hardscape areas. Proofrolling can be completed using a piece of heavy tire-mounted equipment such as a loaded dump truck. During wet weather, the exposed subgrade areas should be probed to determine the extent of soft soils. If soft or pumping soils are observed, they should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Once approved, the subgrade areas should be recompacted to a firm condition, if possible. The degree of compaction that can be achieved will depend on when construction is performed. If the work is performed during dry weather conditions, we recommend that subgrade areas be recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (MDD) obtained using the ASTM International (ASTM) D 1557 test procedure (modified Proctor). If the work is performed during wet weather conditions, it may not be possible to recompact the subgrade to 95 percent of the MDD. In this case, we recommend that the subgrade be compacted to the extent possible without causing undue weaving or pumping of the subgrade soils. Subgrade disturbance or deterioration could occur if the subgrade is wet and cannot be dried. If the subgrade deteriorates during compaction or while being subjected to construction traffic, it may become necessary to modify the compaction criteria or methods. Site soils contain significant fines content (silt/clay) and will be highly sensitive and susceptible to moisture and equipment loads. Once existing pavement and vegetation are removed, the exposed subgrade soils can deteriorate rapidly in wet weather and under equipment loads. The contractor should take necessary measures to prevent site subgrade soils from becoming disturbed or unstable. 4.9.5. Structural Fill All fill, whether existing on-site soils or imported soil, that will support floor slabs, pavement areas or foundations, or be placed in utility trenches are classified as structural fill and should generally meet the criteria for structural fill presented below. Structural fill soils should be free of organic matter, debris, man- made contaminants, and other deleterious materials, with no individual particles larger than 4 inches in the greatest dimension. The suitability of soil for use as structural fill depends on its gradation and moisture content. 4.9.5.1. Materials Structural fill material quality varies depending upon its use as described below: September 26, 2024 | Page 18 File No. 9061-019-01 ■ Structural fill placed below foundations, floor slabs, or as subbase material below pavement areas should meet the criteria for gravel borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(1) of the 2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications. ■ Structural fill placed to raise site grades or to backfill utility trenches should meet the criteria for common borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(3) of the 2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications during dry weather conditions (typically June through September). Common borrow materials are highly moisture sensitive. For wet weather construction (October through May), structural fill placed to raise site grades or in utility trenches should meet the criteria for gravel borrow as described in Section 9-03.14(1) of the 2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications, except that the fines content (material passing the US No. 200 sieve) should not exceed 5 percent. ■ Structural fill placed immediately outside of below-grade walls (drainage zone) should consist of Gravel Backfill for walls in conformance with Section 9-03.12(2) of the 2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Alternatively, walls may be backfilled with sand and gravel meeting the requirements of Gravel Borrow per WSDOT Specification 9-03.14(1), with the exception that they contain less than 5 percent fines. For this condition, a geotextile separator is not required between the native cut and the backfill, but full face vertical geocomposite drainage board should be installed against the wall and terminate against the drain at the base of the wall. ■ Structural fill placed around footing drainpipes should conform to Gravel Backfill for Drains per Section 9-03.12(4) of the 2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications. ■ Structural fill placed as crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) below pavements should conform to Section 9-03.9(3) of the 2023 WSDOT Standard Specifications. ■ Structural fill placed as capillary break below slabs should consist of 1-inch minus clean crushed gravel with negligible sand or silt in conformance with Section 9-03.1(4)C, grading No. 67 of the 2023 WSDOT Standard Specifications. ■ Utility pipe bedding should conform to Section 9-03.12(3) of the 2023 WSDOT Standard Specifications unless required otherwise by the civil engineer. ■ Structural fill placed in utility trenches within the City of Renton right-of-way should meet the City’s requirements for trench backfill. We recommend that the suitability of structural fill soil from proposed borrow sources be evaluated by a representative of our firm before the earthwork contractor begins transporting the soil to the site. 4.9.5.2. Reuse of On-site Soils The existing fill and native soils contain a high percentage of fines and will be sensitive to changes in moisture content and difficult to handle and compact during wet weather. Portions of the on-site soils are expected to be suitable for structural fill, provided the work is completed during the normally dry season (June through September) and that the soil can be properly moisture conditioned. On-site soils with significant debris, large particles (greater than 4 inches in largest dimension), or organic matter, including organic silt and peat soils, should not be used as structural fill. It will be necessary to import Gravel Borrow to achieve adequate compaction during wet weather construction. Imported structural fill consisting of Gravel Borrow should be planned for this project unless the earthwork takes place during the normally dry season. September 26, 2024 | Page 19 File No. 9061-019-01 The contractor should plan to cover and maintain all fill stockpiles with plastic sheeting if they will be used as structural fill. The reuse of on-site soils is highly dependent on the skill of the contractor and schedule, and we will work with the design team and contractor to maximize the reuse of on-site soils during the wet and dry seasons. 4.9.5.3. Fill Placement and Compaction Criteria Structural fill should be mechanically compacted to a firm condition. Structural fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness if using heavy compactors and 6 inches if using hand-operated compaction equipment. The actual lift thickness will be dependent on the structural fill material used and the type and size of compaction equipment. Each lift should be moisture conditioned to within about 3 percent of the optimum moisture content and compacted to the specified density before placing subsequent lifts. Compaction of all structural fill at the site should be in accordance with the ASTM D 1557 (modified proctor) test method. Structural fill should be compacted to the following criteria: ■ Structural fill placed below floor slabs and foundations, and against foundations, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD. ■ Structural fill placed behind below-grade walls should be compacted to between 90 to 92 percent of the MDD within 5 feet of the wall. Care should be taken when compacting fill near the face of below- grade walls to avoid over-compaction and hence overstressing of the walls. Hand-operated compactors should be used within 5 feet behind the wall. Backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD beyond 5 feet of the walls. The contractor should keep all heavy construction equipment away from the top of retaining walls at a distance equal to half the height of the wall, or at least 5 feet, whichever is greater. ■ Structural fill in new pavement and hardscape areas, including utility trench backfill, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the MDD, except that the upper 2 feet of fill below final subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD. However, the compaction criteria for trench backfill within the City of Renton right-of-way should be in accordance with the City requirements. ■ Structural fill placed as crushed surfacing base course below pavements should be compacted to 95 percent of the MDD. ■ Non-structural fill, such as fill placed in landscape areas and fill to form permanent fill slopes, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the MDD. An adequate number of in-place moisture and density tests should be performed during the placement and compaction of structural fill to evaluate whether the specified degree of compaction is being achieved. 4.9.6. Weather Considerations The on-site soils and common borrow contain a sufficient percentage of fines (silt and clay) to be highly moisture sensitive. When the moisture content of these soils is more than a few percent above the optimum moisture content, these soils become muddy and unstable, operation of equipment on these soils will be difficult and it will be difficult or impossible to meet the required compaction criteria. Additionally, disturbance of near-surface soils should be expected if earthwork is completed during periods of wet weather. It will be preferable to schedule site preparation and earthwork activities during periods of dry weather when the soils will: (1) be less susceptible to disturbance, (2) provide better support for construction equipment, and (3) be more likely to meet the required compaction criteria. September 26, 2024 | Page 20 File No. 9061-019-01 The wet weather season generally begins in October and continues through May in western Washington; however, periods of wet weather may occur during any month of the year. The optimum earthwork period for these types of soils is typically June through September. For earthwork activities during wet weather, we recommend that the following steps be taken: ■ Structural fill placed during the wet season or during periods of wet weather should consist of imported gravel borrow with less than 5 percent fines (material passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve). ■ The ground surface in and around the work area should be sloped so that surface water is directed away from the work area. ■ The ground surface should be graded so that areas of ponded water do not develop. ■ Measures should be taken by the contractor to prevent surface water from collecting in excavations and trenches. Measures should be implemented to remove surface water from the work area. Surface water must not be directed towards slopes and we recommend that storm water drainage ditches be constructed where needed along the crest of slopes to prevent uncontrolled surface water runoff. ■ Earthwork activities should not take place during periods of moderate to heavy precipitation. ■ Slopes with exposed soils should be covered with plastic sheeting. ■ The contractor should take necessary measures to prevent on-site soils and soils to be used as fill from becoming wet or unstable. These measures may include the use of plastic sheeting, sumps with pumps, and grading. The site soils should not be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture. Sealing the surficial soils by rolling with a smooth-drum roller prior to periods of precipitation will help reduce the extent that these soils become wet or unstable. ■ The contractor should cover all soil stockpiles that will be used as structural fill with plastic sheeting. ■ Construction activities should be scheduled so that the length of time that soils are left exposed to moisture is reduced to the extent practical. 4.10. Excavations and Permanent Slopes The stability of open-cut slopes is a function of soil type, groundwater seepage, slope inclination, slope height and nearby surface loads. The use of inadequately designed open cuts could impact the stability of adjacent work areas and existing utilities, and endanger personnel. The contractor performing the work has the primary responsibility for protection of workers and adjacent improvements. In our opinion, the contractor will be in the best position to observe subsurface conditions continuously throughout the construction process and to respond to variable soil and groundwater conditions. Therefore, the contractor should have the primary responsibility for deciding whether or not to use open cut slopes for much of the excavations rather than some form of temporary excavation support, and for establishing the safe inclination of the cut slope. Acceptable slope inclinations for utilities and ancillary excavations should be determined during construction. Because of the diversity of construction techniques and available shoring systems, the design of temporary shoring is most appropriately left up to the contractor proposing to complete the installation. Temporary cut slopes and shoring must comply with the provisions of Title 296, Washington Administrative Code (WAC), Part N, “Excavation, Trenching and Shoring.” September 26, 2024 | Page 21 File No. 9061-019-01 Because the contractor has control of the construction operations, the contractor should be made responsible for the stability of cut slopes, as well as the safety of the excavations. The contractor should take all necessary steps to ensure the safety of the workers near the slopes. 4.10.1. Temporary Cut Slopes For planning purposes, temporary unsupported cut slopes more than 4 feet high may be inclined at 1.5H:1V in the fill and alluvium. This slope inclination may need to be flattened by the contractor if significant caving/sloughing or groundwater seepage occurs. For open cuts at the site, we recommend that: ■ No traffic, construction equipment, stockpiles, or building supplies be allowed at the top of cut slopes within a distance of at least 5 feet from the top of the cut; ■ The excavation does not encroach on a 1H:1V influence line projected down from the edges of nearby or planned foundation elements; ■ Exposed soil along the slope be protected from surface erosion using waterproof tarps or plastic sheeting; ■ Construction activities be scheduled so that the length of time the temporary cut is left open is reduced to the extent practicable; ■ Erosion control measures be implemented as appropriate such that runoff from the site is reduced to the extent practicable; ■ Surface water be diverted away from the excavation; and ■ The general condition of the slopes be observed periodically by GeoEngineers to confirm adequate stability. 