The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03063 - Technical Information Report - Geotechnical � :��e��=` -��6; . _ ''-��'''"` i.�'._ ,_ .:� �-`. _�� Associated � . "= j�� E a rt h � ,y. Geotechnica! Engineering � S c i e n c e s ,. �.�-�� r � � t1 C . � - - , �� y - � ��_ _ �- . � "--"�- �� Subsurface Exploration;'Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Water Resources � �� ,. RENTON AQUATIC CENTER Renton, Washin�ton ::� "` �,�T ��y„�"� Prepared for Solid and Hazardous Waste '._.�ii City of Renton -�� Project No. KE02672A � �� December 2, 2002 .�-- ��`' f�� Ecoiogical/Bioiogicai Sciences L'i! � ` - � I �.�r`•�-'� " , I Geologic Assessments 3 c�ca3 , Associated Earth Sciences , Inc . � � � � K.� December 2, 2002 Project No. KE02672A Citv of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 9805� Attention: Nir. Dennis Culp Subject: Subsurface EYploration, Geologic Hazard, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Renton Aquatic Center Renton, Washing�on Dear Mr. Culp: We are pleased to present the enclosed copies of the above-referenced report. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface e�cploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical engineering studies and offers reconunendations for the preliminary design and development of the proposed project. Our recommendations are preliminary in that definite building locations andi or construction details have not been developed at the time of this report. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington Kurt D. Mernman, P.E. Senior Associate Engineer � KDM/ib KE02672A3 Projec[s'�00267?\KE\WP-W2K �� I, 91 I Fikh Avenue,Suite i p0 •Kirkiand,WA 98033 � ?hone 425 827?701 • Fax 425 627-5424 � SUBSURFACE EXPLOR.ATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT RENTON AQUATIC CENTER � Renton, Washington Preparecl for: , City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Prep�rred by: - Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 �`� Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fa�c: 425-827-5424 December 2, 2002 Project No. KE02672A Su6surfcice �iplorntio�t, Geologic Ha;.arcl, <urd Re�uor�Aqturtic Ce►uer Preluni�ian' Geotechnical E►gi�reerrng Report Re�rton, W�slringlon Projeet cnrd Site Con�litiau I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Renton Aquatic Center. The proposed facility will be located near the existing City of Renton Community Center southeast of the intersection of SR-169 and I-405, in Renton Washington as shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Our recommendations are preliminary in that site grading information and construction details have not been finalized at the time of this report. The approximate locations of the eYplorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The site features shown on Figure 2 are based on a site plan provided by Coughlin Porter Lundeen (CPL). In the event that any changes in the na[ure, design, or location of the structures is planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be revie��ed and modified, or verified, as necessary. 1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the preliminar}� design and development of the above-referenced project. Our study included a review of available literature, excavation of exploration borings, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments, and ground water conditions. Geologic hazard evaluations and engineering studies were also conducted to determine suitable geologic hazard mitigation techniques, the type of suitable foundation, allowable bearing pressures, anticipated settlements, basement/retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommendations, and drainage considerations. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by the City of Renton on November 7, 2002. Our study was accomplished in general accordance with our scope of work letter dated October 25, 2002. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the City of Renton and their a�ents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, lNC. SGB/Ib-KE0367'atJ-Projecrsl'0p?6T_IKEIWP-LY_�K Page 1 Si�bsr�rface Erploration, Geologic Haz.nrd, n�id � Re�iton Aquatic Center Preliminan� Geotechnical Engrneering Report Reritora, Washingto�t Project and Site Conditions 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION � This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a site plan provided , by CPL dated October 2, 2002, a site reconnaissance, and our familiarity with previous geotechnical work performed in the site area. We completed a subsurface exploration program consisting of two exploration borings on November 11, 2002. We understand the City of Renton intends upon constructing a new aquatic center adjacent to the existing communiry center. The area proposed for construction would measure some 350 ! feet by 250 feet in plan dimension. The development would include a six-lane lap pool, a kiddy pool, water slides, wave pool, and picnic area, as well as buildings to support changing I rooms, restrooms, concessions, and mechanical equipment. The majority of the area would be I hard-surfaced or landscaped with grass. The project area is primarily undeveloped, with a cover of grass and scattered trees. A covered picnic area and restroom facility is located on the northeast portion of the proposed development area. The site slopes very gently towards the Cedar River located about 700 to 800 feet to the southwest. The property is surrounded by light commercial properties. Site access is from SR-169, also know as the Maple Valley Highway. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) performed a subsurface exploration of the site on November 11, 2002. Our field study included advancing five exploration borings to gain subsurface information about the site. A ground water monitoring well (piezometer) was installed in one of the borings to record future ground water measurements. The various types of soils, as well as the depths where characteristics of the soils changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed represent gradational variations between soil types in the field. Our explorations were approximately located in the field by measuring from known site features and are shown on Figure 2. