Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CC - Drainage Calcs
Storm Drainage Calculations Sagarra Subdivision No. 1 Private Storm Drain Facilities Meridian, Idaho <SS R/yGj�F 1 21F3 �ossT� o�R°�5o� June 2023 Sagarra Subdivision P1 (Private Facilities) Meridian, Idaho Dsesign Criteria: Storage Design Storm: 100-yr Conveyance Design Storm: 100-yr(conveyance system; pipes, etc.) Pre Development Discharge: None Water Quality Design Storm: 2-yr Storm Peak flow rates were calculated for each sub-basin using the rational method (equation 1- 1). Storm rainfall intensities were derived from the 2-year, 10-year, 25-year and 100-year intensity duration frequency curves for Zone A using calculated times of concentration. The time of concentration was calculated for each sub-basin based on the runoff coefficient "C" as defined in the rational method peak flow rate equation, and the individual sub-basin slope and length (see equation 1-2). Q= CiA (equation 1-1) where; Q= Peak Flow Rate (cfs) C= Runoff Coefficient (dimensionless) i = Rainfall Intensity (inches/hour) A = Drainage Area (acres) 1.8(1.1—C)� t� _ � (equation 1-2) where; t,= Time of Concentration (minutes) C= Runoff Coefficient (dimensionless) D = Distance from Remotest Contributing Point (feet) S= Slope Along D The rational method for peak flow calculation assumes: 1) the rainfall occurs uniformly over the drainage area; 2) the peak rate of runoff can be reflected by the rainfall intensity averaged over a time period equal to the time of concentration of the drainage area; and 3) the frequency of runoff is the same as the frequency of rainfall used in the equation. C-Value Lots & ROW 0.62 Existing Pasture 0.2 (FLAT PASTURE -TIGHT CLAY) 3 w y w Z00 _ oNO W5 ` H o�=^>�2 OH - - sc • o y o 0 0 y o aZ dd= _ - _ a 0 `3O __� QU .d = = U c 2 c$o¢o a 0 0`I o /1 y-E 0—p—N U 3 U �15 r C Cv c c 3 N �o o 2 0 s� % Z y C I 2 o g n -- gd e %ate c � L p H€ G _= E 3 o y i LL E - - o yL+ Ea3Uym o t N w t C1 a d o 41 c'cono U Qcl) m aEi'o+ z \ y v o a o°o I � I I � 8W� , zm �— 8W 8W 8 8W / - - CONTACT- - °� � G LINE - - - \ - - - - - - -�� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -/- - - - - - - - aw- - - - - - - - - — � 48-HOURS // BEFORE DIGGING 1-800-342-1585 - - - - - — — - - /— SW— / 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W �8W SW SW—QfSs 11J--Ri \ SS MH Rim 2576.47' SW 8W 8W 8W —$W 1-2 N 8" Inv 2564.08' 8S 8S 8S / 8S -� 8"TSiv 2565.7T — — MHn Rim � ° my 2a64. 3' / 8S 8S 8S 8S 8S O 8S w " Inv zsss.as' — — \ S 8" Inv-2W.94' 8S —8S 8S —L52 I f'_L`E2 , / / ' 'SNW 8"1 MI Rlnv 25 � \ I s e" Inv 256 .z 34-2Lli cn — —.... — — — • 1 ....�.•• VIR IR _ \ I I \ —25-2— —— — o t co / ............... ..... \ � � I � �\ J z Q / ......I \4-2 5-2 I 6-2 I 7-2 •••8-2.••.. 9-2 10-2 11-2 12-2 13-2 I I _ I I I I \ I W ....... 27-2 28— 29-2 1-2 32-2 33-2 �� / \ I I............. �� I I o - - J — Q '�• 30 2 ........3• .............. ....�.. ... BASIN-5 ......, .......... .......-. - - . . ......... _ —2 BASIN-4 ; III m / \ .� � � \ ' /� O canLLJ 8S 43,839 SF 31047 SF /I' Q / 2-2 3-2 _ 8 S 8 r 8 S 8 S I U U , — — _ I Of I I I I I I I I I I I I • I i � / i Q 2(PRIVATE) - -I - - - - I(PRIVATE) - w (D cn I I II — — III I... SS H Rim 25/.1 — ,•• ...- _ I I - - Al- - - - - - 5 I I I I 1 4 III •I'•••..., III I III I I I 3 _2 I I � — - - �ST Inv 256 .36'^ I 11 I III I I I I II I I I I 2 I I a 0 I — — —� A�\ DI-1B 8S � I \ O8S �S J A7 _ � 10,398SF L- ... I - �� NAL > — = CFS--** I ENG� 368 FT - -' .. .. - - 373 FT ` - w - - - - - - - .... - - - - - — :. .......... QP100= 0.32 •••• ., M W -1- - 8W 8w $w O w LIP:2575.59 """ ..••••• � 8�.... .. 8w a � w LIP:2577.08 B ...... BASIN-3 (ACHD) BASIN-2 (ACHID) _ I 1 0 8 1 3 LIP:2575.59 .... ASIN 1 - - 322 FT - w.... I - - - ..........., SEEPAGE BED #3 I • 0 373 FT _-_-___ _ 241 FT ..................... .......:................................ • —G"_�" —.J........ M -.:;:... OssrK ��SO BASIN #3 — - - - - - - - - - —�. • - - - - - - - — _ - - - — - - _ — — I P OF TOTAL AREA= 33,244 SF I I 14,339 SF I I \ I = II I I = I QP100= 0.44 CFS I \ I :. :. • • A _ I I I I I \ . t . .. c. c. . I i I I . • . . . LIP:2574.21 SEEPAGE BED #1DI-2 BP:2574.21® SEEPAGE BED #2 :::' BASIN #1 L / 15,937 SF / — - - - - - - - - - L - - - - - - - - - - -TOTAL AREA= 24737SF:• - - - - - - - I - - �i Pi \/ _ —QP100= 0.42 CFS- BAS11V2 — — — \ — sa MH R n —N�" In 62. S 8" In 62. — — — E.G. ....— - TOTAL afEA= 39,629 SF E.G. �G .G. - E c. -I- �'� - E.G - - Pi — 6Pi E.G. �P1= DI-3A _ _ _ _ \ _ _ - , E.G. 19,346SF - _ _= ---__- __----___- _ - - - - -� � - - - __- - - - - - - - -- _----- - _ ---- - I _ � _ - _ Lu �- - - c —--— + - - - - - -DI-2A - - �-- -- -- - - I �' E G _ - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - 4 =�+a. - - - -- - - --- ----- ------- -- Q o - - - - - - - -�= 6+4gr — — - -- LLs —— — — 48 P1 F _ — z — —— 48 — 8 U 00 0 50 C - S - - �o�• — — — . - 23,692 F .. _ .—.... S .. o I/ QP100= 0.62 CFS oM DI-3B I =w 13,898 SF 00 QP100= 0.36 CFS 3 =Q I U� ro o3 0s o �� II003 \, (n 0 U Z w 00 KU .N 10 W Q0 Uo ZN -in 1 Z Ud DRAINAGE BASINS3 w 0 SCALE: 1" = 40' �3 KY O o3Z U Z L W J 0) c0 W Q m Z U 0-0 Lu O N N m U Z z � � W d ILL '^ a (L m JOB NUMBER: w IDB2355 cD Q DATE: 4-21-23 z SHEET NUMBER: w 0 o W DCA W _ U) BASIN 4 Pretreatment: SAND AND GREASE TRAP & FILTER SAND Storage: SEEPAGE BED C-Value Basin Area 31047 sqft 0.9 Not Used 0 sqft 0 Not Used 0 sqft 0 Basin Area: 31,047 sqft Runoff Coefficient: 0.90 Basin Length: 241 feet Delta Z: 1.02 ft Average Basin Slope: 0.42 % Time of Concentration: 10.00 min Intensity(2-year): 0.69 in/hr Qp (2-year): 0.44 cfs Intensity(25-year): 1.85 in/hr Qp (25-year): 1.19 cfs Intensity(50-year): 2.20 in/hr Qp (50-year): 1.41 cfs Intensity 0i e . i0 Basin #5 Pretreatment: SAND AND GREASE TRAP & FILTER SAND Storage: SEEPAGE BED C-Value Basin Area 43839 sqft 0.9 Not Used 0 sqft 0 Not Used 0 sqft 0 Basin Area: 43,839 sqft Runoff Coefficient: 0.90 Basin Length: 241 feet Delta Z: 1.02 ft Average Basin Slope: 0.42 % Time of Concentration: 10.00 min Intensity(2-year): 0.69 in/hr Qp (2-year): 0.62 cfs Intensity(25-year): 1.85 in/hr Qp (25-year): 1.68 cfs Intensity(50-year): 2.20 in/hr Qp (50-year): 1.99 cfs Intensity 11 Q 11 Calculation Summary INLET Q100 TC min. BASIN 4 1.65 10.00 Basin #5 2.34 10.00 Sand And Grease Trap Throat Velocity The target throat velocity design value is 0.5 ft/sec through the baffles of the S&G trap. 1000 GAL AREA= 8.61 SF Baffle/Box Width = 62 inches Throat Width = 20 inches 1500 GAL AREA= 10.42 SF Baffle/Box Width = 62.5 inches Baffle Spacing = 24 inches 2-Year 50-Year (Pipes) 100-Year(Storage) Throat Qp Throat Vel Qp Throat Vel Throat Vel Size Structure Area SF ft/sec ft/sec Qp ft/sec 1000 GAL SG-4 8.611 1.65 0.19 1000 GAL SG-5 8.611 2.34 0.27 Drainage Basin Total Area (SF) 1 74,886 2 43,839 Sagarra Sub. P1 - Storm Drain Calculations (PRIVATE) Seepage Bed Sizing - Infiltration Gallery#4 - Basin #4 Facility Type:Seepage Bed (ACHD BMP#20) Design Criteria: 1. Storage Chamber Design Criteria: 100-yr, 1-hr storm (intensity=0.96 in/hr) 2. Beds located outside of common lots shall be upsized by 25%for sediment storage 3. Bottom elevation of bed shall be 3-feet above the seasonal high ground water El. 4. Provide 1.5'thickness of ASTM C33 filter sand under rock(No storage credit for sand) 5. Drain rock shall be 1.5"-2" washed rock meeting ACHD specifications. 6. Max. drain rock thickness is 10-feet. 7. Seepage bed shall have 1.5' min. cover under sidewalks. Drainage Basin Characteristics: 2-yr, 1-hr 100-yr, 1-hr 2-yr Runoff 100-yr Tributary Basin Area Combined Runoff Storm Storm Volume Basins (SF) C-Value Volume Intensity Intensity (Cu. Ft.) (Cu. Ft.) BASIN 4 31047 0.9 0.26 0.96 605 2235 0 0 0 0 31047 Total 605 2235 Seepage Bed Sizing: The facility length is calculated below using the required storage volumes calculated above, the total facility rock width user input,the user input for facility depth, and the drain rock void ratio. Infiltration Rate of Underlying Soils: 8 in/hr Drain Rock Void Ratio: 0.40 (1) 100-yr Runoff Volume (Without Infiltration Credit): 2235 Cu Ft (2) Infiltration Volume for 1-hr duration: 380 Cu Ft Required Seepage Bed Capacity(1) - (2): 1855 Cu Ft Drain Rock Thickness: 10 FT Total Facility Width: 10.0 FT Min. Facility Length: 57.0 Ft Provided Seepage Bed Capacity(LxWxDxVoid Ratio): 2280 Cu Ft Is the provided Seepage Bed capacity greater that the required capacity? YES Per ACHD Policy,the facility shall be upsized by 25% if it's not located within a common lot. Is the facility located within a common lot (Y/N)? Y Required Adjusted Facility Length: 57 FT Time Required to Infiltrate 90%of the 100-yr, 1-hr storm (48-hrs Max) Underlying soils infiltration rate: 8 In/hr Bottom Area of Seepage Bed: 570 Sq. Ft. 100-yr, 1hr Storm Volume: 2235 Cu. Ft. Time Required to Infiltrate 90%of storm volume: 5.9 Hrs. OK Final Seepage Bed Dimensions and Volumes: Length Depth Vol (ft) Width (ft) (ft) (Cu Ft) Seepage Bed 57 10.0 10 2280 Total Capacity 2660 Sagarra Sub. P1 - Storm Drain Calculations (PRIVATE) Seepage Bed Sizing - Infiltration Gallery#5 - Basin #5 Facility Type:Seepage Bed (ACHD BMP#20) Design Criteria: 1. Storage Chamber Design Criteria: 100-yr, 1-hr storm (intensity=0.96 in/hr) 2. Beds located outside of common lots shall be upsized by 25%for sediment storage 3. Bottom elevation of bed shall be 3-feet above the seasonal high ground water El. 4. Provide 1.5'thickness of ASTM C33 filter sand under rock(No storage credit for sand) 5. Drain rock shall be 1.5"-2" washed rock meeting ACHD specifications. 6. Max. drain rock thickness is 10-feet. 7. Seepage bed shall have 1.5' min. cover under sidewalks. Drainage Basin Characteristics: 2-yr, 1-hr 100-yr, 1-hr 2-yr Runoff 100-yr Tributary Basin Area Combined Runoff Storm Storm Volume Basins (SF) C-Value Volume Intensity Intensity (Cu. Ft.) (Cu. Ft.) BASIN 1 43839 0.9 0.26 0.96 855 3156 0 0 0 0 43839 Total 855 3156 Seepage Bed Sizing: The facility length is calculated below using the required storage volumes calculated above, the total facility rock width user input,the user input for facility depth, and the drain rock void ratio. Infiltration Rate of Underlying Soils: 8 in/hr Drain Rock Void Ratio: 0.40 (1) 100-yr Runoff Volume (Without Infiltration Credit): 3156 Cu Ft (2) Infiltration Volume for 1-hr duration: 349 Cu Ft Required Seepage Bed Capacity(1) - (2): 2807 Cu Ft Drain Rock Thickness: 13.5 FT Total Facility Width: 15.4 FT Min. Facility Length: 34.0 Ft Provided Seepage Bed Capacity(LxWxDxVoid Ratio): 2827 Cu Ft Is the provided Seepage Bed capacity greater that the required capacity? YES Per ACHD Policy,the facility shall be upsized by 25% if it's not located within a common lot. Is the facility located within a common lot (Y/N)? Y Required Adjusted Facility Length: 34 FT Time Required to Infiltrate 90%of the 100-yr, 1-hr storm (48-hrs Max) Underlying soils infiltration rate: 8 In/hr Bottom Area of Seepage Bed: 524 Sq. Ft. 100-yr, 1hr Storm Volume: 3156 Cu. Ft. Time Required to Infiltrate 90%of storm volume: 9.0 Hrs. OK Final Seepage Bed Dimensions and Volumes: Length Depth Vol (ft) Width (ft) (ft) (Cu Ft) Seepage Bed 34 15.4 13.5 2827 Total Capacity 3177 SAND AND TANK RIM EL 18"HALF DRAIN ROCK PERF PIPE IE TOP OF BOTTOM OF EXISTING SEASONAL TOP OF 18" BOTTOM OF DEPTH LOWEST SEEPAGE MINUS TO TOP OF GROUND EL. HIGH PERF PIPE FROM COVER TANK LOWEST LOWEST FG TOP OF 18"PERF FG GREASE SIZE TANK RIM EL.OVER LOWER PERFORATED THICKNESS DRAIN DRAIN ROCK PIPE TO TO TOP OF TRAP # BED# (GAL) EL. BED. BAFFLE EL LOWER PIPE IE. (FT) DRAIN ROCK ROCK EL. EL. AT SEEPAGE GROUND TO TOP OF BOTTOM OF ROCK TO ROCK CHECK BAFFLE EL (FT) BED WATER EL. ROCK(FT) ROCK(FT) GW SG-4 P5T11000 000 2577.10 2576.68 2571.34 5.76 2570.09 10.00 4.59 2574.68 2564.681 564.68 2576.49 2556.49 3.09 5.41 8.19 2.00TOK:] OK SG-5 2575.90 2575.21 2569.29 6.61 2568.04 13.50 5.17 2573.21 2559.71 2575.24 2555.24 3.67 8.33 4.47 2.00 o� 8W 8W --. aw \ O aw aw aw aw IN -- / /\\ 1-2 �Q W. ORCHARD PARK DR. -8s 8s 8s 8s- 8s 8s - 0 / N:24509 .397 Keyed Notes O ,-o N: 727252.2829 / E: 2450979.3977 / ,` SDMH-4A E- 2450900.8314 8"X 6"TEE I__. / i �' O RIM EL: 2576.83- - - - - - 6"IE:2573.82 _ - J - 8"X 6" RED(E&W) -- N: 727244.6619�-- -TTT_-__ - - -6"IE: 2573.03 -- - - _ ---- --_-- ' _ ----- / 1. 48" DIA. CONCRETE STORM DRAIN CATCH MANHOLE PER ACHD E: 2450863.2992 ---�77- - 8"IE: 2573.03 �� - --=�---� --- -- �d STANDARD SUPPLEMENTAL DRAWING SD-611 (SEE SDA). N: 727250.1922 12" IE IN: 2570.09(S) -- - -_ - -- E: 727250.1922 = 2. 1000 GAL SAND AND GREASE TRAP PER CURRENT ACHD STORM WATER 18"ADS IE OUT:2570.09(W) (SEE -_ =-- --- FG:2576.68 - IF_ m _ _ - - - ) - o -- - 78.57 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC 1.0% __- v I --__- _ _ - - - - o - 7 - 574� j // 3. SEEPAGE BED PER CURRENT ACHD STORM WATER DESIGN GUIDELINES 6"IE• 2 - - 6 -Id 5 d - T - -' - - - - - - o--- --- - I 6SD 6SD I� 6SD 6SD - - DR 35 PVC @ 1 59/ I d- � "' � / 1 - 65�D 6SD 6SD - - , ORNER MARKERS a o o N I o -_i - y11 8 0 1 - - - - - - - - - o I -- ARE NOT REQU RED OR PR VATE SEEPAIGE/BEDS.C �i tiLil I 1/ �_ .......... I I w 25-2 9 ti O N 1 OO 4 4 O O N O8 I \\ I 4. GROUND WATER OBSERVATION WELL PER ACHD SUPPLEMENTAL N. 8's �" ° ........................ I I \ I DRAWINGS SD-627 (SHEETS 1 &2) - (SEE SHEET SDA). LOCATE a N . �� a cy! 57.00' 27.20 LF 12 SD 5 PVC @ 0 80/2i 2s-2 \ 30-2 31 2 2 CURRENT ACHD - R3 C ... o ....... 578'.... - - - - I � I I MONITORING WELLS IN ACCORDANCE WITH C � U - I 32-2 I 33-2 .............................. I I I 4 - - - '�' I STORMWATER GUIDELINES BMP #4 SHEET 2 Q � ao 3 I I I I I �9 a _ ' SG#4 c) 1000 GAL S&G TRAP a I....".....'........ 5. EEN STRUCTURE _•� � \ SOLID WALL 18" DIA ADS N12 DUAL WALL PIPE BETW Q � � SEEPAGE BED#4 I T INTO SEEPAGE BE ( ON PERORATE ) - `L I �- AND 5-FEE D N - D . 12" IE IN: 2571.59 0 \ N N - - I a' \ 6 CAP END .......... „oo �w � o 24-2 a 2 TOP OF LOWER BAFFLE EL:2571.34 1 I I I a.. `-a r o m 12" IE OUT: 2570.23(N) � - \ 7. STANDARD 8" TRAFFIC RATED CLEANOUT PER ISPWC SD-506 (SEE SHEET m �..\. J RIM:2577.10 a rvl <°a8� �o V M a 4 . `.. M tl ° < \ SD.5). 8 �..: RIM:2577.14 8w 8w 8w 8W 8W 8W \ 8. STORM DRAIN SERVICE - (SEE 3/SD.3). M .... W. DIRECTOR LN. a < 9. STANDARD SERVICE MARKER PER ISPWC SD 512. • a 26 2 • ° (PRIVATE) 15.19 LF 12"SDR 35 PVC @ 0.50% 94.35 LF 12"C-900 PVC @ 0.50% °� `9�° o j I 10. 12 ADS N12 MANIFOLD. I' M° 12 177.50 LF 12"SDR 35 PVC @ 1.14/° I � I 4 F . 2SD - 12SD 2 NE <� . .. 23-2 SDMH-4B 1 SD I / SDMH-4C o ' RIM EL: 2576.73/ 1 - --- -- -- --- RIM EL:2578.18 - 1 - - --� - -N- -- - � - ---- ----- SDMH-4D Notes as-HouRs N: 727194.1083 q, / N: 727193.0217 E:2450880.4054 I i i I RIM EL: 2577.88 \ i BEFORE DIMING 12"IE IN: 2571.77E E: : 2572.69(N) I I : 45116 .2435 / 1. SEE SHEET THE PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR EARTHWORK - -342-1585 O ' I 8 IE IN : 2572.69(N) I I I I I I I I I E: 2451160.2435 � / I / 12"IE OUT: 2571.67(NW) I I / 12" IE IN :2572.35(E) 12"IE OUT:2574.38(W) / I I / REQUIREMENTS. / 12" IE OUT:2572.25(W) I I 2. ALL PIPE FITTINGS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BENDS, / TRANSITIONS, TEES, AND REDUCERS ARE NOT CALLED OUT ON THE I I /� 43-2 42-2 41-2 '" '40-2 39-2 38-2 I 37-2 36-2 35-2 m / I I I PLANS AND ARE INCIDENTAL TO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. I. I I I / I CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL FITTINGS INCLUDING BUT NOT U / 22-2 LIMITED TO BENDS, TRANSITIONS, TEES, AND REDUCERS AS REQUIRED J Q TO COMPLETE THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. ALL FITTINGS AND PIPING J a SHALL BE SDR 35 PVC UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED TO BE C-900 PVC - i ------ M" --- --- -- � �--- -- ' ' ; -- --� -- - - -- -- --J ----�/I , FITTINGS JOINING C-900 PVC PIPE SHALL BE 900 PVC. LU p . �-- - < - \ . i 3. ADJUST STRUCTURE FRAMES AND COVERS TO MATCH FINAL FINISHED 00 Q Z - - a • °�. .• �� GRADE ELEVATIONS AND SLOPE (SEE GRADING PLANS) > Q - - - - � • � °� e °�'.....L."''ei- •_^ M M - - M M - - - - • ° •� ALL TRENCHING AND BACKFILL FOR STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION m � SHALL MEET STRUCTURAL FILL SPECIFICATIONS AS PROVIDED IN THE < Z) w PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, AND THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE ISPWC. Q � N 5. PROVIDE CONCRETE COLLARS FOR ALL MANHOLES, AND CLEANOUTS Q Q STORM DRAIN AREA 4 (PRIVATE) WITHIN PAVED LOCATIONS PER THE ISPWC. � F Q 6. TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED � WITHIN ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF ~ U Lu o zo 40 CONSTRUCTION. TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE REMOVED z o FEET UPON COMPLETION OF ALL LANDSCAPING, FINAL SITE CLEANUP AND o a PARKING LOT SWEEPING. �SS\OML ENG� G\STE I / W. ORCHARD PARK DR. � 3 6-9-23 yTF O \pP 8 8s 8s - as bs8s 8s - �. - - _ 8s 8s 8s 8s N: 727255.0427 �'Oss F SO - ��=� _= 8s 8s ER\G N: 727257.6902 N: 727256.7434 / E:2450651.0414 _ _E: 2450411.4152 N: 727255.9419 8"X 6"TEE ` 6"IE: 0411.41 ----- _ E:2450497.1025 - - - - E: 2450569.6465 - -- - 8"X 6"RED E&W \ N: 727253.7893 , 6 IE: 2570.60 -6"IE:2572.38 - - - ( ) E:2450764.4853 - - - - - was - - - - - - - - - - - -- -`6"IE: 2571.57 - - - ,� - --- - __- - - - - Da 6 IE• 257325 , - - - - ----- -8"IE: 2571.57 - - - - - - .. .. .. - - -- - -- -- SEEPAGE BED#5 - -- ----- _ _ _ _ -- --�- --- - 7 -- V IR 85.69 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC @ 1.0/° 2575`- FG:2575.21 3 - ------ -- - - - 7 7 ----- - cn � Id d - - -- - ---- - ---- - --- --- I ° - -34.00' - - - -__- -- "SDR35PVC@1.0% -- --- ----- ----- -•-113.45LF6"SDR35PVC@1.5% - 7 1 ra-e6- - - - -.-..... . 6SD 6 6SD 6SI� I' d - - Id 8 6SB 6SD T.... ......... 6SD O / O 8 0 - - V 6 6SD -- • . - 8 - - \ _ - o __ 10 I O c O C $ I \ 19.89 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC 1.0% o- 4 M M I 25j6........................... \ @ I 6 ---� _� I SG#5 I I \ 4-2 I 5-2 7 6_2 I 1000 GAL S&G TRAP I I 11-2 1z RIM: 2575.90 7-2 6"IE IN: 2570.04 W 9-2 1p-2 I I I I I 3 I I \ I 4S9 5 O 12-2 LL � 13-2 L....; o r o Z 12"IE IN:2569.54 S oW i \\. E: 2450496.8781 N 135° TOP OF LOWER BAFFLE EL: 2569.29 � I I I I f o \ 6"IE. 2570.40 II...... ) c i ... � �... >a ............ I 18"IE OUT:2568.04(N rn I . ................... 29j8...... RIM:2576.03 I c� I ....2577.... \ I I o -- _ LL� • , ,• A i . , S Z U 0. ° M 22.98 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC 1.0° - @ /o . M. . . . ° a 3 •a 2 • M ° ' ' • w a . 3 ' 8 g a \> N: 727236.5975 0 8W 26.29 LF 12"C-900 PVC @ 1.22% 8W 8W 8W 8W o0 • a 8W a , a ° j _..... E:2450519.8578 / \ W W ........... <.. 6"IE: 2570.17 W. DIRECTOR LN. (PRIVATE) ` j4 m 1 12.58 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC @ 1.0% gyp. 8S 8 Rc o ,9 ` ag sz c a u� 2-2 i '� 119.89 LF 12"SDR 35 PVC @ 0.50% �' 8 - 8S 120.91 LF 12"SDR 35 PVC @ 1.84% 8S 1 \ ZO w6 N •° SDMH-5A o� 1 D 1 4 _ 1251) D > --- - w SDMH-5B 1 RIM EL: 25-75.36 � _ _ SDMH-5C 1 0 N: 727175.0035 1 RIM EL: 2576.04 --- -- -- - --- -- --N-- -- - - �o C\l �� N: 727198.0180 RIM EL: 2576.777 �I SDMH-5D �. r---- - E: 2450503.0894 ,��, I I N: 727196.6495 I RIM EL: 2576.38 ' 1 6"IE IN: 2571.59(SW) � 1 E:2450526.5220 I ' < ° • 00 "'I""' ''.. I I E: 2450650.4004 I N: 727195.2696 az 12" IE OUT: 2571.09(NE) 12" IE IN: 2569.96(E) 8"IE IN : 2570.99(N) III 2s�. E: 2450775.3015 z'o f1 12" IE IN: 2569.96(SW) 12"IE IN :2570.66(E) II 12"IE OUT: 2572.88(W) 17.73 LF 6"SDR 35 PVC 2.0% 12" IE OUT: 2569.86 N I I 11� `. O 1 OUT: I - --- 14 - ---- � 15 2 I @ I 2 IE 570 56(W) I I 1................................. p -2 I�6-2 I - ow _ 17-2 I 18-2 19-2 I I 20-2 " '' 21-2 3-- 9 N: 727166.2011 28.87 LF 12"C-900 PVC @ 3.91% E: 2�450485.4342 \ I I z 03 6 IE: 2571.94 < \ I I I II W � - --- - L-I-I --� I - �� -- .. ? `� - -- -- \ - - - ----- Q Lo b . , a <aLu e , a a�• • , . • • • r </ e .Q O � CO H W YON0 m wF W Q U N X Z N li O w waL Q a a o STORM DRAIN - AREA 5 (PRIVATE) Z JOB NUMBER: 0 20 40 Cg IDB2355 gu FEET Q DATE: 6-9-23 �G SHEET NUMBER: ui li Lm ° SDm2 _ � W 24" DIA. CAST IRON Y 24" DIA. CAST IRON SEEPAGE BED WIDTH=SEE PLANS ROADWAY SECTION RING AND COVER Q RING AND COVER OR LANDSCAPE PLANTER J CONCRETE COLLAR PER ISPWC SD-616 (REQ. IN ALL O (SEE PLANS) z_ o PAVED AREAS. NOT REQUIRED WHERE SAND AND 18"DIAMETER DUAL WALL ADS 1 PERFORATED GREASE TRAP LIDS ARE LOCATED COMPLETELY Q O PIPE @ 0.0%(SEE PLAN FOR PIPE SIZE). PIPE w °O a12" WITHIN A PLANTER SHALL BE PERFORATED AS SHOWN ON THE PIPE p a O C� PERFORATION SCHEDULE INCLUDED ON THIS �' �,a - PLACE WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC J DETAIL SHEET-CAP END. STRUCTURAL FILL BETWEEN BOTTOM OF ROAD SECTION �50" 4so ON PAVEMENT SECTION SUBGRADE QQ AND TOP OF DRAIN ROCK FOR BEDS WITHIN PAVED AREAS GROUT GROUT COMPACTED TO 95%MAX DRY DENSITY PER ASTM D1557 ? Q 4 a Q 4 a OVER SAND AND GREASE TRAP. FINISHED GRADE � w CONCRETE GRADE RING A °D ° GROUT GROUT FABRIC SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF ���� h �3/8"DIA. Q Q 6-FEET BEYOND THE SAND AND 0 G 0 00 RISER SECTION AS R^v pap GROUT GROUT / PERFORATION = W W (12" MAX GRADE RING Hoc T� Q a Cr GREASE TRAP ON ALL SIDES. (SKAPS TOP OF 18"PIPE PERF.EL aim \°D DaD°D Da ° W GEONET TN220 OR APPROVED DRAIN ROCK / SEE PLAN FOR PIPE SIZE _ GRO v � Q p�� a 5.00'NON.PERF. EQUAL) -GEOTEXTILE FABRIC IS NOT / ( o PIPE(TYP.) REQUIRED UNDER LANDSCAPE /X ����0 1 l /� �� TOP OF PIPE IE TO o // // o a a 8 . AREAS. -L Q��C7�` OP OF DRAIN ROCK v / D Q D GROUT NON.PERF. o a =D IMPERMEABLE SILTS AND CLAY s� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a � a PIPE 5.0'INTO d w /jo w/ ��� 18"z PERFORATED PIPE IE.- // / �Q D o SEEPAGE BED L p S E'3 ° w Y / O DOCaODOCaOCaODOCaO O SEE PLAN FOR PIPE SIZE AND �O / / 18"DIA.DUAL WALL ADS PIPE BACKFILL D�DQ D� EL B o 'i _ o PLACEMENT IN BED / p p a Z SEE NOTE 4 -0 _ _ >- 1� �� �¢ / INSTALL 6 OZISY NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC (SEE PLAN FOR PIPE SIZE SAND AND GREASE a3 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ) a a a a PIPE TOP OF LOWER r' y s o o n 0 0 0 0 o no no no no no 0 0 o AASHTO M288 CLASS 2 ON TOP&SIDES TRAP WITH CHIPS Q Q �� YSRN) 1_� 1 // DaD° DaD IN BAFFLE EL. 4) c 2"CLEAN ANGULAR DRAIN ROCK / }� � � � � s " DIA PERFORATION IN ELA F v U °'BOTTOM OF OOO OO O / // �� p�� EL D Q *' _ BOTTOM OF DRAIN ROCK/ VALLEYS OF CORRUGATED Q a Q - DRAIN ROCK o Q d � - a TOP OF ASTM C33 SAND PIPE. 5 EA. aDp aD L �a ASTM C33 FILTER SAND D� Q w z D INLET SIDE PIPE INVERT hSOLID y„ 1 WATER TIGHT SEAL ;�, z BOTTOM OF ASTM C33 SAND o Q EL C18 PERF. PIPE a 20" (GROUT) PERF RATED 18" HDPE a PIPE @ 0.0% (SEE am Qasa DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE=8.0"PER HOUR aQ aQ a PERFORATION a pap N WALL INFILTRATION GALLERY m w M D� �����((ALL SEEPAGE BEDS) uv �� DO D QD o a 1,000 GALLON SAND AND OUTLET SIDE <ADS HDPE SECTION DETAIL GROUND WATER EL=GREATER THAN 20.00 FEET BGS) EXISTING POORLY GRADED GRAVEL SCHEDULE o a GREASE TRAP � ) 0- - _ _ a s s as as D DaD CPIPE @ 0.0%� �/ �/� �/v pro-OK) � SEEPAGE BEDa aaJ aaa DaaDaa aaa aaa a p DaD p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p DaD°p aD p �� a a a a a a a a a OaC 8' O� ACHD SEEPAGE BEDS CONTACT DIC,LINE 24" DIA. CAST IRON PLACE TRAPS ON 8" THICKNESS OF CHIPS 48-HOURS RING AND COVER OVER NATIVE UNDISTURBED EARTH BEFORE DIMNC NOTES �-�-�2-� TANK RIM EL PERF PIPE IE EXISTING SEASONAL TOP OF 18" BOTTOM OF DEPTH SAND AND TANK LOWEST LOWEST FG TOP OF 18" HALF DRAIN ROCK TOP OF BOTTOM OF 18" PERF LOWEST FG a STORM 4 1. MUST BE RATED FOR HS-25 TRAFFIC LOADS SEEPAGE MINUS TO TOP OF GROUND EL. HIGH PERF PIPE FROM COVER JOINT DRAIN GREASE SIZE TANK RIM EL. OVER LOWER PERFORATED THICKNESS DRAIN DRAIN ROCK PIPE TO TO TOP OF a 2. INTERIOR DIMENSIONS OF TRAP MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 48" X 24" AT THE THROAT LOCATION. BED # LOWER DRAIN ROCK AT SEEPAGE GROUND TO TOP OF ROCK TO CHECK TRAP # (GAL) EL. BED. BAFFLE EL BAFFLE EL PIPE IE. (FT) (FT) ROCK EL. EL. BED WATER EL. ROCK (FT) BOTTOM OF GW ROCK 4 3. THE DETAIL ABOVE SHOWS AN VALLEY PRECAST 1,000 GALLON SAND & GREASE TRAP. ROCK (FT) 4. THE SAND AND GREASE TRAPS SHALL BE SET SO THAT THE TOP OF LOWER BAFFLE ELEVATION, THE IE'S PIPES J Q MONOLITHIC CONCRETE COLLAR ENTERING, AND THE PIPES EXITING ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROJECT PLANS AND NOTE 9 BELOW. J = PER ISPWC SD-616 ° 5. SAND AND GREASE TRAP COVERS SHALL MATCH THE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION AND SLOPE. 1 D- SGA 1 1000 2577.32 2577.18 2573.41 3.91 2572.16 10.00 3.02 2575.18 2565.18 2577.44 2557.44 1.52 6.98 7.74 2.00 OK z STORM DRAIN 6. SOLID COVERS SHALL HAVE THE WORDS "STORM DRAIN" CAST INTO THE LID. O_ SG-2 2 1000 2575.83 2575.70 2571.92 3.91 2570.67 10.00 3.03 2573.70 2563.70 2575.00 2555.00 1.53 6.97 8.70 2.00 OK 7. DO NOT CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLARS FOR SAND AND GREASE TRAP COVERS LOCATED COMPLETELY 2 Cf) 24" DIA. CAST IRON a WITHIN LANDSCAPE AREAS. Q RING AND COVER co 0 SG-3 3 1000 2574.82 2574.28 2570.42 4.40 2569.17 10.00 3.11 2572.28 2562.28 2573.97 2553.97 1.61 6.89 8.31 2.00 OK 8. H<1FT USE GRADE RINGS (TYP.) Q Z) w 1-FT < H <= 2-FT USE 24" DIA. RCP RISER; U) 2 CONCRETE COLLARS ARE NOT Q REQUIRED WHEN LID IS LOCATED 2-FT < H <= 10-FT USE 48" MANHOLE CONE AND 48" RISERS. Q COMPLETELY WITHIN A PLANTER AREA g EL. A> EL. B BY 0.10 MIN; EL. D < EL. B BY 0.85 MIN.; EL. C < EL. B BY 0.50 MIN. Q Uj PRIVATE SEEPAGE BEDS 10. MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER PER ISPWC SD-617. U) F CO ACHD RIGHT-OF-WAY 11. BOX MANUFACTURER SHALL MARK FLOW DIRECTION AND LABEL INLET AND OUTLET ON SIDE OF BOX. BOTTOM OF MONOLITHIC 12. SEE ACHD STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES BMP#1 "SAND AND GREASE TRAP" FOR ADDITIONAL Z o TANK RIM EL PERF PIPE IE EXISTING SEASONAL TOP OF 18" DEPTH CONCRETE COLLARS REQUIREMENTS. o SAND AND TANK LOWEST LOWEST FG TOP OF 18" HALF DRAIN ROCK TOP OF BOTTOM OF 18" PERF LOWEST FG GREASE SEEPAGE SIZE TANK RIM EL. OVER LOWER PERFORATED THICKNESS DRAIN DRAIN ROCK PIPE TO TO TOP OF MINUS TO TOP OF GROUND EL. HIGH PERF PIPE FROM COVER BED # LOWER DRAIN ROCK AT SEEPAGE GROUND TO TOP OF ROCK TO CHECK OVAL TRAP # (GAL) EL. BED. BAFFLE EL BAFFLE EL PIPE IE. (FT) (FT) ROCK EL. EL. BED WATER EL. ROCK (FT) BOTTOM OF GW ROCK �c`�SSaSTEF ROCK (FT) 1 ,000 GALLON SAND AND GREASE (S & G) TRAP 2 Fo FF 3 SG-4 4 1000 2577.10 2576.68 2571.34 5.76 2570.09 10.00 4.59 2574.68 2564.68 2576.49 2556.49 3.09 5.41 8.19 2.00 OK $D.3 0'� 6-9-23 �O SG-5 5 1000 2575.90 2575.21 2569.29 6.61 2568.04 13.50 5.17 2573.21 2559.71 2575.24 2555.24 3.67 8.33 4.47 2.00 OK -P°ss s< OERC�S°� A W > • J LU O J J W N , •• •• • U N a U Cn W ' •• • • PERCOLATION TEST REQUIRED AT EACH SEEPAGE BED NOTES: - - - - - 2.00' 1.Oo' ' �• �• Keyed Notes O SEEPAGE BED LOCATION: FLOW - FLOW - FLOW - PVC THREADED CAP ' • • • • • 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF GROUNDWATER COMMON LOT BUILDING LOT , IS ENCOUNTERED AT AN ELEVATION HIGHER THAN THE BOTTOM 1. NON WOVEN FILTER FABRIC ON TOP, ENDS, AND ALL SIDES OF 1. THE DESIGN PERCOLATION RATE FOR THE SEEPAGE BED INFILTRATION ELEVATION OF THE LINED SEEPAGE BED; OR, WITHIN 3-FEET OF THE • • SEEPAGE BED. FACILITIES IS 8 INCHES/HR. UNDER DIRECTION OF THE OWNER'S BOTTOM ELEVATION OF AN UNLINED SEEPAGE BED. GEOTECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE, CONTRACTOR SHALL CONDUCT A COMMON LOT o 6"X 4"WYE 6"SDR 35 PVC 2. ALL GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SEAMS SHALL OVERLAP 1-FOOT MINIMUM, N I o PERCOLATION TEST TO BE WITNESSED BY THE OWNER'S GEOTECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE &ACHD. ACHD IS NOT REQUIRED TO UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE MANUFACTURER. FINISHED N WITNESS PERCOLATION TESTS FOR PRIVATE INFILTRATION FACILITIES. o GRADE W Fo 3. THE FULL ROADWAY SECTION IS REQUIRED OVER THE SEEPAGE BED IN ; 4"SDR 35 PVC @ 2.0% o CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL WATER, AND OTHER MATERIALS PAVED AREAS. 7 ow PERFORMED Y THE SOILS ENGINEER AFTER HE SEEPAGE BED IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM THE TEST. THE PERCOLATION TEST SHALL BE 4. SEE STORM DRAIN PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. - - _ � - - PROPERTY LINE \//\// \//,\ <a om EXCAVATED TO VERIFY THE DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE. (NOTE: AN o ��\�� \��\��\��\ �\��\� \ ACHD INSPECTOR MUST BE PRESENT TO WITNESS THE TEST FOR IT TO 5. THE BOTTOM ASTM C33 SAND ELEVATION IS THE MINIMUM EXCAVATION \�j\�j �j\�j\�j\�j j\�j\ \j'SDR 35 PVC RISER sF BE CONSIDERED VALID). IF THE PERCOLATION IS LESS THAN THAT DEPTH. a�\a� a�aa�aa�aa a�aa�a �aa�a zw 4 SPECIFIED BY THE SOILS REPORT AND ENGINEER, CONTRACTOR SHALL I /� /� /� /� /� /� /� // �m CONTACT ENGINEER TO RE-DESIGN THE SYSTEM TO ACHIEVE THE 6. SEE ACHD STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES BMP#20 "SEEPAGE BED" I j\�j\ \�j\�j\�j\ /S\�DRAIN SERVICE zz FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS -"OPTIONAL CHAMBERS ARE NOT STORM DRAIN SERVICE REQUIRED INFILTRATION. ACHD APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR ANY REQUIRED. /x/ MODIFICATIONS TO THE STAMPED, APPROVED DESIGN PLANS. 7. GROUNDWATER WAS DETERMINED WITHIN THE PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL BUILDING LOT Z w REPORT TO BE DEEPER THAN 2558, WHICH IS DEEPER THAN 20-FEET j�j� ��j��j�\/�\��j�\/ \/��� W w J BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE AS DETERMINED WITHIN THE SIDE LOT LINE �l /�X/X /��/��/��/� ��/�� /�x Ofw' DRAIN ROCK SPECIFICATION GEOTEXTILE SPECIFICATION GOETECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY JACOBS DATED 1/31/20. I j �j/�� jjjjj /� 0'. Void Volume of Typical Materials Non-Woven Filter Fabric 8. THE DESIGN VOLUME OF THE FACILITY DOES NOT INCLUDE VOIDS WITHIN 5.00, _ 6"X 4"SDR 35 PVC WYE FLOW PVC THREADED CAP10 Material Void Volume % Property Test Method English THE ASTM C33 FILTER SAND LOCATED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE FACILITY. aaa /\ zo 2" Max Blasted Rock 30 Tensile Strength Grab ASTM D-4632 120 Ibs g. THE SEEPAGE BED WIDTH SHALL REMAIN CONSTANT ALONG THE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ >w 1-'/2" to 2" Uniform Size Gravel 40 Elongation ASTM D-4632 50% LONGITUDINAL LENGTH OF THE SEEPAGE BED. CIL \�j\�j\�j\\/ \�j\�j\�j\� �j\�j\ Zz 3/4" Uniform Size Crushed Chips 40 Puncture ASTM D-4833 65 Ibs 4"SDR 35 PVC @ 2.0% 4"SDR 35 PVC WYE3 �\ �A �� �A� .�\ - A �\ 6 w Crushed Glass 30 Trapezoidal Tear Strength ASTM D-4533 50 Ibs 10. IF ROCK IS ENCOUNTERED, CONTRACTOR MUST HAVE A PERCOLATION UV Resistance ASTM D-4355 70% TEST PERFORMED BY A SOILS ENGINEER AFTER SEEPAGE BED IS FULLY A �3 Crushed aggregates shall have a minimum 50% crushed or fractured face at Apparent Opening Size EXCAVATED (NOTE: AN ACHD INSPECTOR MUST BE PRESENT TO WITNESS a0 ( ASTM D-4751 70 US Std. Sieve THE TEST FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED VALID). IF THE PERCOLATION IS z 13 least on one side and meet the following gradation: AOS LESS THAN THAT SPECIFIED BY THE SOILS REPORT AND ENGINEER, PLAN VIEW SECTION VIEW A-A [PermittivityASTM D-4491 1.50 sec-1 CONTRACTOR MAY NEED TO BLAST OR BORE TO CREATE CONDUIT FOR Crushed Aggregate Water Flow Rate ASTM D-4491 120 gpm/ft2 DRAINAGE TO OCCUR, OR RE-DESIGN THE SYSTEM TO ACHIEVE THE Tom Sieve Size Percent Passing REQUIRED INFILTRATION. ACHD APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR ANY 3 inch 100% Woven Fabric MODIFICATIONS TO THE STAMPED, APPROVED DESIGN PLANS. N z o Property Test Method English STORM DRAIN SERVICE 3 J 1 inch 25-60/o 3/8 inch 04% Tensile Strength (Grab) ASTM D-4632 Min 250 Ibs 11. FOR UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEMS, INSTALL ELECTRONIC W o Puncture Strength or CBR ASTM D-4833 or Min 125 Ibs or Min 950 MARKERS ON EACH CORNER OF THE FACILITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SD•3 a Q m z co CO No. 200 0-2/o g F Puncture ASTM D-6241 Ibs COORDINATE WITH THE ACHD INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FOR PLACEMENT W o 0-1 o m o OF THE MARKERS DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. a = a Z UV Resistance ASTM D-4355 Min 80/o PRIVATE SEEPAGE BEDS DO NOT REQUIRE ELECTRONIC MARKERS. o ,u w a " < Apparent Opening Size ' a 0-1 o AOS ASTM D-4751 70 US Std. Sieve Z Water Flow Rate ASTM D-4491 Min 18 gpm/ft2 - JOB NUMBER: Percent Open Area CW-02215 Min 4% IDB2355 Q DATE: 6-9-23 SEEPAGE BED CROSS SECTION g SHEET NUMBER: w o� SD.3 ' 0 SDm3 o� o�o� 2 O JO B 5 LEGEND - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - �X Z 36' M O1 TROWEL SMOOTH 28 O EDGE OF GUTTER 1 I I O O�O I I V 3 1.75" X 1.75" X 1/4" ANGLE IRON. I 1 STANDARD GRATE FRAME A N A SEE SD-609 AND SD-610A A -� A - = ------ --------- --7 F-- ---------------- s NOTCH _ ,n O4 PAVEMENT SURFACE.L i �Q�P 2 X2 A A O5 STANDARD GRATE AND GRATE FRAME. SEE I 2 6 SD-609 OR SD-610A. ------------- --0 F-- ----------- V d= ` -- y o 4 0 4" X 4" X 3/8" ANGLE IRON i o aQ O7 (3) 7" NO.4 BARS 2 I I a C E 1/16" LIP (TYPICAL) / I I L O o 26-1/2" J 3'-0" I I ILL ` 4° TOP VIEW — — — — — — — — — — - - — — — — — — — — — — J >Noa 28" y t; a 3 4„ 4" 4" \ 4„ 18„ 6„ R1 2" a c N 3/ �. / PLAN VIEW c E- 1 3 TYP. C� e y d 6 '/2„ 6 ' N.T.S. V V Q y R1„ Q 4) o� III I I—I I—III—III T. T SECTION B—B SECTION A—A ISOMETRIC u Z 11=III=III—III—II— 3 _ 1=III=III=III=III Q y �h y o ow —II1=1I1=1II—III III—II1=1I1=1I1=1 rn o II u „ u 5 3 11 I-1 11=1 I I-1 I—I :` _ —III—III—III III- N a E N.T.S. B 5 B s f2 v —III—III—III _ _ o y 2 III=IIIIIIIIII II a B GRATE TYPE III J il, lil"I1 5 II mw a�o� _ 0.20% MIN SLOPE 7 < a TOP VIEW II 1 3 2 H 4 'N.T.S. 8" RADIUS UP TO INLET CATCH JV� 4 � OUTLET BASIN, SEE ROLLED CURB SD-702. 0 BAFFLE WALL WALL 6" 18" 4" 3 Q FLO�I O HAND FORM RADIUS AT FLOW INLET CATCH BASIN TO FIT I 2" 28 5 1/2" 4 3 PLAN ELEV A ELEV D N.T.S. 4 CONTACT DIGLINE BAFFLE WALL 4 z 2" LIP-_ g 4 0 • ELEV C 20" STD 2" 6 SEE NOTES BELOW 3'-0" 2'-4" 6EFOI�E DIGGING., 1-800-342-1585 � ^ 6" 2'-0" 6" TOP OF CURB 2" 7 27 ,/r' I.D. SECTION A—A a 0.2% MIN FLOWLINE OF CURB N.T.S. SECTION A-A a SLOPE N.T.S. LEGEND BASE OF CURB Oj ADJOINING TOP OF CURB. NOTCH ° NOTES L11 o CATCH 1-3/4" x 1-3/4" x 1/4" 2 X2 III—III— 1. SAND AND GREASE TRAP USED FOR SUBSURFACE FACILITIES ONLY J Q O OUTLET. AREA STEEL ANGLE O3 PAVEMENT SURFACE. 2 28 III—III- J a —III—I LEGEND: 4 STANDARD GRATE AND GRATE FRAME, ° TOP VIEW END VIEW 1 MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER PER SD-617 (TYPICAL) z 0 III—III z LOCATION AND FL ELEV. PER DESIGN PLANS (TYPICAL) W O 0 SEE SD-609 OR SD-610A. ,° `: . ° • ' I=III= (=I 3 H 1—FT USE GRADE RINGS (TYPICAL) L Z O STANDARD ROLLED CURB AND GUTTER. $ 1 -2 6 GRATE FRAME DETAIL —III= 1—FT < H <= 2—FT USE 24" DIA RCP RISER 2 > Q O4" X 4" X 3/8" ANGLE IRON 2'-4" NOTES 1 III— O7 (3) 7" N0.4 BARS AO FOUR-SIDED FRAME IS REQUIRED. N.T.S. —III- 2-� < H <= 10—FT USE MANHOLE CONE & 48" DIA RISERS p p O EL. A > EL. B BY 0.10' MIN 00 E LEGEND III EL. D < EL. B BY 0.10' MIN � U W ®EDGE OF GUTTER SECTION A—A III— EL. C < EL. B BY 0.50' MIN. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY ACHD � Q O1 1-1/2" x 3/4" STEEL BARS (TYP.). N.T.S. - I-1III- s WATERTIGHT SEAL Q O2 1/4' FILLET WELD ALL BARS. -III= 8 PRECAST BOX MANUFACTURER SHALL MARK FLOW DIRECTION AND LABEL INLET OR OUTLET 4 PLACES (TYP.) SECTION B—B ON SIDE OF BOX Q J O3LU WELD (4) 1/2"x7" STUDS. N.T.S. U) 2017 ACHD REVISION 2017 ACHD REVISION H (n 2017 ACHD REVISION 2015 SAND AND GREASE TRAP STANDARD DRAWING ~ IDAHO STANDARDS INLET CATCH BASIN STANDARD DRAWING Lu IDAHO STANDARDS CATCH BASIN GRATE STANDARD DRAWING IDAHO STANDARDS INLET CATC H BAS I N STANDARD DRAWING ACHD S ORGUIDELINES DESIGN BMP 01 3 FOR PUBLIC WORKS N0. FOR PUBLIC WORKS NO. S D— 610A FOR PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION KS TYPE I NO. S D — 6 01 1 OF 2 0 a CONSTRUCTION TYPE IV (FOR ROLLED CURB) SD- 604A CONSTRUCTION TYPE III (ACHD SUPPLEMENT) (ACHD SUPPLEMENT) (ACHD SUPPLEMENT) �SS�ONAL ENG� Q� G\srCD E OFF LEGEND 2 0 WELL COVER, 8" DIA. WATERTIGHT GALVANIZED STEEL BOLT DOWN COVER AND CANISTER 2 OR 3 BOLT LID WITH 9/16" HEAD AND SAE THREADS, GASKETED �'j• 6-9-23 � FINISH GRADE CONCRETE (COLLAR), CLASS 3000 (ISPWC SECTION 703) � 9T P� 0 1 z 3/8" DIA HOLES OR SLOTS CUT INTO PIPE AT 3" ON CENTER O O n J� I I 'POss F �F O TRACER WIRE SHALL BE PLACED ON OUTSIDE OF PVC PIPE, MINIMUM 18 GAUGE, INSULATED, SINGLE— / O O O O O \ /� ` EXTEND PIPE (1" TO 6" MAX.) K ERG CONDUCTOR COPPER WIRE, INSULATION COLOR SHALL BE GREEN WITH THREE 6" DIAMETER COILS d ❑o O O 00 0 ` I INSIDE MANHOLE Q: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I-III °• b a III=III=III _ _ s PIPE SHALL BE PERFORATED PVC, ASTM D-3035, SDR 35. WELLS BACKFILLED IN A PIT REQUIRE 6" O O O O O O 7 A •PIPE. DRILLED WELLS MAY USE 4" PIPE 000 000 Lot LO • STORM II—III—II II-1�= >•, OO NONWOVEN FILTER FABRIC AROUND OPENINGS AND BOTTOM, FABRIC OVER CHIPS/DRAIN ROCK pp DRAIN O 0• 0• I I 1=1 I I I I 1=1 I I e O � • I-1TI-11 III=III= - Q POLYPROPYLENE FIBER REINFORCEMENT AT 1 1 2 LBS CY O O = _ II=III. III-11 3 00 >,° AP -.=>.,-•P / / O O O O O O • • Q O BACKFILL MATERIAL TO MATCH STORAGE MEDIA FOR OBSERVATION WELLS LOCATED WITHIN A BMP FACILITY. O O O O O O O '• '• '• -a USE PIPE BEDDING CHIPS FOR OBSERVATION WELLS LOCATED OUTSIDE BMP FACILITIES ❑�pO000000p❑O h " LEGEND • ; c • \ O O / I PIPE FROM INLETS O CONCRETE COLLAR IN PAVED STREET SECTIONS . - \ 3 AND/OR TEE IN PER SD-616. • ' 3 NOTES: MAIN LINE. co 5 1. GROUNDWATER OBSERVATION WELLS ARE FOR MEASUREMENT OF GROUNDWATER LEVELS WITHIN OR NEAR I I OZ GRADE RINGS GROUTED WATERTIGHT IN PLACE, PLAN CONCRETE COLLAR NOT TO EXCEED 18" FROM FINISHED SURFACE • JSTORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES j I TO TOP OF CONE. • _ N.T.S. 2. THIS DETAIL IS FOR WELLS INSTALLED BY DRILLING OR BY EXCAVATED PITS < 3. LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER OBSERVATION WELLS SHALL BE APPROVED BY ACHD O PRECAST MONOLITHIC ECCENTRIC CONE SECTION. Q (REBAR NOT SHOWN). � 4. OBSERVATION WELLS NOT ALLOWED IN CURB OR VALLEY GUTTER SECTION 4 P LAN O L�-� PLAN RAMNEK OR APPROVED GASKETS AT ALL JOINTS. w m p < N.T.S. 0 0 N.T.S. 5 PROPERLY ALIGN ALL INTERIOR JOINTS. Q 10 > �18"� 6 © PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE BARREL SECTION �W O 1 -0 (REBAR NOT SHOWN). a� m (MIN.) a -'rk �, 5 7 O PRECAST GASKETED HUB RING OR RUBBER az a °,e °, e.°,e 6 10 9 8 GASKETED COLLAR. o 11Z. 'f ® SURFACING TO MATCH FLUSH WITH EXISTING o0 °; ,� :.;„ ,' SURFACING (AS SHOWN)• �G � 8 3 ---- o ° 24" -A. 90 FRAME TO BE GROUTED TO GRADE RINGS. W = 4 n W 6 ° 4 ¢ Q 1 10 oo FRAME AND COVER PER SD-617. oa SECTION CONCRETE COLLAR Q 4 8 4" (MIN) 11 MANHOLE STEPS. og > N.T.S. 2 $" a' ° 12 SEE SD-501 FOR CAST IN PLACE MANHOLE Z aZ 2 N BASE. SEE SD-501A FOR PREFABRICATED 0 I- 4 2'-0" 3 BASE. V5 z w OR 2'-6" NOTES: w> 9 4 OA OPTIONAL PREFABRICATED MANHOLE BASE WITH APPROVED PIPE CONNECTIONS MAY BE USED WITH 10 SECTION A—A O NOTE: v 5 ENGINEERS APPROVAL, SEE SD-501A. 9 A TOP OF COLLAR TO BE FLUSH © PLACE VERTICAL WALL ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF aLL 10 N.T.S. WITH MANHOLE COVER. 6 11 6 MANHOLE, ROTATED 45 DEGREES. © 3LB PER CY OF FIBER-REINFORCED 48 © FOR INLET PIPE DIAMETER, D, GREATER THAN 24", CONCRETE MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF z SEE SD-613 OR SD-614. LEGEND REBAR WITH ENGINEER'S APPROVAL. Q g c a O14 REBAR 2 EACH SEE SECTION A-A . ( ) N OD MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER: Nk # ( ) ) 6' MIN A. REFER TO DRAWING NO. SD-617. r- ° A' B. FRAME AND COVER SHALL BE FLUSH WITH w3 ° O #4 REBAR AT 20" SPACING. 7 s: SLOPE OF PAVEMENT. ID 12 C. "STORM DRAIN" ON COVER. O3 SCORES. 7 8'o O WHERE PVC PIPE IS UTILIZED, INSTALL A RUBBER iY �--►� 04 RIM. RING OR GASKET COLLAR WHERE THE PIPE IS IN 10 O o3 SECTION O FRAME AND COVER PER SD-617. SECTION A-A CONTACT WITH MANHOLE BASE AND/OR MANHOLE z ° a CHANNEL, IN ORDER TO INSURE A WATERTIGHT 4" TYPE 1 SEAL. © SEE "DETAIL A" FOR REBAR IN COLLAR. °. ' 4: e BEDDING N.T.S. 64. O EITHER BASE ON SD-501 OR SD-501A MAY BE N.T.S. 0 FINISHED GRADE. / USED WITH EITHER MANHOLE DESIGN. N 2" (MIN.) e ', A*.. � O8 SEE OTHER STANDARD DRAWINGS OF MANHOLES FOR MAXIMUM HEIGHT. O9 GROUT BETWEEN RING AND COVER AND GRADE RINGS. j w rn rn 10 FRIBILLATED POLYPROPYLENE FIBER (1 1/2 LBS. PER CY) DETAIL A 0 > cn 00 Y MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF #4 REBAR IN CONCRETE Q Z } Z �" COLLARS. N.T.S. 2 p 00�o } 2017 ACHD REVISION 2017 ACHD REVISION o 2017 ACHD REVISION CJ L U v Z 2017 ACHD REVISION IDAFORHPUBL PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD C O N C R E T ° o w W STANDARD DRAWING a a IDAHO STANDARDS IDAHO STANDARDS NO. FOR PUBLIC WORKS GROUNDWATER STANDARD DRAWING FOR PUBLIC WORKS GROUNDWATER STANDARD DRAWING FOR PUBLAC STANDARDS STANDARD MANHOLE COLLAR NO NDARD DRAWING (ACHD SUPPLEIMENT) CATCH MANHOLE S D — 611 Z CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION WELL S D — 6 2 7 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION WELL S D — 6 2 7 CONSTRUCTION S D— 61 6 JOB NUMBER: (ACHD SUPPLEMENT) 1 OF 2 (ACHD SUPPLEMENT) 2 OF 2 ACHD SUPPLEMENT) IDB2355 0 DATE: 6-9-23 �G SHEET NUMBER: lii li ° SDA W1: yW o� ENCLOSE TOP & SIDES OF ROCK WITH NON WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SAND/GREASE TRAP (ISPWC SD-624) OR Q JV SEDIMENT MANHOLE (ISPWC SD-61 1) 1-FT MIN TYP 6" MIN TYP 18" DIA. HDPE OR PVC QQ� 18" DIA. CORRUGATED HDPE IF INSTALLED WITH CHAMBERS/ PERFORATED PER RING & OR PVC PIPE PERFORATED PER CHIPS, INSTALL WOVEN ENCLOSE TOP & SIDES OF ROCK SCHEDULE BELOW COVER PER PERFORATION SCHEDULE GEOTEXTILE TO SEPARATE CHIPS WITH NON WOVEN FILTER FABRIC OBSERVATION WELL #1 � ISPWC SD-617 AND DRAIN ROCK SEE COVER ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET IN SIDEWALK OR co) (TYP) TREES & SHRUBS NOTES ARE NOT PERMITTED OBSERVATION OPTIONAL STORMWATER STORAGEM.. MIN 50' DISTANCE ON TOP OF SEEPAGE WELL CHAMBERS, SHAPE & SIZE Sidewalk BED VARY PER MANUFACTURER c ELEV BOTTOM PERF <= EE COVER \\ /\//\/\\/ 1812" l /\\ \//\j\\ WOVEN GEOTEXTILE BETWEENELEV BOTTOM BAFFLE + NOTES \ /\\ \/� CHIPS AND 2" DRAIN ROCKw —12" DIA. HDPE ww 5 ° ° ° ° ° ° ° 18„ ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° /\/\j\\/\\\/\/\ OVERLAP WOVEN AND NON w OR PVC ® ® ® aSEE STD ° ° ° ° ° ° \ \ \ i\ \\ WOVEN GEOTEXTILE A MIN OF I = PERFORATED c = E N NOTE 1 1 0% SLOPE 0% SLOPE \j\\NATIVE\\\�\ 1-FT ON ALL SIDES `2' WASHED DRAIN w 2" WASHED DRAIN w PER SCHEDULE p a o 3 1 . �\� \\� ROCK OR CHIPS> w� ROCK OR CHIPS> Q g BELOW SEE `a o NOTE 11 O O O 0- O O ewa o N NATIVE/�\\�\%\\ \\j 2" WASHED VARIES-SEE 2" WASHED E o o Ta N \�\\ DRAIN ROCK PLAN SHEETS DRAIN ROCK . . ::. .:' ® ® MAINTENANCE a �-�� 1.5-FT . : :.:: ::• l 1.5-FT DIVERSION STRUCTURE WITH ® ACCESS TO p RAISED INVERT OR WEIR WALL L r 1. �.:.' ::'•.^ STRUCTURES T>_ 5' OF 18" SOLID ASTM C33 ASTM C33 f ASTM C33 E W o 1' y N S. WALL PIPE WITH 1.5-FT WIDTH VARIES y FILTER SAND.:;.1 :.'' "'FILTER SAND;:::, '. , FILTER HIGH FLOW BYPASS PIPE WQ PIPE, 4" OF 4" PIPE BEDDING = 3-� PER PLAN SAND 15' MAX WIDTH 11 ON BMP 20 PERF TOP HALF d = SEE NOTE rw aTo� NONWOVEN FILTER FABRIC. OVERLAP TRANSITION 5-FT IN -ELEVATSOC;W (1 of 3) a- m MINIMUM OF 1-FT TOP AND BED NON-PERFORATED OPTIONAL CHAMBER STANDARD a- SIDES ONLY TO PERFORATED PIPE SECTION SECTION A-A SECTION Li N.T.S. N.T.S. a- NOTES: N.T.S. OBSERVATION 00 1. BMP 1-4 OR VEGETATED PRETREATMENT IS REQUIRED. WIDTH 4 PLAN-SEEPAGE BED WELL #1 2. CONTACT DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FOR SEEPAGE BED REDESIGN IF GROUNDWATER IS ENCOUNTERED ABOVE # �� S �5 4S, OUTSIDE ROADWAY SEEPAGE BED MAX HSGW ELEVATION , 3. ALL VAULTS, MANHOLES, & SAND AND GREASE TRAPS SHALL BE HS25 OR GREATER LOAD RATED 191 N.T.S. CONTACT DKLM 4. SEEPAGE BED SHALL BE SHOWN ON BOTH PLAN AND PROFILE VIEWS OBSERVATION WELL #1 48-HOUR$ 5. OPTIONAL CHAMBERS PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET IN SIDEWALK OR 6. ALL GEOTEXTILE SEAMS SHALL OVERLAP 1 FOOT MINIMUM } � � BEFORE DKnNC 7. EL. IN >= EL. BOTTOM PERFORATIONS IN 1811 PERF PIPE �4S•i h5 Sidewalk 8. MAXIMUM BED LENGTH IS 400-FT BETWEEN MANHOLES A A 18" PERF PIPE 12" PERF PIPE 9. BED WIDTH SHALL REMAIN CONSTANT WQ BYPASS SEE NOTE 11 10. WATERTIGHT CONNECTION REQUIRED c� 11. HIGH FLOW BYPASS PIPE ONLY NEEDED IF Q100 VELOCITY THROUGH STRUCTURE > 0.5 FPS z OBSERVATION PERFORATION SCHEDULE J &WELL #2 3/8" PERFORATIONS IN VALLEYS HI FLOW BYPAS PIPE SD PIPE COVER NOTES: ACROSS STREET OF CORRUGATED PIPE. 5 EA ON ® 0 > —> FOR SEEPAGE BEDS OUTSIDE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: WITHIN SIDEWALK (1 NOTE 11 ON M LLI 18 8 EA ON 12" (1 of 3) 71 J � 1. A MINIMUM 1.5-FT COVER FROM TOP OF BED TO FINISH GRADE IS REQUIRED J 2 FOR SEEPAGE BEDS IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: k:t SLEPAGE BE I A _]�P,:F_ 2IP� ® a 1. A MINIMUM 1.0-FT COVER FROM TOP OF BED TO PAVEMENT SUBGRADE IS REQUIRED Sidewalk W z U --BACKFILL OVER BED TO SUBGRADE WITH 6"-8" MINUS PITRUN so -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC REQUIRED OVER TOP OF BED A o Q ; Q -TOP OF BED UNDER SIDEWALK SHALL BE MIN 1.0-FT BELOW PAVEMENT SUBGRADE OBSERVATION WELLS: 2 REQUIRED PER BED PLAN = 2. IF < 1.0-FT COVER FROM TOP OF BED TO SUBGRADE, ANGULAR 4" TO 2" ROCK IS REQUIRED WITH N.T.S. WQ PIPE, DIVERSION STRUCTURE WITH 0 0 ui MINIMUM 50% SINGLE FRACTURED FACE IN PLACE OF 2" DRAIN ROCK. PERF TOP HALF RAISED INV OR WEIR WALL Q Z) Lu 3. FULL ROADWAY SECTION IS REQUIRED OVER SEEPAGE BEDS. SEEPAGE BEDS SHALL NOT EXTEND ABOVE � (A W REQUIREMENTS FOR FACILITIES IN RIGHT-OF-WAY Q SUBGRADE PLAN-SEEPAGE BED � 4. THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE OF THE 1. BED IS LIMITED TO AREA WITHIN 5-FT OF CURB FACE UNDER ROADWAY; UNDER SIDEWALK Q 0� SUBGRADE SOILS AND DETERMINING THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE 2. NO GREATER THAN 10-FEET IN DEPTH TO THE BOTTOM OF THE ROCK; U SEE BMP 20 SHEET 2 OF 3 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES 3. MAY NOT EXTEND OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT—OF—WAY (MAY NOT ENCROACH ON PRIVATE LOT IN AN EASEMENT); N.T.S. �Q w CQ') Q U) U w w 2017 STANDARD DRAWING 2017 STANDARD DRAWING 2017 STANDARD DRAWING o a ACHD STORMWATER DESIGN SEEPAGE BED WITH ACHD STORMWATER DESIGN SEEPAGE BED WITH ACHD STORMWATER DESIGN SEEPAGE BED W ITH GUIDELINES OPTIONAL CHAMBERS BMP 20 GUIDELINES OPTIONAL CHAMBERS BMP 20 GUIDELINES OPTIONAL CHAMBERS BMP 20 ASS SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEET 3 OF 3 \ONAL� �G\STE 3 1/16" CLEARANCE 2-6 LP 6-9-23 �TF OF A ER\��s A IL � , o • . • a ... ... ... •.. • . . • . co a j 1 .• .• .• • 'd 1 d 1 a ' • 1 w .. cn PLAN ° c\j co 2 , > ' 0 N.T.S. 51, 3 OOO 07 3/4" iv 3/4" 9.. OOOO °OO O Opo I ° O� O O 4 � ��C a �o D00 o°Cc �w >Q 0 0000� B °oO <m oo< om $ O°O O o 10" °OoOo° 21" O 0 ° o ooOQO / Ooo °O0 �oo�opoo oOO ° off° 0 0 00 0 os a� SECTION A—A ° O° o QU CAST IRON o 0 0 o O° RING 8c COVER � �o°°�oo�000�o°oo��o° m N.T.S. (:Fnll 0 (l�OrinOn 5 so �Y B �U w 6 a4 lo do z u) 12" 8" 12" SIDE N.T.S. "a ow Y k U K ¢3 w� LEGEND Ml �3 W(( OO OOOOQ°O l 4- 1" DIA. HOLES ON 3 1/2" RADIUS. O o0 0O0 O O O O°_0 O2 12" DIA. x 1'-0" PVC, DIP OR CP. z �a OCIDo�o0000o °OOOOOO 30 FIBER JOINT PACKING. �� O° O 000o p + °vo t�0O O4 1/8 BEND. ° OOO I ° OO-0 0 O5 UNDISTURBED MATERIAL. IM io O�OOOQOOOgcp OpOOOQOO TYPE 1 BEDDING MATERIAL. wZ N O° O OOOOj w J 2, Q w m z co Of 0 �o NOTE: 0 w Q � �X z AO CLEAN-OUT TO BE USED ONLY p w w a L Q SECTION B—B WITH APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER. a a o N.T.S. Z 2015 Q� JOB NUMBER: IDAHO STANDARDS " STANDARD DRAWING IDB2355 FOR PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD 8 TRAFFIC NO c DATE: 6-9-23 CONSTRUCTION RATED CLEAN — OUT SD— 506 SHEET NUMBER: w 0 SDm5 w_ JACOBS Phase II Soils Report Linder Village STAR Design - US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho Kittelson Project No. 23635 Idaho Transportation Department Key No. 20594 Revised January 2020 Prepared for Kittelson and Associates, Inc. Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS' Meridian, Idaho US 20/26 Widening and Collector Roads Meridian, Idaho Project No: W3X86600 Document Title: Phase II Soils Report Document No.: GES0717191102BOI Revision: Revision 1 - Final Date: January 2020 Client Name: Kittelson and Associates, Inc. Project Manager: John Barker Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 999 West Main Street Suite 1200 Boise, ID 83702 United States T +1.208.345.5310 www.jacobs.com ©Copyright 2019 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright. Limitation:This document has been prepared on behalf of,and for the exclusive use of Jacobs'client,and is subject to,and issued in accordance with,the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client.Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of,any use of,or reliance upon,this document by any third party. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS' Meridian, Idaho Contents Acronymsand Abbreviations...................................................................................................................iii PhaseII Soils Report..................................................................................................................................1 230.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 1 230.1.01 Project Background and Description ........................................................ 1 230.1.02 Purpose and Scope of Work..................................................................... 1 230.1.03 Previous Geotechnical Explorations and Reports.................................... 1 230.2 Vicinity Map..................................................................................................................2 230.3 Soils Profile/Pavement Condition Survey.....................................................................2 230.3.01 General Geologic Overview......................................................................2 230.3.02 Surface Conditions....................................................................................2 230.3.03 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing.................................................2 230.3.04 Field Exploration .......................................................................................5 230.3.05 Subsurface Conditions..............................................................................7 230.4 Borrow Source Data.....................................................................................................8 230.5 Aggregate Inventory Report.........................................................................................8 230.6 Borrow and Aggregate Source Plats............................................................................9 230.7 Soil Report Summary ...................................................................................................9 230.8 Total Design Pavement Thickness...............................................................................9 230.8.01 Traffic Data................................................................................................9 230.8.02 R-value Testing.........................................................................................9 230.9 Sub-Subgrading.......................................................................................................... 10 230.10 Grade Pointing............................................................................................................ 10 230.11 Special Placement...................................................................................................... 10 230.12 Compaction ................................................................................................................ 10 230.13 Slope Design Summary.............................................................................................. 10 230.14 Slope Design .............................................................................................................. 10 230.14.01 Cut Slopes............................................................................................... 10 230.15 Embankment Foundation ........................................................................................... 11 230.16 Surface and Subsurface Water.................................................................................. 11 230.17 Drainage..................................................................................................................... 11 230.17.01 Field Infiltration Testing........................................................................... 12 230.18 Retaining Walls........................................................................................................... 13 230.19 Blanket Course or Filter Material................................................................................ 13 230.20 Existing Roadway Material ......................................................................................... 13 230.21 Abutment Embankment Material................................................................................ 13 230.22 Rock Subgrade........................................................................................................... 14 230.23 Topsoil........................................................................................................................ 14 230.24 Pipe............................................................................................................................. 14 230.24.01 Sampling and Testing ............................................................................. 14 230.25 Riprap......................................................................................................................... 14 230.26 Staged Construction................................................................................................... 14 230.27 Dust Abatement.......................................................................................................... 14 230.28 Seismic Design........................................................................................................... 15 230.28.01 Liquefaction............................................................................................. 15 230.29 Pavement Estimating Information .............................................................................. 15 230.29.01 Pavement Type and Surface Smoothness............................................. 16 GES0717191102BOI .lACOBS Linder Village STAR Design-US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho 230.29.02 Typical Section........................................................................................ 16 230.29.03 Base........................................................................................................ 16 230.29.04 Surface Treatment.................................................................................. 16 230.29.05 Paving ..................................................................................................... 16 230.29.06 Seal......................................................................................................... 16 230.29.07 Aggregate Estimating Data..................................................................... 17 230.30 References ................................................................................................................. 17 Appendixes A Soil Boring Logs B Laboratory Test Results C Pavement Design Calculations D Pertinent Geotechnical Reports Tables 1 Soil Boring Summary .......................................................................................................................5 2 Summary of Laboratory Testing Results..........................................................................................6 3 Traffic Data.......................................................................................................................................9 4 Tentative Ballast Thickness........................................................................................................... 10 5 Infiltration Testing Summary.......................................................................................................... 12 6 Infiltration Rates from Other Geotechnical Reports....................................................................... 12 7 Global Stability Results.................................................................................................................. 13 8 Corrosivity Testing Summary......................................................................................................... 14 9 Seismic Hazard Design Parameters.............................................................................................. 15 10 Pavement Smoothness Schedule 2............................................................................................... 16 Figures 1 Vicinity Map......................................................................................................................................3 2 Boring Location Map........................................................................................................................4 GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS' Meridian, Idaho Acronyms and Abbreviations AADT average annual daily traffic AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AC asphalt concrete ACHD Ada County Highway District ASTM ASTM International bgs below the ground surface bpf blow(s) per foot ESAL equivalent single-axle load GPS Global Positioning System ITD Idaho Transportation Department Jacobs Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. KAI Kittelson and Associates, Inc. LL liquid limit mg/kg milligrams per kilogram NP nonplastic ohm/cm ohms per centimeter PGA peak ground acceleration PI plasticity index Project Linder Village Project RAP recycled asphalt pavement SS split-spoon sampler STAR State Tax Anticipation Revenue GES0717191102BOI iii Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS® Meridian, Idaho Phase II Soils Report 230.1 Introduction 230.1.01 Project Background and Description High Desert Development, Inc. is developing the Linder Village Project (project), a commercial development at the southeast corner of the intersection of Linder Road and US Highway 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard) in Meridian, Idaho. As part of the commercial development, High Desert Development, Inc. will utilize State Tax Anticipation Revenue (STAR)funding to complete roadway improvements on US 20/26. The project includes widening US 20/26 to two travel lanes in each direction approximately 2 miles in length, between Linder Road and Locust Grove Road. The widening will occur to the south of the existing highway with the new pavement section accounting for a 14-foot two-way left turn lane, two 12-foot eastbound travel lanes, an 8-foot shoulder, and infiltration (drainage)facilities. The project also includes the design of a new collector roadway approximately a mile in length, an extension of Fox Run Collector Road, through the Linder Village commercial development. Kittelson and Associates, Inc. (KAI) is preparing preliminary and final design plans, specifications, and estimates for this project in general accordance with Idaho Transportation Department(ITD)and Ada County Highway District(ACHD) requirements. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) is providing geotechnical engineering services under subcontract to KAI on this project. This report has been prepared for the use of KAI and its subcontractors in the design of the Linder Village project. The report has been prepared following the recommended outline for a Phase 11 Soils Report as specified in ITD's Materials Manual(ITD, 2018). Pertinent information typically contained in a Phase 111 Pavement Estimating Report is also included. This work was authorized by KAI, under terms and conditions of the Professional Services Agreement for Project No. 23635, executed on March 20, 2019. 230.1.02 Purpose and Scope of Work This report presents the findings of the geotechnical exploration and evaluation to support roadway and pavement design for the widening of US 20/26 and the new Fox Run Collector Road in Meridian, Idaho. The scope of work included the following: • Perform a geotechnical exploration, including 14 borings along US 20/26, 3 borings for the new Fox Run Collector Road, and field tests including infiltration testing. • Present a summary of the findings from the field exploration and laboratory testing. • Summarize geotechnical analyses and pavement design. • Prepare this Phase II report. 230.1.03 Previous Geotechnical Explorations and Reports Jacobs reviewed previously conducted geotechnical explorations and reports. Generally, the conditions encountered during this exploration were consistent with the findings previously reported. The following reports were reviewed: • American Geotechnics, June 18, 2015. "Phase I ®Pavement Rehabilitation Report and Phase III Pavement Estimating Report, US-20 Rehabilitation Projects, Ada County, Idaho, ITD Project Nos. A013(927), A013(928), A013(941); Key Nos. 13927, 13928, 13941." GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho • GeoEngineers, August 29, 2018. "Materials Phase II Soils Investigation Report, US 20/26 Chinden; Locust Grove to Eagle, ITD Project No. A019(944); Key No. 19944; Ada County, Idaho. • GeoEngineers, March 28, 2019. "Infiltration Testing Results, US 20/26 Chinden; Locust Grove to Eagle."Ada County, Idaho; ITD Project No. 019(944); Key No. 19944. • Terracon, August 3, 2016. Combined Phase I(R) Pavement Rehabilitation and Phase Ill Pavement Estimating Report. Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho; Project No. A019(412), Key No. 19412. 230.2 Vicinity Map The limits for the widening of US 20/26 begin just west of Linder Road and extend west to Locust Grove Road. The Fox Run Collector road will be located in the agricultural parcel proposed for commercial development at the southeast corner of Linder Road and US 20/26. A vicinity map is shown in Figure 1. Jacobs performed a subsurface field investigation as part of this project. A boring location map is shown in Figure 2. 230.3 Soils Profile/Pavement Condition Survey Because this project consists of widening an existing roadway facility and will not result in significant changes in vertical or horizontal alignment, soil classification and thickness of subsurface soils have been included in the boring logs in Appendix A. A soil profile has not been prepared for this report, and a pavement condition survey was not performed. 230.3.01 General Geologic Overview The project area is located within the western Snake River Plain physiographic province and within the surficial geologic unit of the Gravel of the Whitney Terrace. These alluvial gravel terrace deposits were derived from the central Idaho mountains and deposited by the ancestral Boise River. They include thick, unconsolidated Quaternary-age deposits that overlie Tertiary-age sediments. The terraces are generally mantled with up to 8 feet of fine-grained loess deposits that consist of silt and clay that overlie the gravelly materials. No bedrock is known to outcrop within the project area (Othberg and Stanford, 1992). The project area lies within the Gravel of the Whitney Terrace (Qwg). Sandy pebble and cobble gravel with a thickness between 16 and 80 feet and mantled with 3 to 6 feet of loess deposits. This is the second terrace above the Boise River. 230.3.02 Surface Conditions The ground surface in the project area is relatively flat, with elevations ranging from 2,570 feet to 2,610 feet along the corridor. US 20/26 crosses through a developed, suburban area that includes roadways, commercial developments, and residential neighborhoods. Several agricultural fields are located south of US 20/26. The agricultural field at the southeast corner of US 20/26 and Linder Road is flat and was not being cultivated at the time of the exploration. The ground surface showed evidence of prior agricultural tilling, some dry vegetation, and granular fill material at the field access roads. 230.3.03 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Jacobs performed field explorations from May 20 through May 22, 2019, on US 20/26 and on June 4, 2019, for the new Fox Run Collector road. After completing the field exploration, laboratory testing was completed by GeoTek, Inc., of Meridian, Idaho, to measure index properties and estimate engineering parameters of soils. The following subsections summarize the field exploration and field and laboratory testing conducted as part of the geotechnical field exploration. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS® Meridian, Idaho I r Rtvencare nr ear 2 P.. Fan star � So-Rrvee0 1 �S�V'rt�nds Or or -Ihls 9t 'Ool Club W Colc Banbury �N�nr llr - GO Club r{ W f]:�krAim Pron br PROJECT AREA W'frm Plc tl` _ gN'MIo�. _ �`—W-Gh 4ntlen-Hlvd-a1� - 4N':It ndnir?.I.d `at_'�W-Ghknden-Blvd (9_ P l^1 J'P in Rd 3 + - w Cemtal � � ~Nr'bhlnd en-ervd�_ ITT W Hawlen -w Lost Fia Ptds G+ _ o - ------- woemerer St MSO Prape tH n0'� '-" �Ylrkory Or may r F � C F LaweH s�mt cettrtmh,l - Mctlevil! Mlddb Hgh 5c Wol SthoOl IS,I '-9 E M:MiWn Rd � 'h'Mc hllL�n FW - �+ Pmeee• H-11 Fark Gpltla nmtl A Project Location w. .t . o awry. E Figure 1: Vicinity Map 1:36.112 Geotechnical Report o o.ss 0.65 ,.sm US 220t26 Widening and Collector Roads 0 0.6 , � m JACOBS Cattily m aaa,s—n m".M—gemenl,E. Es,, HEHE,6armm.IrFCREMENt P.VSCaS,METIrFlASA,EpA,USbA Figure 1. Vicinity Map GES0717191102BOI 3 • � • • • • •. ■ l I IND "fI�+N-BF9nayf�h rr 1. ' - i fi llj2}� • -i: �`�� vrSly-�-ax t -� ! � n � �'' .�. ',� Y • Mr .III � 7' H'' ' iR/ �` ' .• � _ +` ' SP 1 '�-T r`_--'r.1 { �? •. � A I i 1. o r ° 1BrHj3 — ^T�.BHj4_ — -- —° _o h :o- BH,r1 *- BH 2 °PH 1 o _ o H 5 °. °. . . BH-6- —BH=7 —BH!B iPH-2 PH-3'{ 11 CR-3 v p I CR-2 a = t 1 - x r� ft E rth iO"M �. n�I U - c�'Chart vel✓•� __ ,n r-'-.1:�•--� � � - '� ._� �!- ti b t �c� . a _ • rr (? ! J { ✓� • ' 1 F� ,. ` �'�. .� �=Crooked•S13ck-C-i�J� �" WTI 11 _.BH-9_:_ EE m - a aj Linder Village STAR Design-US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS Meridian, Idaho 230.3.04 Field Exploration The field exploration completed by Jacobs consisted of 14 roadway soil borings advanced along US 20/26 and 3 farm field borings along the proposed Collector road alignment to the depth of 11.5 feet below the ground surface (bgs). Haz-Tech Drilling, of Nampa, Idaho, performed the drilling under subcontract to Jacobs. Haz-Tech used a truck-mounted CME 750 drill rig to advance the soil borings using 6-inch hollow- stem auger exploratory drilling equipment. Table 1 details the boring locations, depths, and estimated Global Positioning System (GPS)coordinates from a hand-held GPS and Google Earth. Table 1. Soil Boring Summary DepthGPS Coordinates IF (degrees,estimated) Top of Boring Termination Boring .. Number Drilled Latitude L (feet,estimated) (feet) ongitude BH-1 5/20/2019 43.662815 -116.414906 2575.0 11.5 BH-2 5/20/2019 43.662841 -116.412005 2577.3 11.5 BH-3 5/20/2019 43.662838 -116.409206 2579.0 11.5 BH-4 5/21/2019 43.662831 -116.406399 2579.5 11.5 BH-5 5/21/2019 43.332795 -116.403029 2582.0 11.5 BH-6 5/21/2019 43.662787 -116.400341 2585.6 11.5 BH-7 5/21/2019 43.662817 -116.397689 2588.6 11.5 BH-8 5/21/2019 43.662821 -116.394919 2587.9 11.5 BH-9 5/21/2019 43.662817 -116.391879 2588.2 11.5 BH-10 5/21/2019 43.662830 -116.388614 2590.5 11.5 BH-11 5/21/2019 43.662854 -116.385654 2595.5 11.5 BH-12 5/22/2019 43.662860 -116.382763 2598.7 11.5 BH-13 5/22/2019 43.662869 -116.379918 2601.5 11.5 BH-14 5/22/2019 43.662879 -116.377238 2604.3 11.5 CR-1 6/04/2019 43.659447 -116.411980 2573.2 11.5 CR-2 6/04/2019 43.660186 -116.406976 2578.7 11.5 CR-3 6/04/2019 43.661292 -116.403552 2577.1 11.5 230.3.04.01 Field Tests A Jacobs geotechnical engineer observed drilling activities and maintained written logs, including a record of drilling conditions, sample descriptions, groundwater levels, and other information. Soil samples were examined in the field, visually classified in general accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) D2488, Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), and placed in resealable plastic bags. Jacobs subsequently selected soil samples for laboratory testing. Field classifications were reviewed and modified after completing the laboratory testing program. Standard penetration tests were conducted in general accordance with ASTM D1586, Standard Test Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils. A hydraulic trip-hammer was used to drive the samplers with a 140-pound hammer, free falling for 30 inches, for a total penetration of 18 inches. The number of blows required for each 6-inch interval was recorded during the driving of the sample and is collectively referred to as "blow counts."The sum of the blow counts for the last 12 inches of the driving distance is the "N-value," reported in blows per foot(bpf). "Refusal" is the condition in which the sampler is driven less than 6 inches after 50 blows, or less than 12 inches after 100 blows. After the sampler was GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho driven and the blow counts were recorded, the sampler was withdrawn from the borehole for recovery and classification of the disturbed soil sample. In situ infiltration testing was conducted using a falling head method within the 6-inch hollow-stem augers during the field exploration. Due to restricted work hours resulting from drilling the soil borings within the roadway limits, presoaking for 24 hours was not possible and the test intervals were shortened. Infiltration testing methodology, measured infiltration rates, and determination of design infiltration rates are discussed in Section 230.17.01 Field Infiltration Testing. 