4.10.2. Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes Permanent slopes may be constructed at inclinations of 2H:1V or flatter. Fill to create permanent slopes should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the MDD. To achieve uniform compaction, we recommend that fill slopes be slightly overbuilt (2 to 3 feet) and cut back to expose well-compacted fill. To reduce erosion, newly constructed slopes and disturbed existing slopes should be planted or hydroseeded shortly after completion of grading. Until the vegetation is established, some sloughing and raveling of the slopes should be expected. This may necessitate localized repairs and reseeding. Temporary covering, such as clear heavy plastic sheeting, or erosion control blankets (such as American Excelsior Curlex 1 or North American Green SC150) could be used to protect the slopes during periods of rainfall. 4.11. Pavement Recommendations 4.11.1. Subgrade Preparation We recommend the subgrade soils in new pavement areas be prepared and evaluated as described in Section 4.9. If the exposed subgrade soils are loose or soft, it may be necessary to excavate localized areas and replace them with structural fill or gravel base course. Pavement subgrade conditions should be observed during construction and prior to placing the subbase materials in order to evaluate the presence of zones of unsuitable subgrade soils and the need for over-excavation and replacement of these zones. September 26, 2024 | Page 22 File No. 9061-019-01 4.11.2. New Hot Mix Asphalt Pavement In light-duty pavement areas (e.g., automobile parking or trails), we recommend a pavement section consisting of at least a 3-inch thickness of ½-inch hot mix asphalt (HMA) (PG 58-22) per WSDOT Sections 5-04 and 9-03, over a 4-inch thickness of densely compacted crushed surfacing base course per WSDOT Section 9-03.9(3). In heavy-duty pavement areas, we recommend a pavement section consisting of at least a 4-inch thickness of ½-inch HMA (PG 58-22) over a 6-inch thickness of densely compacted CSBC. The base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD obtained using ASTM D 1557. We recommend that proof rolling of the subgrade and compacted base course be observed by a representative from our firm prior to paving. Soft or yielding zones observed during proof rolling may require over-excavation and replacement with compacted structural fill. The pavement sections recommended above are based on our experience. Thicker asphalt sections may be needed based on the actual traffic data, bus or truck loads and intended use. All paved and landscaped areas should be graded so that surface drainage is directed to appropriate catch basins. 4.11.3. Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Portland cement concrete (PCC) sections may be considered for areas where concentrated heavy loads may occur. We recommend that these pavements consist of at least 6 inches of PCC over 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course. A thicker concrete section may be needed based on the actual load data for use of the area. If the concrete pavement will have doweled joints, we recommend that the concrete thickness be increased by an amount equal to the diameter of the dowels. The base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the MDD. We recommend PCC pavements incorporate construction joints and/or crack control joints spaced at maximum distances of 12 feet apart, center-to-center, in both the longitudinal and transverse directions. Crack control joints may be created by placing an insert or groove into the fresh concrete surface during finishing, or by saw cutting the concrete after it has initially been set-up. We recommend the depth of the crack control joints be approximately one-fourth the thickness of the concrete; or about 1½ inches deep for the recommended concrete thickness of 6 inches. We also recommend the crack control joints be sealed with an appropriate sealant to help restrict water infiltration into the joints. 4.12. Infiltration Considerations We evaluated on-site infiltration feasibility in accordance with the 2021 King County Stormwater Manual. Our recently completed and existing explorations, observations of the subsurface conditions, geologic mapping, and laboratory test results were reviewed. Very soft to medium stiff fine-grained fill and native soils were encountered near the surface in a majority of explorations completed at the site. The native fine- grained soils and fill typically have fine contents (silt and clay) ranging from 61 to 93 percent. Groundwater was observed at depths ranging from about 6 to 17 feet below the ground surface in the recently completed explorations, which corresponds to approximately Elevation 0 to 11 feet. In previous studies completed around the campus, groundwater was observed at depths ranging from about 2 to 7½ feet below the ground surface, which corresponds to about Elevation 11 to 16 feet. Per the Stormwater Manual, we understand that a minimum vertical separation of 3 feet is required between the bottom of planned infiltration facilities and hydraulically restrictive material or the seasonal high groundwater level. Based on the depth of groundwater observed at the site, and the presence of September 26, 2024 | Page 23 File No. 9061-019-01 hydraulically restrictive soils (high silt and clay content) near the ground surface in a majority of the explorations, it is our opinion that shallow stormwater infiltration facilities will be difficult and may not be feasible for development of the site. Further evaluation should be completed when design of improvements has progressed. 4.13. Recommended Additional Geotechnical Services Throughout this report, recommendations are provided where we consider additional geotechnical services to be appropriate. These additional services are summarized below: ■ GeoEngineers will complete final geotechnical reports for the buildings during design phases of the buildings. Additional subsurface explorations may be required to better characterize the subsurface soils for field design and settlement analysis during design. ■ GeoEngineers should be retained to review the project plans and specifications when complete to confirm that our design recommendations have been implemented as intended, as required by the City of Renton. ■ During construction, GeoEngineers should observe stripping and grading, observe placement and compaction of structural fill across the site including utility trench backfill, observe augercast pile installation, observe temporary shoring installation (if used), observe overexcavation of unsuitable soils, observe and evaluate the suitability of wall, foundation, and slab subgrades, evaluate temporary and permanent slope conditions, observe installation of subsurface drainage measures, evaluate the suitability of pavement subgrades, and provide a summary letter of our construction observation services. The purposes of GeoEngineers’ construction phase services are to confirm that the subsurface conditions are consistent with those observed in the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities are completed in accordance with our recommendations, and other reasons described in Appendix D, Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use. 5.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by Unico Properties, LLC and other members of the project team for the EIS work associated with the Longacres Campus Master Plan. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in the field of geotechnical engineering in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. Any electronic form, facsimile, or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Please refer to Appendix D, titled Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use, for additional information pertaining to use of this report. September 26, 2024 | Page 24 File No. 9061-019-01 6.0 REFERENCES Applied Technology Council, “Hazards by Location” accessed via: https://hazards.atcouncil.org/#/. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16, 2016, “Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures.” Booth, D.B, Troost, K.A,, and Wisher, A. P. 2007. “Geologic Map of King County.” Cetin, K.O., H.T. Bulge, J. Wu, A.M. Kammerer, and R.B. Seed (2009) “Probabilistic Model for the Assessment of Cyclically Induced Reconsolidation (Volumetric) Settlement.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 135(3), pp. 387-398. GeoEngineers, 1991. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 1991. “Report, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 1992. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Customer Services Training Center, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 1997. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing BCAG, Headquarters Building 25- 20, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 2013. “Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing 25-20 Parking Lot Addition, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 2022. “Geotechnical Engineering Services, Seattle Sounders Training Facility, Renton, Washington” GeoEngineers, 2023. “Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Services, AC-RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel, Renton, Washington” Idriss, I. M., and Boulanger, R. W. (2008). Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. Monograph MNO-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 261 pp. Idriss, I.M., 2014. “An NGA-West2 empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 1155-1177. Idriss, I.M., and R.W. Boulanger 2014. “Soil Liquefaction during Earthquakes.” Earthquake Engineering Research Institute MNO-12. International Code Council, 2021, “International Building Code.” Ishihara, K., and Yoshimine, M., 1992. “Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes,” Soils and Foundations, 32(1), pp. 173-188. September 26, 2024 | Page 25 File No. 9061-019-01 Landau Associates, 2008, “Report, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Boeing Longacres, Renton, Washington.” Landau Associates, 2021, “Report, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington.” Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2024, “Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction.” Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Geotechnical Design Manual, 2022. Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M., 2001. “Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(4), pp. 297-313. FI G U R E S OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OHPx OHPx X X OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx OHTx OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x O H P x O H P x O H P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OHPx OHP x OHPx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx X X X X X X X X X X X X X SS x SS x SS x SS x SSx SSx SSx S S x S S x S S x SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SS x SS x SSx SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x S D x S D x S D x S D x S D x S D x SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SDxSDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x S D x SDx S D x S D x SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x S D x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx S D x SDx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SD x 2 4 3 6 5 7 8 9 1 12 10 11 15 16 405 TP-3 (1997) TP-4 (1997)TP-5 (1997) TP-6 (1997)TP-7 (1997)TP-8 (1997) TP-9 (1997) TP-10 (1997) TP-11 (1997) TP-12 (1997) TP-13 (1997) TP-14 (1997) TP-15 (1997) TP-16 (1997) TP-17 (1997) CPT-1 (1997) CPT-2 (1997) CPT-3 (1997)CPT-4 (1997) CPT-5 (1997) CPT-6 (1997) CPT-7 (1997)B-20 (1997) B-21 (1997) MW-1 (1991) B-2 (1991)MW-3 (1991) B-5 (1991) B-6 (1991) B-7 (1991) B-8 (1991) B-9 (1991) B-10 (1991) MW-11 (1991) MW-12 (1991) B-13 (1991) B-14 (1991)B-15 (1991) MW-16 (1991) B-17 (1991) MW-20 (1991)MW-21 (1991) MW-22 (1991) MW-23 (1991)MW-24 (1991) MW-25 (1991) MW-26 (1991) MW-27 (1991) MW-28 (1991) MW-29 (1991) MW-30 (1991) MW-32 (1991) MW-33 (1991) MW-34 (1991) B-35 (1991) MW-36 (1991) MW-37 (1991) MW-38 (1992) MW-39 (1992) TP-1 (1991) TP-2 (1991) TP-3 (1991) TP-4 (1991) TP-5 (1991) HH-1 (1992) HH-2 (1992) HH-3 (1992) HH-4 (1992) CPT-1 (2022) CPT-2 (2022) CPT-3 (2022)CPT-4 (2022) CPT-5 (2022) CPT-6 (2022)CPT-7 (2022) CPT-8 (2022) CPT-9 (2022) CPT-10 (2022) CPT-11 (2022) CPT-12 (2022) CPT-13 (2022) CPT-14 (2022) CPT-15 (2022) CPT-16 (2022) CPT-17 (2022) B-1 (2022) B-2 (2022) B-3 (2022) B-4 (2022) B-5 (2022) B-6 (2022) B-7 (2022) B-8 (2022) B-9 (2022) B-10 (2022) B-11 (2022) TP-1 (2022) TP-2 (2022) TP-3 (2022) TP-4 (2022) TP-1 (2013) TP-2 (2013) TP-3 (2013) TP-4 (2013) TP-5 (2013) TP-6 (2013) TP-7 (2013) TP-8 (2013) GEI-1 (2023) GEI-2 (2023) GEI-3 (2023) GEI-4 (2023) GEI-5 (2023) GEI-6 (2023) GEI-1-24 GEI-2-24 GEI-3-24 GEI-4-24 GEI-5-24 GEI-6-24 GEI-7-24 CPT-1-24 CPT-2-24 CPT-3-24 CPT-4-24 GEI-8-24 GEI-9-24 CPT-5-24 CPT-6-24 SW 16th St Oa k e s d a l e A v e S W SW 27th St Lo n g a c r e s W a y S 158th St BN S F Figure 2 Overall Site Plan 300 P: \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ C A D \ 0 1 \ G e o t e c h \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 _ F 0 2 _ O v e r a l l S i t e P l a n . d w g 2 D a t e E x p o r t e d : 9/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 4 8 : 3 2 A M - b y Li s a W i t k o w s k i Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, WA Source(s): ·Aerial from Bing ·Designs from Coughlin, Porter, Lundeen dated 3/1/2024. Coordinate System: Washington State Plane, North Zone, NAD83, US Foot Disclaimer: This figure was created for a specific purpose and project.  Any use of this figure for any other project or purpose shall be at the user's sole risk and without liability to GeoEngineers.  