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the five exploration borings completed for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!b-KEO?67'�13-Projectsl3003673�KElWP-6V3K Page 2 St�bsterj"ace Erplorntio�r, Geologic Ha;.arcl, a�id Renta►�fquatic Center Preliminary Geotechnica!Engi�Teeriirg Report Rento�l, Waslringtai Project a►td Site Cortditio�is 3.1 Exploration Borings E,r•ploration borings were advanced with a Mobile B53 track-mounted drill rig. The borings permitted limited visual observation of subsurface conditions. Representative samples of the soils encountered were obtained from the borings using a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler. The SPT sampler obtains disturbed samples and was driven into the soil using a 140- pound hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches is recorded on the boring logs. Materials encountered in the exploration borings were studied and classified in the field by a geotechnical engineer from our �rm. All exploration borings were sealed with bentonite and cement immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classitication and testing, as necessary. The boring logs have been attached to this report as an Appendix. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations completed for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of applicable geologic literature. As shown on the field logs, the exploration borings generally encountered up to 6 inches of sod and topsoil, overlying natural deposits of Quaternary alluvium. The alluvium consists of silty to clean sand and gravel. In general, the upper horizon of the alluvium was loose to medium dense silty sand. With depth, the alluvium graded to medium dense to dense, clean sandy aravel. The top of the dense alluvium varied from 1 foot in EB-1 and EB-4 to about 10 feet in �he other borings. This bearing depth is shown in parentheses on Figure 2. The soil conditions encountered in our explorations are consistent with the published geologic mapping of the area. In particular, we reviewed the Geologic Map of Renton Qc�adrangle. King Coaertty, Washington, prepared by D.R. Mullineaux, 1965. This publication shows the project site underlain by Quaternary alluvium consisting of fine-grained floodplain deposits over coarser-grained river channel deposits. 4.1 Hydrology We did not encounter ground water in any exploration borings at the time of our study. However, very moist and oxidized soil occurred below 10 feet in EB-4 and EB-5. Given the site's close proximity to the Cedar River and the relatively dry climatic conditions in the Puget Sound Region over the past year, we elected to install a piezometer in EB-5, although ground water was not encountered within the upper 20 feet of the ground surface. Ground water at this site represents unconfined aquifer conditions common to alluvial plain deposits. Ground water elevations may rise significantly following extended periods of wet weather. We will monit�r the piezometer occasionallv over the unc�mina ��inter months t� evaluate �r�und December 2, ..'(XJ2 AS'S'UCIAT�U��1RTH S(,Yb,Y'CbJ', !.'. --,� � --,� .,,�, ,ti,,, -. �� - .- Pa�<� I Subsurface Erploralion, Geologic Hazard, and Re�rton Aq►iatic Ce�rter Prelr►niiinrv Geotechnrcal Engineering Report Renton, j�'ashi�igtoit Geologic Hazards a�id Mitigc�tions II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic conditions as observed and discussed herein. 5.0 SLOPE STABILITY HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION There are no steep slopes within the immediate project vicinity. Consequently, the risk of earth movement on the subject property is low due to the site's relatively flat topography. 6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION Earthquakes occur in the Puget Sound Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur as evidenced by the most recent 6.8-magnitude event on February 28, 2001 near Olympia Washington, the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event, and the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this area during recorded history. Evaluation of return rates indicates that an earthquake of the maanitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within a given 20-year period. � Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is discussed below. 6.1 Surficial Ground Rupture The nearest known fault trace to the project site is the Seattle Fault. Recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (e.g., Johnson et al., 1994, Origin and Evolution of the Seattle Facclt and Seattle Basin, Washington, Geology, v. 22, pp. 71-74; and Johnson et al., 1999, Active Tectonics of the Seattle Faaclt and Central Puget Sound Washin�ton — Implications for Earthqacake Hazards, Geological Society of America Bulletin, July 1999, v. 111, n. 7, pp. 1042-1053) have provided evidence of surficial ground rupture along a northern splay of the Seattle Fault. The recognition of this fault splay is relatively new and data pertaining to it are limited with the studies still ongoing. According to the U.S. Geological Survey studies, the latest movement of this fault was about 1,100 years ago when about 20 feet of surficial displacement took place. This displacement can presently be seen in the form of raised, wave- cut beach terraces along Alki Point in West Seattle and Restoration Point at the south end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of movement along these fault systems is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess of several thousand years. Due to the December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!b-KE0367�r13-Projects12C0?6721KEIWP-LtnK Page 4 Subsr�rface Erploration. Geologrc Ha<,ard, mid Renton Aqiuitic Center Preliminary Geotechr:ical Enguieering Repon Re�►ton, lUashi�igtort Geologic Ha<,ards c�nd rNitigarions suspected long recurrence interval, the potential for surficial ground rupture is considered to be lo�v during the expected life of the proposed structure. 6.2 Seismically Induced Landslides There are no steep slopes within the immediate project vicinity. Consequently, the risk of seismically induced landsliding on the subject property is low due to the site's relatively flat topography. 