230.3.04.02 Laboratory Testing The laboratory testing program included testing to measure index properties and estimate engineering parameters for use in roadway and pavement evaluation. Laboratory test results are in Appendix B. Laboratory testing for the project included the following tests: • ASTM D422—Particle-Size Analysis of Soils • ASTM D4318—Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils • ASTM D2216—Moisture Content of Soils • Idaho T-8— Idaho R-Value • ASTM G57— Soil Resistivity • EPA 9045D—pH of Soil • EPA 9253 and 9038— Chlorides and Sulfates content A summary of laboratory test results is presented in Table 2. The detailed results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. Table 2. Summary of Laboratory Testing Results Atterberg Sample Moisture Limits(%) Classification Chloride Sulfate Passing Boring Sample Depth Content (ASTM Resistivity Content Content 00 ID No. (feet) N LL P1 D2487) pH (ohm/cm) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Sieve R-Value BH-1 SS-1 2.5-4.0 19.3 NP NP SM 23.9 BH-2 SS-1 2.5-4.0 - NP NP SM 38.4 - BH-2 SS-2 5.0-6.5 23.8 NP NP SM 48.1 - BH-3 SS-1 2.5-4.0 - NP NP SM 23.4 - BH-3 SS-3 7.5-9.0 21.4 NP NP SM 38.4 - BH-1 SS-1 2.5-4.0 - SM 7.9 1,350 - - - - BH-4 SS-1 2.5-4.0 - SM - - 150 15 - - BH-4 SS-4 10.0- 5.1 NP NP GM - - - 12.4 - 11.5 BH-5 SS-3 7.5-9.0 34.8 NP NP SM - - 36.9 - BH-6 SS-1 2.5-4.0 11.5 NP NP GP-GM - - 10.5 - BH-6 SS-4 10.0- 8.8 NP NP GP-GM - - 5.2 - 11.5 BH-7 SS-2 5.0-6.5 - SM 7.8 850 180 19 - - BH-8 SS-2 5.0-6.5 12.1 NP NP SP-SM - - - - 6.3 - BH-9 BK-5 3.0-6.0 - GP-GM' - - 78 BH-9 SS-4 10.0- 6.3 NP NP SM - - 13.3 - 11.5 GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS Meridian, Idaho Table 2. Summary of Laboratory Testing Results ChlorideAtterberg Soil Soil Soil Percent Sample Moisture Limits(%) Classification Sulfate Passing Boring Sample Depth Content (ASTM Resistivity Content Content 00 ID No. (feet) N LL P1 D2487) pH (ohm/cm) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Sieve R-Value BH-10 SS-4 10.0- 4.3 NP NP SP-SM - - - 10.9 - 11.5 BH-11 SS-1 2.5-4.0 - SM 7.9 1,100 - - - BH-11 BK-5 3.0-6.0 - ML* - - - - 25 BH-11 SS-3 7.5-9.0 16.3 NP NP SM - - 20.1 - BH-11 SS-4 10.0- - NP NP SP-SM - - 5.6 - 11.5 BH-12 BK-5 3.0-6.0 - - - SM* - - - 35 BH-12 SS-3 7.5-9.0 21.0 25.8 1 ML - - 53.3 - BH-13 SS-2 5.0-6.5 24.5 NP NP ML - 55.5 - BH-14 BK-5 3.0-6.0 - ML* - - - 21 BH-14 SS-2 5.0-6.5 SM 8.3 1,100 - CR-1 BK-5 1.0-5.0 ML* - - - - 10 CR-1 SS-2 5.0-6.5 6.5 NP NP SM - - 33.9 - CR-1 SS-3 7.5-9.0 - NP NP GW-GM - - 9.7 - CR-2 SS-1 2.5-5.0 - - - SP-SM - 25 50 - - CR-2 SS-3 7.5-9.0 8.5 NP NP SP-SM - - - 11.8 - CR-3 BK-5 1.0-5.0 - - - ML* - - 8 CR-3 SS-1 2.5-4.0 12.9 13.2 5.7 SC-SM - 34.9 - CR-3 SS-4 10.0- 4.0 NP NP GP-GM - 9.8 - 11.5 PH-1 BK-1 1.0-2.0 - ML* - - 16 PH-3 BK-1 1.5-2.5 SM* - 29 *Soil classification for R-value testing was completed in general accordance with ASTM D2488, Visual Classification of Soils. Notes: = laboratory test not performed LL = liquid limit mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram NP = nonplastic ohm/cm = ohms per centimeter PI = plasticity index SS = split-spoon sampler 230.3.05 Subsurface Conditions In general, the roadway subsurface profile interpreted from the soil borings consists of an existing pavement section of asphalt concrete and medium dense aggregate base overlying an existing subgrade of loose silty sand with gravel underlain by alternating layers of sandy silt with clay, silty sand with gravel, and stiff sandy silt, and a lower layer of dense silty sand. Beginning from the ground surface downward, the generalized soil profile consists of the following: GES0717191102BOI 7 Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho US 20/26, Linder Road to Meridian Road (BH-1 through BH-8) • Existing Pavement Section. The existing pavement section had a measured thickness of 6.0 to 10.0 inches of asphalt concrete and 1.5 to 2.0 feet of aggregate base. • Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Silty Gravel with Sand (GM-GP). This soil layer starts below the existing pavement section and extends to a depth ranging from 2 feet to 10 feet and is brown and medium dense to dense. Field N-values ranged from 12 to 45 blows per foot(bpf). • Silty Sand (SM). This layer extends from below the silty sand and gravel layer to a depth of 5 to 10 feet bgs and is brown and loose to dense. Field N-values ranged from 2 to 65 bpf. • Silty Gravel with Sand (GM). This layer starts below the silty sand and extends from a depth of 7.5 feet to 11 feet (bottom of exploration depth), and is light brown and medium dense to very dense. Field N-values ranged from 20 to refusal for this layer. US 20/26, Meridian Road to Locust Grove Road (1131-11-9 through 131-11-14) • Existing Pavement Section. The existing pavement section had a measured thickness of 6.0 to 8.0 inches of asphalt concrete and 1.5 to 2.0 feet of aggregate base. • Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand (GP-GM). This soil layer starts below the existing pavement section and extends to a depth ranging from 2 feet to 7 feet and is brown and medium dense to very dense. Field N-values ranged from 12 to 68 bpf. • Sandy Silt (ML) and Silty Sand (SM). This layer extends from below the gravel to a depth of 3 to 10 feet bgs and is brown and very stiff to hard or very loose to dense. Field N-values ranged from 3 to refusal. • Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM). This layer starts below the sandy silt/silty sand and extends from a depth of 7 feet to 11 feet bgs (bottom of exploration depth) and is light brown and medium dense to very dense. Field N-values ranged from 29 to refusal for this layer. Fox Run Collector Road (CR-1, CR-2, and CR-3) • Topsoil. This layer extends from ground surface to depths of 1.0 to 1.5 feet. Dry vegetation is present at the ground surface. • Silty Sand (SM). This layer extends from 1.0 to 1.5 feet bgs to a depth of 5 to 7 feet bgs and is brown and very loose to dense. Field N-values ranged from 3 to refusal. • Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM). This layer extends from a depth of 7 feet to 11 feet bgs (bottom of exploration depth), and is light brown and medium dense to very dense. Field N-values ranged from 29 to refusal for this layer. 230.3.05.01 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings at the time of drilling. Section 230.16 contains a discussion of surface and subsurface water in the project area. 230.4 Borrow Source Data If needed, it is anticipated that borrow materials will be obtained from local approved contractor-furnished sources. 230.5 Aggregate Inventory Report No specific sources of aggregate have been selected. It is anticipated that borrow materials will be obtained from local approved contractor-furnished sources. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS' Meridian, Idaho 230.6 Borrow and Aggregate Source Plats Borrow and Aggregate Source Plats have not been provided because these materials will be obtained from local approved contractor-furnished sources. 230.7 Soil Report Summary A soil report summary was not prepared because this project involves widening US 20/26, and a single pavement section will be used. Boring logs are presented in Appendix A. 230.8 Total Design Pavement Thickness A pavement section was developed using the Idaho R-value flexible pavement design procedures outlined in the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018). 230.8.01 Traffic Data The existing roadway section along US 20/26, Linder Road to Locust Grove Road, is paved with asphalt concrete (AC) pavement(plant mix). ITD provided traffic data for US 20/26, from Beginning MP 37.08 to Ending MP 39.04. The traffic data indicate a calculated traffic index of 11.5. Table 3 summarizes the traffic data. Table 3. Traffic Data One-way20-year Cumulative Current Projected AADT for ESALs, Roadway Segment (2019)AADT the i .- US 20/26, 21820 30410 8169 11.5 MP 37.1 to 39.0 Fox Run Collector 6450 9580 710 8.6* Road *A traffic index of 8.6 is based on traffic estimates provided by Kittelson&Associates at an assumed growth rate of 2 percent. This is above the baseline of 8.0 requirement listed in the design of flexible pavements section of the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual,Section 7206.5.3,"Collector Street Design." Notes: AADT = average annual daily traffic ESALs = equivalent single-axle loads 230.8.02 R-value Testing R-value testing of subgrade soil was completed to support pavement design for this project. Reported R- values in the US 20/26 corridor ranged from 16 to 35. For this project, a design R-value was assigned based on soil classification, field tests, R-value test results, and local experience. A design R-value of 20 was selected for the subgrade material for US 20/26. For the Fox Run Collector Road, a design R-value of 8 was selected. The pavement section recommendations in Table 4 are based on a design R-value of 60 for subbase and 80 for the 0.75-inch minus granular aggregate road base (Type B aggregate for untreated base). Based on field classifications and engineering judgment, the subgrade soils are not considered expansive. The project area is in Climate Zone 1. The existing US20/26 pavement section consists of approximately 6 to 10 inches of AC pavement over 1.5 to 2 feet of aggregate base. Table 4 shows the recommended tentative ballast thickness (new pavement section)values for both US 20/26 and Fox Run Collector Road. Appendix C contains the flexible pavement calculations. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho Table 4. Tentative Ballast Thickness Actual Thickness(inches) Gravel Equivalent(inches) Traffic Roadway Segment Index Plant Mix Base Subbase Total Required Design US 20/26 11.5 6 9 20 35 35.33 35.60 Fox Run Collector Road 8.8 4 8 18 30 30.38 30.50 The project will also include widening of Linder Road and Meridian Road to add turn lanes, not continuous through lanes. The scope of work for this project did not include the pavement design for these roadways. ACHD recommends that these sections of Meridian and Linder roads be constructed with a 5-inch layer of plant mix, a 4-inch layer of aggregate base, and a 25-inch layer of subbase. 230.9 Sub-Subgrading The need for sub-subgrading is not anticipated, as the existing roadway embankment materials are well suited for in-place moisture conditioning and compaction. 230.10 Grade Pointing According to the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018), grade pointing is sub-subgrading to remove undesirable soils from cut-fill transitions, provide drainage, eliminate abrupt transitions, or minimize the effects of differential settlement. There are no cut-to-fill transitions where grade pointing will be required. 230.11 Special Placement No special placement requirements were identified for this project. 230.12 Compaction Class A compaction should be specified for this project. 230.13 Slope Design Summary According to the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018), the slope design summary is provided when the project includes special slope treatments or slopes that are more than 10 feet high. Jacobs does not anticipate slopes greater than 4 feet in height, therefore a slope design and design summary have not been prepared. 230.14 Slope Design The project area is generally flat in elevation; therefore, the need for slope design is not anticipated. Slopes should be constructed at 2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (2H:1 V) or flatter and onsite soils that are free-draining, or import borrow material, should be used in the embankments. Slopes should be protected from erosion, and new slopes should be covered with vegetation. Fill slopes are anticipated to be less than 4 feet in height. 230.14.01 Cut Slopes Permanent cut slopes are not anticipated for this project. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS Meridian, Idaho Temporary cut slopes and trenches during construction must comply with local, state, and federal codes, ordinances, and regulations. If space restrictions or construction methods necessitate steeper cut slopes than are permitted or safe, these slopes must be supported. The contractor should be responsible for designing all temporary slopes and trench support systems. This will permit the contractor to select a system particularly suited to the planned construction. 230.15 Embankment Foundation Vertical profile changes associated with replacing the existing structure are anticipated to be minimal. Thus, existing embankments will not increase in height. However, due to roadway widening, additional embankment fill will be placed adjacent to existing embankments. Settlement is anticipated to primarily occur during construction as fill is placed. Little if any additional settlement is expected following placement of the fill because of the low-plasticity of the subsurface material. New embankment fill should be keyed or benched into existing embankments. 230.16 Surface and Subsurface Water Surface water features near the project site include the North Slough and Simpson Lateral, an irrigation canal. This canal generally runs east-west to the south of US 20/26, daylighting and reentering underground pipe. Eventually, the canal daylights in the farm field near the proposed Fox Run Collector Road and travels west before turning and traveling south. The canal appears to reenter an underground pipe to travel westward, past Linder Road and beyond the area of the project. Existing surface water conveyance systems may be affected by the construction of the Fox Run Collector Road and by the commercial development of this parcel. Surface water conveyance is not a part of the scope of work on this project. The groundwater table is expected to fluctuate because of seasonal variations and local irrigation practices. Groundwater was not encountered during the subsurface investigation at the time of drilling, implying a groundwater table greater than 11.5 feet bgs in the project area. The Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, Section 8000, Drainage and Stormwater Management requires groundwater monitoring, unless substantial equivalent site historical data regarding groundwater levels is available and was collected during the prior two years within 2,000 feet of the proposed infiltration site and on the same landform feature (ACHD, 2017). Jacobs reviewed existing geotechnical reports prepared by Terracon for the WinCo commercial development at Linder Village (Terracon, 2015, 2018). Borings for the proposed development range from as shallow as 6 feet to as deep as 20 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered in the deeper borings with depths ranging from 15 to 20 feet bgs, at approximately elevation 2,558 feet to 2,553 feet. For purposes of drainage design for the Fox Run Collector road, a seasonal high groundwater table elevation of 2,558 feet is recommended. Pertinent geotechnical reports that were reviewed and referenced herein are included in Appendix D. Along US20/26, geotechnical explorations have been performed by GeoEngineers between Locust Grove and Eagle (2018), and Kleinfelder between State Highway 16 and Linder(2019). GeoEngineers installed several monitoring wells with the bottom of well elevation ranging from 2,588.5 to 2,600.8 feet. Groundwater was not encountered while drilling or during monitoring between August and December of 2017. Kleinfelder conducted a subsurface exploration between November of 2018 and January of 2019. Groundwater along the US20/26 alignment was encountered between elevation 2,510 and 2,548. 230.17 Drainage To match the existing drainage pattern, US 20/26 will be graded so surface runoff is directed to either side of roadway and into existing drainage features or proposed drainage features. Drainage ditches, curb and gutter, and/drainage pipes should be designed to collect surface runoff and convey water away from pavement areas. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho 230.17.01 Field Infiltration Testing In situ infiltration rates were tested during the field exploration. Falling head infiltration tests were completed using the hollow-stem augers advanced to the test depths during the field exploration. The results of the infiltration tests are shown in Table 5. Table 5. Infiltration Testing Summary Depth Boring Date Testing Measured Infiltration Design Infiltration Number Drilled (feet bgs) Soil Type at Test Interval Rate(inch/hour) Rate(inch/hour) BH-3 5/20/2019 10 Silty Gravel with Sand(GM) 34 8 BH-6 5/21/2019 5 Silty Sand(SM) 20 4 BH-9 5/21/2019 10 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) >40 8 BH-12 5/22/2019 10 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt >40 8 and Gravel(SP-SM) CR-2 6/04/2019 7.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt >40 8 and Gravel(SP-SM) Measured infiltration rates were higher than typical for silty sand and silty gravel soils. Restricted work hours for roadway borings prevented the standard 24-hour presoak of each test zone. Procedures outlined in the Encased Borehole Test (ASTM D6391)could not be followed and the measured infiltration rates included unknown amounts of leakage from the hollow-stem auger joints. Therefore, each measured infiltration rate was reduced by a minimum factor of safety of 4 to account for these factors. The maximum design soil infiltration rate is 8 inches per hour in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, Section 8000, Drainage and Stormwater Management(ACHD, 2017). From Linder Road to Meridian Road, stormwater drainage features installed between 0 to 10 feet bgs within silty sand soils, Jacobs recommends a design infiltration rate of 4 inches per hour. From Meridian Road to Locust Grove Road, stormwater drainage features above 10 feet bgs are not recommended due to the presence of weakly cemented sandy silt soils. For both roadway segments, drainage features installed below 10 feet bgs within silty sand and gravel soils, Jacobs recommends a design infiltration rate of 8 inches per hour. Due to the uncertainty of the infiltration data collected in the field, previously completed geotechnical reports for adjacent segments of US20/26 and the WinCo commercial development were reviewed. Table 6 summarizes infiltration rates included in geotechnical reports prepared for nearby projects. Table 6. Infiltration Rates from Other Geotechnical Reports ReportInfiltration Rate for Sand and Gravel Terracon(2015) WinCo Commercial Development at Linder 7 to 9 inches per hour and US20/26 GeoEngineers(2018&2019) US20/26 Locust Grove to Eagle 8 inches per hour Kleinfelder(2019) US20/26, Highway 16 to Linder Road 8 inches per hour a Measured infiltration rate b Design infiltration rate Jacobs recommendations are consistent with other infiltration rates documented in the project area. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS Meridian, Idaho 230.18 Retaining Walls A mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining wall will be used to accommodate the US20/26 roadway widening by cutting into an existing landscape berm. The wall will begin at STA 698+43, 84 feet right of centerline, and will end at STA 718+37.25, 96 feet right of centerline. AASHTO (2017)commentary states that minimum wall reinforcement lengths have historically been 8 feet, however shorter lengths, on the order of 6 feet or 70 percent of the wall height, can be considered if smaller compaction equipment is used. Given that longer reinforcement lengths mitigate against horizontal deformations and the limited subsurface data along the wall alignments, a minimum reinforcement length of 8 feet is recommended. On this basis, the recommended nominal (ultimate) bearing resistance is 9,500 pounds per square foot (psf). Applying a resistance factor of 0.65 for the Strength I Limit State yields a factored bearing resistance of 6,100 psf. These values assume a minimum of 1 foot of embedment of the walls and horizontal toe conditions. A Service I Limit resistance of 1,800 psf was estimated to limit settlement to less than 1 inch. For all retaining walls, settlement is anticipated to primarily occur during construction as fill is placed. 230.18.01.01 Global Stability A global stability evaluation was performed to assess the overall stability for the following scenarios: 1. Pre-earthquake, static loading with effective stress parameters 2. Earthquake, pseudo-static seismic load of 0.07g, equal to half the PGA The analysis was performed for the highest section of MSE wall equal to 7 feet. The results are presented in Table 7. Table 7. Global Stability Results MethodScenario Analysis Failure Surface Target Factor of Safety Resultant Factor of Safety 1 Spencer Block 1.5 2.1 2 Spencer Block 1.1 1.7 The results indicate that the proposed MSE walls are stable for the design scenarios. 230.19 Blanket Course or Filter Material Following further review of subgrade soils encountered in the exploration and discussion with ITD District 3, a Type III subgrade separation geotextile per ITD Standard Specification 718.07 is recommended to be placed between subgrade soil and imported base material. 230.20 Existing Roadway Material It is anticipated that minimal existing roadway material will be available for reuse on the project. If sufficient quantities exist, recycled asphalt pavement(RAP) may be ground to a maximum particle size of 3 inches and thoroughly blended with imported subbase material. The blended subbase material should not include greater than 50 percent RAP. In addition, RAP should not be used as or blended with aggregate base. 230.21 Abutment Embankment Material Abutments are not proposed for this project. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening .JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho 230.22 Rock Subgrade Rock subgrade was not encountered during the field investigation. Rock subgrade is not anticipated at this project site. 230.23 Topsoil Topsoil was encountered during the field investigation for the Fox Run Collector Road. Topsoil to a depth of 1.5 feet bgs was encountered in the field south of Chinden. Topsoil should be removed below proposed pavement sections and possible future embankment and retaining wall footprints. 230.24 Pipe No culvert or pipes were observed during field investigations. However, existing pipes and culverts may be within project limits, including crossing below the existing US 20/26 roadway. Pipe replacement and extension is not within the scope of work for this project. 230.24.01 Sampling and Testing Samples of the subgrade material were captured during the field investigation. The following laboratory tests were performed: • ASTM G57-Soil Resistivity • EPA 9045D-pH of Soil • EPA 9253 and 9038-Chlorides and Sulfates content Results of the corrosivity testing are presented in Table 8. Table 8. Corrosivity Testing Summary Soil Boring Sample Sample Classification Resistivity Chlorides Sulfates ID No. . (mg/kg) Bed Load BH-1 SS-1 2.5-4.0 SM 7.9 1,350 150 15 Abrasive BH-7 SS-2 5.0-6.5 SM 7.8 850 180 19 Abrasive BH-11 SS-1 2.5-4.0 SM 7.9 1,100 140 24 Abrasive BH-14 SS-2 5.0-6.5 SM 8.3 1,100 120 21 Abrasive 230.25 Riprap The placement of riprap is not anticipated on this project. 230.26 Staged Construction Staged construction is not required. 230.27 Dust Abatement Because of dry conditions during the summer months, dust abatement will be necessary. The ITD Materials Manual(ITD, 2018)describes the unit of measure for Water for Dust Abatement as MG, where 1 MG = 1,000 gallons. It is estimated that 70,000 square yards of subgrade within the project limits will require dust abatement. Assuming three applications per day of 0.5 gallon per square yard of subgrade for a period of 50 days, approximately 5,250 MG will be required for dust abatement. This estimate should GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS' Meridian, Idaho be considered very rough as variables such as temperature, wind, and volume of traffic will alter the amount of water required for dust abatement. 230.28 Seismic Design Figure 630.04.01.1 of the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018) indicates a horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA)of 0.08 units of gravity(g)for an approximate 1,000-year return interval. Figure 630.04.01.2 indicates a horizontal response spectral acceleration coefficient of 0.2 sec (Ss)of 0.18 g for an approximate 1,000-year return interval. Figure 630.04.01.3 indicates a horizontal response spectral acceleration coefficient of 1 sec (S1)of 0.06 g. The seismic parameters can also be determined from the maps for the 2017 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications(AASHTO, 2017), available from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)website (USGS, 2019). The USGS seismic parameters given the latitude and longitude of the site are shown in Table 9. Table 9. Seismic Hazard Design Parameters Parameter Coefficient Value Site Class D Peak Ground Acceleration PGA 0.0801 Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 sec. SS 0.178 Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 sec. S1 0.057 Note: Latitude and longitude used for these values were based on the American Society of Civil Engineers 7-16 design code. The USGS parameters confirm those approximated from the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018). Based on the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications(AASHTO, 2017), the project area is classified as Site Class D because of an average N-value between 15 and 50 in the upper 50 feet of the profile (maximum depth drilled). A Site Factor, FPGA, of 1.6 is recommended for Site Class D and a PGA less than or equal to 0.1 g. The project area is not within 6 miles of an active fault; Figure 630.05.01.1 of the Materials Manual(ITD, 2018)and the USGS q faults database (USGS, 2018)were reviewed. The Western Snake River Plain Fault system (a series of northwest to southeast trending normal faults) is located southwest of the site from Meridian through Nampa and south of Lake Lowell. This fault system is over 1.6 million years old and is not shown as an active fault in the Materials Manual. Approximately 20 miles north of the project site are the Big Flat, Squaw Creek, and Bristol Creek faults, comprising a series of north-south trending normal faults located north of the city of Emmett. 230.28.01 Liquefaction Liquefaction potential at this site is considered to be low due to elevation of groundwater, density of the material, grain size, and fines content in the material. Therefore, liquefaction should not be a design consideration. 230.29 Pavement Estimating Information Information typically included in an ITD Phase III Pavement Estimating Report is included in the sections below to be included on the design plans. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening JACOBS and Fox Run Collector Road Meridian, Idaho 230.29.01 Pavement Type and Surface Smoothness Hot mix asphalt(HMA) plant mix pavement is recommended for new pavement sections. Smoothness schedule 1 is recommended for new construction of US20/26. Plant mix should be placed in a minimum of 2 lifts. 230.29.02 Typical Section Typical sections for the project pavements are presented in Table 10 Pavement Smoothness Schedule 2 should be designated for US20/26. Table 10. Pavement Smoothness Schedule 2 Segment Pavement Base Subbase US20/26 6 inches of Superpave HMA 9 inches of%-inch Aggregate 20 inches of Granular Type B Subbase Linder Road/Meridian Road 5 inches of Superpave HMA 4 inches of%-inch Aggregate 25 inches of Granular Type B Subbase Fox Run Way, Fox Run 4 inches of Superpave HMA 8 inches of%-inch Aggregate 18 inches of Granular Avenue,W Plaza Shops Type B Subbase Drive 230.29.03 Base Aggregate base should consist of 3/4-inch Type B aggregate for untreated base per the requirements of Section 703.04 of the ITD Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (2018). Granular subbase should meet the criteria for of Section 703.11 of the ITD Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (2018). 230.29.04 Surface Treatment Surface treatment is not planned for this project. 230.29.05 Paving PG 70-28 binder for Pavement Class SP3 is recommended for HMA plant mix with 1/2-inch nominal aggregate size. A Tack Coat consisting of CSS-1 H diluted Emulsified Asphalt at an application rate of 0.12 gallons per square yard is recommended for asphalt to asphalt lifts. The method of measurement is based on a baseline of 1:1 dilution with material certifications confirming the percent asphalt residue by mass. 230.29.06 Seal Existing pavement markings will be grinded, cleaned and filled with a sand slurry mix. The sand slurry shall consist of approximately 20-percent by weight CSS-1 emulsified asphalt, approximately 2-percent by weight Portland cement, water and the remainder fine aggregate for concrete. Fog Coat consisting of CSS-1 H diluted Emulsified Asphalt at an application rate of 0.12 gallons per square yard is recommended over the US20/26 surface; the method of measurement is based on a baseline of 1:1 dilution with material certifications confirming the percent asphalt residue by mass. GES0717191102BOI Linder Village STAR Design—US 20/26 Widening and Fox Run Collector Road JACOBS Meridian, Idaho 230.29.07 Aggregate Estimating Data '/2-inch aggregate for Superpave HMA Pavement Class SP3 is estimated at 143 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), including asphalt. %-inch Type B aggregate for untreated base is estimated at 140 pcf, including 7 percent moisture content. Granular Subbase is estimated at 130 pcf, including 7 percent moisture content. 230.30 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2017.AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 8th Edition. November. Ada County Highway District (ACHD). 2017.Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, Section 8000, Drainage and Stormwater Management. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2017. Load and Resistance Factor Design Bridge Design Specifications. American Geotechnics. 2015. Phase I®Pavement Rehabilitation Report and Phase /I/Pavement Estimating Report, US-20 Rehabilitation Projects, Ada County, Idaho, ITD Project Nos. A013(927), A013(928), A013(941);Key Nos. 13927, 13928, 13941. June 18. GeoEngineers. 2018. Materials Phase II Soils Investigation Report, US 20126 Chinden;Locust Grove to Eagle, ITD Project No. A019(944); Key No. 19944;Ada County, Idaho. August 29, GeoEngineers. 2019. Infiltration Testing Results, US 20126 Chinden; Locust Grove to Eagle, Ada County, Idaho;ITD Project No. 019(944);Key No. 19944. March 28. Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). 2018. Materials Manual. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD). 2018. Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Kleinfelder. 2019. Phase II(A) Soil Report, US-20126 Improvements Highway 16 to Linder Road;Key No. 21858, ITD Project No. A021(858). April 8. Othberg, K. L. and L. R. Stanford. 1992. Geologic Map of the Boise Valley and Adjoining Area, Western Snake River Plain, Idaho. Idaho Geological Survey, Geologic Map Series. Scale 1:100,000. Terracon. 2015. GeoReport for WinCo Foods— Chinden &Linder. November 15. Terracon. 2016. Combined Phase I(R) Pavement Rehabilitation and Phase /I/Pavement Estimating Report. Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho; Project No. A019(412), Key No. 19412. August 3. Terracon. 2018. Geotechnical Engineering Services—Report Update for WinCo Foods. November 27. U.S. Geological Survey(USGS). 2018. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website. Accessed July 15, 2019. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/gfauIts/ U.S. Geological Survey(USGS). 2019. Unified Hazard Tool: U.S. Geological Survey website. Accessed July 15, 2019. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive. GES0717191102BOI Appendix A Soil Boring Logs PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Linder and Chinden ELEVATION: 2575.0 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/20/19 22:00 END:5/20/19 22:20 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2575.0 Asphalt Concrete 10"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Brown,moist(cD=19.3%),medium dense. SS-1 5-5-7 28%gravel to 1"diameter;48%sand;24%fines, (12) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. 4.0 5 5.0 2570.0 SS-2 4-4-3 (7) Silty Sand(SM) 6.5 Brown,moist,loose. About 35%fine to coarse sand. 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,very loose. SS-3 1-1-1 (2) 9.0 10 10.0 2565.0 Silty Gravel with Sand(GM) Light Brown,moist,dense. SS-4 17-23-26 Fragmented gravel. (49) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/20/19 22:20 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Linder ELEVATION: 2577.3 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/20/19 22:30 END:5/20/19 23:00 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2577.3 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. 19-11-8 20%gravel to 1"diameter,fragmented;41%sand; SS-1 (19) 38%fines,PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. 4.0 5 5.0 2572.3 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist(m=23.8%),medium dense. SS-2 3-7-14 6%gravel to 1/2"in diameter;46%sand;48%fines, (21) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented in lower 1.0'of sample. 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,very dense. SS-3 16-23-35 Weakly cemented/caliche. (58) Gravel in shoe of sampler. 9.0 Silty Gravel with Sand(GM) Light Brown,moist,very dense. Fragmented gravel. 10 10.0 2567.3 SS-4 28-37-46 (83) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/20/19 23:00 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-3 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden(Linder and Bergman) ELEVATION: 2579.0 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/20/19 23:15 END:5/21/2019 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR a DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2579.0 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 1.0 BU-5 2.5 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Brown,moist,moderately dense. SS-1 13-16-9 35%gravel to 1.5"diameter;41%sand;23%fines, (25) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented. 4.0 5 5.0 2574.0 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-2 2-5-12 Weakly cemented. (17) 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist*=21.4%),dense. SS-3 4-11-23 7%gravel to 3/4"diameter;55%sand;38%fines, (34) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented/caliche. 9.0 Silty Gravel with Sand(GM) Light Brown,moist,dense. Silt decreases with depth. 10 10.0 2569.0 SS-4 15-16-23 (39) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/2019 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-4 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Bergman ELEVATION: 2579.5 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 00:20 END:5/21/19 00:50 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2579.5 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Brown,moist,dense. SS-1 18-20-18 Chlorides(CI)-150 mg/kg. (38) Sulfate(SO4)-15 mg/kg. 4.0 5 5.0 2574.5 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Resistivity-1,350 OHM. Brown,moist,medium dense. pH-7.9. SS-2 8-11-16 (27) 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand ISM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-3 3-4-10 (14) 9.0 10 10.0 2569.5 Silty Gravel with Sand(GM) Light Brown,moist(m=5.1%),very dense. 25-32-27 52%gravel to 1.5'in diameter,fragmented;36% SS-4 (59) sand;12%fines,PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 00:50 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-5 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden ELEVATION: 2582.0 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 01:15 END:5/21/19 01:35 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2582.0 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Silty Sand with Gravel SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-1 5-12-14 30%gravel to 1/2"in diameter. (26) 4.0 5 5.0 2577.0 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,loose. SS-2 3-1-4 (5) 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist*=34.8%),medium dense. SS-3 1-7-19 14%gravel to 1/2"in diameter;49%sand;37%fines, (26) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented. 9.0 10 10.0 2572.0 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-4 6-8-12 Gravel pieces in shoe. (20) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 01:35 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-6 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Fox Run ELEVATION: 2585.6 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 01:50 END:5/21/19 02:40 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2585.6 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 1.0 BU-5 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) Brown,moist(cD=11.5%),medium dense. 8-11-10 54%gravel to 1.5"in diameter,fragmented;36% I SS-1 (21) sand;10%fines,PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. I 4.0 �I II I�I II♦ 5 5.0 2580.6 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,loose. SS-2 1-3-6 Increase cementation with depth. (9) 6.5 7.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 1 Brown,wet(due to infiltration testing in zone above), f l SS-3 25-34-31 very dense. IIII (65) I 9.0 �I II I�I II♦ 10 10.0 I I 2575.6 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) I Brown,moist(m=11.5%),very dense. I�I SS-4 22-22-29 52%gravel to 1.5"in diameter;33%sand;5%fines. I I� (51) II 1 11.5 III Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 02:40 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-7 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden ELEVATION: 2588.6 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 03:45 END:5/21/19 04:15 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION 0 TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR a DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2588.6 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 1 Brown,moist,medium dense. 