The locations of features shown may be approximate.  GeoEngineers makes no warranty or representation as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the figure, or data contained therein.  The file containing this figure is a copy of a master document, the original of which is retained by GeoEngineers and is the official document of record.Feet 0 N Legend Area A Area B Area C B-1 Historic Boring MW-1 Historic Monitoring Well TP-1 Historic Test Pit HH-1 Historic Hand Hole Historic Cone Penetrometer Test GEI-1-24 Proposed Boring by GeoEngineers, 2024 CPT-1-24 Proposed Cone Penetrometer Test by GeoEngineers CPT - 1 W x Wx Wx W x W x W x W x X X X XX O H P x O H P x O H P x O H P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OHPx OHPx OHP x OHP x OHPx OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx X X X X X X X X X X X SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSS x SDx SDx S D x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SS x SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SSx SSx SDx SSx SSx SSx SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SDx SDx SDx SSx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx S D x S D x S D x S D x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x Wx W x W x W x Wx W x W x W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx SDx SDx S D x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x S D x SDx SD x S D x SD x SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x 2 1 405 MW-1 (1991) B-2 (1991)MW-3 (1991) B-5 (1991)B-6 (1991)MW-27 (1991) MW-28 (1991) MW-29 (1991) MW-34 (1991) MW-38 (1992) MW-39 (1992) TP-1 (1991) HH-1 (1992) HH-2 (1992) HH-3 (1992) HH-4 (1992) GEI-1 (2023) GEI-2 (2023) GEI-3 (2023) GEI-4 (2023) GEI-5 (2023) GEI-6 (2023) GEI-1-24 GEI-2-24 CPT-1-24 CPT-2-24 CPT-3-24 GEI-9-24 Lon g a c r e s W a y Oa k e s d a l e A v e S W BN S F SW 16th St Figure 3 Site Plan - Area A N N P: \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ C A D \ 0 1 \ G e o t e c h \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 _ F 0 3 - F 0 5 _ S i t e P l a n . d w g 3 D a t e E x p o r t e d : 9/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 4 8 : 2 9 A M - b y Li s a W i t k o w s k i 150 Source(s): ·Aerial from Bing ·Designs from Coughlin, Porter, Lundeen dated 3/1/2024. Coordinate System: Washington State Plane, North Zone, NAD83, US Foot Disclaimer: This figure was created for a specific purpose and project.  Any use of this figure for any other project or purpose shall be at the user's sole risk and without liability to GeoEngineers.  The locations of features shown may be approximate.  GeoEngineers makes no warranty or representation as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the figure, or data contained therein.  The file containing this figure is a copy of a master document, the original of which is retained by GeoEngineers and is the official document of record.Feet 0 N Legend GEI-1-24 Proposed Boring by GeoEngineers, 2024 B-1 Historic Boring MW-1 Historic Monitoring Well TP-1 Historic Test Pit CPT-1-24 Proposed Cone Penetrometer Test by GeoEngineers HH-1 Historic Hand Hole CPT-1 Historic Cone Penetrometer Test Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, WA OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x X O H P x O H P x O H P x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SS x SSx S S x S S x S S x S S x S S x S S x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x S D x S D x S D x S D x S D x SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x S D x SDx S D x S D x SDx S D x S D x S D x S D x S D x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx S D x S D x S D x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x W x W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx S D x SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x S D x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x S D x S D x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x S D x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx S D x SD x SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SD x SD x 4 3 5 12 15 16 Lo n g a c r e s W a y Oa k e s d a l e A v e S W TP-3 (1997) TP-4 (1997) TP-5 (1997) TP-6 (1997)TP-7 (1997)TP-8 (1997) TP-9 (1997) TP-10 (1997) TP-11 (1997) TP-12 (1997) TP-13 (1997) TP-14 (1997) TP-15 (1997) TP-16 (1997) TP-17 (1997) CPT-1 (1997)CPT-2 (1997) CPT-3 (1997) CPT-4 (1997) CPT-5 (1997)CPT-6 (1997) CPT-7 (1997) B-20 (1997)B-21 (1997) B-7 (1991) B-8 (1991) B-9 (1991) B-10 (1991) MW-20 (1991) MW-21 (1991) MW-22 (1991) MW-23 (1991) MW-24 (1991) MW-25 (1991) MW-26 (1991)MW-32 (1991) MW-33 (1991) B-35 (1991) MW-36 (1991) MW-37 (1991) TP-2 (1991) TP-3 (1991) TP-4 (1991) TP-5 (1991) CPT-1 (2022)CPT-2 (2022) CPT-3 (2022) CPT-4 (2022) CPT-5 (2022) CPT-6 (2022)CPT-7 (2022) CPT-8 (2022) CPT-9 (2022) CPT-10 (2022) CPT-11 (2022) CPT-12 (2022) B-1 (2022) B-2 (2022) B-5 (2022) B-6 (2022) B-7 (2022) B-9 (2022) B-10 (2022) TP-1 (2022) TP-2 (2022) TP-1 (2013) TP-2 (2013) TP-3 (2013) TP-4 (2013) TP-5 (2013) TP-6 (2013) TP-7 (2013) TP-8 (2013) GEI-3-24 GEI-4-24 GEI-5-24 GEI-6-24 CPT-4-24 GEI-8-24 CPT-5-24 CPT-6-24 150 Source(s): ·Aerial from Bing ·Designs from Coughlin, Porter, Lundeen dated 3/1/2024. Coordinate System: Washington State Plane, North Zone, NAD83, US Foot Disclaimer: This figure was created for a specific purpose and project.  Any use of this figure for any other project or purpose shall be at the user's sole risk and without liability to GeoEngineers.  The locations of features shown may be approximate.  GeoEngineers makes no warranty or representation as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the figure, or data contained therein.  The file containing this figure is a copy of a master document, the original of which is retained by GeoEngineers and is the official document of record.Feet 0 N Figure 4 Site Plan - Area B N N P: \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ C A D \ 0 1 \ G e o t e c h \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 _ F 0 3 - F 0 5 _ S i t e P l a n . d w g 4 D a t e E x p o r t e d : 9/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 4 8 : 2 9 A M - b y Li s a W i t k o w s k i Legend GEI-1-24 Proposed Boring by GeoEngineers, 2024 B-1 Historic Boring MW-1 Historic Monitoring Well TP-1 Historic Test Pit CPT-1-24 Proposed Cone Penetrometer Test by GeoEngineers HH-1 Historic Hand Hole CPT-1 Historic Cone Penetrometer Test Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, WA OH P x OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHTx OHTx OHTx OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x OH P x SDx SD x SD x SDx SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x SDx SSx SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x SS x S D x W x W x Wx Wx Wx Wx SDx SD x SDx SD x SDx SD x SD x SDx SD x SD x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx SD x SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SD x SD x SD x SD x SDx 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 MW-11 (1991) MW-12 (1991) B-13 (1991) B-14 (1991) B-15 (1991) MW-16 (1991) B-17 (1991) MW-30 (1991) CPT-13 (2022)CPT-14 (2022) CPT-15 (2022) CPT-16 (2022) CPT-17 (2022) B-3 (2022) B-4 (2022) B-8 (2022) B-11 (2022) TP-3 (2022) TP-4 (2022) GEI-7-24 Lo n g a c r e s W a y Oa k e s d a l e A v e S W SW 27th St 150 Source(s): ·Aerial from Bing ·Designs from Coughlin, Porter, Lundeen dated 3/1/2024. Coordinate System: Washington State Plane, North Zone, NAD83, US Foot Disclaimer: This figure was created for a specific purpose and project.  Any use of this figure for any other project or purpose shall be at the user's sole risk and without liability to GeoEngineers.  The locations of features shown may be approximate.  GeoEngineers makes no warranty or representation as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the figure, or data contained therein.  The file containing this figure is a copy of a master document, the original of which is retained by GeoEngineers and is the official document of record.Feet 0 N Figure 5 Site Plan - Area C N N P: \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ C A D \ 0 1 \ G e o t e c h \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 _ F 0 3 - F 0 5 _ S i t e P l a n . d w g 5 D a t e E x p o r t e d : 9/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 4 8 : 2 9 A M - b y Li s a W i t k o w s k i Legend GEI-1-24 Proposed Boring by GeoEngineers, 2024 B-1 Historic Boring MW-1 Historic Monitoring Well TP-1 Historic Test Pit CPT-1-24 Proposed Cone Penetrometer Test by GeoEngineers HH-1 Historic Hand Hole CPT-1 Historic Cone Penetrometer Test Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, WA AP P E N D I C E S APPENDIX A Field Explorations September 26, 2024 | Page A-1 File No. 26881-001-00 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface soil and groundwater conditions were evaluated through a field exploration program that consisted of drilling nine borings (GEI-1 through GEI-9) and completing 6 cone penetrometer tests (CPT-1 through CPT-6). The locations of the explorations were estimated by taping/pacing from existing site features as well as using a handheld global positioning system (GPS). The approximate locations of the explorations are shown in Figures 2 through 5. Ground surface elevations at the exploration locations were estimated based on existing LiDAR data. Exploration locations should be considered accurate to the degree implied by the method used. Borings Borings GEI-1 through GEI-9 were completed from July 8 to 12, 2024, and were advanced to depths ranging from about 21½ to 76½ feet below existing site grades. The borings were completed using a track- mounted, continuous-flight, hollow-stem auger Diedrich D-50 Turbo drill rig owned and operated by Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. The borings were continuously monitored by a geologist from our firm who evaluated and classified the soils encountered, obtained representative soil samples, and observed groundwater conditions. Our representative maintained a detailed log of each boring. Disturbed samples of the representative soil types were obtained from the borings using standard penetration test (SPT) sampling procedures. SPT sampling was performed using a 2-inch outside-diameter split-spoon sampler driven with a standard 140-pound hammer in accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) D 1586. The soils encountered in the borings were typically sampled at 2½- to 5-foot vertical intervals with the SPT split spoon sampler. Samples were obtained by driving the sampler 18 inches into the soil with an automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows required for each 6 inches of penetration is recorded. The standard penetration resistance (“N-value”) of the soil is calculated as the number of blows required for the final 12 inches of penetration (blows per foot). This value is shown on the boring logs. This resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of cohesive soils. If the high penetration resistance encountered in the very dense soils precluded driving the total 18-inch sample interval, the penetration resistance for the partial penetration is entered on logs as follows: if the penetration is greater than 6 inches and less than 18 inches, then the number of blows is recorded over the number of inches driven; 30 blows for 6 inches and 50 for 3 inches, for instance, would be recorded as 80/9 inch. The blow counts are shown on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. The SPT is a useful quantitative tool from which soil density/consistency was evaluated. Soils encountered in the borings were classified in the field in general accordance with ASTM D 2488, the Standard Practice for Classification of Soils, Visual-Manual Procedure, which is summarized in Figure A-1. Logs of the borings are provided in Figures A-2 through A-10. The boring logs are based on our interpretation of the field and laboratory data and indicate the various types of soils and groundwater conditions encountered. The logs also indicate the depths at which these soils or their characteristics change, although the change may actually be gradual. If the change occurred between samples, it was interpreted. The September 26, 2024 | Page A-2 File No. 26881-001-00 densities noted in the boring log is based on the blow count data obtained in the borings and judgment based on the conditions encountered. Observations of groundwater conditions were made during drilling. The groundwater conditions encountered during drilling are presented in the boring log. Groundwater conditions observed during drilling represent a short-term condition and may or may not be representative of the long-term groundwater conditions at the site. Groundwater conditions observed during drilling should be considered approximate. Cone Penetrometer Tests Cone penetrometer tests CPT-1 through CPT-6 were completed on July 15, 2024 to depths of about 61 feet below the ground surface. The CPTs were completed using a truck-mounted CPT rig owned and operated by ConeTec, Inc. The CPT is a subsurface exploration technique in which a small-diameter steel tip with adjacent sleeve is continuously advanced with hydraulically operated equipment. Measurements of tip and sleeve resistance allow interpretation of the soil profile and the consistency of the strata penetrated. The tip resistance, friction ratio, and pore water pressure are recorded on the CPT logs. The logs of CPT probes are presented in Figures A-11 through A-16. The CPT soundings were backfilled in general accordance with procedures outlined by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Measured groundwater level in exploration, well, or piezometer Measured free product in well or piezometer Distinct contact between soil strata Approximate contact between soil strata Contact between geologic units SYMBOLS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS GW GP SW SP SM FINE GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND CLAYS NOTE: Multiple symbols are used to indicate borderline or dual soil classifications MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON NO. 