6.3 Liquefaction Under the present ground water conditions, the encountered stratigraphy has a low potential for liquefaction due to the dense condition of the gravel and the depth to ground water exceeding 20 feet. However, following extended periods of extremely high precipitation, ;round water could rise to within 10 or 15 feet of the ground surface, or even higher during flooding events. The risk of liquefaction would increase if foundations were to be placed on the loose upper sandy alluvium. The risk to the structures could be mitigated by founding them on the lower dense gravel or replacing the upper loose material with compacted structural fill, or rock beneath the footings. Short aggregate pier foundations would also mitigate the liquefaction risk. 6.� Ground Motion The project site is located within a Zone 3 rating for seismic activity on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest) based on the Seismic Zone Map of the Uriited States, Figure No. 16-2 in the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). This zonation is based on past earthquake activity in the Puget Sound region. As such, design recommendations in the report accommodate the possible effect of seismic activity in areas with a Zone 3 rating, corresponding to a peak ground acceleration of 0.3g (a Richter magnitude 7.5 earthquake occurring directly beneath the site), in accordance with UBC guidelines, using soil type So. 7.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION To mitigate and reduce the erosion hazard potential and off-site soil transport, we recommend the following: 1) All storm water from impermeable surfaces should be tightlined into an approved storm water drainage system or temporary storage facilities. 2) To reduce the amount of soil transport, silt fences should be placed along the site margins. December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SClENCES, /NC. SGB%76-KEO'67?A3-Projecrs�°Oi0?6T_'IKEI4i'P-l4'�K Page 5 Subsurjace Erploration, Geologic H�rzard, and Renton Aquatic Ce�tter Prelimiirary Geotechnical Engi�reering Report Renton, Washington Geologic Hnzards and Mitigations 3) Construction should proceed during the drier periods of the year and disturbed , areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. �I 4) Soils to be reused around the site should be stored in such manner as to reduce � erosion. Protective measures may include, but are not necessarily limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, or the use of straw bales/silt fences. � December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED F.�1RTK SCIE�YCES, INC. SGB�'lb-KEO?67'r13-Projects120026721KElWP-W'K Page 6 � Sribsurf�zce Erplorntivn, Groli�oic Ha��n-d, cind �� Rento�:Aquatic Ce»ter Prelin:inary Geotecfuucal Engineering Report Renton, Wns{�ingtat Preliminary Design Recommendations III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECONIME�iDATIONS I, 8.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the proposed development provided the risks discussed are accepted and the recommendations contained herein are properly followed. We anticipate that construction of the pools will require excavation to depths of about 8 to 10 feet. The bearing stratum of inedium dense to dense alluvium occurs at depths ranging from 8 to 10 feet within the proposed changing room building area, and depths ranging from 1 to 10 feet within the currently proposed pool areas. Therefore, it may be beneficial to consider relocating the proposed structures such that the pools are located within the areas of deeper bearing soils, and the buildings are located near the southeast site corner where shallow bearing soils occur. Limited removal and replacement of the loose surficial deposits is recommended for conventional foundation support. Alternately, short aggregate pier foundations could be used for support of the building using a higher allo«-able bearing pressure. 9.0 SITE PREPARATIOI� Site preparation of planned building, pool, and other improvement areas should include removal of all trees, and any other deleterious material. Following demolition of the existing covered picnic area, any remaining foundation elements should be removed. Any buried utilities should be removed or relocated if they are under building or pool construction areas. The resulting depressions should be backfilled with structural fill as discussed under the Strcectccral Fill section of this report. Additionally, the upper sod and organic topsoil should be removed and the remaining roots grubbed. Areas where loose surficial soils exist due to grubbing operations should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated as subsequently recommended for structural fill placement. In the explorations completed for this study, the bearing stratum of inedium dense to dense alluvium occurs at depths ranging from 8 to 10 feet within the proposed building area, and depths ranging from 1 to 10 feet within the currently proposed pool areas. Since the density of the soil at the site is highly variable, random soft pockets may exist at the indicated bearing depth. Therefore, the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the �eld by the geotechnical engineer. `'Jhere possible, building, sidewalk areas, and pool eYcavation subgrades should be proof- rolled with a loaded, tandem-axle dump truck to identify any soft spots; soft areas should be overexcavated and back�lled with structural fill. If proof-rolling is not possible within the construction space or construction is to proceed during wet weather, we recommend systematic probing in place of proof-rolling to identify soft areas of the exposed subgrade. December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SG6i7b-KE0367'.93-Projerrs13G0?6T_'iKEIWP-w3K Page 7 Su6surface Erploratiar, Geologic Ha<,ard, a�:d Reirtat Aqcratic Ce�rter Preliminary Geotechnic�rl Engineering Repon Re�itar, tiV�rslri�igto�i Prelin�i►ian�Desig�t Recontmendations In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, however, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the loose to medium dense sand and gravel alluvium can be made at a maximum slope of 2H:1V(Horizontal:Vertical). As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. 