1 14-15-12 1 Resistivity-850 OHM. SS-1 (27) �i I; pH-7.8. 4.0 �I 11 I�I 11♦ 5 5.0 1 2583.6 Silty Sand(SM) Chlorides(CI)-180 mg/kg. Brown,moist,medium dense. Sulfate(SO4)-19 mg/kg. SS-2 2-5-11 Weakly cemented with depth. (16) 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-3 7-12-12 Weakly cemented. (24) 9.0 10 10.0 2578.6 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 1 Light brown,moist,dense. 1 SS-4 16-22-23 1 111 (45) I�T I 11.5 1 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 04:15 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-8 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden ELEVATION: 2587.9 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 03:00 END:5/21/19 03:30 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2587.9 Asphalt Concrete 8"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) Brown,moist,dense. SS-1 18-19-26 P. (45) a. .I. 4.0 11 LI Ll l. .l. 5 5.0 p{ 2582.9 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) Brown,moist(m=12.1%),medium dense. SS-2 11-9-7 407%gravel to 1"diameter,fragmented;47%sand; (16) 6/o fines,PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Large fragmented gravel in shoe. P I. 6.5 11 LI Ll l. .l. 7.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) P Brown,moist,loose. SS 3 6-4-2 {.I.I. (6) Ll l. .l. 9.0 11 11 LI Ll l. .l. 10 10.0 2577.9 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) p{ Brown,moist,very dense. SS-4 10-25-50/4" J'.I (75/10") j.l 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 03:30 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-9 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Meridian ELEVATION: 2588.2 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 21:45 END:5/21/19 22:45 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2588.2 Asphalt Concrete 8"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) 3.0 Brown,moist,very dense. SS-1 22-28-40 P. (68) a. .I. 4.0 11 LI P R-value-78 BULK-5 5 5.0 p{ 2583.2 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-2 13-13-10 6.0 23 P ajl 6.5 11 LI Ll l. .l. 7.5 Silty Sand ISM) Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-3 3-4-8 (12) 9.0 10 10.0 2578.2 Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) Dark brown,moist(m=6.3%),very dense. SS-4 18-25-27 41%gravel to 1.5'in diameter;46%sand;13%fines, (52) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 22:45 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-10 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden(Zamzows) ELEVATION: 2590.5 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 23:00 END:5/21/19 23:20 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2590.5 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 3.0 Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-1 11-11-11 Silty Sand(SM) (22) Brown,moist,medium dense. 4.0 BULK-5 5 5.0 2585.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist,very loose. 6.0 SS-2 2-2-1 6.5 7.5 SS-3 0-1-11 (12) Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) 9.0 Brown,moist,medium dense. 11 i.l i.) 10 10.0 2580.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) P Brown,moist(m=4.3%),dense. P i' SS-4 14-16-20 38%gravel to 1"in diameter;51%sand;11%fines, (36) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. p{ i.) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/21/19 23:20 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-11 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden(White Church) ELEVATION: 2595.5 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/21/19 23:30 END:5/22/2019 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR a DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) le 2595.5 Asphalt Concrete 6"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 3.0 Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-1 11-11-3 III R-value-25 I 4.0 Silty Sand(SM) Resistivity-1,100 OHM. BULK-5 Brown,moist,medium dense. pH-7.9. Weakly cemented,trace of gravel. 5 5.0 2590.5 Chlorides(CI)-140 mg/kg. Sulfate(SO4)-24 mg/kg. SS-2 7-14-10 6.0 24 6.5 7.5 Silty Sand(SM) Brown,moist(cD=16.3%),very dense. SS-3 31-50/4" 7%gravel to 3/4"in diameter;73%sand;20%fines, (50/4"") PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented/caliche. 9.0 10 10.0 2585.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) {'.I I• Tan,moist,medium dense. {•I.I 11-14-15 38%gravel to 1.5"in diameter;56%sand;6%fines, !I f SS-4 (29) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. �.I•t 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/22/2019 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-12 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Castlebury ELEVATION: 2598.7 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/22/19 00:05 END:5/22/19 00:45 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2598.7 Asphalt Concrete 7"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 3.0 Brown,moist,dense. SS-1 20-22-16 11111 R-value-35 (38) IiT I 4.0 �I 11 I BULK-5 5 5.0 I I 2593.7 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) I Brown,moist,loose. I�I SS-2 7-33-3 No sample recovery. 6.0 I I� fl 6.5 III IJ? 11 �I 7.5 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist*=21.0%),very stiff. SS-3 3-7-10 3%gravel to 3/4"in diameter;43%sand;53%fines, (17) PL=25.8,LL=26.4,PI=0.6. Weakly cemented. 9.0 10 10.0 2588.7 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) {'.I I• Tan,moist,very dense. {•I.I SS-4 13-24-30 (54) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/22/19 00:45 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-13 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden and Castlebury ELEVATION: 2601.5 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/22/19 01:00 END:5/22/19 01:25 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2601.5 Asphalt Concrete 7 thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 3.0 Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-1 12-9-10 11111 (19) IiT I 4.0 �I II I BULK-5 5 5.0 2596.5 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist(m=24.5%),firm. SS-2 2-3-5 5%gravel to 3/4"in diameter;39%sand;56%fines, 6.0 8 PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. Weakly cemented. 6.5 7.5 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist,hard. SS-3 9-19-34 Weakly cemented/caliche. (53) Gravel in shoe of sampler. 9.0 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) {'.I I• Brown,moist,dense. {•I.I Fragmented gravel to 1"in diameter. j I•{ 10 10.0 �.I•� 2591.5 {I•I !If SS-4 14-19-18 (37) !• I• 11.5 { { Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/22/19 01:25 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I BH-14 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Chinden(Locust Grove) ELEVATION: 2604.3 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:5/22/19 01:40 END:5/22/19 02:10 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION 0 TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2604.3 Asphalt Concrete 7"thick Aggregate Base 2.5 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) 3.0 Brown,moist,medium dense. SS-1 22-14-10 11111 R-value-21 (24) IiT I 4.0 I Sandy Silt(ML) Resistivity-1,100 OHM. BULK-5 Brown,moist,firm. pH-7.9. Slightly cemented. 5 5.0 2599.3 Chlorides(CI)-120 mg/kg. Sulfate(SO4)-21 mg/kg. 6.0 SS-2 2-3-4 6.5 7.5 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist,hard. SS-3 17-50/4" Weakly cemented/caliche. (50/4 9.0 10 10.0 2594.3 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist,hard. SS-4 26-50/6" Weakly cemented/caliche. (50/6 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 5/22/19 02:10 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I CRA SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Farm field(Linder and Chinden) ELEVATION: 2573.2 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:6/4/19 09:20 END:6/4/19 09:45 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6'- CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2573.2 Silty Sand(SM) Boring located in farm field. Brown,moist,loose. 1.0 2.5 Silty Sand(SM) K-5 Brown,moist,medium dense. BULK-'SS-12-3-8 Increased cementation with depth. R-Value-10. (11) 4.0 5 5.0 2568.2 Silty Sand(SM) Brown to tan,moist(m=6.5%),very dense. SS-2 18-26-33 3%gravel to 1/2"in diameter;63%sand;34%fines, (59) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. 6.5 7.5 Well-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GW-GM) `I Tan,moist,dense. 11-21-16 50%gravel to 1"in diameter;40%sand;10%fines, �I SS-3 (37) PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. `II 9.0 �I �CI F 10 10.0 III 2563.2 Well-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GW-GM) �I Tan with white gravel,moist,dense. FI SS-4 12-21-24 Subrounded to subangular gravel to 1"in diameter. �I (45) 11.5 Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 6/4/19 09:45 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I CiR-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Farm field(Linder and Chinden) ELEVATION: 2578.7 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:6/4/19 10:20 END:6/4/19 12:20 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION 0 TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR o DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2578.7 Silty Sand(SM) Boring located in farm field. Brown,moist,loose. 1.0 2.5 Sandy Silt(ML) Brown,moist,medium dense. BULK-5 SS 6-10-12 Weakly cemented. Chlorides(CI)-25 mg/kg. (22) Sulfate(SO4)-50 mg/kg. 4.0 5 5.0 2573.7 Silty Sand(SM) Brown to tan,dry,very dense. SS-2 22-33-47 Weakly cemented/caliche. (80) 6.5 Poorly-Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SP-SM) I'.l I• 7.5 Brown and tan,wet(m=8.4%),very dense. {•I'.l 43%gravel to 1"in diameter;45%sand;12%fines, !I{ PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. l I•{ I'. I• SS-3 14-23-30 (53) !�f aIf 9.0 I'. I• !If I' I' 10 10.0 {I•I. 2568.7 Well-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GW-GM) 1�I Brown and tan,moist,very dense. FI 29-39-50/5" Fragmented gravel to 1"in diameter. rl SS-4 (89/11") 16I 11.5 FI Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 6/4/19 12:20 15 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS® W3X86600 I CR-3 SHEET 1 OF 1 SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT:US 20/26 Chinden Blvd.Widening,Meridian,Idaho LOCATION:Farm field(Fox Run and Chinden) ELEVATION: 2577.1 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR:Haztech DRILLING EQUIPMENT AND METHOD:CME-75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig,6"Hollow-Stem Auger ORIENTATION:Vertical WATER LEVELS: Not Observed START:6/4/19 12:30 END:6/4/19 13:00 LOGGER:L.Kinne DEPTH BELOW EXISTING GRADE(ft) STANDARD SOIL DESCRIPTION (D COMMENTS INTERVAL(ft) PENETRATION O TEST RESULTS RECOVERY(ft) SOIL NAME,USCS GROUP SYMBOL,COLOR, J DEPTH OF CASING,DRILLING RATE, MOISTURE CONTENT,RELATIVE DENSITY OR a DRILLING FLUID LOSS,TESTS,AND 00 #TYPE 6"-6"-6" CONSISTENCY,SOIL STRUCTURE,MINERALOGY INSTRUMENTATION (N) n 2577.1 Silty,Clayey Sand(SC-SM) Boring located in farm field. Brown,moist,loose. 1.0 2.5 Silty,Clayey Sand(SC-SM) BULK-5 Brown,moist(cD=12.9%),loose. SS-1 2-4-5 11%gravel to 3/4"in diameter;54%sand;35%fines, R-Value-8. (9) PL=13.2,LL=18.9,PI=5.7. 4.0 5 5.0 2572.1 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) I Brown reddish-brown,moist,dense. SS-2 11-17-24 About 65% angular to subangular gravel. (41) 1�1 IT 6.5 `I II 1�I Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) I I♦ 7.5 Brown reddish-brown,moist,dense. I I Fragmented gravel to 1.5"in diameter. I I I�I SS-3 13-18-28 I I� (46) III r 9.0 j I♦ II �I 10 10.0 III 2567.1 Poorly-Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand(GP-GM) I'll Brown and tan with black,moist(m=4.0%),very SS-4 21-43-50/3" dense. rl (93/9") 47%gravel to 1"in diameter,fragmented;43%sand; I I 10%fines,PL=NP,LL=NV,PI=NP. �h 11.5 I Bottom of Boring at 11.5 ft bgs on 6/4/19 13:00 15 Appendix B Laboratory Test Results GeoTek,Inc. 320 East Corporate Drive Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642-3 5 1 1 (208)886-7010 (208)886-7924 www,gcotcluisa,Com Moisture Content and R-Value ASTM D 2216 and Idaho T-8 Project Linder Village Date June 19,2019 Work Order# 1500-ID1 Tech. Steven Huber Client CH2M Hill Laboratory Number 3583 3585 3587 3589 3590 3591 3592 3594 BH-1,SS-1.2.5' BH-2,SS-2,5.0' BH-3,SS-3,7.5' BH-4,SS-4, BH-5,SS-3,7.5' BH-6,SS-1,2.5' BH-,SS-4, 10.0' BH-8,SS-2,5.0'- Location of Sample 4.0' 6.5' 9.0' 10.0'-11.5' 9.0' 4.0' 11.5' 6.5' Sample Wet Before Wash 595.7 1 233.0 748.5 628.8 290.8 372.1 623.2 317.9 Sample Dry Before Wash 499.2 188.2 616.6 598.5 215.8 333.7 , 572.6 283.7 Moisture Content(%) 19.3% 23.8% 21.4% 5.1% 34.8% 11.5% 8.8% 12.1 Laboratory Number 3595 3597 3599 3602 3604 3612 3615 3616 BH-9,SS-4, BH-10, SS-4, BH-11,SS-3, BH-12,SS-3, BH-13,SS-2, CR-1,SS-2,5.0' CR-2,SS-3,7.5' CR-3,SS-1, 2.5' Location of Sample 10.0'-11.5' 10.0'-11.5' 7.5'-9.0' 7.5'-9.0' 5.0'-6.5' 6.5' 9.0' 4.0' Sample Wet Before Wash 839.1 765.5 694.3 338.8 649.1 291.7 776.2 312.6 Sample Dry Before Wash 789.7 734.2 597.1 280.0 521.3 273.8 715.5 277.0 Moisture Content(%) 6.3% 4.3% 16.3% 21.0% 24.5% 6.5% 8.5% 12.9% Laboratory Number 3617 Laboratory Number 3596 3601 3603 3607 CR-3,SS-4, BH-9,BK-5, BH-11.BK-5, BH-12,BK-5, BH-14,BK-5,3.0' Location of Sample 10.0'-11.5' Location of Sample 3.0'-6.0' 3.0'-6.0' 3.0'-6.0' 6.0' Sample Wet Before Wash 916.3 R-Value at 200 psi 78 1 25 135 1 21 Sample Dry Before Wash 880.7 Moisture Content(%) 4.0% GeoTek,Inc. -Idaho Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 15.3 12.5 4.5 15.8 28.0 23.9 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? silty sand with gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 3/4" 84.7 Classification 1/2" 80.2 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-2-4(0) 3/8" 76.5 Coefficients #4 72.2 D90= 21.0832 D85= 19.1861 D60= 0.6707 #8 68.5 D50= 0.3891 D30= 0.1331 D15= #16 65.1 D10= Cu= Cc= #30 58.4 #50 44.4 Remarks #100 31.6 F.M.2.99 #200 23.9 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-1 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3583 SS-1 Depth:2.5-4.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridian,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 8.3 12.0 4.6 17.0 19.7 38.4 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? silty sand with gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 Classification 1/2" 86.8 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) 3/8" 84.3 Coefficients #4 79.7 D90= 17.6634 D85= 10.2939 D60= 0.4749 #8 75.8 D50= 0.2565 D30= D15= #16 72.2 D10= CU= Cc= #30 63.9 #50 52.2 Remarks #100 44.0 F.M.2.36 #200 38.4 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-2 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3584 SS-1 Depth:2.5-4.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1t.e Suite 300 Meridim,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 0.0 5.7 9.5 18.6 18.1 48.1 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 100.0 3/8" 98.6 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 94.3 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 86.9 #16 77.9 Classification #30 69.8 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) #50 62.9 Coefficients #100 56.0 Dgo= 3.0769 D85= 2.0331 D60= 0.2232 #200 48.1 D50= 0.0881 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.54 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-2 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3585 SS-2 Depth: 5.0-6.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E O T E K '^M —tek's-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k 7k Xk 7k 3k Ik 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I gii 20 IIII 10I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 21.5 13.8 6.3 16.2 18.8 23.4 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? silty sand with gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 85.0 Classification 1/2" 72.9 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-b 3/8" 69.8 Coefficients #4 64.7 D90= 28.8131 D85= 25.4350 D60= 2.5460 #8 59.5 D50= 0.7130 D30= 0.1762 D15= #16 55.0 D10= CU= Cc= #30 47.7 #50 36.6 Remarks #100 28.5 F.M:3.60 #200 23.4 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-3 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3586 SS-1 Depth:2.5-4.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O C C C C C 0 N M V N 7 N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 0.0 6.6 8.5 17.2 29.3 38.4 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 100.0 3/8" 99.2 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 93.4 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 86.5 #16 79.8 Classification #30 72.3 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) #50 62.8 Coefficients #100 51.6 Dgo= 3.3631 D85= 2.0122 D60= 0.2497 #200 38.4 D50= 0.1371 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.54 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-3 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3587 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E O T E K '^M —tek- -- Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V W N co � n � M ik 3k �k 7k 7k Xk 7k 3k �k 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 27.8 23.7 8.6 14.0 13.5 12.4 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? silty gravel with sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 81.3 3/4" 72.2 Classification 1/2" 61.9 USCS(D 2487)= GM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 56.9 Coefficients #4 48.5 Dgo= 30.0727 D85= 27.4014 D60= 11.5559 #8 41.6 D50= 5.4839 D30= 0.6601 D15= 0.1195 #16 34.8 D10= CU= Cc= #30 29.2 #50 22.5 Remarks #100 16.5 F.M.4.78 #200 12.4 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-4 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3589 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' geo:,Cek m - Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 9.3 20.5 18.7 36.9 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 96.3 3/8" 94.2 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 85.4 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 78.0 #16 69.1 Classification #30 59.9 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) #50 51.7 Coefficients #100 44.1 D90= 6.6784 D85= 4.5778 D60= 0.6061 #200 36.9 D50= 0.2584 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M.2.18 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-5 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3590 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M —tek's-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V W N co � n � M ik 3k �k 7k 7k Xk 7k 3k �k 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LU 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 29.8 23.7 6.9 12.8 16.3 10.5 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded gravel with silt and sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 75.2 3/4" 70.2 Classification 1/2" 63.0 USCS(D 2487)= GP-GM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 56.9 Coefficients #4 46.5 Dgo= 31.9016 D85= 29.7831 D60= 11.0909 #8 40.6 D50= 6.2933 D30= 0.5207 D15= 0.1842 #16 36.7 D10= Cu= Cc= #30 31.9 #50 21.1 Remarks #100 13.3 F.M.4.83 #200 10.5 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-6 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3591 SS-1 Depth:2.5-4.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridian,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 0 I 1 i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 1 I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 16.2 35.9 12.2 19.0 11.5 5.2 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded gravel with silt and sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 94.2 3/4" 83.8 Classification 1/2" 63.7 USCS(D 2487)= GP-GM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 57.9 Coefficients #4 47.9 Dgo= 22.1103 D85= 19.5408 D60= 10.9820 #8 37.8 D50= 5.4697 D30= 1.2368 D15= 0.3636 #16 29.4 D10= 0.2085 Cu= 52.68 Cc= 0.67 #30 20.8 #50 13.1 Remarks #100 7.9 F.M.5.01 #200 5.2 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-6 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3592 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M -tek's-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 14.0 32.6 8.7 21.8 16.6 6.3 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded sand with silt and gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 3/4" 86.0 Classification 1/2" 76.8 USCS(D 2487)= SP-SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 68.4 Coefficients #4 53.4 D90= 20.6717 D85= 18.6017 D60= 6.8738 #8 45.8 D50= 3.6963 D30= 0.6022 D15= 0.2704 #16 40.9 D10= 0.1655 Cu= 41.53 Cc= 0.32 #30 29.9 #50 16.5 Remarks #100 9.3 F.M.4.50 #200 6.3 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-8 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3594 SS-2 Depth: 5.0-6.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V W N co � n � M ik 3k �k 7k 7k Xk 7k 3k �k 100 I Ell, I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I wNJ Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 15.7 25.3 7.8 21.3 16.6 13.3 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? silty sand with gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 86.2 Classification 1/2" 74.3 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-b 3/8" 68.1 Coefficients #4 59.0 D90= 28.7409 D85= 22.9010 D60= 5.2349 #8 52.5 D50= 1.7355 D30= 0.4269 D15= 0.0993 #16 46.0 D10= Cu= Cc= #30 35.3 #50 25.1 Remarks #100 18.0 F.M.4.12 #200 13.3 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-9 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3595 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1t.e Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' geo;,Cek m - Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 16.7 21.4 7.6 27.7 15.7 10.9 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded sand with silt and gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 3/4" 83.3 Classification 1/2" 74.4 USCS(D 2487)= SP-SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-b 3/8" 69.6 Coefficients #4 61.9 D90= 21.2954 D85= 19.6558 D60= 3.8839 #8 55.5 D50= 1.2681 D30= 0.4994 D15= 0.1708 #16 49.0 D10= CU= Cc= #30 34.2 #50 20.5 Remarks #100 14.2 F.M.4.12 #200 10.9 Date Received: 6/4/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-10 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3597 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1t.e Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I 20 oil II10 I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 8.8 39.2 25.0 20.1 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 98.9 3/8" 97.8 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 93.1 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 86.0 #16 75.8 Classification #30 54.7 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-b #50 37.4 Coefficients #100 27.1 D90= 3.4438 D85= 2.1342 D60= 0.7052 #200 20.1 D50= 0.5115 D30= 0.1887 D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M.2.28 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven HUber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-11 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3599 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M —tek- -gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 1,I F11, 1 I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LU 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 7.9 30.6 8.4 21.6 25.9 5.6 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded sand with silt and gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 94.5 Classification 1/2" 80.6 USCS(D 2487)= SP-SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-b 3/8" 73.4 Coefficients #4 61.5 D90= 17.2311 D85= 14.5655 D60= 4.2004 #8 54.3 D50= 1.3564 D30= 0.3964 D15= 0.2052 #16 48.6 D10= 0.1544 Cu= 27.21 Cc= 0.24 #30 38.7 #50 23.6 Remarks #100 9.6 F.M:3.98 #200 5.6 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-11 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3600 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridian,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 4.8 16.9 21.6 53.3 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? sandy silt Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 97.7 3/8" 97.7 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 96.6 PL= 25.8 LL= 26.4 PI= 0.6 #8 92.9 #16 87.5 Classification #30 79.1 USCS(D 2487)= ML AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) #50 71.0 Coefficients #100 62.8 D90= 1.5605 D85= 0.9513 D60= 0.1214 #200 53.3 D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.13 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-12 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3602 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridian,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E O T E K '^M —tek- -- Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 6.5 17.4 15.6 55.5 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? sandy silt Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 98.9 3/8" 97.8 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 95.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 89.9 #16 83.3 Classification #30 74.8 USCS(D 2487)= ML AASHTO(M 145)= A-4(0) #50 67.8 Coefficients #100 61.8 D90= 2.3855 D85= 1.3841 D60= 0.1226 #200 55.5 D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.30 Date Received: 5/29/19 Date Tested: 6/4/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location:BH-13 Date Sampled: 5/20-5/22/19 Sample Number: 3604 SS-2 Depth: 5.0-6.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M —tek- -gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.1 16.8 44.5 33.9 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 100.0 3/8" 98.7 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 97.3 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 95.7 #16 93.5 Classification #30 87.4 USCS(D 2487)= SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-2-4(0) #50 66.9 Coefficients #100 46.5 D90= 0.7030 D85= 0.5371 D60= 0.2428 #200 33.9 D50= 0.1724 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.14 Date Received: 6/6/19 Date Tested: 6/10/19 Tested By: Steven Huber,EI Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location: CR-1 Date Sampled: 6/4/19 Sample Number: 3612 SS-2 Depth: 5.0-6.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M —tek- -- Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I FI"T" Al 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 "A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 19.4 30.5 12.5 12.7 15.2 9.7 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? well-graded gravel with silt and sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 3/4" 80.6 Classification 1/2" 70.0 USCS(D 2487)= GW-GM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 66.0 Coefficients #4 50.1 1390= 21.7395 D85= 20.3415 D60= 7.1989 #8 39.4 D50= 4.7254 D30= 0.7917 D15= 0.1634 #16 32.8 D10= 0.0785 Cu= 91.71 Cc= 1.11 #30 28.0 #50 21.2 Remarks #100 14.3 F.M.4.68 #200 9.7 Date Received: 6/6/19 Date Tested: 6/6/19 Tested By: Connor Finney Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location: CR-1 Date Sampled: 6/4/19 Sample Number: 3613 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1t.e Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I FI"T" Al 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w too 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 18.4 24.9 10.5 16.2 18.2 11.8 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded sand with silt and gravel Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 3/4" 81.6 Classification 1/2" 70.6 USCS(D 2487)= SP-SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-I-a 3/8" 66.4 Coefficients #4 56.7 D90= 21.5591 D85= 20.0883 D60= 6.0724 #8 48.2 D50= 2.7599 D30= 0.4250 D15= 0.1163 #16 40.4 D10= Cu= Cc= #30 33.5 #50 26.0 Remarks #100 17.4 F.M.4.30 #200 11.8 Date Received: 6/6/19 Date Tested: 6/10/19 Tested By: Connor Finney Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location: CR-2 Date Sampled: 6/4/19 Sample Number: 3615 SS-3 Depth: 7.5-9.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E O T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C < < N M V N N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 3.4 21.7 28.7 34.9 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec.* Pass? silty,clayey sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 1/2" 95.1 3/8" 92.8 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) #4 88.7 PL= 13.2 LL= 18.9 PI= 5.7 #8 85.9 #16 82.3 Classification #30 72.7 USCS(D 2487)= SC-SM AASHTO(M 145)= A-2-4(0) #50 53.6 Coefficients #100 39.8 D90= 6.1470 D85= 1.8816 D60= 0.3757 #200 34.9 D50= 0.2605 D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Remarks F.M:1.84 Date Received: 6/6/19 Date Tested: 6/10/19 Tested By: Connor Finney Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location: CR-3 Date Sampled: 6/4/19 Sample Number: 3616 SS-1 Depth:2.5-4.0 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridian,l0 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F—(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K '^M —tek- -gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure Particle Size Distribution Report O O O C C C C C 7 N M V (O O N co n M ik 3k �k 7k Xk 7k 3k N 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Z 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. %+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 18.3 28.9 11.2 15.5 16.3 9.8 Test Results(ASTM C136& ASTM C117) Material Description Opening Percent Spec." Pass? poorly graded gravel with silt and sand Size Finer (Percent) (X=Fail) 3" 100.0 2" 100.0 Atterberg Limits(ASTM D 4318) 1.5" 100.0 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP 1" 100.0 Classification 1/2" 71.5 USCS(D 2487)= GP-GM AASHTO(M 145)= A-1-a 3/8" 66.7 Coefficients #4 52.8 D90= 21.5703 D85= 20.0891 D60= 6.8596 #8 43.3 D50= 4.0131 D30= 0.5715 D15= 0.1713 #16 36.9 D10= 0.0783 Cu= 87.58 Cc= 0.61 #30 30.6 #50 21.3 Remarks #100 13.9 F.M.4.53 #200 9.8 Date Received: 6/6/19 Date Tested: 6/10/19 Tested By: Connor Finney Checked By: Tyler Lydeen,EI Title: Staff Professional (no specification provided) Location: CR-3 Date Sampled: 6/4/19 Sample Number: 3617 SS-4 Depth: 10.0-11.5 Boise Office Client: Jacobs axo a corFmrate ar1�Suite 300 Meridim,10 83642 Project: Linder Village Phone(208)888.7010 F-(208)898-7924 G E 0 T E K ' ge"'C"k-s-gym Project No: 1500-ID Figure LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60 zl Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 50 O� G�0 40 x w z 30 1z U g a Off' 20 mot G 10 CL-ML MH or OH i i 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT SOIL DATA NATURAL SOURCE SAMPLE DEPTH WATER PLASTIC LIQUID PLASTICITY USCS NO. CONTENT LIMIT LIMIT INDEX N N % N • 3583(SS-1) 2.5-4.0 19.3 NP NV NP SM ■ 3584(SS-1) 2.5-4.0 17.9 NP NV NP SM ♦ 3585(SS-2) 5.0-6.5 23.8 NP NV NP SM ♦ 3586(SS-1) 2.5-4.0 19.3 NP NV NP SM ♦ 3587(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 21.4 NP NV NP SM * 3589(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 5.1 NP NV NP GM OO 3590(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 34.8 NP NV NP SM ❑+ 3591 (SS-1) 2.5-4.0 11.5 NP NV NP GP-GM ® 3592(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 8.8 NP NV NP GP-GM ❑x 3594(SS-2) 5.0-6.5 12.1 NP NV NP SP-SM Boise Office Client: Jacobs 320 a cop—ata o,� m e s�� aoo H.Adl, .ID e3642 Project: Linder Village 'G�, Ph—(ZOO)OS&IO 10 Pax[408)889-7924 G E O T E K Project No.: 1500-ID Figure Tested By: Steven Huber, El Checked By: Tyler Lydeen, El LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60 zl Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 50 O� G�0 40 x w z 30 1z U g a Off' 20 mot G 10 Cy X MH or OH i i 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT SOIL DATA NATURAL SOURCE SAMPLE DEPTH WATER PLASTIC LIQUID PLASTICITY USCS NO. CONTENT LIMIT LIMIT INDEX N N % N • 3595(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 6.3 NP NV NP SM ■ 3597(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 4.3 NP NV NP SP-SM ♦ 3599(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 16.3 NP NV NP SM ♦ 3600(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 3.0 NP NV NP SP-SM ♦ 3602(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 21.0 25.8 26.4 0.6 ML * 3604(SS-2) 5.0-6.5 24.5 NP NV NP ML OO 3612(SS-2) 5.0-6.5 6.5 NP NV NP SM ❑+ 3613(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 2.3 NP NV NP GW-GM ® 3615(SS-3) 7.5-9.0 8.5 NP NV NP SP-SM ❑x 3616(SS-1) 2.5-4.0 12.9 13.2 18.9 5.7 SC-SM Boise Office Client: Jacobs 320 a cop—ata o,� m e s�� aoo H.Adl, .ID e3642 Project: Linder Village 'G�, Ph—(ZOO)OS&IO 10 Pax[408)889-7924 G E O T E K Project No.: 1500-ID Figure Tested By:0 Steven Huber, El ❑Steven Huber, El A Steven Huber, El 0 Steven Huber, El V Steven Huber, El *Steven Hub LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60 zl Dashed line indicates the approximate- upper limit boundary for natural soils 50 O� G�0 40 x w z 30 1z U g a Off' 20 mot G 10 CL-ML MH or OH i i 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT SOIL DATA NATURAL SOURCE SAMPLE DEPTH WATER PLASTIC LIQUID PLASTICITY USCS NO. CONTENT LIMIT LIMIT INDEX N N N N • 3617(SS-4) 10.0-11.5 4.0 NP NV NP GP-GM Boise Office Client: Jacobs 320 a cop—ata o,� m e s�� aoo H.Adl, .ID e3642 Project: Linder Village Ph—(ZOO)OS&IO 10 Pax[408)889-7924 GEOTEK Project No.: 1500-ID Figure Tested By: Steven Huber, El Checked By: Tyler Lydeen, El American Geotechnics A M E R I C A N 5260 Chinden Blvd. r Boise, Idaho 83714 Phone:(208) 658-8700 J Fax: (208) 658-8703 T E C H N I C S Report to: GeoTek Project: Linder Village Report Date: 6/3/2019 File No.: 00783.308 Material Information Date Sampled: 5/21 to 5/22/2019 Sampled By: Client Date Received: 5/30/2019 Date Tested: 6/2/2019 Test Results Soil Resistivity and pH for Corrosion Testing AASHTO T-288, T-289 Minimum Resistivity Lab Number Sample ID Soil Type Ohm-cm pH @ Temp, F° 19-0246 Test 1; B-4 SM 1,350 7.9 74.7 19-0247 Test 2; 13H-7 SM 850 7.8 74.5 19-0248 Test 3; BH-11 SM 1,100 7.9 74.7 19-0249 Test 4; BH-14 SM 1,100 8.3 74.7 Reviewed By: Travis Thomsen American Geotechnics 1 of 1 Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 1804 N.33rd Street Date Report Printed: 6/17/2019 11:58:09 AM Boise,Idaho 83703 http://www.analyticallaboratories.com Phone(208)342-5515 These test results relate only to the items tested. Laboratory Analysis Report Sample Number: 1926919 Attn: LUKE LANDRIANI Collected By: L.KINNEY GEOTEK,INC Submitted By: S.HUBER 320 E CORPORATE DR STE 300 MERIDIAN,ID 83642 Source of Sample: 1500-ID CR-2,SS-1,2.5'-5.0'(SOIL) Time of Collection: Date of Collection: 6/4/2019 Date Received: 6/6/2019 Report Date: 6/14/2019 Field pH: Lab pH: PWS#: Field Temp: Temp Rcvd in Lab: PWS Name: Analysis Date Test Requested MCL Result Units MDL Method Completed Analyst Sample Prep * 6/5/2019 NC Soil Chloride,Cl 25 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/12/2019 NC Soil Sulfate,SO4 50 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/12/2019 NC Email: shuber@geotekusa.com;llandriani@geotekusa.com Thank you for choosing Analytical Laboratories for your testing needs. MCL=Maximum Contamination Level If you have any questions about this report,or any future MDL=Method/Minimum Detection Limit analytical needs,please contact your client manager: UR =Unregulated Page 1 of 1 James Hibbs Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 1804 N.33rd Street Date Report Printed: 6/13/2019 10:40:58 AM Boise,Idaho 83703 