200 SIEVE MORE THAN 50% PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS SC LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) COARSE GRAINED SOILS MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER GM GC ML CL OL SILTS AND CLAYS SANDS WITH FINES SAND AND SANDY SOILS MH CH OH PT (LITTLE OR NO FINES) CLEAN SANDS GRAVELS WITH FINES CLEAN GRAVELS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSANDS POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSAND SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAYMIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS, ROCK FLOUR,CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHTPLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TOMEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLYCLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTYCLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS ORDIATOMACEOUS SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGHPLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS AND SILTS OFMEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITHHIGH ORGANIC CONTENTSHIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -SILT MIXTURES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 Contact between soil of the same geologic unit Material Description Contact Graphic Log Contact NOTE: The reader must refer to the discussion in the report text and the logs of explorations for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. Descriptions on the logs apply only at the specific exploration locations and at the time the explorations were made; they are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. Groundwater Contact Blowcount is recorded for driven samplers as the number of blows required to advance sampler 12 inches (or distance noted). See exploration log for hammer weight and drop. "P" indicates sampler pushed using the weight of the drill rig. "WOH" indicates sampler pushed using the weight of the hammer. Key to Exploration Logs Figure A-1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SYMBOLS SYMBOLS Asphalt Concrete Cement Concrete Crushed Rock/ Quarry Spalls Topsoil GRAPH LETTER AC CC SOD Sod/Forest Duff CR DESCRIPTIONS TYPICAL TS No Visible Sheen Slight Sheen Moderate Sheen Heavy Sheen Laboratory / Field Tests %F %G AL CA CP CS DD DS HA MC MD Mohs OC PM PI PL PP SA TX UC UU VS Sheen Classification NS SS MS HS Percent fines Percent gravel Atterberg limits Chemical analysis Laboratory compaction test Consolidation test Dry density Direct shear Hydrometer analysis Moisture content Moisture content and dry density Mohs hardness scale Organic content Permeability or hydraulic conductivity Plasticity index Point load test Pocket penetrometer Sieve analysis Triaxial compression Unconfined compression Unconsolidated undrained triaxial compression Vane shear Continuous Coring Bulk or grab Direct-Push Piston Shelby tube Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Sampler Symbol Descriptions Modified California Sampler (6-inch sleeve) or Dames & Moore Rev. 03/2024 AL (LL = 30; PI = 3) Groundwater observed at approximately 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) during drilling Driller adding mud at 20¼ feet 45 5 45 41 36 33 26 Brown silt with organic matter (soft, moist) (fill) Brown sandy silt (medium stiff, moist) Brown silt (soft, moist) (alluvium) Becomes gray-brown and wet Brown silty fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) Black fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) 1 2 3 MC 4 MC 4.5 AL; CS 5 6 %F 7 8 %F 9 18 15 9 24 18 18 18 15 10 6 4 3 2 12 20 18 25 ML ML ML SM SP Notes: 76.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292370 172720 19 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/8/20247/8/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-1 Figure A-2 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 *Blow counts may be overstated due to 2 feet of heave Heave 8 9 26 25 Black fine to medium sand with silt and occasional gravel (medium dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand (dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand (medium dense to dense, wet) 10 11%F 12%F 13 14 15 16 17 18 11 10 10 18 18 18 18 18 18 28 15 19 28 44* 16 36 20 34 SP-SM SP-SM SP SP-SM SP Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-1 (continued) Figure A-2 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 AL (LL = 44; PI = 12) Groundwater observed at approximately 9 feet bgs during drilling Driller adding mud at 20 feet 46 52 56 41 Brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel (medium dense, moist) (fill) Gray silt with organic matter (soft, moist) Gray to brown silt (very soft to medium stiff, moist) (alluvium) Becomes wet Black silty fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) Black fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) With occasional gravel 1 2 3A MC 3B AL; CS 4 MC 5 MC 6A 6B 7 8 9 8 7 18 18 18 18 16 16 3 0 2 5 15 24 27 27 SM ML ML SM SP-SM Notes: 76.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292500 172240 16 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/9/20247/9/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-2 Figure A-3 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 11 7 23 18 Black silty fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) Black fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense to very dense, wet) With occasional gravel 10%F 11 12 13 14 %F 15 16 17 18 9 9 18 15 8 9 18 18 18 14 29 32 32 24 23 41 39 51 SM SP-SM Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-2 (continued) Figure A-3 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 -60 Groundwater observed at approximately 13 feet bgs during drilling 4 37 59 21 Brown sandy silt (moist) (fill) Gray to brown silt (very soft to medium stiff, moist) (alluvium) Black fine to medium sand (loose to medium dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 MC 5 6A 6B 7 %F 9 18 18 18 18 18 6 2 1 1 8 25 ML ML SP Notes: 21.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292710 172050 17 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/9/20247/9/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-3 Figure A-4 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 Shelby tube attempted at 11½ feet, no recovery Groundwater observed at approximately 17 feet bgs during drilling 24 15 39 42 24 28 Brown silt (soft to medium stiff, moist) (fill) Gray fine sand with silt (very loose, moist) (alluvium) Gray silt (very soft, moist) Gray silty fine sand (medium dense, moist) Becomes wet with wood chunks Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense to dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 5 MC 6 %F 7 %F 8 9 9 15 18 18 18 18 18 18 4 1 1 1 18 10 19 32 ML SP-SM ML SM SP-SM Notes: 76.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292470 171470 17 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/10/20247/10/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-4 Figure A-5 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 9 11 22 18 Grades to black 10%F 11 12 13 14 15 %F 16 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 21 40 37 37 48 23 22 21 40 Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-4 (continued) Figure A-5 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Shelby tube attempted at 12 feet, no recovery Groundwater observed at approximately 15½ feet bgs during drilling 46 34 7 29 45 30 29 25 Brown silt with sand and gravel (very stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silt with sand (stiff, moist) (alluvium) Brown silt (soft to medium stiff, moist) Gray silty fine to medium sand (very loose to loose, moist) Becomes wet Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Gray silty fine gravel with sand (dense, wet) 1 2 3 MC 4 5 MC 6 %F 7 %F 8 9 %F 1 18 18 18 18 18 18 11 28 10 3 6 2 5 13 16 ML ML ML SM SP-SM GM Notes: 76.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1294340 171950 19 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/11/20247/11/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-5 Figure A-6 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 1817 Gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel (loose, wet) Gray silty fine gravel with sand (medium dense, wet) Gray silty fine to medium sand (medium dense to dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with gravel (dense, wet) Gray fine gravel with sand (dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand (dense, wet) 10 11%F 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 18 12 13 11 7 11 10 10 38 5 28 35 25 49 47 41 46 SM GM SM SP GP SP Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-5 (continued) Figure A-6 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Groundwater observed at approximately 13 feet bgs during drilling Driller adding mud at 20 feet 13 2 5 24 24 25 Brown sandy silt with occasional gravel and organic matter (stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silty fine gravel with sand (medium dense, moist) Brown to gray silty fine sand (very loose to loose, moist) (alluvium) Black to gray fine to medium sand (loose to medium dense, wet) Black fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense to dense, wet) Gray fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel (dense, wet) 1 2 3 4 5 %F 6 %F 7 8 %F 9 18 8 9 9 18 18 8 13 25 8 6 4 6 17 12 37 ML GM SM SP SP-SM SP-SM Notes: 76.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1294650 171530 20 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/12/20247/12/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-6 Figure A-7 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 12 9 16 13 Gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel (medium dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with silt and gravel (medium dense, wet) Gray silty fine to medium sand (dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) With gravel Gray fine to medium sand with gravel (very dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand (medium dense to dense, wet) 10 11%F 12 13 14 15 %F 16 17 18 9 12 12 18 18 13 9 18 18 35 18 29 34 37 22 26 77 30 SM SP-SM SM SP-SM SP SP Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-6 (continued) Figure A-7 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Groundwater observed at approximately 10 feet bgs during drilling Shelby tube attempted at 17 feet, no recovery 13 46 28 57 37 Gray silt (medium stiff, moist) (fill) With organic matter Brown silty fine to medium sand (very loose to loose, moist) (alluvium) Becomes wet Brown silt (very soft, wet) Brown fine sand with interbedded organic silt (medium dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 5 %F 6 MC 7 MC 10 18 9 10 18 18 7 6 3 7 1 13 ML SM ML SP Notes: 21.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292850 170560 19 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/11/20247/11/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-7 Figure A-8 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 AL (LL = 32; PI = 1) Groundwater observed at approximately 13¼ feet bgs during drilling 27 49 42 34 67 Light brown sandy silt (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silt (soft to medium stiff, moist) (alluvium) With occasional organic matter Brown silt with interbedded sand (soft, moist) Gray-brown organic silt (very stiff, wet) Dark brown silt with interbedded sand (hard, wet) 1 2 MC 3 MC 4 MC 5A 5BAL 6 MC 7 18 10 8 18 15 14 7 5 2 3 18 34 ML ML ML OL ML Notes: 21.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292800 171450 18 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/10/20247/10/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-8 Figure A-9 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 Groundwater observed at approximately 9 feet bgs during drilling 11 38 60 21 Brown silt (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silt (soft, moist) (alluvium) Gray organic silt (very soft to soft, wet) Brown fine sand with silt (medium dense to dense, wet) Becomes black 1 2 MC 3 MC 4 5 6 %F 7 18 18 18 12 15 12 6 2 3 2 18 36 ML ML OL SP-SM Notes: 21.5 Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1292650 172520 16 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 7/8/20247/8/2024 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Google Earth. Vertical approximated based on . Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 9061-019-01 Log of Boring GEI-9 Figure A-10 Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS Renton, Washington Da t e : 9 / 1 9 / 2 4 P a t h : P : \ 9 \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 \ G I N T \ 9 0 6 1 0 1 9 0 1 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 08:08 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-1-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.575 m / 60.94 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP01.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46500 Long: -122.23995 Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Clays Sand Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Undefined 12.2 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 09:25 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-2-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.525 m / 60.78 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP02.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46408 Long: -122.24013 Sand Mixtures Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 9.8 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 10:52 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-3-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.525 m / 60.78 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP03.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46376 Long: -122.23903 Undefined Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 15.1 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Punch Out Punch Out Punch Out Punch Out 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 12:07 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-4-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.550 m / 60.86 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP04.