10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL All references to structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, and placement and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specitied under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used. Construction plans are preliminary at this stage and do not include site grading information. However, placement of structural fill may be necessary in order to achieve the desired site grades. After stripping, planning excavation, and any required overexcavation has been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer, the upper 12 inches of exposed �round in building areas or areas to receive fill should be recompacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. Some of the near- �' surface soils contain moderate quantities of silt and are considered somewhat moisture- sensitive. Therefore, if the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain, and should probably not be attempted before allowing the subgrade to dry/drain adequately. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to 9� percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. The majority of on-site soils are suitable for use as structural fill. In the case of utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current local or county codes and standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the location of the perimeter footings before sloping down at an angle of 2H:1V. The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 72 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of tine-grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. The upper 3 to 4 feet of soil over portions of the site contain more than 12 percent silt. As December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGBAb-KE0267_'A3-Projectsl?00?672tKEiWP-W2K Page 8 I Sr�bsurface Erploratiar, Geologic Ha;.ard, und Renton�iquatic Center Preliminary Geoteclutical Engineering Report Rentoit, Wc�shingto�i Preliminarv Design Recomniendatioits such, some of the site soils are considered moisture-sensitive. In addition, construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free-draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by ��eight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction and at least 25 percent retained on the No. 4 sieve. A representative from our tirm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present durin� placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in- place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses, and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a suitable monitoring and testing frequency. 11.0 FOUNDATIONS Spread Footings Spread footings may be utilized for building support when founded either directly on the medium dense to dense alluvial sand and gravel deposits, or a zone of structural fill that extends down to a depth of 4 feet below the base of foundations or to the medium dense sand and gravel deposits, whichever is less. Structural fill should conform to that described under the Site Preparation and Strc�ctitrnl Fill sections of this report. Structural fill placed below footings must extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the edges of the footings. We recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (ps� be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads for footings founded either directly upon the medium dense to dense alluvial sand and gravel deposits or structural fill as described above. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. For higher allowable soil bearing pressures, the foundation should be supported by short aggregate piers (Geopiers�'� as presented subsequently. Perimeter footings for the proposed buildings should be buried a minimum of 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. No minimum burial depth is required for interior footings; however, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footings should be founded in or above loose or organic existing soils. To limit settlements, all footings should have a minimum width of 14 inches for one-story structures or 16 inches for two-story structures. It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at 1H:1V from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area which has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. In addition, a 1.SH:1V line extending Deeember 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, I,vr _ __,. _ _ __ . , ., __, P��, Subsurface Erploration, Geofogic Hazard, aitd Rentoii Aquatic Center Prelimi�tarv Geotedtnical Engineering Repon Rento�a, Washi►igton Preliminarv Design Recommendations do�vn from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the ed�e of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be on the order of 3/.� inch. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. Aggreaate Pier Foundations An alternative to supporting the building on a limited thickness of structural fill with a reduced bearing pressure would be to prepare the building pad for construction by installation of short aggregate piers (GeopiersT""). Aggregate piers are constructed by creating a drilled cavity in the matrix soil, and filling the cavity with aggregate that is densely compacted in thin lifts. The compaction typically induces densification in the surrounding matrix soil, and aggregate volumes in excess of the initial cavity volume are expected. Aggregate piers are installed along continuous foundation bearing walls and at spread foundation locations, and may be installed beneath slab-on-grade floor areas, if needed. Following installation of aggregate piers, the site is finish-graded and conventional shallow foundations are constructed above the aggregate piers. If aggregate piers are selected, the pier subcontractor in conjunction with the project structural engineer should provide the final design of the foundation system includin� the number and locations of piers, depths, diameters, and load bearing capacities. After the piers are designed and constructed, the resulting foundations should yield a bearing capacity of 3,500 to 4,000 pounds per cubic foot (pcfl. Pier Inspection The actual total length of each pier will be adjusted in the field based on required capacity and conditions encountered during drilling. Since completion of the pier takes place below ground, the judgment and experience of the geotechnical engineer or his field representative must be used as a basis for determining the required penetration and acceptability of each pic Consequently, use of the presented pier capacities in the design requires that all piers 1 inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist from our firm who c:. interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractors operations. AESI, acti�. as the owner's field representative, would determine the required lengths of the piers and ke� records of pertinent installation data. -1 fin�l �ummar��: rer��rt �.