http://www.analyticallaboratories.com Phone(208)342-5515 These test results relate only to the items tested. Laboratory Analysis Report Sample Number: 1925244 Attn: LUKE LANDRIANI Collected By: L.KINNEY GEOTEK,INC Submitted By: L.KINNEY 320 E CORPORATE DR STE 300 MERIDIAN,ID 83642 Source of Sample: LINDER VILLAGE B-4,SS-I,COMBINED(SOIL) Time of Collection: Date of Collection: 5/21/2019 Date Received: 5/30/2019 Report Date: 6/11/2019 Field pH: Lab pH: PWS#: Field Temp: Temp Rcvd in Lab: PWS Name: Analysis Date Test Requested MCL Result Units MDL Method Completed Analyst Sample Prep * 6/5/2019 NC Soil Chloride,Cl 150 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Soil Sulfate,SO4 15 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Email: shuber@geotekusa.com;llandriani@geotekusa.com Thank you for choosing Analytical Laboratories for your testing needs. MCL=Maximum Contamination Level If you have any questions about this report,or any future MDL=Method/Minimum Detection Limit analytical needs,please contact your client manager: UR =Unregulated Page 1 of 1 James Hibbs Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 1804 N.33rd Street Date Report Printed: 6/13/2019 10:40:58 AM Boise,Idaho 83703 http://www.analyticallaboratories.com Phone(208)342-5515 These test results relate only to the items tested. Laboratory Analysis Report Sample Number: 1925245 Attn: LUKE LANDRIANI Collected By: L.KINNEY GEOTEK,INC Submitted By: L.KINNEY 320 E CORPORATE DR STE 300 MERIDIAN,ID 83642 Source of Sample: LINDER VILLAGE 131-1-7,SS-2,COMBINED(SOIL) Time of Collection: Date of Collection: 5/21/2019 Date Received: 5/30/2019 Report Date: 6/11/2019 Field pH: Lab pH: PWS#: Field Temp: Temp Rcvd in Lab: PWS Name: Analysis Date Test Requested MCL Result Units MDL Method Completed Analyst Sample Prep * 6/5/2019 NC Soil Chloride,Cl 180 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Soil Sulfate,SO4 19 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Email: shuber@geotekusa.com;llandriani@geotekusa.com Thank you for choosing Analytical Laboratories for your testing needs. MCL=Maximum Contamination Level If you have any questions about this report,or any future MDL=Method/Minimum Detection Limit analytical needs,please contact your client manager: UR =Unregulated Page 1 of 1 James Hibbs Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 1804 N.33rd Street Date Report Printed: 6/13/2019 10:40:58 AM Boise,Idaho 83703 http://www.analyticallaboratories.com Phone(208)342-5515 These test results relate only to the items tested. Laboratory Analysis Report Sample Number: 1925246 Attn: LUKE LANDRIANI Collected By: L.KINNEY GEOTEK,INC Submitted By: L.KINNEY 320 E CORPORATE DR STE 300 MERIDIAN,ID 83642 Source of Sample: LINDER VILLAGE 131-1-11,SS-1,COMBINED(SOIL) Time of Collection: Date of Collection: 5/21/2019 Date Received: 5/30/2019 Report Date: 6/11/2019 Field pH: Lab pH: PWS#: Field Temp: Temp Rcvd in Lab: PWS Name: Analysis Date Test Requested MCL Result Units MDL Method Completed Analyst Sample Prep * 6/5/2019 NC Soil Chloride,Cl 140 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Soil Sulfate,SO4 24 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Email: shuber@geotekusa.com;llandriani@geotekusa.com Thank you for choosing Analytical Laboratories for your testing needs. MCL=Maximum Contamination Level If you have any questions about this report,or any future MDL=Method/Minimum Detection Limit analytical needs,please contact your client manager: UR =Unregulated Page 1 of 1 James Hibbs Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 1804 N.33rd Street Date Report Printed: 6/13/2019 10:40:58 AM Boise,Idaho 83703 http://www.analyticallaboratories.com Phone(208)342-5515 These test results relate only to the items tested. Laboratory Analysis Report Sample Number: 1925247 Attn: LUKE LANDRIANI Collected By: L.KINNEY GEOTEK,INC Submitted By: L.KINNEY 320 E CORPORATE DR STE 300 MERIDIAN,ID 83642 Source of Sample: LINDER VILLAGE 131-1-14, SS-2,COMBINED(SOIL) Time of Collection: Date of Collection: 5/22/2019 Date Received: 5/30/2019 Report Date: 6/11/2019 Field pH: Lab pH: PWS#: Field Temp: Temp Rcvd in Lab: PWS Name: Analysis Date Test Requested MCL Result Units MDL Method Completed Analyst Sample Prep * 6/5/2019 NC Soil Chloride,Cl 120 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Soil Sulfate,SO4 21 mg/kg 10 EPA 300.0 6/5/2019 NC Email: shuber@geotekusa.com;llandriani@geotekusa.com Thank you for choosing Analytical Laboratories for your testing needs. MCL=Maximum Contamination Level If you have any questions about this report,or any future MDL=Method/Minimum Detection Limit analytical needs,please contact your client manager: UR =Unregulated Page 1 of 1 James Hibbs GeoTek,Inc. 320 East Corporate❑rive Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642-3 5 1 1 (208)886-7010 (208)886-7924 www,gcotcluisa,Com R-Value Idaho T-8 Project Linder Village Date June 28,2019 Work Order# 1500-ID1 Tech. Steven Huber Client CH2M Hill Laboratory Number 3596 3601 3603 3607 3614 3618 BH-9,BK-5, BH-11.BK-5, BH-12,BK-5, BH-14,BK-5, CR-1,BK-5, CR-3,BK-5, Location of Sample 3.0'-6.0' 3.0'-6.0' 3.0'-6.0' 3.0'-6.0' 1.0'-5.0' 1.0'-5.0' MR-Value at 200 psi 78 25 35 21 10 8 GeoTek,Inc. -Idaho R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 - 60 a� M 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf DAD Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 128.8 9.1 0.00 21 2.41 87 79 77 2 100 127.5 8.5 0.00 18 2.40 173 80 78 3 100 125.8 8.0 0.00 20 2.43 302 79 78 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure=78 Brown Sandy Gravel with Silt Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Eric Boucher Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,EI Location: BH-9 Remarks: Sample Number: 3596(BK-5) Depth: 3.0-6.0 Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642 "C� Phone(208)888.7010 Fax(208)888.7924 G E O T E K www.geotekumcom Figure _ R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 + + 80 60 a� M o' 40 20 — 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 108.5 11.2 0.36 87 2.50 163 25 25 2 100 109.6 9.2 0.91 71 2.47 264 31 31 3 100 110.5 9.6 1.24 66 2.45 284 35 35 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure=25 Brown Sandy Silt Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Eric Boucher Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,EI Location: BH-I I Remarks: Sample Number: 3601 (BK-5) Depth: 3.0-6.0 Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642 'Cr.' Phone(208)888-7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K www.geotekumtom Figure_ R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 a) 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 129.2 8.9 0.00 67 2.54 382 46 46 2 100 133.2 9.9 0.00 96 2.45 84 19 19 3 100 128.8 9.4 0.00 85 2.55 J 162 31 31 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure=35 Brown Silty Sand with Gravel Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Steven Huber,EI Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,El Location: BH-12 Remarks: Sample Number: 3603 (BK-5) Depth: 3.0-6.0 Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642 'G:' Phone(208)888-7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K w .geotekusa.com Figure R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 a� 40 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 121.6 12.7 0.00 118 2.45 191 21 21 2 100 122.3 12.2 0.00 108 2.50 243 24 24 3 100 120.6 13.1 0.00 120 2.53 131 18 18 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure=21 Dark Brown Sandy Silt Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Steven Huber,EI Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,El Location: BH-14 Remarks: Sample Number: 3607(BK-5) Depth: 3.0-6.0 Dark Brown Sandy Silt Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 87642 Phone(208)888.7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K www.geotekusa.com Figure R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 m 40 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure- Idaho T-8 Compact. R Density Moist. Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value psi pcf psi @ 160 psi in. psi Value Corr. 1 100 107.5 19.1 0.00 128 2.51 273 15 15 2 100 105.0 20.8 0.06 140 1 2.55 1 171 9 9 3 100 106.7 20.2 0.00 131 2.52 211 11 11 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure= 10 Dark Brown Silt w/Trace Gravel Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Steven Huber,EI Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,El Location: CR-1 Remarks: Sample Number: 3614(BK-5) Depth: 1.0-5.0 Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642 Phone(208)888-70 10 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K www.geatekusa.com Figure_. R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 — 60 a� M 40 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 109.3 18.6 0.09 145 2.45 155 6 6 2 100 112.5 17.3 0.00 142 2.52 193 8 8 3 100 112.8 16.3 0.00 139 2.55 282 9 9 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure= 8 Dark Brown Silt w/Gravel Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Steven Huber,EI Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,EI Location: CR-3 Remarks: Sample Number: 3618(BK-5) Depth: 1.0-5.0 Date: 7/19/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642 Phone(208)888-7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K w .geotekumcom Figure R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 m m 40 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 103.2 20.6 0.00 69 2.51 336 44 44 2 100 102.4 21.8 0.00 116 2.52 211 18 18 3 100 102.4 22.4 0.00 131 2.50 169 11 11 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure= 16 Lt.Brown Sandy Silt Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Colton Bunn Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,EI Location: PH-1 Remarks: Sample Number: 3674 Depth: 1.0-2.0 Date: 8/8/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 8364I Phone(208)888-7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K www.geotekusa corn Figure _ R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 80 60 a� m 40 — 20 t 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure-psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure-Idaho T-8 Compact. Density Moist. R Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure pcf % Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure Value Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. 1 100 115.1 14.0 0.00 119 2.54 147 17 17 2 100 119.0 12.5 0.00 60 2.47 389 48 48 3 100 117.2 13.0 0.00 71 2.50 272 41 41 Test Results Material Description R-value at 200 psi exudation pressure=29 Brown Silty Sand with trace Gravel Project No.: 1500-ID Tested by: Colton Bunn Project: Linder Village Checked by: Tyler Lydeen,EI Location: PH-3 Remarks: Sample Number: 3675 Depth: 1.5-2.5 Date: 8/8/2019 Boise Office 320 E Corporate Dr.Suite 300 Meridian,ID 8364I Phone(208)888-7010 Fax(208)888-7924 G E O T E K www.geotekusa.eom Figure Appendix C Pavement Design Calculations Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by:John Barker, P.E. 8/14/2019 Widening of US-20/26 Chinden Boulevard This calculation is for the thickness design of flexible pavement. It follows the guidlines of the ITD Materials Manual(January 2018)Section 510.00,Idaho R-Value Method (I) Traffic Index TI value is based on design ESALs.Refer to attached ESALs forecast report. ESALs202O:= 469000 ESALs2041 8638000 ESALs:= (ESALs2041 —ESALs2020) = 8169000 ESALs 10.119 round to nearest 0.5,per TI:= 9.0 = 11.56 Materials Manual510.02.03 TI1 — 11.5 106 J note-ESALs provided by ITD include those for the Linder to Meridian Road Segment,and Meridian to Locust Grove Segment,and the total from Linder to Locust Grove. We have conservatively used the highest ESAL values from the Meridian to Locust Grove segment (II) Substitution Ratios Gf= Substitution Ratio from Table 510.05.1 Plant Mix(PM): GfpM(TI):— 2.0 if 6.7<— TI< 8.0 GfpM(TI1) = 1.60 1.8 if 8.1 <_ TI< 9.9 1.6 if 10.0 <_ TI< 12.6 Untreated Aggregate Base(UAB): GfUAB 1 Granular Subbase(GS): GfGS:= 0.8 (III) Design by R-Value CF = Climatic Factor from Figure 510.04.01.1 Climate Factor Zone 1 for Southwestern Idaho-Figure 510.04.01.1 A. Calculate the ballast requirement for the plant mix pavement RUAB =Resistance Value of Untreated Aggregate Base Material RUAB 80 GEPM REQU =Required equivalent thickness ofgravel (ft) GEPM_REQD 0.0032(TI1) 100— RUAB (CF).ft= 8.83.i Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Chinden.xmcd 1 of 3 Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by: John Barker, P.E. 8/14/2019 LTPM= Layer Thickness of plant mix surface due the substitiution ratio GEpM REQD Set Thickness of Plant LTpM:= Ceil — ,Olin =5.60 i Ma at 6 inches LTPM):= 6in=0.5• GfpM(TI1) Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM GEpM:= LTpM•GfpM(TI I) =9.60•i B. Calculate the ballast requirement for the untreated aggregate base course RCS =Resistance Value ofgranular subbase RGS:= 60 GEUAB_REQD =Required equivalent thickness ofgravel (ft) GEUAB_REQD:= 0.0032(TIl) 100—RGS (CF)•ft= 17.66 i LTUAB =Layer Thickness of aggregate base due to the substitiution ratio LTUAB:= Ceil[�GEUAB REQD— GEPM 0.25ix1 =8.25 i GfU� J Set Thickness of UAB LT = 9in= 0.75•f Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM and UAB GEUAB LTUAB•GfUAB+ GEPM=18.60 i C. Calculate the ballast requirement for the granular subbase Rs =Resistance Value of Subgrade Soil GEGS_REQD=Equivalent gravel thickness of Granular subbase(ft) GEGS_REQD 0.0032(TI1) 100—RS (CF)ft=35.33 i Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Chinden.xmcd 2 of 3 Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by: John Barker, P.E. 8/14/2019 LTGS =Layer Thickness of granular subbase due the substitiution ratio LTGS:= Ceil GEGS_REQD— GEUAB tin l=20.00.in GfGS Set Thickness of granular subbase LT := 20in=1.67• Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM, UAB and GS GEGS:= LTGS•GfGS+ GEUAB=35.60 i Required Gravel Design Thickness Equivalent(in): Design Gravel Equivalent in (LTPM) = 0.5 ft (GEPM_REQD) =8.&in (GEPM) = 9.6.in (LTUAB) = 0.75•ft (GEUAB_REQD) =17.7•in (GEUAB) = 18.6•in (LTGS) =1.67•ft (GEGS_REQD) =35.3•in (GEGS) =35.6•in TotalThickness: (LTTOTAL:= LTPM+ LTUAB+ LTGS) (LTTOTAL) =2.92. Total Required Gravel Equivalent(in): (GETR:= GEGS REQD) (GETR) =35.33•in Total Design Gravel Equivalent(in): (GETR:— GEGS) (GETA) =35.60 in Check_GE:= if(GETA> GETR,"ok","not ok") _ "ok" Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Chinden.xmcd 3 of 3 Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by: John Barker, P.E. 12/18/2019 Fox Run Collector Road This calculation is forthe thickness design of flexible pavement.Itfollows the guidlines of the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual,Section 7206.5.3,Collector Street Design (I) Traffic Index per section 7206.5.4 of the Policy Manual,TI=8 for Collector Streets TII := 8.6 Use TI of 8.6 per traffic count data provided by Kittelson&Assoc.on truck traffic (II) Substitution Ratios Gf= Substitution Ratio from Table 510.05.1 Plant Mix(PM): GfpM(TI):= 2.0 if 6.7<— TI< 8.1 GfpM(TII) = 1.80 1.8 if 8.1 <— TI< 9.9 1.6 if 10.0 <— TI< 12.6 Untreated Aggregate Base(UAB): GfUAB 1. Granular Subbase(GS): (III) Design by R-Value CF = Climatic Factor ACHD does not use a Climate Factore,use 1 A. Calculate the ballast requirement for the plant mix pavement RUAB =Resistance Value of Untreated Aggregate Base Material RUAB:= 80 GE PMREQU =Required equivalent thickness of gravel (t) GEpM REQD 0.0032(TI1 100 — RUAB (CF)•ft= 6.60•i Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Fox Run Collector with TI of 8.6 and 4-in HMA.xmcd 1 of 3 Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by: John Barker, P.E. 12/18/2019 LTPM= Layer Thickness of plant mix surface due the substitiution ratio GEPM REQD Set Thickness of Plant LTPM:= Ceil GfPM(TII)— Min = 3.70 i Mix at4inches (LTPM):= 4in= 0.33 Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM GEPM:= LTPM•GfpM(TI l) = 7.20•i B. Calculate the ballast requirement for the untreated aggregate base course RGS =Resistance Value ofgranular subbase RGS:= 60 GEUAB_REQD=Required equivalent thickness of gravel Oct) GEUAB_REQD 0.0032(TI1) 100— R GS S (CF)•ft= 13.21•i LTUAB = Layer Thickness of aggregate base due to the substitiution ratio LTUAB Ceil[�GEUAB REQD — GEPM 0.25ixf = 6.25•i GfUAB J Set Thickness of UAB LT = 8in= 0.67• Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM and UAB GEUAB:= LTUAB•GfUAB + GEPM= 15.20 i C. Calculate the ballast requirement for the granular subbase Rs =Resistance Value of Subgrade Soil GEcs_REQD =Equivalent gravel thickness of Granular subbase(ft) GEGS_REQD 0.0032�TI1) 100— RS (CF)ft= 30.38•i Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Fox Run Collector with TI of 8.6 and 4-in HMA.xmcd 2 of 3 Flexible Pavement Section Design Performed by: Landon Kinney, EIT Linder Village Project Reviewed by: John Barker, P.E. 12/18/2019 LTGS =Layer Thickness of granular subbase due the substitiution ratio LTGS:_ Ceil GEGS_REQD — GEUAB 1 in I= 18.00•in J GfGS Set Thickness of granular subbase LT := 18in= 1.5•f Recalculate Gravel Equivalent of PM, UAB and GS GEGS:= LTGS.GfGS + GEUAB = 30.50 i Required Gravel Design Thickness Equivalent(in): Design Gravel Equivalent in LTpM) = 0.3•ft (GEpM_REQD) = 6.6.in (GEpM) = 7.2•in (LTUAB) = 0.67•ft (GEUAB_REQD) = 13.2•in (GEUAB) = 15.2•in (LTGS) = 1.50•ft (GEGS_REQD) = 30.4•in (GEGS) = 30.5•in TotalThickness: (LTTOTAL LTpM+ LTUAB + LTGS) (LTTOTAL) = 2.50•f Total Required Gravel Equivalent(in): (GETR:= GEGS_REQD) (GETR) = 30.38•in Total Design Gravel Equivalent(in): (GETR:= GEGS) (GETR) = 30.50•in Check_GE:= if(GETA>GETR,"ok","not ok") = "ok" Flexible Pavement Design_Linder Village_Fox Run Collector with TI of 8.6 and 4-in HMA.xmcd 3 of 3 Appendix D Pertinent Geotechnical Reports Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report for 75-acre Development at West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road, Meridian, Idaho (Terracon, 2007) ...._.............. I 'l i PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT 75-Acre Development at West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road Meridian, Idaho Terracon Project No. 62075514 F August 9, 2007 I i k_1 ! ) Prepared for: DMG REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, LLC Boise, Idaho I SS�pNAL Ey �G\STEgF���� _f '�9T 4TF OF 0P���� Prepared by. TERRACON CONSULTANTS, INC. j Boise, Idaho i III I Au 2007 Irerracon August 9, Consulting Engineers&Scientists 11849 West Executive Drive,Suite G DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Boise, Idaho 83713 Phone 208.323.9520 350 North 9th Street Fax 208.323.9592 www.terracon.com Suite 201 Boise, Idaho 83702 Attention: Mr. David McKinney -- Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Chinden & Linder Development Meridian, Idaho r-I Terracon Project No. 62075514 Dear Mr. McKinney: .� I Terracon has performed a preliminary geotechnical engineering exploration for the - referenced project. This exploration was authorized by you on July 11, 2007, and jl performed in general accordance with our Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Services dated July 10,-2007. The accompanying report describes the exploration, summarizes our findings and presents our preliminary recommendations. -1 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we may be further assistance to you in any way, we are available at your convenience. Sincerely, TERRACON CONSULTANTS, INC. Mathew B. Fielding, P.E. James R. Kuenzli, P.E. _ MAB:tt\62075514.Report.doc 1 Attachments r I Copies To: Addressee (3) Delivering Success for Clients and Employees Since 1965 More Than 95 Offices Nationwide Terracon TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Letter of Transmittal INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................1 PROJECTDESCRIPTION....................................................................................................1 SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES..................................................................................1 FieldExploration..................................................................................................I...I...I LaboratoryTesting.......................................................................................................2 i SITECONDITIONS...............................................................................................................3 SUBSURFACECONDITIONS..............................................................................................3 SoilConditions.............................................................................................................3 Groundwater Conditions..............................................................................................3 I PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................4 Geotechnical Considerations....................................................................................... Earthwork ....................................................................................................................4 Foundations.................................................................................................................5 llPavements...................................................................................................................5 GENERALCOMMENTS.......................................................................................................6 APPENDIX A Figure 1 -Test pit Location Plan fFigure 2—Site Diagram Figure 3—Site Diagram, House, Shed Area Test pit Logs Grain Size Distribution Curve APPENDIX B General Notes Unified Soil Classification -1 r ii i TERRACON PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT 75-Acre Development at West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road Meridian, Idaho r Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9, 2007 INTRODUCTION 1 This report contains the results of our preliminary geotechnical exploration for the proposed development to be located at the southeast corner of Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road in Meridian, Idaho. The exploration consisted of excavating 10 test pits to determine subsurface lconditions, performing limited laboratory testing on representative soil samples, performing engineering analyses of the subsurface soils, and preparing this report, which summarizes the I- exploration and presents our preliminary recommendations. � l This report contains preliminary recommendations for planning and development of the site and should not be used for final design and construction. Our recommendations do not address the construction of residences. Additional exploration, laboratory testing, and recommendations will be necessary after the details of the proposed development have been determined. The recommendations contained in this report are based on the results of our field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and our understanding of - the proposed project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand this project consists of developing approximately 75 acres of land located at the southeast corner of West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road in Meridian, Idaho. The proposed project will primarily be a commercial development with associated roadways and parking area. We understand a small residential development is planned near the southeast portion of the site. Current plans for the development are conceptual at this time i_ so the location of buildings and infrastructure are unknown. r SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Field Exploration ! `- The subsurface exploration consisted of excavating 10 test pits. The approximate locations - of the test pits are shown on Figure 1 — Test Pit Location Plan, which is included in JAppendix A. 1 i i j! Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9,2007 I The test pits were located in the field by Terracon by measuring from existing site features with a measuring wheel. Relative ground surface elevations at test pit locations were measured by Terracon using a laser level. Elevations reported on the test pit logs are rounded to the nearest Y? foot. The top of the concrete base for the signal pole located at the southeast corner of West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Roadwas used as a temporary benchmark (TBM). The elevation of the TBM was assumed to be 100.0 feet. The approximate location of the TBM is shown on Figure 1 — Test Pit Location Plan in Appendix A. The locations and elevations of the test pits should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. lThe test pits were excavated to depths ranging from about 5.5 to 11 feet below the existing ground surface with a backhoe. A Terracon field engineer/geologist recorded logs of the ;r I test pits during the drilling operations. Disturbed soil samples were obtained at various depths in the test pits. Descriptions of the materials encountered are shown on the test pit logs. Laboratory Testing f Samples obtained during the field exploration were taken to the laboratory where they were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System j l (described in Appendix B). Representative soil samples were selected for testing to l determine the engineering and physical properties of the soil. Laboratory tests conducted and a brief description of the purpose of each test are listed below. The results of the laboratory tests are included on the test pit logs in Appendix A. TABLE 1 — LABORATORY TESTING Tests Conducted To Determine Natural Moisture Content Moisture content representative of field conditions at the time samples were taken. Percent Passing No. 200 Amount of clay and silt in a sample. Sieve Grain-Size Distribution Size and distribution of soil particles, used for classification. Atterberg Limits The consistency and range of moisture i content within which the material is [_ workable. 2 r Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9, 2007 SITE CONDITIONS At the time of our exploration, the approximately 75-acre site consisted primarily of farm ground with a residence and several farm buildings located near the center of the northern side of the site. Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road bordered the site the north and west, respectively. Residential developments bordered the site the east and south. Several ditches and canals were present at the time or our field work. The approximate location of these features is shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A. Standing water was present east of the residence at the time of our field work, possibly from the ditch adjacent to the residence driveway. We also observed the presence of some stock piles of uncontrolled fill/ trash, and a domestic well (shown on Figure 3). We understand the existing residence has a basement and a septic system. The approximate location of the septic tank is shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A. Our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (dated July 25, 2007) should be reviewed for additional information about existing man-made features. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil Conditions The subsurface conditions encountered at the test pit locations are indicated on the individual test pit logs included in Appendix A. Stratification boundaries on the logs represent the approximate depths of changes in soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. The subsurface profile generally consisted of silt and sand mixtures underlain by medium dense to very dense silt, sand and gravel mixtures. Slight to strong cementation was observed in many locations below four feet. Approximately 6 to 12 inches of the upper soil was apparently disturbed/loosened due to farming activities. Groundwater Conditions The test pits were monitored during excavation for the presence of groundwater. Groundwater was not encountered in the test pits during our field work. . Fluctuations of the depth to groundwater may occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of irrigation, rainfall, snowfall, runoff, the water level in nearby sloughs and canals, and other factors not evident at the time the test pits were drilled. Evaluation of these factors is beyond the scope of this exploration. 3 I Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9,2007 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical Considerations For initial estimating purposes, we have provided preliminary recommendations for general earthwork, foundation recommendations, pavement subgrade preparation, and pavement _ sections for the streets. Additional exploration, laboratory testing, and recommendations will be necessary after the details of the proposed development have been determined. The 10 test pits we excavated as part of our field exploration were not compacted. As indicated in our proposal, we recommend that a professional surveyor determine specifically the locations of the tests pits. If for some reason buildings or other settlement sensitive infrastructure are positioned over any of the test pits, it will be necessary that the contractor remove the backfill in the test pit and replace it with properly placed and compacted structural fill at the time of construction. Earthwork Though final earthwork recommendations should be provided after additional exploration has occurred, the following guidelines should be considered for planning and development of the property. In preparing the site for construction, deleterious materials such as I_ vegetation, root systems, topsoil, debris, existing fill, organic material, and soft, frozen, or otherwise unsuitable materials should be removed from the proposed building and pavement areas. As indicated previously, the upper 6 to 12 inches of soil in our test pits appears to have been loosened by farming operations. This loosened soil should be removed or moisture conditioned and compacted prior to construction of the proposed developments. Compaction requirements, including density and moisture conditioning, should be determined in subsequent investigations when additional details about the proposed development are known. Special attention should be given to removal of man-made features including (but not limited to) the existing house and basement, the septic system and drain field, uncontrolled fill/trash, underground storage tanks, concrete lined ditches, and soft or organic soil in ditches/canals. Excavations resulting from the removal of these items should be properly backfilled with structural fill compacted to densities appropriate for the planned construction. Failure to remove these or other deleterious items or failure to place structural fill may result in abrupt differential settlement with associated distress to buildings, roadways, or other infrastructure. 4 Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9,2007 The native fine grained soils may be susceptible to rutting or pumping under construction traffic when wet. Soils which become rutted, pumped, or otherwise disturbed are not suitable for support of pavements, and should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Earthwork should be performed in dry weather to reduce the potential for rutting and pumping soils. If unstable conditions develop, stability may be improved by scarifying and drying. If construction occurs during wet conditions, lightweight or track mounted excavation equipment and dump and spread construction methods may reduce the potential for subgrade pumping. The contractor(s) is responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary } excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom, and for protecting existing facilities/utilities. Excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Grading operations should be controlled to prevent water from flowing into construction areas. Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavation soils should be avoided during construction. Excess water should be promptly removed. Positive drainage should be provided away from the roadways both during and after construction. Failure to provide adequate drainage measures may result in premature pavement failure, softening of soils 1 and ponded water. Foundations i For initial estimating purposes, footings for the proposed commercial buildings should be i founded at least 30 inches below finished grade for frost protection. Footings should not be founded on loose or disturbed soil. Special care should be given where footings will cross areas where existing man-made features are located. We recommend detailed geotechnical explorations be conducted for each building after the proposed locations of the buildings are known. While the actual bearing capacity should be determined in subsequent explorations, we estimate bearing capacities may range from 1500 to 3000 psf, depending on structural requirements, underlying soils, and the previous use of the land. Pavernen tS pavement sections are resented below for estimating purposes. One Two preliminary p p 9 P p section is for roadways within the proposed development and one is for parking areas. The pavement sections are based on an assumed R-value of 20. The number of ESALs the pavement sections have been designed for are shown in the table below. Actual pavement I sections should be based on geotechnical explorations conducted after grading plans have 5 II I Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9, 2007 I � been developed and additional traffic information is known. Materials used in the pavement i-, section should conform to applicable section of the Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC). TABLE 2 - PRELIMINARY ASPHALT PAVEMENT SECTIONS Design ESALs Area Asphalt(in) I Base (in) I Total (in) 1 30,000 Interior Roadways' 3.0 12.0 15.0 14,000 Parking Lot 3.0 +6.0 9.0 1. Pavement design for the roadways was based on Idaho Department 1 of Transportation design methods. -1 2. Pavement design for the parking areas was based on the NAPA publication "Design of Hot Mix Asphalt Pavements for Commercial, Industrial, and Residential Areas." {_l GENERAL COMMENTS - This report is a preliminary exploration to provide general geotechnical guidelines for I, planning and development of the site. Specific geotechnical explorations should be performed for individual building sites and roadways to determine site specific design parameters and recommendations for foundation and slab support systems, and construction methods. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data j obtained from the test pits performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between test ( l pits, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations i appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. I ' The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. if the owner is lconcerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be - ` undertaken. _I This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted i l geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended 6 i ! Chinden and Linder Development Terracon Terracon Project No. 62075514 August 9, 2007 I or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes I and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. I II I I ; _ I . ! L i _l ` I E [ l 7 � I —W--e st-C—h-i-n-de-n-Bo-u-lev-a-rd--- F -f-I F II Scale T1 0 100 200 300 ft! -all J,11 IJ I III J:J--11XU.1L_1J 7 II Co 4 41 L 2 TP ti -n- J= F 7F E -m ff--i 17 fall -i-nnn 4� 3- - )l E -H- Zi 'e F. -F iL ILQ—, -TR-9 TP I TP-6 N I r —i J IL 911ff I I.' r 7P ----------1_11 ----------- LEGEND: NOTES: 1. Locations are approximate. Approximate Test Pit Location. 