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46239 Long: -122.23996 Undefined Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 8.0 50.5 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Punch Out Punch Out Punch Out Punch Out 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 13:28 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-5A-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.500 m / 60.69 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP05.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46182 Long: -122.23941 Sensitive, Fine Grained Sensitive, Fine Grained Clays Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Sand Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Clays Silt Mixtures Sands Clays Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 15.4 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Assumed Drill Out Assumed Drill Out Assumed Drill Out Assumed Drill Out 0 200 400 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 24-59-27985 Date: 2024-07-15 14:44 Site: Longacres Site, Renton, WA Sounding: CPT-6A-24 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.600 m / 61.02 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 24-59-27985_CP06.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46159 Long: -122.23238 Silt Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Clays Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 9.1 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Hydrostatic LineDissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved The reported coordinates were acquired from consumer-grade GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing September 26, 2024 | Page B-1 File No. 09061-019-01 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Soil samples obtained from the borings were transported to our laboratory and evaluated to confirm or modify field classifications, as well as to evaluate engineering properties of the soil. Representative samples were selected for laboratory testing that consisted of moisture content determinations, percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve (%F), Atterberg limits and one-dimensional consolidation testing. The tests were performed in general accordance with test methods of the ASTM International (ASTM) or other applicable procedures. Soil Classifications All soil samples obtained from the borings were visually classified in the field and/or in our laboratory using a system based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and ASTM classification methods. ASTM test method D 2488 was used to visually classify the soil samples, while ASTM D 2487 was used to classify the soils based on laboratory tests results. These classification procedures are incorporated in the boring logs shown in Figures A-2 through A-10, in Appendix A. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture contents were determined in general accordance with ASTM D 2216 for numerous samples obtained from the borings. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs at the respective sample depth in Appendix A. Percent Passing U.S. No. 200 Sieve (%F) Selected samples were “washed” through the U.S. No. 200 mesh sieve to estimate the relative percentages of coarse- and fine-grained particles in the soil. The percent passing value represents the percentage by weight of the sample finer than the U.S. No. 200 sieve. These tests were conducted to verify field descriptions and to estimate the fines content for analysis purposes. The tests were conducted in accordance with ASTM D 1140, and the results are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A at the respective sample depths. Atterberg Limits Atterberg limits testing was performed on selected fine-grained soil samples. The tests were used to classify the soil and to estimate index properties of the soil. The liquid limit and the plastic limit were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 4318. The results of the Atterberg limits are summarized in Figure B-1. The plasticity chart relates the plasticity index (liquid limit minus the plastic limit) to the liquid limit. One-Dimensional Consolidation Consolidation tests were completed on two relatively undisturbed soil samples extruded from Shelby tubes obtained from borings GEI-1 and GEI-2. The tests were used to aid in evaluating consolidation characteristics of the very soft to medium stiff fine-grained deposits in the upper portion of the alluvial soils. The consolidation tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2435, using a fixed-ring consolidometer. The results of the consolidation tests are summarized in Figures B-2 and B-3. Note: This report may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of GeoEngineers, Inc. Test results are applicable only to the specific sample on which they were performed and should not be interpreted as representative of any other samples obtained at other times, depths or locations, or generated by separate operations or processes. The liquid limit and plasticity index were obtained in general accordance with ASTM D 4318. GeoEngineers 17425 NE Union Hill Road Ste 250, Redmond, WA 98052 Symbol Boring Number Depth (feet) Moisture Content (%) Liquid Limit (%) Plasticity Index (%)Soil Description GEI-1 GEI-2 GEI-8 11.2 8.9 11.7 36 52 34 30 44 32 3 12 1 Silt (ML) Silt (ML) Silt (ML) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PL A S T I C I T Y I N D E X LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY CHART 09061-019-01 Date Exported: 08/09/2024 CL-ML ML or OL CL or OL MH or OH CH or OH Fi g u r e -B-1 At t e r b e r g L i m i t s T e s t Re s u l t s Lo n g a c r e s C a m p u s M a s t e r P l a n E I S Re n t o n , W a s h i n g t o n Project: Longacres Master Plan EIS Project No.: 09061-019-01 Boring:GEI-1 Sample:4.5 Depth: 11.2 17425 NE Union Hill Road Suite 250 Redmond, Washington 98052 One-Dimensional Consolidation Consolidation Plot ASTM D2435 GEI-1, 4.5 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 Ax i a l S t r a i n Axial Stress (ksf) Project: Longacres Master Plan EIS Project No.: 09061-019-01 Boring:GEI-2 Sample:3B Depth: 8.9 17425 NE Union Hill Road Suite 250 Redmond, Washington 98052 One-Dimensional Consolidation Consolidation Plot ASTM D2435 GEI-2, 3B 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 Ax i a l S t r a i n Axial Stress (ksf) APPENDIX C Exploration Logs from Previous Studies September 26, 2024 | Page C-1 File No. 09061-019-01 APPENDIX C EXPLORATION LOGS FROM PREVIOUS STUDIES Appendix C includes logs from previous studies completed in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Those previous studies are listed below. ■ GeoEngineers, 1991. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 1991. “Report, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 1992. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Customer Services Training Center, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 1997. “Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing BCAG, Headquarters Building 25-20, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 2013. “Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing 25-20 Parking Lot Addition, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 2022. “Geotechnical Engineering Services, Seattle Sounders Training Facility, Renton, Washington” ■ GeoEngineers, 2023. “Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Services, AC-RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel, Renton, Washington” AL (LL = 58, PI = 22)49 48 70 Approximately 4 inches of topsoil Gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel and organic matter (medium dense, moist to wet) (fill) Dark brown sandy silt (very stiff, moist to wet) (alluvium) Dark brown silt with sand (medium stiff, moist to wet) Gray elastic silt with trace of organic matter and interbedded layer of peat (less than 1-inch thick) (very soft to medium stiff, wet) Decreased organic content Interbedded peat layer (less than ¼-inch thick) 1 2 3 4 AL 5 MC 6 MC 7 18 18 18 18 24 5 7 1 6 TS SM ML ML MH Notes: 16.5 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293121 172672 20 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method Groundwater not observed at time of exploration 10/3/202310/3/2023 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-1 Figure A-2 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 AL (LL = 62, PI = 30) Groundwater observed at approximately 19½ feet below ground surface during drilling 28 41 51 26 2 Approximately 3 inches of topsoil Brown silt with occasional organic matter (medium stiff, moist to wet) (fill) Brown sandy silt (medium stiff, moist) (alluvium) Gray elastic silt with trace organic matter (soft to medium stiff, wet) Interbedded peat layer (½-inch-thick) Black fine to medium sand (medium dense to dense, wet) Brown-gray fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel (loose to medium dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 5 MC 6 AL 7 %F 8 9 18 12 7 12 18 18 18 6 5 5 6 4 6 20 30 10 TS ML ML MH SP SP-SM Notes: 76.5 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293191 172629 18 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 10/3/202310/3/2023 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-2 Figure A-3 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 20 11Becomes fine to medium; decreased gravel content Dark gray fine to coarse sand with gravel (dense, wet) Dark gray fine to medium sand with occasional gravel (dense, wet) Dark gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel (medium dense to dense, wet) 10 %F 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 14 7 12 12 18 18 18 12 7 22 9 8 31 37 47 47 39 24 SP SP SM Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-2 (continued) Figure A-3 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Approximately 4 inches of topsoil Brown silt with trace organic matter (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silt with sand (stiff, moist) (alluvium) Brown silty fine sand (loose, moist to wet) Brown silt with sand (very soft to soft, moist to wet) Gray elastic silt with less than ¼-inch peat interbed layer (very soft to soft, wet) (AL [LL = 54, PI = 22]) Dark gray fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) 1 2 3 4 5 AL 6 MC 7 18 10 8 18 18 18 12 6 2 2 2 21 TS ML ML SM ML MH SP-SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 2 8 10 20 21.5 49 67 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)10/24/2023 6.90 21.5 Drilling Method10/5/2023 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 12.80 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc.Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ-253 A 2-in well was installed on 10/5/2023 to a depth of 20 ft. Start Drilled 10/5/2023 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Turbo 19.7020 NAVD88 1293381 172638 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Monitoring Well GEI-3 Figure A-4 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Groundwater observed at approximately 10.9 feet below ground surface during drilling 35 58 32 79 18 19 64 11 28 Approximately 4 inches of topsoil Brown silt with trace organic matter (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Gray silty fine sand (very loose, wet) (alluvium) Dark gray silt with less than ¼-inch peat occasional interbeds (soft, wet) Gray sandy silt (medium stiff, wet) Gray silt with interbedded peat layer (4 inches thick) (medium stiff, wet) Black fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Black silty fine sand with gravel (loose, wet) Dark gray fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel (medium dense to dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 MC 5 %F 6 MC 7 %F 8 9 %F 8 18 18 12 18 18 12 12 5 1 3 7 7 26 16 6 TS ML SM ML ML ML SP-SM SM SP-SM Notes: 76.5 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293361 172567 18 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 10/4/202310/4/2023 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-4 Figure A-5 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 16 6 Gray fine to coarse sand with gravel (medium dense to dense, wet) Gray fine gravel with silt and sand (very dense, wet) Gray fine to medium sand with silt and gravel (dense, wet) 10 11 %F 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 7 12 12 13 18 7 12 7 12 17 24 32 37 39 20 41 51 37 SP GP-GM SP-SM Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-4 (continued) Figure A-5 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Groundwater observed at approximately 9.2 feet below ground surface during drilling AL (LL = 38, PI = 9) 31 44 44 24 64 11 Approximately 5 inches of topsoil Brown silt with trace organic matter (medium stiff to stiff, moist) (fill) Gray silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist to wet) (alluvium) Gray silt with interbedded peat layer (less than ¼-inch-thick) (very soft, wet) Gray silt with trace organic matter (very soft, wet) Dark gray sandy silt with trace organic matter (soft, wet) Black fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Black fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel (medium dense to dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 4 5 AL 6 %F 7 %F 8 9 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 15 10 10 1 1 3 24 29 29 TS ML SM ML ML ML SP-SM SP-SM Notes: 76.5 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293525 172505 18 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 10/5/202310/5/2023 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Sheet 1 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-5 Figure A-6 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 12 26 7 23 Black silty fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) Black fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel (dense, wet) Black fine gravel with silt and sand (dense, wet) Black fine to coarse sand with gravel (dense, wet) Black fine gravel with silt and sand (dense, wet) Black fine to coarse sand with gravel (dense, wet) 10 %F 11 12 13 %F 14 15 16 17 18 12 18 18 18 18 10 15 12 6 25 31 30 14 30 38 36 44 33 SM SP-SM GP-GM SP GP-GM SP Sheet 2 of 2Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-5 (continued) Figure A-6 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 AL (LL =42; PI = 12) Groundwater observed at approximately 10.9 feet below ground surface during drilling 18 47 55 Approximately 4 inches of topsoil Brown silt with trace organic matter (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Gray sandy silt (stiff, moist) (alluvium) Gray silt (very soft to medium stiff, moist to wet) Becomes wet Black fine sand with silt (very loose, wet) 1 2 %F 3 4 AL 5 6 18 18 18 18 18 11 4 2 1 3 TS ML ML ML SP-SM Notes: 16.5 JBA RN/MWS Advance Drill Technologies, Inc. Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 TurboDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293624 172435 19 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 10/4/202310/4/2023 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Site Survey. Vertical approximated based on Site Survey. Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 26881-001-00 Log of Boring GEI-6 Figure A-7 AC - RI Dual Brand Longacres Hotel Renton, Washington Da t e : 1 0 / 3 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 6 \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 6 8 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 Groundwater observed at approximately 7¼ feet during drilling 76 7 23 7 4 4 5 9 33 33 28 28 34 19 23 24 Approximately 2¼ inches of asphalt concrete Brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel (loose, moist) (fill) Gray silt with sand (soft, wet) Gray silty fine sand; trace organic matter (very loose, wet) (alluvium) Dark brown fine sand with silt (very loose, wet) Dark gray to black silty fine sand; occasional wood fragments (very loose, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand with silt; organic matter (medium dense, wet) Dark brown to black fine to medium sand (medium dense, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand with occasional gravel (medium dense, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) 1 MC 2SA 3MC 4 %F 5 %F 6%F 7 %F 8%F 9 10%F 6 16 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 3 3 3 1 21 16 17 26 24 AC SM ML SM SP-SM SM SP-SM SP SP SP-SM Notes: 36.5 NBD CC Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted RigDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293438 171535 19 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 5/17/20225/17/2022 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring B-1 Figure A-2 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 Groundwater observed at approximately 7½ feet during drilling 61 2 3 6 21 24 34 26 24 21 21 Brown silt with sand and occasional gravel; rootlets (soft to medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown sandy silt with occasional gravel (medium stiff, wet) Brown fine sand with silt (very loose, wet) (alluvium) Dark brown to black fine sand (very loose to medium dense, wet) Dark brown to black fine to medium sand (loose, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) 1 MC 2SA 3MC 4 MC 5 %F 6 7 8%F 9 10%F 6 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 7 3 4 3 10 11 8 8 28 ML ML SP-SM SP SP SP-SM Notes: 36.5 NBD CC Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted RigDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293411 171109 20 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 5/17/20225/17/2022 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring B-2 Figure A-3 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 Groundwater observed at approximately 5 feet during drilling 82 12 10 6 30 35 40 38 26 25 Brown sandy silt; occasional rootlets (soft, moist) (fill) Brown silt with sand; slight oxidation staining (soft, moist to wet) (alluvium) Brown silty fine sand to sandy silt (very loose/very soft, wet) Gray fine sand with silt; wood fragments (very loose to loose, wet) Gray fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand (loose, wet) Dark brown to black fine sand with silt; trace organic matter (loose to medium dense, wet) Occasional shell fragments 1 MC 2SA 3MC 4 5 %F 6 7 %F 8 9 %F 10 6 18 18 18 18 9 18 18 18 18 3 1 0 0 16 6 20 9 ML ML SM/ML SP-SM SP-SM SP SP-SM Notes: 36.5 NBD CC Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted RigDrilling EquipmentAutohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) 1293398 170690 20 NAVD88 Easting (X) Northing (Y) Start Total Depth (ft) Logged By Checked By End Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Drilled Hammer Data System Datum Driller Drilling Method See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed 5/17/20225/17/2022 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring B-3 Figure A-4 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ S T A N D A R D _ % F _ N O _ G W REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) In t e r v a l Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 Approximately 2 inches of topsoil Brown sandy silt with occasional gravel; organic matter (very stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silty fine sand; trace organic matter (very loose to loose, wet) (alluvium) No organic matter Gray silt with sand (very soft to soft, wet) Trace organic matter Gray fine to medium sand with silt (medium dense, wet) 1 MC; CA 2 MC 3 MC 4 MC; CA 5A 5B 6 18 15 5 10 16 18 22 7 1 1 4 23 TS ML SM ML SP-SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 6 7 17 21.5 24 22 23 40 Start Drilled 12/6/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 19.7020 NAVD88 1293157 170825 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 5.76 21.5 Drilling Method12/6/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 13.94 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 211 A 2-in well was installed on 12/6/2022 to a depth of 17 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-4 Figure A-2 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 2 inches of topsoil Brown silty fine to medium sand; organic matter (medium dense, moist) (fill) Brown silty fine to medium sand (very loose to loose, wet) (alluvium) Brown sandy silt (medium stiff, wet) Dark gray silty fine to medium sand (loose, wet) 1 MC; CA 2 3 %F; CA 4 MC 5A 5B SA 6 12 12 15 18 16 18 13 4 1 2 7 8 TS SM SM ML SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 4 5 15 21.5 19 41 58 12 33 12 Start Drilled 12/6/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 18.0018.36 NAVD88 1293118.9 171250 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 4.89 21.5 Drilling Method12/6/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 13.11 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 212 A 2-in well was installed on 12/6/2022 to a depth of 15 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-5 Figure A-3 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 5 inches of asphalt concrete pavement Brown silt with sand (soft to medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silty fine sand (very loose to loose, wet) (alluvium) Occasional organic matter Gray fine to medium sand with silt (loose to medium dense, wet) 1 MC; CA 2 3 MC; CA 4 5 6 18 15 18 13 13 18 4 4 4 3 8 11 AC ML SM SP-SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 4 5 15 21.5 33 29 Start Drilled 12/5/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 19.8020 NAVD88 1293411 171450 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 6.75 21.5 Drilling Method12/5/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 13.05 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 210 A 2-in well was installed on 12/5/2022 to a depth of 15 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-6 Figure A-4 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 2 inches of topsoil Dark brown sandy silt with occasional gravel; organic matter (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Brown silt (very soft, wet) (alluvium) Dark gray silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, wet) 1 MC 2 MC; CA 3 MC 4 CA 5 SA 6A 6B 5 18 18 18 18 18 8 2 0 1 14 7 TS ML ML SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 6 7 17 21.5 35 40 42 31 24 Start Drilled 12/6/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 18.6019 NAVD88 1293595 171841 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 4.30 21.5 Drilling Method12/6/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 14.30 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 213 A 2-in well was installed on 12/6/2022 to a depth of 17 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-7 Figure A-5 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 2 inches of topsoil Brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel; organic matter (loose, moist) (fill) Becomes moist to wet Gray-brown silty fine to medium sand (very loose, wet) (alluvium) Becomes wet Gray fine to medium sand with silt (loose, wet) 1 MC 2 MC; CA 3 MC 4 %F; CA 5 MC 6 16 18 18 18 18 18 6 5 2 0 4 9 TS SM SM SP-SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 9 10 20 21.5 27 24 30 37 38 Start Drilled 12/7/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 22.0022.33 NAVD88 1293677.4 170601.8 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 8.00 21.5 Drilling Method12/7/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 14.00 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 215 A 2-in well was installed on 12/7/2022 to a depth of 20 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 20 15 10 5 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-8 Figure A-6 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 4½ inches of asphalt concrete pavement Brown/gray silty fine to coarse sand with gravel (medium dense, moist) (fill) Brown/gray silt with sand (very soft to medium stiff, moist) (alluvium) Becomes moist to wet Becomes wet Gray silty fine sand (very loose, wet) Black/gray fine to medium sand (loose to medium dense, wet) 1 2 MC 3 MC; CA 4 MC; CA 5 MC 6 7 18 18 18 18 18 18 Grab 7 3 0 2 7 17 AC SM ML SM SP Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 4 5 15 21.5 31 31 38 36 Start Drilled 12/7/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 20.1020.49 NAVD88 1293690.8 171038 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 6.58 21.5 Drilling Method12/7/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 13.52 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 216 A 2-in well was installed on 12/7/2022 to a depth of 15 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 20 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-9 Figure A-7 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 4 inches of asphalt concrete pavement Brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel (medium dense to dense, moist) (fill) Brown silty fine gravel with sand (loose, wet) (alluvium) (No recovery) Gray fine to medium sand with silt (loose, wet) 1 CA 2 MC; CA 3 MC 4 5 6 15 12 3 0 13 18 35 19 9 7 5 8 AC SM GM SP-SM Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 4 5 15 21.5 6 6 Start Drilled 12/5/2022 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 20.2020.52 NAVD88 1293686.7 171551.1 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 7.10 21.5 Drilling Method12/5/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 13.10 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 209 A 2-in well was installed on 12/5/2022 to a depth of 15 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 20 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-10 Figure A-8 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Approximately 2 inches of topsoil Brown silt with sand; organic matter (medium stiff, moist) (fill) Gray sandy silt; trace organic matter (very soft to soft, wet) (alluvium) Dark gray silt; organic matter (soft, wet) 1 MC 2 CA 3 CA 4 5A 5B 6 MC 18 18 0 0 18 18 5 3 0 4 3 6 TS ML ML ML Concrete surfaceseal 2-inch Schedule 40PVC well casing Bentonite seal Sand backfill 2-inch Schedule 40PVC screen,0.010-inch slotwidth 1 6 7 17 21.5 38 75 Start Drilled 12/7/2023 Hammer Data Date MeasuredHorizontal Datum Vertical Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Drilling Equipment Top of Casing Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) Groundwater Depth to Water (ft) Notes: Surface Elevation (ft) Logged By Diedrich D-50 Track-mounted Rig 18.9019.19 NAVD88 1293938.6 170892.1 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet)1/19/2023 3.82 21.5 Drilling Method12/7/2022 End Checked By DrillerTotal Depth (ft) Autohammer 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop 15.08 JYE WCW Advance Drill Technologies Hollow-stem Auger DOE Well I.D.: BPQ 214 A 2-in well was installed on 12/7/2022 to a depth of 17 ft. Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Steel surface monument El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 15 10 5 0 De p t h ( f e e t ) 0 5 10 15 20 FIELD DATA MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Wa t e r L e v e l In t e r v a l Re c o v e r e d ( i n ) Bl o w s / f o o t Co l l e c t e d S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n WELL LOG Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Boring with Monitoring Well B-11 Figure A-9 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington Da t e : 4 / 1 0 / 2 3 P a t h : P : \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ G E O T E C H _ W E L L _ % F Brown sandy silt; rootlets (soft, moist) (fill) Brown silt; occasional organic matter and rootlets (soft, moist) Gray fine sand with silt (loose, moist) (alluvium) Dark brown fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) ML ML SP-SM SP-SM 1 MC 2 SA 3MC 4 5MC 6 31 29 21 34 Probe depth at ground surface = 7 to 8 inches Probe depth at 1 foot = 7 inches Probe depth at 3 feet = 6 to 7 inches Moderate caving observed at 4 feet Probe depth at 4 feet = 7 inches Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 5½ feet 93 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C _ % F Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Test Pit TP-1 Figure A-5 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Te s t i n g S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g SAMPLE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Date Excavated Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Coordinate System Horizontal Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Total Depth (ft)5/16/2022 8.25 20 NAVD88 1293468 171012 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) NBD Checked By CC See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed See "Remarks" section for caving observedEquipment Kubota Mini-excavator Logged By Excavator Kelly's Excavating Brown silt with sand; organic matter (soft, moist to wet) (fill) Brown silt with sand; rootlets (soft, moist) Brown silt; trace rootlets (soft, moist) (alluvium) Gray fine sand with silt; rootlets (loose, wet) Dark brown fine sand with silt (medium dense, wet) ML ML ML SP-SM SP-SM 1 MC2 3SA 4 5 MC 6 59 32 44 Probe depth at ground surface = 6 inches Probe depth at 1 foot = 8 inches Probe depth at 3 feet = 8 inches Slight to moderate caving observed from 4 to 7 feet Probe depth at 4 feet = 8 inches Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 5½ feet 90 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C _ % F Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Test Pit TP-2 Figure A-6 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Te s t i n g S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g SAMPLE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Date Excavated Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Coordinate System Horizontal Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Total Depth (ft)5/16/2022 8.25 19 NAVD88 1293607 171032 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) NBD Checked By CC See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed See "Remarks" section for caving observedEquipment Kubota Mini-excavator Logged By Excavator Kelly's Excavating Gray fine sand with silt and occasional gravel (loose to medium dense, moist) (fill) Gray sandy silt with occasional gravel (very stiff, moist) Brown silt (soft, moist) (alluvium) Gray sandy silt (medium stiff to stiff, wet) SP-SM ML ML ML 1 MC 2 3 SA 4 5MC 6 15 32 46 Probe depth at ground surface = 5 inches Probe depth at 1 foot = 1 inch Probe depth at 2 feet = 10 inches Moderate caving observed from 4 to 8 feet Probe depth at 4 feet = 8 to 9 inches Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 5 feet 91 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C _ % F Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Test Pit TP-3 Figure A-7 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Te s t i n g S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g SAMPLE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Date Excavated Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Coordinate System Horizontal Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Total Depth (ft)5/16/2022 8.25 21 NAVD88 1293681 170848 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) NBD Checked By CC See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed See "Remarks" section for caving observedEquipment Kubota Mini-excavator Logged By Excavator Kelly's Excavating Gray fine sand with silt; occasional rootlets (loose, moist to wet) (fill) Dark gray silty fine sand with occasional gravel (loose, moist) Gray silty fine to medium sand (loose, moist) (alluvium) Brownish gray silt with sand; occasional wood fragments and trace rootlets (medium stiff, moist) Dark brown sandy silt; organic matter (medium stiff, wet) Dark brown sandy silt to silty fine sand; burried log (medium stiff/loose to medium dense, wet) SP-SM SM SM ML ML SM/ML 1 MC 2 SA 3MC 4 5MC 6 16 9 27 43 Slight groundwater seepage observed at 5½ feet 39 Note: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on Topographic Survey. Vertical approximated based on Topographic Survey. Da t e : 7 / 1 4 / 2 2 P a t h : \ \ G E O E N G I N E E R S . C O M \ W A N \ P R O J E C T S \ 2 5 \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 \ G I N T \ 2 5 9 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 . G P J D B L i b r a r y / L i b r a r y : G E O E N G I N E E R S _ D F _ S T D _ U S _ J U N E _ 2 0 1 7 . G L B / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C _ % F Sheet 1 of 1Project Number: Project Location: Project: 25930-001-00 Log of Test Pit TP-4 Figure A-8 Sounders Training Facility Renton, Washington El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Te s t i n g S a m p l e Gr a p h i c L o g SAMPLE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t ( % ) REMARKS Fi n e s Co n t e n t ( % ) Date Excavated Surface Elevation (ft) Vertical Datum Coordinate System Horizontal Datum Easting (X) Northing (Y) Total Depth (ft)5/16/2022 10.5 21 NAVD88 1293678 170721 WA State Plane North NAD83 (feet) NBD Checked By CC See "Remarks" section for groundwater observed Caving not observedEquipment Kubota Mini-excavator Logged By Excavator Kelly's Excavating The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 15:49 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-1 Cone: 836:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.450 m / 31.00 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP01.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46213 Long: 122.23622 Undefined Sands Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Organic Soils Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Sand Mixtures Sands Silt Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand 14.1 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 13:10 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-2 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.425 m / 30.92 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP02.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46220 Long: 122.23542 Silt Mixtures Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Silt Mixtures Clays Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Sensitive, Fine Grained Clays Sensitive, Fine Grained Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 9.0 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 13:33 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-3 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.575 m / 31.41 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP03.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46180 Long: 122.23665 Undefined Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Organic Soils Clays Organic Soils Clays Silt Mixtures Sands Undefined 14.1 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-17 12:47 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-4 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 18.500 m / 60.69 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_SP04.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46177 Long: 122.23518 Clays Sand Mixtures Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Undefined Organic Soils Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Gravelly Sand to Sand Gravelly Sand to Sand Sands Undefined 1.2 Ueq(ft) Refusal Refusal Refusal Refusal Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 12:28 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-5 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.275 m / 30.43 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP05.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46151 Long: 122.23611 Undefined Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 3.5 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-19 11:08 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-6 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.350 m / 30.68 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP06.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46130 Long: 122.23720 Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Clays Sands Clays Clays Sand Mixtures Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Clays Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined23.8 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 09:04 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-7 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.450 m / 31.00 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP07.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46140 Long: 122.23547 Undefined Gravelly Sand to Sand Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 5.6 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 11:22 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-8 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.875 m / 32.40 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP08.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46096 Long: 122.23617 Undefined Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 9.2 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-19 10:25 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-9 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.425 m / 30.92 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP09.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46075 Long: 122.23727 Clays Sand Mixtures Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Clays Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 2.3 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 10:14 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-10 Cone: 855:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.325 m / 30.59 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP10.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46062 Long: 122.23527 Undefined Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 8.2 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch Pre Punch The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-19 09:32 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-11 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.450 m / 31.00 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP11.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46030 Long: 122.23731 Clays Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Sand Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 18.7 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 10:44 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-12 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.300 m / 30.51 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP12.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.46019 Long: 122.23537 Silt Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 3.5 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-19 08:47 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-13 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.475 m / 31.09 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP13.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.45970 Long: 122.23695 Clays Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sensitive, Fine Grained Sensitive, Fine Grained Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Sands Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Undefined 16.1 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 11:44 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-14 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.500 m / 31.17 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP14.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.45977 Long: 122.23609 Clays Sands Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 12.7 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 08:37 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-15 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.550 m / 31.33 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP15.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.45952 Long: 122.23518 Clays Sands Stiff Sand to Clayey Sand Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sand Mixtures Sands Sands Sands Sand Mixtures Sands 14.3 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-19 08:00 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-16 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.425 m / 30.92 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP16.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.45933 Long: 122.23709 Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Clays Silt Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sands Undefined 4.6 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 0 125 250 375 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 qt (tsf) De p t h ( f e e t ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 fs (tsf) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Rf (%) 0 50 100 1500 u (ft) 0 3 6 9 SBT Qtn GeoEngineers Job No: 22-59-24169 Date: 2022-05-18 09:37 Site: Renton CPT Sounding: CPT-17 Cone: 730:T1500F15U35 Max Depth: 9.300 m / 30.51 ft Depth Inc: 0.025 m / 0.082 ft Avg Int: Every Point File: 22-59-24169_CP17.COR Unit Wt: SBTQtn (PKR2009) SBT: Robertson, 2009 and 2010 Coords: Lat: 47.45910 Long: 122.23513 Clays Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Silt Mixtures Sand Mixtures Sands Undefined 3.6 Ueq(ft) Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Target Depth Equilibrium Pore Pressure (Ueq)Assumed Ueq Dissipation, Ueq achieved Dissipation, Ueq not achieved Hydrostatic Line The reported coordinates were acquired from hand-held GPS equipment and are only approximate locations. The coordinates should not be used for design purposes. 