��t:ld the�! he di�trihut�� fnll��vinn c�mnlet��n �f nier in�tallati�n I December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SC/ENCES, 1,�� ., �. r��=�. ,:�� , ,:e _�ti,,�, ��r� .�,�,�- ..,,�. PaQe 10 ; Subsurjace Erpfor�ttion, Geologic Hn<.ard, and Rento�i Aqc�ntic Center Preliminary Geotecfrnical Engineering Report Renton, Washington Prelintinr�ry Design Reconunend��iais 12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT Slab-on-grade floors can be constructed directly on medium dense to dense alluvium, Geopiers�`, or a maximum of 2 feet of structural fill compacted to 95 percent of ASTM:D- 1557. Areas of the slab subgrade that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be recompacted to an unyielding condition prior to placing the pea gravel, as described below. The floor should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of washed, uniformly graded granulithic material or pea gravel to act as a capillary break. Areas of slab subgrade that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be compacted to a non-yielding condition prior to placement of capillary break material. The slab should also be protected from dampness by an impervious moisture barrier or otherwise sealed. The impervious barrier should be placed between the capillary break material and an optional 2- to 3-inch-thick layer of sand. The sand helps to protect the vapor barrier from damage and allows drainage of the slab during curing provided the slab is poured when the sand is dry. Therefore, the sand layer must not be exposed to rain or snow prior to pouring the slab. 13.0 SWIMMING POOL RECONiMENDATIONS We understand a 25-yard, 6-lane lap pool and a wave pool are planned for construction. Since significant excavation for these pools will be required, we recommend the pools be founded on the medium dense to dense gravelly alluvium. We anticipate that construction of the proposed pools will require sloping of the sidewalls of the excavations at slopes of 2H:1V because the cleaner sand within the upper soil horizon will likely not support steeper cut slopes. Therefore, some type of retaininQ wall or cast-in-place system will be necessary to construct vertical pool side walls. The following section presents appropriate retaining wall design parameters. If some other type of retaining wall or other than a cast-in-place (backfilled) wall is used, we should be provided with pool design drawings to determine if the lateral earth pressures below are appropriate for the proposed design. Ground water was not encountered in our soil borings during our subsurface exploration. However, ground water may rise to elevations high enough to impose hydrostatic pressures on the base and sides of the proposed pools following extended periods of intense precipitation. We installed a piezometer in EB-5 to monitor ground water elevations throughout the winter and spring. Given that the site resides within close proximity to the Cedar River, the pools should be designed with a drainage system to allow for relief of hydrostatic pressure around and beneath the pool. Alternatively, the pool should be designed to accommodate hydrostatic uplift pressures. With ongoing ground water monitoring, it will be possible to estimate a seasonal high ground water level for incorporation into the design. December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/16-KE0167'�113-Projectsl?00?6T_'IK£IWP-W:'K Page 11 Subsurfnce Erplorarior�, Geologic Ha<.nrd, and Rentat Aquntic Ceiiter Preliminary Geotechnical E�rgi�leering Repon Renro�t, 1Vnshi►tgton Prelimi�lary Desigii Recontmendations 14.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES Finished floor elevations were not provided. However, we anticipate that retaining walls may be necessary for the proposed construction. All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pcf. Fully restrained, horizontally backfilled rigid walls, which cannot yield, should be designed for an equivalent fluid of 50 pcf. If parking areas are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill consisting of on-site sand and gravel soil, compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended, as this will increase the pressure acting on the wall. A lower compaction may result in settlement of structures, utilities, or concrete pavement placed above the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by ' our firm during placement. Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction equipment, or sloping backfill must be added to the above values. Perimeter footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the wall. This would involve installation of a minimum 1-foot-wide washed gravel blanket drain, which is continuous with the perimeter footing drain and extends to within 1 foot of the ground surface. 14.1 Passive Resistance and Friction Factors Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural alluvial soils or supporting structural fill, or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with structural �11 and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density to achieve the passive resistance provided belo��v. We recommend the following design parameters: • Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf • Coefficient of friction = .35 The above values are allowable and include a safety factor of at least 1.5. 15.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS The majority of on-site soils will likely provide adequate drainage during post-construction heavy precipitation events. However, some method should be in place to contain any storm December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB�(b-KEO?67'�13-Projecrs',_'00'67?iKEiWP-W3K Page 12 S�ebsurfnce Erploratiat, Geologic Ha;.ard, and Renro�t Aquatic Ce�rter Prelimii►ary Geotechnical Engiiteering Repon Rentoir, Wnshington Prelimi�tary Design Recommendatiau «-ater runoff and discharge it to a suitable collection system during the earthwork portion of construction in the event that runoff does occur. Therefore, prior to site work and during construction, the contractor should be prepared to provide temporary storm water storage or discharge mechanisms as necessary. All retaining and footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be at the bottom of the footing at all locations and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. In addition, all retaining walls should be lined with a minimum 12-inch-thick washed gravel blanket provided over the full height of the wall, and which ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to ��alls should be sloped downward a��ay from the structure to achieve surface draina�e. 16.0 PAVEMENT RECOMIviENDATIONS Based on our current understanding of the project, construction of new asphalt pavement is not planned. However, site surfacing will likely consist of concrete pavement. Site preparation for these areas should consist of overexcavating to remove the existing vegetation, topsoil, and any loose/soft upper soils to expose the underlying stable soils. Since the density of the upper soils is variable, random loose/soft areas may exist and the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by the geotechnical engineer. To limit differential settlement and cracking of the concrete pavement, we recommend overexcavating areas to receive concrete by 18 inches and replacing this material with compacted structural fill. The excavated soils can be used as fill provided the moisture content at the time of compaction allows for the minimum specified compaction. In addition, the subgrade should be slightly inverted to drain toward the catch basins or surface drains. After the area to be paved is overexcavated, the exposed ground should be recompacted to 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. Structural fill may then be placed to achieve desired subbase grades. Upon completion of the recompaction and structural fill placement, the recommended minimum pavement section is 6 inches of reinforced concrete pavement underlain by 4 inches of 1 '/a-inch minus crushed rock base course with less than 3 percent material retained on the No. 200 sieve. The crushed rock course must be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density. 17.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING At the time of this report, site grading, structural plans, and construction methods have not been developed. Therefore, the recommendations presented herein are preliminary. We are December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. SGB/!b-KEO?67'113-Projecrs12002 6 73 1KE1WP-W2K Page 13 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hnzard, and '' Renton Aquatic Ce�iter Prelimi�rary Geotechnical Engi�teering Report Renton, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. I�irkland, Washington ��5��:;3. �'f;'� ��.�. �""��,�°�r.�. ',yc.�'�.`�- :�r,... +b "i J�,6.a ; �'��{� J � o � ,_��.-� � �, Z � � � c. �r} � .:;�.-'v '", C�,'I�,1,r,'Ft:�% r� � .�:�,s� J��j�?dAL��'� . •------- --t - �-��Gfi`'...Jf��' . i�'j(,�f� �S�c�ti� 11 ;2Q I� 1 r�..� �� Susan G. Beckham, P.E. Kurt D. Merriman, P.E. Project Engineer Senior Associate Engineer Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site and Exploration Plan Appendix: Exploration Logs December 2, 2002 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. SGB/Jb-KE0267'�r13-Projects120026731KEIWP-W3K Page 14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — .. . . ., . . . .. .`�. .; .• �xi+3ia. �n' -��,"tx`•t Y.Le[fdilt.`{62dt1 ' � ��7f 'L" ry,��+N.phYGPFYYF.�/?.�� . ��. �.-._'iv z, +> >:Jw:lit:ta�....ri . � � Y�OC�9�1i�.� I(�. ��'� t .. '`•�+ !L !O ' ' ..r 1 'f .. , _ � / . �� V ` •� . v u . I� -- a' ��•�9 ��. �r << ` _ j�>7 v Z 42; �; 1 �',1.� I,1ti 0 ��,'. - ., : , .. � t :. � , �f/1 L$h . . �' . , _ . �� p ,: , . !' � -. (r .: j �, '-,' � a�� - �; �,;- � ,r�� ,;;� `� � . - ,- „- ��. : .. ;I � .. .. .. . . _ ` . _ r 1 ` �K =-� NE 91 H '�1 4 �� ' IT,.,� I' � �i : cn i �?'n� fL � � � `' ' , H1111 - � I 1'� .. ■ Q � �a� i,:� ' r^.. O +:� 4' L'C ' i n. y. < � / � tn „ _ �.0 -�J - �,� '1' 0 — -i �5 r;, .-o � I �`�S� .�. � M , .. �,• , � i ^' n s tiN,, '�` . - l J ti(u, i .f �, *� . z A I R f'0 T Wy r � __ :; • , ��,\�� , �ym , , ` , �c: ,i ' `\ /��/✓ �` --- —'`--- _ ' � � • _� `ILCi ,v �a'vn � � , . � t. D ��' -. �- I'.•i'.. Sf r ' i... ,j+ .� �� .: �,v, '2 • � � '� �`•. '' � -!b " '��I ,f� `'� �+,; ��, ,:y __ :fC-(fr�:. � :r. 4.'.. ��'iw � , , �� \\ ' � �j��C 4:y�f �`' .LY Z i, " . I 'r( �' � � � " : _ -' �(! a.�� :'z �, �` \' �7 � � v.F,� ..�� Li3f�T'G� � ��yl: \\ � . �JJ�'_ �� k •,�w � � v, �i/ .\ ;f t `-. 3) � ' Y � � ,�� Va�'''c,� `\ :. �: r--:' ` �,.».f � .�'�—`__ .. / 1 ., .�. �� .. �' ` .` Y^ -- --/. -_��_ r ,' ' \ �� ,.i `�. � t '\t'"�, �. � � C� � � ;. ,i` �` \ l'� ' d,I .r �?� .. \`� .�<. _ :1Y� . . T` ' O .r_` � \ _ ' �1 �y :a f� . " �: �f ,_ . J__' .it��/'7T . \. • .•� �L � � S __ ' � ' `�' J�� ITE. �,, \\ e ?;l .i r, �, 4. ,; .:a ,`s�-- - � �'�•'F \ ` ' „9 ,r , - ,r , ��<ti: ; ,i,. \ �•, - u � �?, � �E �,�.� ': ��t i� � �1. �`� i� �p� , �i. ' `� �'2 �� ' \ Vr+�. ��. 1'; ' r�..,�� u 5ii! ,i F,p c4 , , '� . � Y: . . 1 ` �'� �. .. O:� ,, �_r � � � � .. ' � .Yl�f�l�l f� . `i�;\` Y (.. .'�r^`r ti: �� ' �� i. � ,� ` -�TII ST -^ P.7RA" A,. al+�c[ !ir ° �` '?'. �; ? i Y S.u., i l � �� _ '._ +` .."•,""""""""""" ....._..""' ♦tf[` �,., J': ' �� 'i �i _; - ,,� �s j' ' � ,,, .. �� r7 :��' i e' � ;: S �1'�H' S1� �� "� " : ,r�� F r •,� • \ � : ! �� s .,�� CEDAR RI�ER `�: �� {;,: r 9�, � ' � y = . ,�` L1 t > 's � � • ' ;�,. ' `� ,t �;t � , v11 ,,,- ,c'� F' ,t ,i ai i,p ,�t- . " - � Gp p,�)� ,' — � �^ ` _ ,�tiva� :K;t, , _ � . lv'ATURAL ZOIJE . , V y ',. o •, ,� W; P.:� t:�': � .. � - 1k � ,- r'•. �\l �� `' , FEtIT�:rtl 'JILLia=E . _ '�., .' =,f�. � Oc . . a cF. :v h' d . - �k�...�;r FL _. .lr� F` �,�-.��R �y�. a s "�`ti v'1 ' �'� Z. •1`c� G�'! ��r q ' ,f� � . ,tC o._ - e � $ ` � ].� �: r. M�y � �2001 ThOmaS 6ro5 IdaGs N . = . .,, ' '� � r��•...,:...�",�.5°..��.yd. � � � ��a..�y:W::..+Y3t3.�;`s.=.a�..,:++;,�zy$�,l=re, _ �:i+�• = . . ; �, lr( .. � ti • -. , �.. � w . A V` N � N g NO SCALE � a � � � Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 € N � � � � � RENTON AQUATIC CENTER DATE 11/02 i u� RENTON, WASHINGTON N PROJ.N0. KE02672A 0 \1 `:� ! ; ' nse.