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Brown sandy silt with occasional gravel and trace organics (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Approximate ground surface elevation: 15 feet. Test pit completed at 5.5 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. No caving observed. TS ML SM Probed 1 to 3 inches Probed 1 to 2 inches CEC = 9.5 meq Probed 1 to 2 inches Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 5.5 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-1 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-2 Sheet 1 of 1 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown sandy silt with occasional gravel and trace organics (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Dark brownish-gray fine to medium sand with silt (loose, wet) Approximate ground surface elevation: 14 feet. Test pit completed at 7.5 feet. Slow groundwater seepage observed at 7 feet. Moderate caving observed at 5.5 to 7.5 feet. TS ML SM SP-SM 18 30 Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 70 Probed 3 to 5 inches Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 8 Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 7.5 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-2 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-3 Sheet 1 of 1 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Brown sandy silt with occasional gravel and trace organics (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Dark gray silty fine to medium sand (loose, wet) Approximate ground surface elevation: 13½ feet. Test pit completed at 7 feet. Slow groundwater seepage observed at 6.5 feet. Moderate caving observed at 6 to 7 feet. TS ML SM SM 32 Probed 1 to 2 inches Probed 2 to 4 inches CEC = 10.2 meq Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 15 Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 7.0 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-3 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-4 Sheet 1 of 1 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown sandy silt with roots (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Dark gray fine to medium sand (loose, wet) Approximate ground surface elevation: 14½ feet. Test pit completed at 6.5 feet. Slow groundwater seepage observed at 6.5 feet. Moderate caving observed at 5.5 to 6.5 feet. TS ML SM SP 15 Probed 1 to 2 inches Probed 1 to 3 inches Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 3 Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 1 / 1 / 1 3 P a t h : P : \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 6.5 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-4 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-5 Sheet 1 of 1 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown sandy silt with roots (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Dark gray fine to medium sand (loose, wet) Approximate ground surface elevation: 15 feet. Test pit completed at 7 feet. Slow groundwater seepage observed at 7 feet. Moderate caving observed at 5 to 7 feet. TS ML SM SP Probed 1 to 3 inches Probed 2 to 4 inches CEC = 10.3 meq Probed 1 to 3 inches Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 7.0 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-5 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-6 Sheet 1 of 1 1 2 3 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown sandy silt with trace organics (stiff, moist) Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, moist) Dark gray fine to medium sand with silt (loose, wet) Approximate ground surface elevation: 16 feet. Test pit completed at 8 feet. Slow groundwater seepage observed at 7.5 feet. Moderate caving observed at 6 to 8 feet. TS ML SM SP-SM 25 Probed 1 to 3 inches Probed 1 to 3 inches Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 11 Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 8.0 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-6 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-7 Sheet 1 of 1 1 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown silty fine sand with trace organics (medium dense, moist) Approximate ground surface elevation: 12½ feet. Test pit completed at 2 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. No caving observed. TS SM 11 Probed 1 to 3 inches %F = 40; OC = 2% Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 2.0 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-7 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-8 Sheet 1 of 1 1 6 inches sod and topsoil Light brown silt with occasional sand and trace organics (stiff, moist) Approximate ground surface elevation: 13 feet. Test pit completed at 2 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. No caving observed. TS ML 7 Probed 1 to 3 inches OC = 3% Notes: See Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. Se a t t l e : D a t e : 1 0 / 2 8 / 1 3 P a t h : \ \ S E A \ P R O J E C T S \ 0 \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 \ 0 0 \ G I N T \ 0 1 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 . G P J D B T e m p l a t e / L i b T e m p l a t e : G E O E N G I N E E R S 8 . G D T / G E I 8 _ T E S T P I T _ 1 P _ G E O T E C Date Excavated: Equipment: Logged By:8/7/2013 Mini-excavator Total Depth (ft) ET 2.0 Te s t i n g S a m p l e De p t h ( f e e t ) 1 2 SAMPLE Gr a p h i c L o g El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Sa m p l e N a m e Te s t i n g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gr o u p Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n En c o u n t e r e d W a t e r Mo i s t u r e Co n t e n t , % REMARKS Log of Test Pit TP-8 Boeing Building 25-20, Parking Lot Addition Renton, Washington 0120-280-00 Project: Project Location: Project Number:Figure A-9 Sheet 1 of 1 APPENDIX D Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use September 26, 2024 | Page D-1 File No. 09061-019-01 APPENDIX D REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USE1 This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks with respect to the use of this report. Read These Provisions Closely It is important to recognize that the geoscience practices (geotechnical engineering, geology and environmental science) rely on professional judgment and opinion to a greater extent than other engineering and natural science disciplines, where more precise and/or readily observable data may exist. To help clients better understand how this difference pertains to our services, GeoEngineers includes the following explanatory “limitations” provisions in its reports. Please confer with GeoEngineers if you need to know more how these “Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use” apply to your project or site. Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons and Projects This report has been prepared for Unico Properties, LLC and other members of the project team and for the Project(s) specifically identified in the report. The information contained herein is not applicable to other sites or projects. GeoEngineers structures its services to meet the specific needs of its clients. No party other than the party to whom this report is addressed may rely on the product of our services unless we agree to such reliance in advance and in writing. Within the limitations of the agreed scope of services for the Project, and its schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with our revised Proposal with Unico Properties, LLC dated March 1, 2024 and generally accepted geotechnical practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. We do not authorize, and will not be responsible for, the use of this report for any purposes or projects other than those identified in the report. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report is based on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors This report has been prepared for the Longacres Campus Master Plan EIS in Renton, Washington. GeoEngineers considered a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of services for this project and report. Unless GeoEngineers specifically indicates otherwise, it is important not to rely on this report if it was: ■ Not prepared for you; ■ Not prepared for your project; ■ Not prepared for the specific site explored; or ■ Completed before important project changes were made. For example, changes that can affect the applicability of this report include those that affect: ■ The function of the proposed structure; ■ Elevation, configuration, location, orientation or weight of the proposed structure; 1 Developed based on material provided by GBA, GeoProfessional Business Association; www.geoprofessional.org. September 26, 2024 | Page D-2 File No. 09061-019-01 ■ Composition of the design team; or ■ Project ownership. If changes occur after the date of this report, GeoEngineers cannot be responsible for any consequences of such changes in relation to this report unless we have been given the opportunity to review our interpretations and recommendations. Based on that review, we can provide written modifications or confirmation, as appropriate. Environmental Concerns are Not Covered Unless environmental services were specifically included in our scope of services, this report does not provide any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations, including but not limited to, the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Subsurface Conditions Can Change This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. The findings and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by man-made events such as construction on or adjacent to the site, new information or technology that becomes available subsequent to the report date, or by natural events such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability or groundwater fluctuations. If more than a few months have passed since issuance of our report or work product, or if any of the described events may have occurred, please contact GeoEngineers before applying this report for its intended purpose so that we may evaluate whether changed conditions affect the continued reliability or applicability of our conclusions and recommendations. Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on field observations from widely spaced sampling locations at the site. Site exploration identifies the specific subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoEngineers reviewed field and laboratory data and then applied its professional judgment to render an informed opinion about subsurface conditions at other locations. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from the opinions presented in this report. Our report, conclusions and interpretations are not a warranty of the actual subsurface conditions. Geotechnical Engineering Report Recommendations are Not Final We have developed the following recommendations based on data gathered from subsurface investigation(s). These investigations sample just a small percentage of a site to create a snapshot of the subsurface conditions elsewhere on the site. Such sampling on its own cannot provide a complete and accurate view of subsurface conditions for the entire site. Therefore, the recommendations included in this report are preliminary and should not be considered final. GeoEngineers’ recommendations can be finalized only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. GeoEngineers cannot assume responsibility or liability for the recommendations in this report if we do not perform construction observation. We recommend that you allow sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation during construction by GeoEngineers to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes if the conditions revealed during the work September 26, 2024 | Page D-3 File No. 09061-019-01 differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether earthwork activities are completed in accordance with our recommendations. Retaining GeoEngineers for construction observation for this project is the most effective means of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. If another party performs field observation and confirms our expectations, the other party must take full responsibility for both the observations and recommendations. Please note, however, that another party would lack our project- specific knowledge and resources. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report Could Be Subject to Misinterpretation Misinterpretation of this report by members of the design team or by contractors can result in costly problems. GeoEngineers can help reduce the risks of misinterpretation by conferring with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report, reviewing pertinent elements of the design team’s plans and specifications, participating in pre-bid and preconstruction conferences, and providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Exploration Logs Geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. The logs included in a geotechnical engineering or geologic report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but separating logs from the report can create a risk of misinterpretation. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance To help reduce the risk of problems associated with unanticipated subsurface conditions, GeoEngineers recommends giving contractors the complete geotechnical engineering or geologic report, including these “Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use.” When providing the report, you should preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal that: ■ Advises contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that its accuracy is limited; and ■ Encourages contractors to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. Contractors are Responsible for Site Safety on Their Own Construction Projects Our geotechnical recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor’s procedures, methods, schedule or management of the work site. The contractor is solely responsible for job site safety and for managing construction operations to minimize risks to on-site personnel and adjacent properties. Biological Pollutants GeoEngineers’ Scope of Work specifically excludes the investigation, detection, prevention or assessment of the presence of Biological Pollutants. Accordingly, this report does not include any interpretations, recommendations, findings or conclusions regarding the detecting, assessing, preventing or abating of Biological Pollutants, and no conclusions or inferences should be drawn regarding Biological Pollutants as they may relate to this project. The term “Biological Pollutants” includes, but is not limited to, molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses, and/or any of their byproducts. September 26, 2024 | Page D-4 File No. 09061-019-01 A Client that desires these specialized services is advised to obtain them from a consultant who offers services in this specialized field. Information Provided by Others GeoEngineers has relied upon certain data or information provided or compiled by others in the performance of our services. Although we use sources that we reasonably believe to be trustworthy, GeoEngineers cannot warrant or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of information provided or compiled by others.