��Q:�O�'��• \\ _.. � _ \\ '��`�, `` � ' � _ � -`wy `�r . � .: `tF9" \,, -- �' . �\ ��,T ,+<'� ' ��\ �'`•,•.\ . s�` � �. . . � ' ��,y h`''Y '\�1'J' � ^ .:.� .,. `'�` �Q"v-Lb � . ) :' ,\ '`• ��.�\ � � ;' ! �� \ ._+ : . `Yf�� l r^�,`.., �, j ` i O .�� Y.: �i�l. I/�� .�. y�k"k � � �� J;s'2`;�y` �' :,��+�' � ., ,w ��'t' � I f (�y w� �,`�,� �. �'•�rs � i� � I �l�-`r�2�' /� � • `� p�� ':� �O ' \J'�1� � \` �x sr�.ti �1 �� . � .< � ;:�d�� . :S� , X '' � " \\ :ai,v,a;.-o� �.J �,�� "� �' ..,; .Cqh . /�� .: �j' :` ��. !iF s- sJ2 ,.. ,. � �� ' � • : •,Y�o�� EB-1�" � .� ,F F- �,- �EB-�' ��:,EB-4. Q�` �� , i�� '�< i,��-c� , ,� „ ;;E;" ; • ��o�� :�' �� 4��/,��-. '�` x��f��/' �Y J , , ;,, . ,, ` , .�,��' ?'',•�:^�`;,� � ',l�i / '',;�' - c� ,.:. ,, ��. . �, 1:� ` �� ,�,/ � / ,,,, .�;°Qe� _ _ i '`�.., _.. �,�,, � ; ��j > , y;,,• " � /, :.� -.�..�n11d" t ;„. .F� r� � �� \ T� Y f" i R ', �` \. ('. �� j t ,r.�//�\`� �`., /iK � 4�' T � �\� ��- � 'T ) ..1 �,��"'.'__ � < � '�'Li` ` ., '' .E B�2 ,�` ,/`--��'' , .. t�, f.c,:�;:� A��s,,��`� �;� ��o)•C, �; ' -, �� ; � � � ��, .,�' ..�� ;' ;�eI ^� ,Y /� .` �\ti y rr.♦ y ,,,, 4�` r , �v-�\a� \ �. ,' K` l`�5'��• ��S•J.1�`f. ,' l 4i '� Jj� -' �r � ` . � t. X �j/�,��' � �;: `� EB-3ts�~ -�� ,1�0 - . �,�� y � . ' .l� � �/ / .`�`� / K • .. E^=I�{!' . .� `',�\ �•, . T• � p C ('�Q � y\ n ,_K, �1!' � /� `.' [� `V.J) J ^�iJ ' ,�/� ' \ '��IiI�C Z / �/ ._____"__ _—,4' �� - '-� ��.�'` �.F_ y"/��.- �^..:/ .j - /:' ! �/` Ex:$'.".-�.�� ~--------- � ��• ._. ' %.l= fi-. ?/'/' ',�; '� ' ' `�\ c�'' a �sc - � �/ � -� �/ Q-�� C� .1�� .. . . .,,_.. -. �.c� �{�i . � f � . �`�� _ _- _ - �''--' , r.� .', ..-�� ' .`2\ --- � -- �_ - .` �-1^.af0 � S�LT `\\ �-- -—:�`"—_'----- � - !2�(a `L`� .`i.;< �� ` ..s;- `'S' �' ;� �t•,�7^ �� . .., ' ��a,�,��J W%�"C �; � �_ �, _. _ flIP �k_. �4-- ��.�.�i'�N`��C�a.�1All�1T �p� Y _"— if.�lC�„��1 �Iwc��i(�.�. _ � � � i ' '` •/ � . }:Lc. i �' Q'��- �Y . ""_� __._ _i1_.,t�ONI�/ '.�-7__.._..— _'___'—"__�—�`_ ..'_ �� I 1�i —. '� �� R O �C�.SC�!�I IJ I__I__�— _ �.\ � r�''s`��s.�? .�..s4xeNr ; — :'. . �---_-- - — i;:'%�£7R0 f�SEfrfk_=—L�----- - -��— � - � - - - ---- ---0''�� .... ------- -- ^. � �� .. ,.... . . _ . LEGEND EB-� � Approximate location of exploration boring N � (1) Depth to bearing soils � � - 0 80 y s = APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET � REFERENCE:ARAIIJACKSON ARCHITECTS&PLANNERS,KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS,2/88. U U : Associated Earth Sciences, ��. SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 2 � RENTON AQUATIC CENTER DATE 11/02 � � � � � � RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ.NO. KE02672A � M� A � W � a � � `�ve�l-�,r,:c�yra�el and Terms Describing Reiative Density and Consistency � '.-'-'Gw 5ravel w�th sard.Iittle;o Densih� SPT'Z�blowsifcot " " • ' • �� no`ires Very L�cse 0;0 4 a =- - -- n "_-'_-' CJat58- �CCS2 1 IO 10 J y ; � v �'°>>;-� Pccrl��-�^raced�rave! Gra�re�Sc�ls 1 �� > >� � MeCwm,Cense 10 to�0 �, � �)`'�a�;�;; G� arc ravel with sand, � Test Symbols a � � o��y � Oerse 3ato..0 c c little IC no fines Very Cense >�p G =Gra�n Size N ; z, °':�;�� M = Mcisture C�ntent d n y ;�:i;;ii Consisienc� SP'fj��blaws/faot q =;�ttereerg L;mits z �;lC ravel and sii c – �•=� d � �g ry very Scrt 0 to 2 C = C�em�cal • a �' 'r,,,,C°'C:.'� C'M yfdV@I`.vith sand Fine- • � _ � �,, :�. � SCrt 2 ta 4 C� = Ory CensiN y y _ _ � GraineC Soiis MeCium SGif 4 to 8 K = PermeaCdity Q = `L� -� � J � ;,y.��.��; SI�ff 810 15 z � �y-; Cia;ley gravel an� ver�St�"rf t5�0 30 - �' �ar> >.� GC � � e � ,;,,��,� c,aYey gravel w�th sand Hard >..0 � ,� =�=-%:' Component Definitians � � ^ 'Ne!I-yf2C2c sard ar.c Oescnptive Term Size Range and Sieve N�mber � �, �� '•�•'�'•'•'� $yy Sdf1C'�nth��ravel,little BculCers Larcer than �� ' _'' I to no `ir.es+ CocCles ., 'o �2' ' - ` Grave� �':c^�o.»(a.;G mm) '" ; v �=! i °�crfy-�,raced san� � Ccarse Grave� ;':o��s' cn � 'I'�� ' SP and sarc with c,ravel. Fine Gravel �.'-';o�`�c.�t{a 75 rr.m) _ c: v u -r I � hltl@ :O nC fIf185 °dnd Na �� %5 mm):0 NC.�CC�iQ�;;rrr^j � � �, Ccar,e Sand ;�c ; ?5 r,mi io No. 10:'�C^�m� � �i � �;i;y .,�rC anC P�IECiI,fTl J'n�C �•:G +GY��G Tfi'11 i0 NC. 1� Q-<< 1 � � SM \ rrm " ,= :ity s�nc�:J�th F�r:e_ar� .:c 1C ,0.125 mrr.):c^io _�0 n,J;� .Ti � u� _ �i _ : � ( � ` _ ; =ravel S�it arc�:a�i _.�'a��er:han Nc. cC0;0 0-�r�r*'� = �� •'�• sc C`��'��' �ar�arc ��% Estimated Percentage Moisture Content � ,vr c,2,�ey sarc�.v�(h cr�,e! „. . c� : Percentaee 5v Gry-ats�rc� �Tas�re. � , � Comecner,t r •��;;? '��le�cr,t us;� _r�. 'cucr . � I�il�. S.:aCC;J Sfl�. �fd':C!�;i SJ�. fcC2 <j CiiC^:`I�v1C�5(-?�fC:cCiIC:F ML I Fa,,� 5_� ."v rr.r_is;.:•g � _, ��it .vith s�rC Gr,rave! - . ,y y � = I V �..;'2 '� .=�� CiS[ L'ar""' ..(�G v�5'ui@ . 'IJ n _ . ��-:�ih -NCr.-Grr�2r� _�ar_2 •;ta.c! � T .� r�d`I �f�GIV iG fT1ECil.Ri CC^SillUc�iS: > ..°o �/E:��:1_I�; 'P/a'i=f ;:ciC12�1:: `� - ��Si,G; s�ity._af:Cy �r F�res �c, �er'�e^^e:� ^ct.�e��r�,riry � � + _ C.1. �.C��'j'.:��:`(. �E.:('::�cV �'0 3CC � ,. ':�c:•�/iS�C'�'�:c,:�a'c! �..i.cil:i i � � _ . • . � _7 — _ - �fnf^�Cc...:V'..�.�. '3C'3 ,, : - i .� �n - - - � - —–— Grc�r�c �:ay or;,it or;c.v Symbols � � _ Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. EX loration Lo � � � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE02672A EB-1 1 of 1 Project Name Renton Aquatic Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) Location RentOn, WA Datum N/A Driller/Equipment Davies Drilling Date Start/Finish 11l11/Q�� Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/ 30�� Hole Diameter(in) I c a� i� � � t D � � � i � �,� � � Blows/Foot ,- � S� � `° � ��°' o a� 0 T I � C�cn o cv m t � DESCRIPTION � � �0 20 3o ao ° R il 3 � S-� Weathered Quaternary Alluvium g �� Moist,tan,silry SAND with gravel. (SM) io � I ------------------------------- I ; Quaternary Alluvium � Moist,grayish-tan GRAVEL with sand,few silt. (GW) 5 ( S-2 zi �a6 25 ; I I ' I I � 10 � � � �s � � � S-3 sz s� �� Trace silt. 29 � � i 15 � i '11 S-4 � ,a 1 �� Becom br wn�increased moistur cont nt. o� t 50�� Bottom of expbretion boring at 16.5 feet � � Btow count likey overstated due to gravel content. I I � ' I i 20 I ' i G � " I � I � 25 � I � � � � i i � 30 ! � I I I I� i � I I i I ' ( I 0 35 a � � � v � E v > 0 z � � � Sampler Type(ST): N � 2"OD Split Spoon Sampier(SPT) � No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: SGB o W 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) � Ring Sample SZ Water Level Q Approved by: W � Grab Sample � Shelby Tube Sample 1 Water Level at time of drilling (ATD) a Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. EX loration Lo � � � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE02672A EB-2 1 of 1 Project Name Renton Aquatic Center Ground Surface Elevation (ft) �ocation Renton, WA Datum N/A DrillerlEquipment Davies Drilling Date Start/Finish 11/11!(1�� Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/30�� Hole Diameter(in) � H V� � � � y y v � "�� BIOWS/FOOt F _� � N a�i S cEo `� >' �E � ° � � T �' �� DESCRIPTION � 3 m 10 20 3o ao ° rr �i s S'� Weathered Quaternary Aliuvium 7 �i2 Slightly moist,tan SILT,little sand,Vace gravel. (ML) 5 S-2 3 �s � Quaternary Alluvium 3 I 5 Slightly moist,tan,fine to medium SAND,trace silt. (SP) 2 � , I � S-3 Becomes fine-grained,little silt. � .� � 3 � � � � � i I ------------------------------- I Becomes graveliy at 8.5'(inferred from drilling action). i 10 :� � �I S-4 Moist,brown GRAVEL with sand,few silt. (GW) Poor recovery. �2 �Z7 i �5 i � i � ( � 15 ' � S-5 Gravei becomes mostly pebble-sized,trace silt,trace sand. (GQ) � I � � ' 30 I Bottom of exploration boring at 16.5 feet ; Blow count likey overstated due to gravel content. 20 I I I � I 25 I i I � � � i i i � i I I 30 i I ( i � I i g 35 � � 0 N � N v d E m > c? I I N Sampler Type(ST): o � 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) � No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: SGB o i11 3"OD Spiit Spoon Sampler(D&M) � Ring Sample � Water Level Q Approved by: w �" Grab Sample 0 Shelby Tube Sample 1 Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) a Associated Earth Sciences, inc. EX loration Lo � � � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE02672A EB-3 1 of 1 Project Name Renton Aquatic Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) Location Renton. WA Datum N/q Driller/Equipment Davies Drilling Date StartlFinish 11/11/fl�� Hammer WeighUDrop 140#/ 30" Hole Diameter(in) c a� I N C �1 i V� 0 � �p p i� � IL� �� J N UIDW.S�FQ�t � � S � ��` >' �� a� 0 N � I T � c�cn o m m t DESCRIPTION " 3 io 20 3o ao ° I IT il Weathered Quaternary Alluvium I S_1 V m i t r wn I T. ML 2 Quaternary Alluvium 4 9 Moist,brown,fine to medium SAND,Vace silt.(SP) 5 S-2 � �3 LitUe silt. z � 5 � S-3 Contains interbeds of ciean,fine to medium SAND. 2 �5 i I 3 � � j � f � j Becomes gravelly at 8.5'(inferred from drilling action). i � �� i S� Moist,grayish brown GRAVEL with sand,trace silt. (GW) 4 � I ! �0 2 I 15 I I � � 15 I �3 � S-5 21 � 7 ; r re ve is I Bottom of expbration boring at 16.5 feet Blow count likey overstated due to gravel content. I I 20 � � , I � � i I � � I 25 I i I � � I 30 I � � I i I � 35 I � � I I I i � I � I i ' N QI � � N > O Z a' � � Sampler Type(ST): N m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) � No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: SGB o m 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) � Ring Sample S_Z Water Level() Approved by: w L� Grab Sample �-�,''� Shelby Tube Sample 1 Water Level at time of driliing(ATD) a Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. EX loration Lo � � � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE02672A EB-4 1 of 1 Project Name Renton Aquatic Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft} Location Renton, WA Datum N/Q DrillerlEquipment Davies Drilling Date StarUFinish ��/1'i/�� Hammer WeighuDrop 140#1 30" Hole Diameter(in) ' � � ! c a� I� .: tn U� O � � tn � � Q Q� �,� � N BIOWS/FOOt ,� a ;S E `O �, a o� 3 o T in �`n 3 0 '° �p t � DESCRIPTION � � io 20 3o ao ° i IT il a I IS-� Weathered Quaternary Alluvium 7 �� ' Moist,brown GRAVEL with sand,little silL(GM) ------ ------------- Quaternary Alluvium 5 I ' � S-2 Moist,grayish brown GRAVEL withsand,trace silt. (GW) ao soi ' a (drilling becomes easier at approxiamtely 8.5') 10 s S-3 � Becomes very moist. y �y (poor recovery) io I 15 S 4 �a {poorrecovery) 33 s� 2a Bonom of exploration boring at 16.5 feet Bbw count likery overstated due to gravel content. 20 I I I � 25 I I i � � 30 0 35 I � � C. L� U + O I Z I � I Q Sampler Type(ST): h �° m 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) � No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: SGB o � 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D&M) � Ring Sample SZ Water Level() Approved by: m w � Grab Sample � Shelby Tube Sample 1 Water Level at time of drilling(ATD) a Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. ' EX loration Lo � � � � � Project Number Exploration Number Sheet KE02672A EB-5 1 of 1 Project Name Renton Aquatic Center Ground Surface Elevation(ft) Location RentOn. WA Datum N(A DrillerlEquipment Davies Drilling Date Start/Finish 11/1 1/�� Hammer Weight/Drop 140#/30" Ho1e Diameter(in) � � I � a� � v � I to U� O � � � in °' L� �a� J v� BIOWS/FOOt F = a c��a E a � 3 � S. � T �E � o ; a� p T t� �� o m m ,L � DESCRIPTION " � io 20 3o ao !° �� /T j� Flush-mount steel monumeni and sli ca p 6 'I I S'� Weathered Quaternary Alluvium Concrece . � a 2p ' WMoist,tan,silty SAND with gravel. (SM) #iGV20 silica sand . �Z i � � Cuttings II i ' + --------------------------- ; ; Quatemary Alluvium j 5 � Benfonite chips I -! S-2 Moist,brown,fine to medium SAND,few silt(SP);contains lenses of silty, 3 �5 I ; ;-{ fine to medium sand. 5 I � I� 1 1/4-inch inside diameter Schedule 80 PVC � blank I � i ------------------------------- , Gravel at 8.5'(inferred from drilling action). I l ! 10 - ; ! :i S-3 Moist,grayish brown GRAVEL with sand,trace silt. (GW) 3� I 6� � '� sa j � I #10/20 silka sand ' I � � � i 15 �� - i 9 i j i S-4 gecomes reddish brown. iy �33 ' i 1 1/4-inch inside diameter Schedule 80 PVC; . ! I 0.010"machrne cut slots I ' I � I � 1 � � 20 � ! Flush threaded end cap� -- ; j Becomes brown. I I Natrve soil �- I � ` Bottom of expbraGon boring at 21.5 feet ' I � i I 25 I � I I � � 30 ! � � I i � � I � I i t <v 3�j i � ' o � i o � ti I � N W � n i i C? ( i I I � N Sampler Type(ST): N !� 2"OD Split Spoon Sampler(SPT) � No Recovery M-Moisture Logged by: SGB o LL 3"OD Split Spoon Sampler(D 8�M) � Ring Sample SZ Water Level Q Approved by: a !� Grab Sample � Shelby Tube Sample 1 Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)