2. Not for construction.. Figure 1 -Test Pit Location Plan 3. TBM is the top of the concrete base for the Chinden and Linder Temporary Benchmark. signal pole located at the southeast corner 11849 West Executive Drive,Suite G Development of Chinden and Linder with an assumed Boise, Idaho 83713 Meridian, Idaho elevation of 100 feet. 4. Based on a drawing provided by DMG Real Drawn By: MAB Scale: As shown Project No. 62075514 Estate Partners, LLC. Checked By: MBF1 Date: 8-1-2007 'i- i �l [-1 -I E 'I J N ` 1 FIGURE 2—SITE DIAGRAM 0 600 1200 75-Acres at West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road feet Meridian,Idaho 83646 BASED ON 2003 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH FROM I � ADA COUNTY ASSESSORS OFFICE Proj.Mngr:MBF on Proj.#62075514 Terracon Designed by:BLP 11849 W.Executive FN:Figure2.ppt Drive,Suite G DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED-FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES Drawn by:BLP Boise,Idaho 83713 Date:7/9/07 If I_ i � I _l t_ J Li � l , a � I � 1 N I , FIGURE 3—SITE DIAGRAM,HOUSE/SHED AREA 75-Acres at West Chinden Boulevard and North Linder Road 0 100 200 feet Meridian,Idaho 83646 BASED ON 2003 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH FROM ADA COUNTY ASSESSORS OFFICE Proj.Mngr:MBF war ��acon Proj.#62075514 Designed by:BLP 11849 W.Executive FN:Figure3.ppt I Drive,Suite G DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, Boise,Idaho 83713 AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES Drawn by:BLP Date:7/12/07 C1 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-1 Page 1 of 1 ! ` CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE -; See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS LU � I > U WIL a oS DESCRIPTION = Waoo� U W Z NW0 U J � Z Cn WW UJ O �r IL W Q W F_0 1-Z W~ ? a~ Approx. Surface Elev.: 99 ft ❑ rn W rn M o ¢:5 Z Y..\ — Topsoil: Clay with Sand; medium stiff, slightly moist, tan Y_) \��.•\` 1 98 BS 7 34/12 Clay with Sand; hard, slightly moist, tan 1.5 97.5 Sandy Silt; stiff, dry, weakly to strongly cemented, tan 2 BS BS . l -I 4 I I 6 93 Gravel with Silt and Sand; very dense, 6 BS slightly moist, trace cementation, tan 8 n'•D: 9 90 Gravel with Sand; very dense, slightly BS 0. moist, trace cobbles, tan o'•D: 10 89 10 a BOTTOM OF TEST PIT I � m I p Z O V ` Cr Cr a The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines 0 between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-26-07 o — J WL NE T G Case 570 LOGGED g...-26-07 _ WL � � RIG PIT COMPLETED Y I Fer-r W TMA o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 1 I � I IJ LOG OF PEST PIT NO. TP-2 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development CLIENT See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS w Q CO DESCRIPTION > w C1 w0 w w z m �w _ _ _j > z rn w W U) O o- � ° F_o �z w~ ? g~ r-I 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 95.5 ft o U) W U)m o <� z Topsoil. Silt with Sand; medium stiff, moist, BS 20 brown 94.5 Silty Sand; medium dense,weakly to moderately cemented, trace gravel, brown l BS 91.5 4 Gravel with Silt and Sand; dense, moist, BS 6 6 weakly cemented, brown O:•. BS Q. �. 7 88.5 Gravel with Silt and Sand; dense, moist, brown l o'•D: :EN o. 8 BS 4 I. D.D: at o.ao. A 10 85.5 10 0 BOTTOM OF TEST PIT l m i o Z 0 I � a The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-26-07 i' lN WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-26-07 RIG Case 570 LOGGED o WL ] Ferl GGED BY TMA 1 1 0 WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 �_I ......._.... ..__ r , LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-3 Page 1 of 1 I l CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS I w U W Q ( p a- o C7 a- W of 2 I U DESCRIPTION V_ w� CD N W w a t=- d O Z cn. W W o d U r w Q w aO QO z gz CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 102 ft o U) of W In C) Q z - ' Silt; stiff, dry to slightly moist, brown iF 2 BS 3.5 98.5 Sand with Gravel; dense, moist, brown BS °..� 4 5.5 96.5 Gravel with Sand; very dense, moist, occasional cobbles, brown to red brown 6 i co'•D: °. ff •F�o: i J o'•D: Q: g °. Q sloughing at 8.5 feet o:. 0 9 93 I_ BOTTOM OF TEST PIT J 0 z 0 U I I1 W The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. ` J m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 I_ WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED _ 7-13-07 W WLlin RIG Case 570 LOGGED B� JI re Y MAB o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 0] L LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-4 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS w � U L U1 a CL L1 Ur j A DESCRIPTION W J N o� M U CL EL OCL U I—O W Z W Imo— ZEL m H O o I O Approx. Surface Elev.: 100.5 ft p co cc a- C Q ZZ) Topsoil: Sandy Silt; medium stiff, slightly moist, brown BS 99.5 Sandy Silt; medium stiff, slightly moist, brown 2.1 98.4 2 Silty Sand with Gravel; medium dense, slightly moist, cemented in places, brown BS I gip::•.•. 4 i strongly cemented at 5.7 feet 94.5 s o: Gravel with Silt and Sand; dense to very dense, moist, stongly to weakly cemented, BS p:. brown a p:.• BS ° :. 10 90.5 10 ti BOTTOM OF TEST PIT � o c� Z I 0 LU a The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. � l WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S),ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-26-07 N WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-26-07 o WL SC RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY TMA II , o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 1 . LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-5 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS > U w w CL - I- o o a w Cr DESCRIPTION > o'er o o� I U w Z LU N w w _ = J > w =(/j O U� o O w f— w Q w a_ Qo �� V az O Approx.Surface Elev.: 102 ft o w w m �0 ¢-1 o z� If.:` Topsoil: Silt; soft, slightly moist, upper 12 inches plowed, light brown 1.3 100.7 Silt; stiff, dry, brown f 2. 100 Silty Sand; medium dense to very dense, 2 BS slightly moist, cemented in places, brown I (( moderately to strongly cemented from 4 4 _I feet to 6.5 feet 1_l s 6.5 95.5 I Gravel with Sand; very dense, moist, °. a. brown o'•D: 8 BS I Q. l_J o'•D: a.(•to: �. o.. .: 10 92 10 0 BOTTOM OF BORING Z 0 U f W F a C9 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines ibetween soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 N WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-13-07 Lu o W L ie ff RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY MAB o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 0] � I I IJ LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-6 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE -i See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS W > n w a DESCRIPTION o o� U W Z w J N W W > zcn �w Z �vi Ci � a O w f— W < U ro Qo LU�� z az cD Approx. Surface Elev.: 96 ft o U) � U)m U ¢ z Topsoil: Silt; medium stiff to soft, dry, upper 12 inches plowed, brown Silt; medium stiff, slightly moist, brown 95 ( i 2 94 Silty Sand; dense to very dense, slightly 2 BS moist, weakly to moderately cemented, brown t_ cementation increases with depth r _ 4 :.4.5 91.5 Gravel with Sand; very dense, slightty moist, strongly cemented,trace cobbles, I brown 5.5 90.5 Refusal at 5.5 feet BOTTOM OF BORING iJ i 0 1 Z 0 Cr Cr f W a The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. ° WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 i i W WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-13-07 o W_Ire WL RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY MAB o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 m I LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-7 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development CLIENT See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho I SAMPLES TESTS W U O W Q 4 o O Q U) _ DESCRIPTION $ w J N W0 _ = J > Z U) Q W UJ O U IL aIL ° 10 �z W~ Z g'= 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 101 ft o U) W I m o ¢2 o z� ? '—' Topsoil: Silt; soft, dry, brown, upper 12" : P ry %•?a_� plowed, brown 100 Silt; medium stiff, dry, brown i BS 1.1 4 97 4 Sandy Silt; medium stiff, slightly moist, BS 66 brown 6 95 6 Silty Sand; dense to very dense, moist, BS �'•�•'6•5 strongly cemented, brown 94.5 Refusal at 6.5 feet BOTTOM OF TEST PIT � i j_ ' I 0 z 0 _l W a N The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines j o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S),ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 N WL 7- NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-13-07 o WL amm'lhcan RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY MAB o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 II " :_l LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-8 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS w > U DESCRIPTION o U w Z w J N w W _j > ZCo Ww Wrn O U� w{- g ° a n L) i-0 Qo �� z ° z 1 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 103 ft o U) W �m 3:L) Q z y ` Topsoil: Clay with Sand; soft, slightly moist, upper 12 inches plowed, brown BS 12 34/ 19 102 Silt with Sand; medium stiff, slightly moist, brown 2 i_..I 4 99 4 Silty Sand; very dense, moist,weakly 1 cemented, brown BS } cementation increase with depth 6 7 96 -11 Gravel with Silt and Sand; very dense, BS moist, brown 8 S BOTTOM OF TEST PIT 10 m O Z O Q 't ~ a N The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. `° m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 N WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-13-07 o WL RIG Case 570 1 LOGGED BY MAB 'I relm le 4.6 0.mo-W c 3 n o WL 1APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 III i LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-9 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho SAMPLES TESTS w U DESCRIPTION $ a o °c� Uw w Z wJ N ww _ = J > ZU �w co O U� a a UU o z w� z a. Approx. Surface Elev.: 104.5 ft o c¢n can n �o Q z 1 '' Topsoil: Silt; soft, slightly moist, brown 0.8 103.7 Silt with Sand; medium stiff to stiff, slightly moist, brown BS 10 I 2 - 3.5 101 Silty Sand; medium dense to dense, moist, cemented in places, brown 4 BS 6 .. 6.5 98 Gravel with Sand; very dense, moist, ry brown o •D: BS o'•D: 8 ' I I •' D: 10 o o'•D: m •Q: 93.5 o BOTTOM OF TEST PIT f4 W n. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines 3 I o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. i m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 1 I N WL NE TEST PIT COMPLETED 7-13-07 o WL RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY MAB o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 i LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-1 O Page 1 of 1 CLIENT PROJECT DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC Chinden and Linder Development SITE i See Test Pit Location Plan Meridian, Idaho i i SAMPLES TESTS i w Q 0 W p o_ DESCRIPTION o U � Z WWJ U � U) �W �U,z �C!1 o g o a 2 OU 1-O w z o-~ i ; Approx. Surface Elev.: 104.5 ft o U) � U)m o ¢M z ^' Topsoil: Silt; soft, dry, brown 103.5 1_ Silt; medium stiff, dry, brown BS 2 102.5 Silty Sand; dense to very dense, moist, 2 cemented in places, brown I BS 19 4 _I strongly cemented from 4.5 feet to 8 feet i II 6 8 96.5 8 o.• Gravel with Silt and Sand; very dense, I °Q moist, brown o'•D: BS ,:Bo: I Q. 10 94.5 10 a BOTTOM OF TEST PIT Z 0 U a c� The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines o between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. m WATER LEVEL DEPTH(S), ft TEST PIT STARTED 7-13-07 i N WL .Q NE TEST PIT COMPLETED __7.13-07 W W WL T RIG Case 570 LOGGED BY MAB re rr a cm o o WL APPROVED MBF JOB# 62075514 . m Il � � | | u | � - GeoReport for Winco Foods - Chinden and Linder, Meridian, Idaho (Terracon, 2015) Irerracon GeoReport Winto Foods - Chinden & Linder Meridian, Idaho Terracon Project No. 62155033 Prepared for: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, ID November 6, 2015 12154 .0 1 L/dy/iSo t e r r a c o n . c o m J Irerracon 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A geotechnical exploration has been performed for the proposed WinCo Foods Store to be located southeast of the intersection of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, Idaho. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: ■ Based on our explorations, the subsurface conditions generally consisted of lean clay underlain by sandy silt to silty sand, further underlain by gravel and sand deposits. ■ The proposed structure may be supported on shallow spread footings founded on the undisturbed native soils or on Structural Fill that extends to undisturbed native soils. Footings founded in this manner may be designed using a net allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. The site is designated as Site Class D per the 2012 International Building Code (IBC 2012). Soils exposed during construction will be susceptible to rutting or pumping under construction traffic when wet. Soils that rut, pump, or are otherwise disturbed are not suitable for support of foundations, floor slabs, or pavements, and should be removed and replaced with Structural Fill or Aggregate Base. Measures that may help reduce disturbance of exposed soils include performing earthwork during warm, dry weather, the use of light track-mounted equipment, and avoidance of heavy repeated traffic over a given area. This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire GeoReport for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the GeoReport must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. Project Considerations should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport PROJECT DESCRIPTION ITEM DESCRIPTION A proposed WinCo Foods store will be constructed southeast of the intersection Project location of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (Highway 20/26) in Meridian, Idaho. (See Site Location). The proposed WinCo Store will be a part of a larger retail development that will be constructed at the site. A site plan that was provided to us indicates the proposed single-story WinCo Proposed structure store will measure 85,000-square-feet in plan area. The plan sheet shows retail buildings on each side of the proposed WinCo. Our services did not include exploration or recommendations for the adjacent buildings. We assume the proposed WinCo store will be typical of other WinCo structures Building recently constructed. Loads and construction have been assumed consistent with construction WinCo Foods Site Design Criteria Manual, dated January 1, 2011, which include masonry-block load-bearing and non-load-bearing walls, steel columns, girders, and joists for support of the roof structure. The floors will be slab-on-grade. Columns: 75 Kips Maximum loads Walls: 4 Kips/If Slab: 300 psf uniform, 5-kip point load Grading plans are not available at this time. We assume minor permanent cuts Grading/slopes and/or fills will be on the order of about 3 feet or less, except for the truck loading ramp, which is anticipated to be 4 feet below adjacent grade. The finish floor elevation (FIFE) is not known at this time. Below grade The proposed truck loading ramp is anticipated to be approximately 4 feet below construction FIFE. No free-standing retaining walls are anticipated. A parking area will be constructed north of the proposed structure, and a truck access drive will be constructed south of the store. Pavements are anticipated to consist of asphaltic concrete and/or Portland cement concrete. WinCo has requested pavement section thickness recommendations based on equivalent single axle loads (ESALs) that approximately represent 10 year and 20 year Pavements design lives. Based on past WinCo projects,traffic volumes for these two periods are assumed to consist of the following: Standard Duty: 90,000 ESALs (approximately 20 year design life) 45,000 ESALs (approximately 10 year design life) Heavy Duty: 180,000 ESALs (approximately 20 year design life) 90,000 ESALs (approximately 10 year design life) Stormwater We understand that stormwater will be disposed on site. On a preliminary basis, facilities WinCo has indicated the stormwater management areas may be located beneath the proposed parking area in front of the store. Estimated start of Not known to Terracon construction Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES Field Exploration Our field exploration included drilling borings within the proposed WinCo Foods store and associated parking and drive areas, as well as excavating test pits for infiltration testing within potential stormwater management areas. A general summary of the field exploration performed for this project is presented in the following table. Number of Explorations Exploration Depth Location 9 Borings 21 to 21'/2 feet Proposed WinCo store 9 Borings 6'/2 to 21'/2 feet Proposed pavement areas 2 Test pits 8 to 9 feet Potential infiltration areas (for percolation testing) The specific exploration locations were selected by Terracon and were located in the field using a handheld GPS device having an accuracy typically within 20 feet. Relative ground-surface elevations at the boring and test pit locations were measured by Terracon using an engineer's level and utilizing a temporary benchmark (TBM) established near the site with an assumed elevation. Relative elevations reported on the exploration logs are rounded to the nearest '/2 foot. The top of a concrete pad supporting utility cabinets located on the west side of Linder Road near an existing fire station was used as the TBM with an assumed elevation of 100 feet. The locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. The approximate boring, test pit, and TBM locations are shown on the Exploration Plan. A Terracon field engineer recorded a log of each boring and test pit during the drilling/excavation operations. These field logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring and test pit logs were prepared that represent the engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on observations and tests of the samples in the laboratory. Copies of the boring and test pit logs are presented in Exploration Results. The borings were drilled using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with hollow-stem augers. Disturbed soil samples were obtained at various depths in the borings using a 2-inch- outside-diameter split-spoon sampler driven in general accordance with the Standard Penetration Test(SPT). The result of the SPT is an N-value. The N-value is the number of blows from a 140- pound hammer falling from a height of 30 inches that are required to drive the split-spoon sampler Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport the last 12 inches of an 18-inch interval (or the distance indicated). N-values are shown on the boring logs. The N-value provides a reasonable estimate of the relative in-place density of non-cemented sandy type materials. However, the N-value only provides an indication of the relative stiffness of cohesive materials, since the penetration resistance of these soils may be affected by the moisture content. Considerable care must be exercised in interpreting the N-value in gravelly soils, particularly where the size of the gravel particles exceeds the inside diameter of the sampling spoon. An automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the split-spoon sampler in the borings performed on this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published correlations between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the cathead and rope method. The higher efficiency of the automatic hammer affects the standard penetration resistance blow count (N- value) by increasing the penetration per hammer blow over what would be obtained using the cathead and rope method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface information for this report. The test pits were located within potential infiltration areas described to us by WinCo. The test pits were excavated using a Cat 305E rubber tire backhoe. Bulk samples were obtained of select soil types that were encountered. Infiltration tests were performed within the test pits, and then the test pits were loosely backfilled with the soils that were removed during excavation. In its current condition, this backfill is not suitable for support of proposed pavements. During construction, test pit backfill located in pavement or structure areas should be overexcavated and then backfilled and compacted in accordance with the compaction recommendations of this report. Laboratory Testing Samples obtained during the field exploration were transferred to the laboratory and visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Exploration Results. Representative samples were selected for testing to determine physical and engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Following are the laboratory tests conducted and a brief description of the purpose of each test: Test Conducted To Determine: Natural moisture content Moisture content of the sample. Unit weight Dry unit weight of the sample representative of the in-place conditions. Gradation (sieve analysis) Grain size distribution of the sample material. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport Test Conducted To Determine: Percent passing the No. 200 sieve Amount of clay/silt sized particles in the sample. Atterberg limits Plasticity of the sample. pH and resistivity Corrosive potential of soil to buried metal. Sulfate content Potential of soil to degrade concrete. Chloride content Potential of soil to corrode reinforcement in concrete. Resistance value(R-value) Ability of a soil to withstand a traffic loading. The tests were performed in general accordance with their respective ASTM standards. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment. Results of the laboratory tests are generally summarized on the exploration logs presented in Exploration Results. Tabular results of the pH, resistivity, and sulfate and chloride content tests and graphical results of the gradation and R-value tests are also presented in Exploration Results. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport SITE CONDITIONS The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visits performed in association with the field exploration and from our review of aerial photographs available from Google Earth Pro. ITEM DESCRIPTION The proposed WinCo Foods store will be located southeast of the intersection Parcel information of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, Idaho. See Location. We understand the project site is approximately 8.7 acres. At the time of our field exploration, the project site was a portion of a recently Existing harvested potato field. An unpaved farm road and an irrigation ditch are improvements located on the south side of the site. At the time of our exploration, water was flowing within the ditch. The project site is in a mixed-use area of farm fields, single-family residential neighborhoods, and retail developments. More specific information regarding the area surrounding the project site is summarized below, as observed during our field exploration. Surrounding North: A portion of the harvested potato field followed by Chinden Boulevard developments and then a retail development. East: A portion of the harvested potato field and then an irrigation ditch. South: A single-family residence, farm buildings, and an agricultural field. West: Linder Road followed by a fire station and a single-family residential development. Current ground cover The potato crop was harvested prior to our field exploration. The ground surface was generally bare soil with some potato vines and potatoes. The project site is relatively flat. Relative ground surface elevations indicate Existingtoo there is approximately 3 feet of relief between the ground surface elevations topography h p y at the boring locations across the project site and about 1 to 1'/2 feet of relief between the relative elevations of the borings for the propose structure. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t GEOTECHNICAL MODEL Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs,which are presented in Exploration Results. Stratification boundaries on the logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Based on our explorations and laboratory testing, generalized soil conditions for the project site are presented in the following table. Approximate Depth' Description to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Typically medium stiff to stiff. Stratum 1 1 to 6 feet Lean clay with varying amounts of sand. Isolated layers were soft, very stiff, and hard. Silty sand to sandy silt with Silty sand: Typically medium dense varying amounts of gravel. to very dense. A loose layer was 5 to 10 feet Portions of this stratum encountered within boring B-7. Stratum 2 were cemented. This (where encountered) stratum was not Sandy Silt: Typically very stiff to encountered in borings B-21 hard. A medium stiff layer was B-10, and B-14. encountered within boring B-5. Extended to the Gravel and sand deposits. Stratum 3 2 maximum depth Portions of this stratum Medium dense to very dense. explored of 21'/2 feet. were with silt. 1. Depth below existing ground surface,as encountered in our borings. 2. Borings B-1,B-3,B-4,B-6,and B-7 were terminated above Stratum 3. The borings and test pits were monitored during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling at depths ranging from about 15 to 18 feet below the existing ground surface. Fluctuations of the depth to groundwater may occur based on the level of water flowing in the nearby ditches and canals and due to seasonal variations in the amount of irrigation, rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. Evaluation of these factors is beyond the scope of this exploration. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport SITE PREPARATION The recommendations presented in this GeoReport for design and construction of foundations, slabs, and pavements are contingent upon the successful performance of the tasks related to the earthwork recommendations outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. Monitoring of earthwork should include observation and testing of site and subgrade preparation, placement of fill materials, foundation bearing conditions, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project. Site Clearing and Subgrade Preparation Prior to construction, deleterious materials such as undocumented fill, vegetation, root systems, topsoil, debris, manmade structures/utilities, and soft, frozen, disturbed, or otherwise unsuitable materials should be completely removed from the proposed construction areas. At the time of our exploration the surface soils were in a very loosened state due to the recent potato harvest. Based on the observed roots and potatoes and the current surface conditions, the depth of stripping should be estimated to be about 6 inches below the ground surface. However, if at the time of construction the soil conditions are more compressed than at the time of our field exploration the necessary stripping depth may be less to remove the same volume of soil. We recommend the actual stripping depth be determined by Terracon at the time of construction. Exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions that could prevent uniform compaction. After the deleterious materials described above have been removed and the subgrade cut to grade, the top 8 inches of the exposed native soils in structure and pavement areas should be scarified, moisture conditioned to -1% to +2% of optimum moisture content, and compacted to the requirements outlined in the Compaction Requirements subsection presented below. Material Types Fill material requirements vary depending on their intended use. The following table summarizes the fill material designations and the zones where they may be placed. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t Fill Designation Materials Acceptable Location for Placement On-site soils may be used as Site Grading Materials, provided they are free of topsoil, Site Grading Materials vegetation, construction debris, and other Pavement and other non- deleterious materials. The native clay soils building areas. are moisture sensitive and will likely be difficult to moisture condition and compact. Structural Fill should consist of 3-inch or 6- inch minus uncrushed aggregates meeting Building and pavement areas with the exception of those Structural Fill the requirements of Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) Section areas where Aggregate Base is specified. 801. Aggregate Base should meet the Base course material for Aggregate Base requirements for 3/4-inch (Type 1) crushed pavements and floor slabs aggregate in accordance with ISPWC Section and all other locations within 802. building and pavement areas. Compaction Requirements Fill materials should be placed in horizontal, loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches thick. Structural Fill, Aggregate Base, and granular Site Grading Materials should be adjusted to -2% to +2% of optimum moisture content, and compacted to the minimum percentages of either maximum dry density or relative density shown in the following table, whichever is appropriate for the material being used. Native fine-grained soils exposed in the subgrade or used as Site Grading Materials should be adjusted to -1% to +2% of optimum moisture content, and compacted to the minimum percentages of either maximum dry density or relative density shown in the following table, whichever is appropriate for the material being used. Each lift of fill should be tested at various locations within the structure footprint and parking/drive areas to verify it meets the density requirements presented in the following table. Percent of Maximum Dry Percent Relative Density, Location Density, ASTM D698 ASTM D4253/D4254 Beneath foundations, structures, and 98 80 pavements Other areas of fill and backfill, 95 75 including backfill against foundations Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport Grading and Drainage All grades must provide effective drainage away from the structures during and after construction. Water permitted to pond next to foundations can result in greater soil movements than those discussed in this report. These greater movements can result in unacceptable differential movements and cracked slabs. Estimated movements described in this report are based on effective drainage for the life of the structure and cannot be relied upon if effective drainage is not maintained. Exposed ground should be sloped at a minimum 5 percent away from the building for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the structures. After construction, we recommend verifying final grades to document that effective drainage has been achieved. Grades around the structures should be periodically inspected and adjusted as necessary, as part of the structure's maintenance program. Earthwork Construction Considerations Grading operations should be controlled to prevent water from flowing into construction areas. Excessive wetting or drying of the subgrade soils should be avoided during construction. Excess water should be promptly removed. Soils exposed during construction will be susceptible to rutting or pumping under construction traffic when wet. Soils that rut, pump, or are otherwise disturbed are not suitable for support of foundations, floor slabs, or pavements, and should be removed and replaced with Structural Fill or Aggregate Base. Measures that may help reduce disturbance of exposed soils include performing earthwork during warm, dry weather, the use of light track-mounted equipment, and avoidance of heavy repeated traffic over a given area. The Contractor is responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of the excavation sides and bottom, and for protecting existing facilities/utilities. Excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Design Parameters Description AM Criteria Foundation type Conventional shallow spread footings. Undisturbed native soils or compacted Structural Fill Bearing material that meets the requirements presented in Site Preparation. The compacted Structural Fill should be supported on undisturbed native soils. Net allowable bearing pressure 2,000 psf' Columns: 36 inches Minimum footing width Strip footings: 24 inches Minimum embedment depth below lowest Exterior Footings: 24 inches adjacent permanent finished grade Interior footings not subject to frost: 18 inches Estimated settlement Total: Approximately 1 inch Differential: Typically%to%of the total settlement Ultimate coefficient of friction to resist 0.35 (An appropriate factor of safety should be sliding applied to this value for use in design.) 1. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by 1/3 for support of temporary loads such as those generated by wind and seismic events. Foundation Construction Considerations Care should be taken when excavating the foundations to avoid disturbing the supporting soils. The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose/disturbed soil prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Care should be taken to prevent wetting or drying of the bearing materials during construction Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport FLOOR SLABS Design Parameters Description Criteria Interior floor system Slab-on-grade concrete Minimum 6 inches of 3/4-inch-minus crushed Aggregate Base'. Aggregate Base Floor slab support should be placed on native soils or on Structural Fill extending to native soils. The native soils should be prepared in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this GeoReport. 1. Aggregate Base should meet the requirements presented in the Materials Types subsection of Preparation. The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Floor Slab Construction Considerations Structural Fill should be placed over the exposed native soils immediately following subgrade preparation to reduce the potential for the prepared subgrade to dry. If Structural Fill is not immediately placed and the subgrade soils are allowed to dry, subgrade soils should be reworked by scarifying, moisture conditioning, and compacting, as described in >ite Preparation . Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport BELOW GRADE STRUCTURES Design Parameters We understand that below grade walls are planned in the loading dock area. Backfill for walls supporting unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should consist of Structural Fill or Aggregate Base. Ultimate lateral earth pressures are presented in the following table and illustrated in the figure below. For the values presented below to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out from the base of the wall at an angle of at least 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active and passive cases, respectively. Earth Pressure Equivalent Fluid Surcharge Pressure, p, Earth Pressure, p2 Conditions Density (pcf)' (psf)' (psf)' Active (Ka) 35 (0.27)S (35)H At-Rest(Ko) 55 (0.43)S (55)H Passive (Kp) 480 --- --- 1. These values are based on soil and rock meeting the requirements Structural Fill or Aggregate Base as defined in the Material Types subsection of the Site Preparation section of this GeoReport, with an assumed unit weight of 130 pcf and an angle of internal friction of 35 degrees. S Surcharge For active pressure movement (0.002 H to 0.004 H) S For at-rest pressure - No Movement Assumed '.I Horizontal Finished Grade H Horizontal Finished Grade it p, pi—+I Retaining Wall Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction, and the strength of the materials being restrained. The active earth pressure condition is applicable for structures that are free to rotate. The at-rest earth pressure is appropriate for structures that are restrained at the top. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t The recommended design lateral earth pressures are ultimate values and do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. These values are for horizontal backfill only. Lateral earth pressures should be adjusted as necessary for surcharge loads, sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressures, live loads near the wall (including compaction equipment), and/or seismic loads as appropriate. Passive pressure should not be used to resist sliding. Fill against foundation and retaining walls should be compacted to densities specified in the Compaction Requirements subsection of Site Preparation. Compaction of each lift adjacent to walls should be accomplished with hand-operated tampers or other lightweight compactors. Over-compaction may cause excessive lateral earth pressures on the wall. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport SITE CLASSIFICATION FOR SEISMIC DESIGN IBC' Seismic Design Parameters Description Value Site classification D Ss, Short period spectral response acceleration (Site Class 13)3 0.30g (for Site Class B) S1, 1-second period spectral response acceleration (Site Class 13)3 0.10g (for Site Class B) 1. Based on Section 1613 of the 2012 International Building Code(IBC). 2. Based on Chapter 20 of ASCE 7, the seismic site class is determined from a soil profile extending to a depth of 100 feet. The current scope did not include a boring to a depth of 100 feet. The borings for this project extended to a maximum depth of approximately 21'/2 feet. The classification above is based on the assumption that soils similar to those encountered in the lower portions of the borings continue to a depth of at least 100 feet. If desired, a geophysical exploration could be performed to confirm the site classification, or possible justify a more favorable site classification. 3. Accelerations shown above should be adjusted as required by the IBC to account for the Site Classification. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport PAVEMENTS Asphalt pavement section designs were based on the traffic estimates presented in Project Description. If traffic volumes will exceed the presented values, Terracon should be notified to provide pavement sections designed for higher levels of traffic. Design, construction, and maintenance considerations are also presented below. Asphalt Pavement Sections Asphalt pavement section options were designed for this project in general accordance with the procedures outlined in the 1993 Guide for Design of Pavement Structures by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and based on the native clay soils encountered at the site. As requested by WinCo, recommended pavement section thicknesses are provided below for ESAL loads provided by WinCo that are reportedly estimated to be for 20 year and 10 years design lives. Recommended Asphalt Pavement Section Thickness Traffic Area - (Inches) Asphalt Concrete' Crushed Aggregate Base Total (3/4 inch —Type 1) Approximately 20 Year Design Life "Standard-duty" 3 13 16 "Heavy-duty' 4 12 16 Approximately 10 Year Design Life "Standard-duty" 3 11 14 "Heavy-duty" 4 10 14 1. Aggregate base and asphalt concrete should conform to the applicable sections of the ISPWC. 2. The design lives presented are approximated by the number of ESALs anticipated during these time periods. If actual traffic volumes exceed those presented in 1roject Description,the actual life of the pavement should be expected to be less than the listed time period. Pavement sections should be placed on subgrade soils prepared in accordance with Preparation. Within the "heavy-duty" pavement areas a Type III Subgrade Separation Geotextile meeting the requirements of Section 2050 of the ISPWC should be placed between the prepared subgrade and the aggregate base layer to reduce migration of the clay into the base layer, which would reduce the effective layer thickness of the base. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport The base aggregates should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches thick, and then compacted to at least 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The asphalt concrete should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the maximum theoretical density, as determined by AASHTO T-209. Hot mix asphalt pavements should be Superpave Class SP-2 meeting the requirements of Section 810 of the ISPWC, using '/2-inch nominal maximum aggregate size. Asphalt cement should be PG 64-28, Performance Graded Asphalt meeting the requirements of Section 805 of the ISPWC. Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Section For areas subject to concentrated, repetitive loading conditions such as dumpster pads, ingress/egress aprons, and truck dock areas we recommend using a Portland cement concrete pavement. For dumpster pads, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the container and tipping axle of the refuse truck. Recommended PCC Pavement Section Thickness (inches) Traffic Area Portland Cement Crushed Aggregate Base Concrete' (3/4 inch —Type 1)' Total Dumpster pad and truck dock areas 7 4 11 1. The concrete should be air entrained and have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing per ASTM C 31. 2. Aggregate base should conform of the requirements of Section 802 of the ISPWC. The rigid pavement section should be placed on subgrade prepared in accordance with Preparation. The base aggregates should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches thick, and then compacted to at least 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. As a minimum the concrete pavement sections should be reinforced with 6-inch by W2.9/2.9 wire mesh. Reinforcement of concrete with wire mesh does not prevent cracking of the concrete. However, the wire mesh aids in reducing the potential for shrinkage cracks that occur in concrete to become wider. Wire mesh should be located approximately 2 inches below the surface of the slab, which will require lifting the mesh during placement or using chairs to support the mesh. In loading dock areas, 1-inch diameter dowel bars should be placed at mid-depth to transfer loads between joints. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport An adequate number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI and/or AASHTO requirements. Control joints should be saw cut to '/4 of the depth of the concrete, and should be cut as soon as the slab can support the weight of a man and saw, which is usually less than 12 hours after concrete placement. Sealing of construction joints is essential to protect the subgrade and promote long term performance of concrete pavement. Joints should be sealed with a sealant designed especially for pavements subject to truck and car traffic. The joints should be sealed as soon as possible (in accordance with sealant manufacturer's instructions) to reduce infiltration of water into the base and subgrade. Pavement Design Considerations Long-term pavement performance will depend on several factors, including reducing or preventing increases in subgrade moisture content and providing preventive maintenance. In general, increases in the moisture content of subsurface soils can result in adverse effects to the pavement section, including frost susceptibility or loss of subgrade strength. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. Openings in the pavement surface, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration into the surrounding pavement section and subgrade. Water can collect in the islands and migrate into the underlying subgrade soils, thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated vegetation, and near-surface soils with low permeability. The civil design for pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of these features are edge drains connected to the storm-water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeable barriers that reduce lateral migration of water such as a cutoff barrier installed to a depth below the pavement section. The following should be considered as minimum recommendations in the design and construction of pavements: Provide a minimum 2% grade in the ground surface away from the edge of pavements. Provide a minimum 2% cross slope for the subgrade and pavement surface to promote proper surface drainage. Install pavement drainage at the perimeter of areas where frequent wetting, such as from irrigation or other sources of water, is anticipated. Install joint sealant and seal cracks promptly. Seal all landscaped areas adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils. ■ Place compacted low-permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t Pavement Construction Considerations Pavement sections should be placed on properly prepared subgrade, as described in Preparation. As construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed or altered due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may become unsuitable for pavement support. The long-term effects of localized areas of inadequately prepared subgrade may result in cracks or potholes in the pavement. Therefore, the subgrade should be carefully evaluated at the time of paving for signs of disturbance or excessive rutting. If disturbance or rutting has occurred, subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placing the pavement section materials. In areas of prepared subgrade or partial thickness pavement, the contractor should limit traffic to equipment necessary to construct the pavement section. Heavily loaded vehicles operating on these surfaces may cause significant damage, resulting in deterioration and reduction in pavement life. Pavement Maintenance Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided through an on-going pavement management program. These maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). This type of maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides a relatively high return on investment for pavements. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoReport CORROSION CONSIDERATIONS Tests were performed on samples of near surface soil to provide an indication of the potential of the soils to corrode metal or degrade concrete. Results of the tests are summarized in Exploration Results. We recommend the design engineers consult with the manufacturers of specific products to determine the need for corrosion protection of buried metal pipes. Based on the results of the sulfate content tests, it is our opinion that Type I or Type II cement is suitable for this project. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 rerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) Meridian, Idaho November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033 GeoRepol"t INFILTRATION TESTING Terracon completed two infiltration rate tests in pits excavated using a backhoe. The locations of the infiltration tests were selected by Terracon, based on the potential infiltration facility locations described by WinCo. The approximate test pit locations are shown on the Exploration Plan. The test pits were excavated on October 21, 2015, and the bottom areas of the test pits measured from about 24 to 28 square feet. Each test pit was presoaked by maintaining a head of water of about 2 feet for a period of about 3'/2 hours. The infiltration tests were performed on October 21 and 22, 2015 by establishing a head of water of about 2 feet and recording the drop in water level over time. Each test was repeated after water had drained from the excavation. Results of the tests are summarized in the following table. These field test results are not intended to be design rates; they represent the tests at the depths and locations indicated. Location Depth' Soil Type Field Percolation Rate TP-1 9 feet Poorly graded gravel with sand and cobbles 7 inches/hour TP-2 8 feet Poorly graded gravel with sand 9 inches/hour 1. Depth below the existing ground surface. Design rates should be determined by the designer by applying an appropriate factor of safety to the field percolation rates presented above. With time, the bottoms of infiltration systems tend to plug with organics, sediments, and other debris. Long-term maintenance will be required to remove these deleterious materials to help reduce decreases in the actual infiltration rate. In addition, infiltration rates may be affected by the following factors, which should be considered when selecting the factor of safety: Test Procedures: Infiltration during the tests likely included both vertical and lateral seepage, whereas seepage from stormwater infiltration systems may primarily flow downward, depending on the geometry and details of the system. Water Quality: The infiltration tests were performed using clear water, whereas the stormwater will likely not be clear, but may contain organics, fines, and grease/oil. The presence of these deleterious materials will tend to decrease the rate that water percolates from the infiltration systems. Design of the stormwater infiltration systems should account for the presence of these materials and should incorporate structures/devices to remove these deleterious materials. Soil Variability: Based on the soils encountered during our exploration, we expect the infiltration rates of the soils could vary over short distances due to variations in fines content, soil type, and cementation. The design elevations and sizes of the proposed infiltration systems should account for this expected variability in the infiltration rate. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable lrerracan ProposedWinCoFoodsStore Meridian,ldaho November6,2015 ■TerraconProjectNo.62155033 GeoReport PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS Our work is conducted with the understanding of the project as noted in Project Understanding. Verification of any stated assumptions and revision of our understanding to reflect actual conditions is important to our work, and the design team should confirm this understanding. The design team should collaborate with Terracon to prepare the final design plans and specifications. This facilitates the incorporation of our opinions related to implementation of our geotechnical recommendations. Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the geotechnical conditions in the area, the data obtained from the field exploration and testing, and our understanding of the project. Variations may occur between exploration point locations, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. Terracon should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction, and other earth-related construction phases of the project. If variations appear, we can provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified so we can provide evaluation and supplemental recommendations. Our scope of services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Our services and any correspondence are intended for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site characterization for that specific purpose to obtain the level of detail necessary for cost estimating. Site safety, cost estimating, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable i Jf V Y-BraY7 �••T II 1• f' 4w • _ - ILLi 4- C 7 -- _.IW-s,-Hwy zs] VV-_-vefest L—n •v at r 00� — sr er +r _•- it I "` °• W-'Tango-Q—We SAL oil' as rr - zr doff K 1 K � �- ! _ -I i - q � ° -� a c. �r.�. ' - #• rR * _- t� • '- .tip r '. -.r f Ytv er_ ti CS+5 rl . ■ ri sr' �• + F r i �."a CD y '•} �J_ �,r■ srt r 'A' r r P •- AOs R � AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY IITI LOCATION GOOGLE EARTH PRO. I rerracon DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, 11849 W.Executive Dr. Suite G AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Boise,ID 83713 _ a C� y + � • # PURPOSES1 1: 1 B-1 B-2 B-3 %4 , TP-1 - - B-q B-5 TP-2 t t B-6 - B-7 B-9 _ B-10 � - w C - -- -- --_-_- Fyn ANCHOR 1 i10 ? p- B-11 B-12 8-13 L N B-1A 8-15 SITE D I __ B-18 t L rt3 i. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY Project Manager: Project No. EXPLORATION PLAN Exhibit MICROSOFT RING MAPS R 10 62155033Irerracon Drawn by: RJO Scale: N.T.S. Proposed Winco Foods Store DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, 2 Checked by: BPD BO(If10S File Name: 11849 W.Executive Dr. Suite G Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Approved by: Date: Boise,ID 83713 Meridian,Idaho PURPOSES RJO 1 1 11/01/2015 BORING LOG NO. B-1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d LL F o LIMITS ATTERBERG w } Z U Latitude:43.661022° Longitude: -116.413264° " Q F F J w z F a F W> � o� ¢w z w F w a o W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:95.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 3-2-4 — X 1.5 N=6 2.0 93.5+/- LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL), brown,stiff 0 — 1.5 2-3-12 19 N=15 15.0 90.5+/- — X SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,brown and gray,very dense 15-24-27 1.5 16.5 89+/- N=51 Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N N F N z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: zCn Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion c� WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-1 BORING LOG NO. B-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.661004' Longitude: -116.412073' " Q ~ W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O � U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 2-3-3 — X 1.5 N=6 2.0 95+/- SANDY LEAN CLAY(CU brown, medium stiff 1.5 2-2-3 N=5 5 6.0 91+/- 1.5 2-2-12 6.5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), 90.5+/- N=14 rayish-brown,medium dense Boring Tenninated at 6.5 Feet N F N O z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 F_ 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w U) Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: zCn Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion c� WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-2 BORING LOG NO. B-3 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.661003' Longitude: -116.41104' " Q ~ W w z F a F- W> _J o� ¢w z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:98.5(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn 0 W LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,medium stiff to very stiff 2.2.5 1.5 N=7 3.5 95+/- 1.5 10-15-24 SILTY SAND(SM), brown,dense N=39 .5.0 93.5+/- 5SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),,grayish-brown,very dense 20 26 40 1.5 N=66 26.5 92+/- Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N N F N z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� r'.I-vPI And grade rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-3 BORING LOG NO. B-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.660679' Longitude: -116.412754' " Q ~ it W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:96.5(Ft.)+/- p m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,medium stiff to stiff 3-4-4 1.5 14 33-22-11 N=8 2.0 94.5+/- SANDY SILT(ML), brown, hard, interbedded cemented layers 1.5 4-13-33 N=46 5 6.0 90.5+/- 1.5 15-17-45 6.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SMI,brown,very dense 90+/- N=62 Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N (V F O z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� r'.I-vPI And grade rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-4 BORING LOG NO. B-5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.660671° Longitude: -116.41161° " Q ~ tr W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:98(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O � U W LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL),brown,medium stiff 1.5 3-2-3 76 N=5 3.5 94.5+/- 1.5 N 5 21 SANDY SILT(ML),brown,medium stiff 5.0 93+/ 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), 28-14-37 ° grayish-brown,very dense 1.5 N=51 o 6.5 91.5+/- Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N N F N N z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� r'.I-vPI And grade rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-5 BORING LOG NO. B-6 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d LL F o LIMITS ATTERBERG w } Z U Latitude:43.660398° Longitude: -116.413281° " Q F F J w z F a F W> � o� ¢w z w F w a o W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:95.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 2-2-3 1.5 N=5 i 2.0 93.5+A SILTY SAND(SM), brown, medium dense to dense, interbedded cemented layers 1.5 5-6-7 18 N=13 less silt below 5 ft 5 1.5 16-20-21 6.5 89+/- N=41 Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N F N N z 0 W H a m 0 in N >J 0 Z 0 0 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w U) Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-6 BORING LOG NO. B-7 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d LL F o LIMITS ATTERBERG w } Z U Latitude:43.660382° Longitude: -116.411034° " Q F F J w z F CL F W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:98(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O � rr U W LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,soft to medium-stiff 3-2-4 1.5 N=6 0.3 1-2-2 17 N=4 5.0 93+/ 5 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,medium stiff 1-3-3 6.0 92+/- 1.5 N=6 916.5 SILTY SAND(SM),brown,loose 91.5+/- Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N H O z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 F_ 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w U) Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-7 BORING LOG NO. B-8 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d LL F o LIMITS ATTERBERG w } Z U Latitude:43.660233° Longitude: -116.412794° " Q F F J w z F a F W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:96.5(Ft.)+/- 0 Q m Q w LL O w p rn W DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. LEAN CLAY(CL),brown 2.5 94+/- 2 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM), brown e 5.0 91.5+/- 5 8 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL(SW-SM), "0 grayish-brown,dense 1.5 17-21-22 8 11 <� N=43 <8 7.0 89.5+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GP1,grayish-brown,very dense o .D 1.5 24-37-26 Q N=63 o .D 1 Q. 12-38-48 o °Qo. 1.5 N=86 N z o .D o Q U K p�o W 2 Q. � o M O Q M QD 15 32-24-56 N 1.5 N=80 w o .D 3: Q 0 z °Qe o �p Q °�o C< n ° QD 2 ° 20.9 75.5+/- 0.9 25-50/5" 0 Boring Terminated at 20.9 Feet w z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an cD 0 _I And gracp rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 16 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-8 BORING LOG NO. B-9 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z a ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w z U Latitude:43.660228' Longitude: -116.412169' " Lu Q r w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn rr 0 W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown,stiff 1.5 3-5-5 N=10 soft to medium stiff from 2.5 to 4.5 ft 1.5 1-2-2 18 N=4 4.5 92.5+/- CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SCE, brown,dense 5 1.5 7-10-23 N=33 7.0 90+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), ° grayish-brown,very dense 25-38-49 u, Q '.9.0 88+/- 1.5 N=87 X I POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GPI,grayish-brown,very °3 dense 1 O. 19-36-40 1.5 N=76 O °QQ. z 0 0 a. W °�o 00 � a C °QQ. M O o .p' 15 O. 1.5 19-43-49 o Q°'. N=92 W ° a z 6 °CS0 J F a. U) ° o L U 2 O. zo.7 76.5+/- 0.7 48-50/2" Boring Terminated at 20.7 Feet 0 W z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And gracip rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 17.5 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-9 BORING LOG NO. B-10 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z a ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w z U Latitude:43.660222' Longitude: -116.411543' " Lu Q r w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 4-3-3 1.5 N=6 1.5 3-2-4 26 N=6 s.s 92+/- 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), 1 5 6-11-17 ° grayish-brown,medium dense N-28 o 7.0 90.5+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES(GPI,, ° grayish-brown,medium dense to very dense 15-16-10 o�D 1.5 N=26 N O QQ. o .D 1 10-15-18 0 o Qo. 1.5 N=33 N z o .D 0 Q U K p�o W � o M O Q M QD 15 o Qe. 1.3 16-33-50/4" J w o .D 3 Q 0 z o Bo. o �D Q 0�o QD 2 7s.s+/- 0.8 32-50/4" oBoring Terminated at 20.8 Feet w z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And gracip rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 18 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-10 BORING LOG NO. B-11 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.6599° Longitude: -116.412802° " Q F F J w z F a F o> � o� ¢w z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v of Approximate Surface Elev:96.5(Ft.)+/- p m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 3-4-3 1.5 N=7 3.0 93.5+/- 3 7-19 SILTY SAND(SM),brown,medium dense,interbedded cemented 1.5 N_26 21 24-22-2 layers 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GP),grayish-brown, 7-28-36 ° dense to very dense 1.5 N=64 o .D Q. °Q4 QD. 15 35-39-43 N=82 °Q4 X I I N o .D Q. 1 N ° 1 5 14-20-23 z �p N=43 0 Q ° Q d °QQ 0 M Q. 1 °cf 32-34-37 o D 1'5 N=71 3 Q. o ° z o QJ F °Q°. Q oLU Q 2 0 °3.0. 17-39-41 o•.p 1.5 0 Q 21.5 75+/- N=80 LU Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: Z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And grade rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 15 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-11 BORING LOG NO. B-12 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS W } z U Latitude:43.659898' Longitude: -116.412167' " Q ~ W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w o 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI U W Approximate Surface Elev:97(Ft.)+/- 0 Q m Q w LL W w DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn W LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CLI, brown,stiff 1 5 4-5-6 20 N=11 2.5 94.5+/- SANDY SILT(MU,brown,hard,interbedded cemented layers 1 5 14-14-20 23 11- N=34 llt.5 92.5+/- SILTY SAND(SM), brown,very dense, interbedded cemented layers 5 1.5 21-27-28 N=55 7.0 90+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GPI,grayish-brown, dense to very dense o .D X1.5 19-24-25 Q N=49 o .D 1 20-29-30 0.8 N=59 N z o .D 0 Q U K p�o W 2 Q. � o M O Q M QD 15 N 14-28-20 1.5 N=48 w o .D 3: Q 0 z °Qe o �p Q °3o U) W QD 2 1.3 17-32-50/4" 21.3 75.5+/- wBoring Terminated at 21.3 Feet o: a z 0 0 2 0 o! LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And gracip rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 16 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-12 BORING LOG NO. B-13 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z a ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } z U Latitude:43.659896' Longitude: -116.411543' " Lu Q ~ r w z F d F W> J 0U) Qw z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CL),brown 2 2.0 95.5+/- SILTY CLAY WITH SAND(CL-ML), brown,stiff 2-5-7 1.5 N=12 14.5 93+/- SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND(GM), brown,dense 5 0 1.5 7-22-23 36 N=45 0 7.0 90.5+/- SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),grayish-brown,dense b 1.5 11-12-21 N=33 F 10.0 PJ, 87.5+/- 10— a POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(G grayish-brown, 10-16-16 0 ° dense to very dense 1 N=32 z O �. oa U 0 o W w � a a- b QQ. N Q. 15 O ° 1.5 19-49-47 o X'.� N=96 a. 0 °Q4'. z 0 0° J F Q °�O W u7 o Q 2 7-37-47 N=84 0 21.5 76+/- WBoring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w 0 Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And gracip rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 18 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. 0 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-13 BORING LOG NO. B-14 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.65958° Longitude: -116.412801° " Q F it F J w z F a F W> � o� ¢w z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:96.5(Ft.)+/- p m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown, medium stiff 2-2-3 1.5 N=5 more plastic from 2 to 3 ft 3.0 93.5+/- 3-14-14 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), 1.5 N-28 18 48-17-31 ° grayish-brown, medium dense o W.. Q 5.0 91.5+/- 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES(GPl, 13 27-35 ° grayish-brown,dense to very dense 1.5 N=62 o .D Q. °Q4 QD 1.3 15-37-50/4" °Q4. N o .D Q. 1 N ° 1 5 32-41-45 z �p N=86 0 Q ° Q 2 °QQ 7 M Q. 1 °cf 1 13-16-16 0 .0 2 N=32 0.4� X o °B-° z o Q °Qa. Q 19.0 77.5+/- .'• o POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPA,grayish-brown,very 0 ' '0 dense '. '�o; 2 W 1.5 13-20-43 N=63 0 X WBoring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And grade rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 15 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-14 BORING LOG NO. B-15 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.659569° Longitude: -116.411548° " Q F F J w z F d F W> J 0U) Qw z w F w a o W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown,stiff 5-4-5 1.5 N=g 20 32-21-11 2.5 95+/- SANDY SILT(ML), brown,very stiff 1.5 7-5-13 N=18 4.5 93+/- SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,grayish-brown,dense 5 1.5 16-14-18 N=32 7.0 90.5+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES(GPI, °(3-° grayish-brown,dense to very dense 0.5 50/6" o .D Q o .D 1 14-21-29 o °Qo. 1.5 N=50 N z o .D 0 Q U K p�o W � o M O Q M QD 15 17-26-22 N 1.5 N=48 w o .D 3: Q 0 z °Qe o �D Q °�o W LU QD 2 30-48-36 ° 1.5 N=84 21.5 76+/- WBoring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL A W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And gracp rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 18 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-15 BORING LOG NO. B-16 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.659447° Longitude: -116.41333° " Q F F J w z F a F W> _ 00 ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:95.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CL), brown, hard 18-22-23 1.0 94.5+/- 1.5 N=45 SILTY SAND(SM),brown,dense,interbedded cemented layers 3.0 92.5+/- 24-36 48 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),grayish-brown,very dense 1.5 N=84 p - 5.0 90.5+/- 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GP),grayish-brown,very 30 39-28 °�� dense 1 N39- o .D 6.5 89+/- Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet N N CA N O z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 Cn 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c� r'.I-vPI And grace rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/12/2015 Boring Completed:10/12/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-16 BORING LOG NO. B-17 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w }} Z U Latitude:43.65943° Longitude: -116.412223° " Q F F J w z F d F W> J 0U) Qw z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97(Ft.)+/- 0 Q m Q w LL w rn o_ DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. 0 LEAN CLAY(CL),brown 2.5 94.5+/- 2 SILTY SAND(SM), brown 5.0 92+/- 5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL(SM),,brown,very dense 1 5 26 43 40 5 17 N=83 7.0 90+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GPI,grayish-brown, < dense to very dense o .D X1.5 24-47-40 Q N=87 o .D 1 0 Q. 1 26-50/6" 0 N z o .D o Q U K p co W W � o M O Q M QD 15 34-42-27 N 1.5 N=69 w o .D 3 Q 0 z °Qe o �p Q °3o W LU QD 2 o 19-20-20 ° < 1.2 N=40 21.5 75.5+/- WBoring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL A W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `—` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And grace rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 16 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-17 BORING LOG NO. B-18 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w }} Z U Latitude:43.65943° Longitude: -116.411022° " Q F tr F J w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:98.5(Ft.)+/- o m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O rn U W LEAN CLAY(CLI, brown,stiff 2-4-5 1.5 N=9 20 3.0 95.5+/- 1-10-13 SANDY SILT(ML), brown,very stiff, interbedded cemented layers 1.5 N_23 25 11- 11.15.0 93.5+/- 5 SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,grayish-brown,very dense 17-24-28 1.5 N=52 .7.5 91+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES(GP), grayish-brown,very dense 1.5 13-41-38 QD. N=79 N F Q 1 QD 15 25-40-46 z °Q°.. N=86 Z O � 0p W w °Qo. c� �D M O °Eo o.p. 15 ° Q. 1.5 19-33-43 ° .0. N=76 w . X o ' D z o °Q° J Q o° 0 °B. LU o .0 2 14-28-26 o °�Q 21.5 77+/- N=54 LU Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: `-` Hollow-stem auger 0 J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Borings backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion `� Elevations were measured in the field using an c9 0 _I And grace rod WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Boring Started:10/9/2015 Boring Completed:10/9/2015 17 Feet While drilling ������� m Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling,Inc. Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G F Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-18 TEST PIT LOG NO. TP-1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.66068' Longitude: -116.4128' " Q ~ W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a 0 W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:96(Ft.)+/- 0 Q m Q w LL W w rn o_ DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. p LEAN CLAY(CL), brown,topsoil to 0.7 feet 2.0 94+/- SILTY CLAY(CL-ML), brown,weak cementation 1"4.0 92+/- SILTY SAND(SM),brown,moderate to strong cementation 5 6.0 90+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND AND ° COBBLES(GP-GM), brown Q 0 190 87+/- POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND GP 3 2 , o Test Pit Terminated at 9.1 Feet 0 N O 0 O U K W H a m 0 in N >J 0 Z 0 0 F_ 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. a- W w W Advancement Method: Notes: LL_ J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Cn Backfilled with excavated soils upon completion c� r'.I-vPI And grade rod Elevations were measured in the field using an WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Test Pit Started:1 012 2/201 5 Test Pit Completed:10/22/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Excavator:CAT 305E Backhoe Operator:Syman Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-19 TEST PIT LOG NO. TP-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho LOCATION See Exhibit 2 w Z d ATTERBERG LL F o LIMITS w } Z U Latitude:43.66068' Longitude: -116.41151° " Q ~ it W w z F a F- W> � o� ¢w z w F w a O W w 2�z LL-PL-PI v W Approximate Surface Elev:97(Ft.)+/- 0 m Q w LL W O DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O � U W LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL),brown,topsoil to 0.9 feet 2.0 95+/- SANDY SILT(ML), brown,weak to moderate cementation 3.0 94+/- SILTY SAND(SM), brown,with cemented particles 5 6.0 91+/- a POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES(GP), •�• brown • .b' 1 8.0 89+/- Test Pit Terminated at 8 Feet N F N O z 0 W H a m 0 N >J 0 Z 0 0 F_ 0 W H a it a z 0 0 2 0 LL W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Q W w W Advancement Method: Notes: LL_ J Q H O Abandonment Method: z Cn Backfilled with excavated soils upon completion c� r'.I-vPI And grade rod Elevations were measured in the field using an WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c7 Test Pit Started:1 012 2/201 5 Test Pit Completed:10/22/2015 mz Groundwater not encountered ������ Excavator:CAT 305E Backhoe Operator:Syman Cn 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G Boise,Idaho Project No.:62155033 Exhibit: A-20 GENERAL NOTES DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS Water Initially N Standard Penetration Test Encountered Resistance(Blows/Ft.) Water Level After a (HP) Hand Penetrometer Bulk lit S Specified Period of Time Sample Apoon J W V Water Level After CO ZW a Specified Period of Time F_ (T) Torvane J Shelby J W d Tube Water levels indicated on the soil boring I-_ (DCP) Dynamic Cone Penetrometer LLI logs are the levels measured in the borehole at the times indicated. W Groundwater level variations will occur (PID) Photo-Ionization Detector over time. In low permeability soils, accurate determination of groundwater (OVA) Organic Vapor Analyzer levels is not possible with short term water level observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve;their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device.The accuracy of such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/-indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead,the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the area. RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS (50%or more passing the No.200 sieve.) (More than 50%retained on No.200 sieve.) Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing,field Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance 0 Descriptive Term Standard Penetration or Descriptive Term Unconfined Compressive Strength Standard Penetration or (Density) N-Value (Consistency) Qu,(psf) N-Value Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. W F' Very Loose 0-3 Very Soft less than 500 0-1 2 H (� Loose 4-9 Soft 500 to 1,000 2-4 Z W d' Medium Dense 10-29 Medium Stiff 1,000 to 2,000 4-8 H N Dense 30-50 Stiff 2,000 to 4,000 8-15 Very Dense >50 Very Stiff 4,000 to 8,000 15-30 Hard >8,000 >30 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) Percent of Major Component Particle Size of other constituents Dry Weight of Sample Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in.(300 mm) With 15-29 Cobbles 12 in.to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm) Modifier >30 Gravel 3 in.to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand #4 to#200 sieve(4.75mm to 0.075mm Silt or Clay Passing#200 sieve(0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s) Percent of Term Plasticity Index of other constituents Dry Weight Non-plastic 0 Trace <5 Low 1 -10 With 5-12 Medium 11 -30 Modifier > 12 High >30 Irerracon UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Group Group Name E' Symbol Gravels: Clean Gravels: Cu>_4 and 1 <Cc<3' GW Well-graded gravel F More than 50%of Less than 5%fines c Cu<4 and/or 1 >Cc>3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F coarse fraction retained Gravels with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,c,H Coarse Grained Soils: on No.4 sieve More than 12%fines c Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,c,H More than 50%retained on No. 200 sieve Sands: Clean Sands: Cu>_6 and 1 <Cc<3 E SW Well-graded sand 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%fines° Cu<6 and/or 1 >Cc>3 E SP Poorly graded sand fraction passes No.4 Sands with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand c'H'l sieve More than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand c'H'l PI>7 and plots on or above"A"line J CL Lean clay K,L,M Inorganic:Silts and Clays: PI<4 or plots below"A"line J ML Silt K,L,M Fine-Grained Soils: Liquid limit less than 50 Organic: Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,N 50%or more passes the <0.75 OL Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O No.200 sieve PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clay K,L,M Inorganic:Silts and Clays: PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M Liquid limit 50 or more Organic: <0.75 OH Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,P Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,Q Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-inch(75-mm)sieve H If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name. e If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles If soil contains>_ 15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. or boulders,or both"to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. c Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded K If soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with gravel," gravel with silt,GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay,GP-GM poorly whichever is predominant. graded gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. L If soil contains>_30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add"sandy"to °Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded group name. sand with silt,SW-SC well-graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded M If soil contains>_30%plus No.200, predominantly gravel,add sand with silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay "gravelly"to group name. D 2 "PI>_4 and plots on or above"A"line. E Cu=D60/D10 Cc= ( 30) 0 PI<4 or plots below"A"line. D10 x D60 P PI plots on or above"A"line. F If soil contains>_15%sand,add"with sand"to group name. °PI plots below"A"line. c If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-G M,or SC-SM. 60 For classification of fine-grained ' soils and fine-grained fraction 50 of coarse-grained soils Equation of"A"-line -7 Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5. x 40 then PI=0.73(LL-20) ' pEquation of"Ll"-lineO z Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7, CG >- 30 then PI=0.9(LL-8) 20 Goo Q ' J MH or OH , 10 , 7 CL - ML 4 -- ML or OIL 0 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (ILL) Irerracon ExhibitA-22 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 w 60 co55 Q: w 50 z 45 z w 40 w CL 35 `2 30 N 25 0 c� 20 N Z 15 W w 10 T c�cli 5 0 N 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 N L) GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS U) LJ tJ COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY Cn z coarse fine coarse I medium fine Q Boring ID Depth USCS Classification ILL PL PI Cc Cu • B-8 5-6.5 WELL GRADED SAND with SILT and GRAVEL(SW-SM) 2.44 16.93 m TP-1 9-9.1 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND(GP) 15.16 68.80 Q z A TP-2 5.9-8 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND(GP) 7.49 91.49 it 0 0 W Boring ID Depth D,00 D60 D30 D,o °/oGravel %Sand %Fines i 0 B-8 5-6.5 12.5 1.149 0.437 19.0 70.4 10.6 vwi m TP-1 9-9.1 50 20.873 9.8 0.303 76.2 22.2 1.6 o A TP-2 5.9-8 125 26.966 7.715 0.295 64.4 26.3 0.8 J Q 0 z Z W Q PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store PROJECT NUMBER: 62155033 LU SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard WinCo Foods LLC o Meridian, Idaho Irerracon CLIENT: Boise, Idaho 0 11849 W. Executive Dr., Suite G m Boise, Idaho EXHIBIT: A-23 a J R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE TEST RESULTS IDAHO T-8 Boring ID: B-5 Depth: 0'-1.5' Date of Test: 11/3/2015 Description: LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) Specimen No.: 1 2 3 Molding Pressure(psi): 50 75 75 Kneading Pressure(psi): 50 75 75 Dry Density(pcf): 100.1 100.7 108.9 Moisture Content(%): 21.6% 20.3% 18.7% Expansion Pressure(psi): 0.06 0.25 0.31 Horizontal Pressure at 134 134 130 160 psi Vertical Pressure(psi): Sample Height(in.): 2.59 2.56 2.53 Exudation Force(Ibs): 1979 2495 3543 Uncorrected R-Value: 10 10 11 Corrected R-Value: 11 11 11 Expansion Pressure(psi) 70 ----------------------------------------------------------------- - - ...............----------------------------------_------------------------------------------------------------------------------•--•---•- 60 ..................s.......................................................a............................... ......... ......... .......... .......... ......... .... ......... .......... • Exudation Force ♦ Expansion Pressure 50 ..................s...................................................................... ......... ... ................................................... _ ......... .............i.... ........... Balance Line ..... ......... ... m 40 ..................e............................................................................................................. .......... ................. .......... .......... ....................... ................................ ............ .......... ......... .......... 3 Expansion Pressure > Balance Line for Traffic Index=7.0 30 ......... .......... ......... .......... .......... .......... ......... ......... ......... .......... .......... ......... .......... .. ................................. .......... 20 ............................................................................................ .......... ......... ......... ......... .......... .......... ......... .......... ......... .......... .. .......... ......... .......... ...............:............... ..................'........................ ........ ......... ......... .......... .......... ......... .......... ......... .......... ......... .......... E X W O 0 1000 2000 2500 3000 4000 5000 Exudation Force(Ibs) W R-Value at 2500 Ibs Exudation Force: 11 a Expansion Pressure: 1.07 psi= 7.38 kPa W m Traffic Index: 7 E d F PROJECT NUMBER: 62155033 PROJECT: Proposed WinCo Foods Store E Irerracon CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC. LL Linder Road and Chinden 11849 W.Executive Dr.,Suite G @ SITE: Boulevard,Meridian,Idaho Boise Idaho EXHIBIT: A-24 J_ Z CR6204,4-14-15,Rev.1.0 CHEMICAL LABORATORY TEST REPORT Irerracon Project Number: 62155033 Service Date: 10/21/15 750 Pilot Road, Suite F Report Date: 10/21/15 Las Vegas,Nevada 89119 Task: (702)597-9393 Client Project Winco Foods,LLC Proposed WinCo Foods Store 650 N.Armstrong Place SE of Intersection of Linder Rd&Chinden Blvd. Boise,Idaho Sample Submitted By: Terracon(62) Date Received: 10/20/2015 Lab No.: 15-0864 Results of Resistivity Analysis Sample Number 1 2 Sample Location B-4 B-13 Sample Depth(ft.) 2.5 2.0 pH Analysis,AWWA 4500 H 8.81 8.66 Water Soluble Sulfate(SO4),ASTM D 516(mg/kg) 63 94 Chlorides,ASTM D 512,(mg/kg) 28 37 Resistivity,ASTM G 57,(ohm-cm) 1504 1552 Analyzed By: Kurt D.Ergun Chemist The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM,AASHTO,or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of the client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicable to the actual samples tested at the location(s)referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials. Geotechnical Engineering Services - Report Update, WinCo Foods (Terracon, 2018) November 27, 2018 Irerracon WinCo Foods, LLC 650 North Armstrong Place Boise, Idaho 83704 Attn: Ronald Schrieber P: (208)672-2087 E: ronald.schrieber(a),wincofoods.com Re: Geotechnica[ Engineering Services — Report Update WinCo Foods Store Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road Meridian, Idaho Terracon Proposal No: 6215033A Dear Mr. Schrieber: We have completed additional geotechnical engineering services for the above reference project. This study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Proposal P62185094 dated October 10, 2018 for WinCo Food, LLC (WinCo). Terracon previously performed geotechnica[ engineering services for the project and prepared a report dated November 6, 2015. Terracon received a revised site layout drawing on October 3, 2018 that shows the location of the WinCo Foods Store had been moved north of its previous store location. The purpose of these services is to perform additional geotechnica[ exploration and prepare an updated letter for the geotechnica[ report dated November 6, 2015, Terracon project number 62155033. 1 .0 PROJECT INFORMATION This project is a soil exploration for the WinCo Foods Store proposed near the southeast corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard. The supplemental exploration is for a revised site layout with the new location of the store and parking lot having been moved north. Additional soil explorations where drilled near the new footprint of the building and in the new parking area. Based on the new site plan, we understand the proposed WinCo Foods Store will have a footprint of 80,200 square feet. We assume the description of building construction, maximum loads, grading and pavements present in the referenced report still apply. 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION The scope of additional services is described below. Terracon Consultants, Inc. 11849 West Executive Drive, Suite G Boise, Idaho 83713 P [208] 323 9520 F [208] 323 9592 terracon.com Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden)—Additional Exploration Meridian, Idaho November 27, 2018 Terracon Project No. 62155033A 2.1 Additional Field Exploration Number of Borings Approximate Boring Depth Planned Location (feet) 4(Borings U-4—U-7) 21 % Newly proposed building area 3(Borings U1-U3) 6% Newly proposed pavement area Boring Layout and Elevations: The specific exploration locations were selected by Terracon and were located in the field using a handheld GPS device having an accuracy typically within 20 feet. Relative ground-surface elevations at the boring and test pit locations were measured by Terracon using an engineer's level and utilizing a temporary benchmark (TBM) established near the site with an assumed elevation. Relative elevations reported on the exploration logs are rounded to the nearest '/2 foot. The top of a concrete pad supporting utility cabinets located on the west side of Linder Road near an existing fire station was used as the TBM with an assumed elevation of 100 feet. The locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. The approximate boring, test pit, and TBM locations are shown on the Exploration Plan. Subsurface Exploration Procedures: Borings were generally drilled in accordance with the methods described in the Field Exploration section of the referenced report. 2.2 Laboratory Testing Samples obtained during the field exploration were transferred to the laboratory and visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification. Representative samples were selected for testing to determine physical and engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Following are the laboratory tests conducted and a brief description of the purpose of each test: Test Conducted To Determine: Natural moisture content Moisture content of the sample. Gradation (sieve analysis) Grain size distribution of the sample material. Atterberg limits Plasticity of the sample. The tests were performed in general accordance with their respective ASTM standards. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment. Results of the laboratory tests are generally summarized on the attached boring logs. Graphical results of the gradation analyses are also attached. Responsive■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden)—Additional Exploration Meridian, Idaho November 27, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 62155033A 3.0 GEOTECHNICAL MODEL The subsurface profile is generally consistent with the soil conditions described in the reference report. The borings were monitored during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling at depths ranging from about 19 '/2 to 21 feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at shallower depths during the previous exploration at this site. Fluctuations of the depth to groundwater may occur based on the level of water flowing in the nearby ditches and canals and due to seasonal variations in the amount of irrigation, rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. Evaluation of these factors is beyond the scope of this exploration. 4.0 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS The soil conditions encountered in the new borings drilled within the currently proposed building area were generally consistent with those in the borings drilled in 2015 within the previous building location. However, one boring previously drilled within the current building footprint (boring B-7) encountered soft/medium stiff soils that extended to the maximum depth explored of about 6'/2 feet. Based on our engineering analysis, the shallow foundation recommendations included in the referenced report still apply. However, due to the soft/loose soils encountered in boring B-7, we recommend that Terracon be contacted to visually observe foundation excavations prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete. If soft//loose, or disturbed soils are observed, these soils should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted Structural Fill meeting the requirements in the referenced report. If overexcavation is required, the overexcavation should extend laterally from the outside perimeter of the footing a distance equal to 2/3 of the depth of the overexcavation. 5.0 SITE CLASSIFCATION FOR SEISMIC DESIGN Based on the 2015 International Building Code, the seismic design parameters present in the referenced geotechnical report are still applicable. The previous report was based on the 2012 IBC. 6.0 PROJECT CONSDIERATIONS The project considerations provided in the Terracon geotechnical report for (project 62155033) dated November 6, 2015 are still applicable. Responsive■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed WinCo Foods Store (Linder/Chinden) —Additional Exploration Meridian, Idaho November 27, 2018 it Terracon Project No. 62155033A We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. 4 11124 21 4 Ryan J. Olsen, P.E. � Nicholas Ravenna Geotechnical Department Manager Project Professional Responsive■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4 EXPLORATION PLANS Additional Borings Previous Borings _ - _ I Al Previous Test Pits I Temporary Benchmark _ =k i l hl :- 7A 'A8 A Jkl ni Y IL WJ F —. Z. r 44 i x -Al LI I I I ka 1 - 7 5 5k1 rt- N Pan M i PAa — _ s sf � F� 5. F = SITE PLAN it ._ - -R= Teet im Fj20T-8MicrcisofLCorporatian DIAGRAM I!FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY,AND IS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS Project Manager: Project 62155033 NJR 62 EXPLORATION PLAN Exhibit Drawn by: NJR Scale: AS SHOWN lrerraconWinCo Food Store - Chinden & Linder- Reporl Checked by: RJO File NdNf 5033A 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G Update - Approved by:RJO 11/27/2018 Date: Boise,ID 83713.1944 Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian.ID EXPLORATION RESULTS BORING LOG NO. U-1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w p o. z U LL Latitude:43.6619'Longitude:-116.4125' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 Z w F w O w z o W LL-PL-PI U Approximate Surface Elev.96.5(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w 'L O w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O U a LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 1.2 5-6-8 10 N=14 2.0 94.5+/- SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,light brown,very dense 26-39-49 _ 1.2 N=88 F ' .4.0 92.5+/- POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPI,gray and brown, umi very dense a- :'a 1 2 30-36-46 •:'o .6.5 90+/- N=82 Q Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet 0i 0 Lu Lu Lu d c? 0 U) 0 0 0 0 Lu Z_ M O N N >J 0 Z 0 O J ¢ O Lu H O EL Z_ U' K O 2 O K w 0 w ¢ Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic ¢ IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J F- r 0 Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS z Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 0 O Groundwater not encountered Irerracon Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc m 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-2 BORING LOG NO. U-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w p o. z U LL Latitude:43.6618'Longitude:-116.4109' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 Z w F w O w z o W LL-PL-PI U Approximate Surface Elev.98.5(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w 'L O w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O U a LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL),brown,stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 2-5-5 1 N=10 3.0 95.5+/- 10-12-42 °. POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL(SP-SM�, 1.1 8 •;'A N=54 brown,very dense c� Q 5 :. 1 22-25-30 :o � 6.5 92+/- N=55 Q Boring Terminated at 6.5 Feet 0i 0 Lu Lu Lu d c? 0 U) 0 0 0 0 Lu Z_ M O N N >J 0 Z 0 O J ¢ O Lu H O EL Z_ U' K O 2 O K LL 0 w ¢ Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic ¢ IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J F- r 0 Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS z Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 0 O Groundwater not encountered Irerracon Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc m (n 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-3 BORING LOG NO. U-3 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w p o. z U LL Latitude:43.6615'Longitude:-116.4116' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 Z w F w O w z o W LL-PL-PI U Approximate Surface Elev.98(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w O L w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O U a SILTY CLAY(CL-ML),brown,stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 2-6-8 1 N=14 29-22-7 2.0 96+/- SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,brown,very dense 15-24-38 _ 1.2 N=62 F ' .4.0 94+/- POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPI,brown,very a :.:�.: dense 5 5.9 92+/- 0.6 38-50/5" 2 QBoring Terminated at 5.9 Feet Q 0i 0 Lu Lu Lu d c? 0 U) 0 0 0 0 Lu Z_ M O N N >J 0 Z 0 O J Q O Lu H O EL Q Z_ U' K O 2 O K LL 0 w Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J Q F- r 0 Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS z Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 0 O Groundwater not encountered Irerracon Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc m (n 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A4 BORING LOG NO. U-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w p o. z U LL Latitude:43.661'Longitude:-116.4122' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p D W 2 z w F w O w L z o W LL-PL-PI U Approximate Surface Elev.97(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w O L w DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O U a LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 2-5-5 0.9 N=10 2.0 95+/- SILTY SAND(SM),trace gravel,brown,very loose 22-24-38 _ 1.1 N=62 o . c� w . .5.0 92+/- 5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPA,gray to brown, 14-29-41 w "° very dense 0.9 N=70 F •.':�o a •:'D r7.5 89.5+/- o POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GP),trace silt,gray to 0.7 29-50/6" 1 i °�4' brown,very dense Ji a. LU ob 0.9 14-31-40 0 N=71 U) °�4 0 o° O o ° e z 15.0 82+/- •'a POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPI,gray to brown, 5 0.3 50/5" very dense W O •.:'D . Z O K •.:'D Q cn •'�O o •;a• 2 13�0 21.3 75.5+/- W Boring Terminated at 21.3 Feet a z T X 0 2 O LL 0 W Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J Q F- r z Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c� Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 While drilling at 20ft IrerraconO � Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc (n 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-5 BORING LOG NO. U-5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w O o. z U LL Latitude:43.661'Longitude:-116.4113' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 z w F w O w 0 z o W LL-PL-PI U Approximate Surface Elev.98(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w O L w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O U a LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 1-5-8 1 N=13 2.5 95.5+/- SILTY SAND(SM),brown,very dense 14-24-48 _ 1.5 N=72 0 0 UJ w I(�\ 5-3 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GPI,brown to gray, 1.1 1 N�55 0 Q ° 4' dense 0, o �4 0.8 10-20-25 3 X QD. N=45 01�4: OD very dense 1 0 1.1 2 N367 2 1 0�4 H oa ° 04 z o° cQ 0 o-.D' 15 N Q. 23-34-28 J 0e: 0.8 N=62 w 16.5 81.5+/- POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPA,brown to gray, medium dense z O ' o :,•o. 2 15-10-10 7A0T O 21.5 76.5+/- N=20 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z T X O 2 O U- 0 w Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J Q F- r z Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c� Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 While drilling at 21ft Irerracon O� Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-6 BORING LOG NO. U-6 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z 0 v F LIMITS w O o. z U LL Latitude:43.6605'Longitude:-116.4118' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 z w F w O w z o W LL-PL-PI 0 Approximate Surface Elev.97(Ft.)+/- o ¢m ¢ w O L w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O U a LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,very stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 6-9-10 1.1 N=19 2.0 95+/- CLAYEY SAND(SCII,brown,medium dense N 1 9-9-9 28-19-9 N=18 0 W '..5.0 92+/- 5 Q ° POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SPI,brown and gray, 2 "° very dense 0.5 29-50/6" Lu •.':�o of ••:�o . o :�0 gray ra 0 8 34-35-38 ° N=73 Lu •.:o . w c� ' '0 1 1 34-36-50 0 o N=86 0 o 0 ;•:�o 0 z M ♦ ��Q M 15 o brown and gray w 16.5 80.5+/- tO 7 �36 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND(GP),brown and gray, very dense o Q. J o .D' 0 4. 2 —7 0.6 29-50/4" o Boring Terminated at 20.8 Feet W a z T X 0 2 0 U- 0 w Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J Q F- r z Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c� Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 While drilling at 20ft Irerracon O� Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-7 BORING LOG NO. U-7 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: WinCo Food Store- Report Update CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC Boise, Idaho SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho c7 LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 J ATTERBERG O w z 0 v LIMITS w O o. z U LL Latitude:43.6603'Longitude:-116.4113' _ Q w w z z = F > J W p W 2 z w F w O w 12� z o W LL-PL-PI 0 Approximate Surface Elev.98(Ft.)+/- 0 ¢m ¢ w L w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) O a LEAN CLAY(CL),brown,medium stiff,Topsoil depth is 0.4' 1 1 4-4-4 12 N=8 2.0 96+/- ' SILTY SAND(SM),brown,medium dense 8-9-9 _ 1.2 N=18 0 . c� F �5.0 93+/- 5 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND(GP-GM), 38-49-50 w ° brown and gray,very dense 1.4 N=99 ¢ o � Q z Q 1 16-29-39 8 N=68 [If o Lu 0 1 20-38-40 0 o N=78 U) 0 00 11 � a Z � o . M � N ° 15 ° 12 23-30-32 a N=62 w �: 0 0 z 0a J � 0 , Q W 0 2 0 o M09F 23-45-50 O Q' '21.5 76.5+/- N=95 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet a z T X 0 2 0 U- 0 w Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Q IL w Advancement Method: Notes: ` Hollow-Stem Auger 0 J Q F- r z Abandonment Method: U) Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. 0 Elevations were measured in the field using an O J WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS c� Boring Started:10-23-2018 Boring Completed:10-23-2018 While drilling at 19.5ft IrerraconO � Drill Rig:CME-75 Driller:Haz-Tech Drilling Inc (n 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G ? Boise,ID Project No.:62155033A Exhibit: A-8 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422/ASTM C136 U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 3 4 6 810 14 16 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 x 60 N � 55 F m o � W 50 F z a W z 45 W W Q 40 o W a 0 35 U a K W 30 � 25 u, 0 20 0 0 15 0 z 10 a M C M J O N 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 o GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY ? coarse fine coarse medium fine a c� F Boring ID Depth USCS Classification We(°i°) LL PL PI Cc Cu no • U-5 7.5-9 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND(GP) 0.47 51.17 w cf m U-7 7.5-9 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND(GP-GM) 0.38 79.26 a z K O O K Boring ID Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Fines %Clay a LU • U-5 7.5-9 25 11.458 1.103 0.224 59.8 36.7 3.5 N m U-7 7.5-9 37.5 9.574 0.662 0.121 50.6 41.9 7.5 0 J a F O z W 0C a PROJECT: WinCo Food Store-Report Update U) PROJECT NUMBER: 62155033A Lu >- SITE: Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard CLIENT: WinCo Foods LLC o Meridian, Idaho Irerracon Boise, Idaho 11849 W Executive Dr,Ste G O Boise,ID Cc EXHIBIT: B-1 ik _. s �. r {� r + • p,r I, • i �r 1 � e k GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CORTLAND AT THE ORCHARD PARK 907 &991 West Chinden Boulevard Meridian, ID PREPARED FOR: Mr. Nicholas Sommariva Cortland 3424 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30326 PREPARED BY: Atlas Technical Consultants, LLC October 11, 2022 2791 South Victory View Way B222117g Boise, ID 83709 �T�T��. 2791 South Victory View Way Boise, ID 83709 (208)376-4748 i oneatlas.com October 11, 2022 Atlas No. 13222117g Mr. Nicholas Sommariva Cortland 3424 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30326 Subject: GeotechnicalInvestigation Cortland at the Orchard Park 907 & 991 West Chinden Boulevard Meridian, ID Dear Mr. Sommariva: In compliance with your instructions, Atlas has conducted a soils exploration and foundation evaluation for the above referenced development. Fieldwork for this investigation was conducted on September 20, 2022. Data have been analyzed to evaluate pertinent geotechnical conditions. Results of this investigation, together with our recommendations, are to be found in the following report. We have provided a PDF copy for your review and distribution. Often, questions arise concerning soil conditions because of design and construction details that occur on a project. Atlas would be pleased to continue our role as geotechnical engineers during project implementation. If you have any questions, please call us at (208) 376-4748. Respectfully submitted, L Clinton Wyllie, PG Monica Saculles, PE Staff Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer Distribution: Jose Mora, Cortland (PDF Copy); Ross Erikson, Erikson Civil (PDF Copy) Page11 �TrT-G7T�1 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Description ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Authorization .............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Scope of Investigation................................................................................................ 1 2. SITE DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Site Access ................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Regional Geology....................................................................................................... 2 2.3 General Site Characteristics....................................................................................... 2 2.4 Regional Site Climatology and Geochemistry............................................................. 3 3. SEISMIC SITE EVALUATION ............................................................................................ 3 3.1 Geoseismic Setting .................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Seismic Design Parameter Values ............................................................................. 3 4. SOILS EXPLORATION....................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Exploration and Sampling Procedures........................................................................ 4 4.2 Laboratory Testing Program....................................................................................... 4 4.3 Soil and Sediment Profile........................................................................................... 5 4.4 Volatile Organic Scan................................................................................................. 5 5. SITE HYDROLOGY............................................................................................................ 6 5.1 Groundwater.............................................................................................................. 6 5.2 Soil Infiltration Rates .................................................................................................. 6 5.3 Infiltration Testing....................................................................................................... 7 6. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ....................................................................................... 7 6.1 Retaining Wall Backfill Materials................................................................................. 8 6.2 Retaining Wall Drainage............................................................................................10 7. FOUNDATION AND SLAB DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................10 7.1 Foundation Design Recommendations - 3 Story Structures, Townhomes, and Pool.10 7.2 Preliminary Foundation Design Recommendations - 5 Story Structure.....................11 7.3 General Foundation Information................................................................................11 7.4 Floor Slab-on-Grade..................................................................................................12 8. PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................13 8.1 Flexible Pavement Sections ......................................................................................13 8.2 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ..............................................................................14 8.3 Common Pavement Section Construction Issues......................................................14 9. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................15 9.1 Earthwork..................................................................................................................15 9.2 Dry Weather..............................................................................................................15 9.3 Wet Weather.............................................................................................................16 Atlas No. B222117g Page I i Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �/��M" ■ p �TrT-G7T-Zr-_. 9.4 Soft Subgrade Soils...................................................................................................16 9.5 Frozen Subgrade Soils..............................................................................................16 9.6 Structural Fill .............................................................................................................17 9.7 Backfill of Walls.........................................................................................................18 9.8 Excavations...............................................................................................................18 9.9 Groundwater Control.................................................................................................19 10. GENERAL COMMENTS..................................................................................................19 11. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................20 TABLES Table 1 — Seismic Design Values................................................................................................4 Table2 — Groundwater Data.......................................................................................................6 Table 3 — Infiltration Test Results................................................................................................7 Table 4 — Lateral Earth Pressure Values for Native Soil..............................................................8 Table 5 — Lateral Earth Pressure Values for Native Sediments and Fill Materials .......................9 Table 6 — Soil Bearing Capacity................................................................................................11 Table 7 — Soil Bearing Capacity................................................................................................11 Table 8 —AASHTO Flexible Pavement Specifications...............................................................13 APPENDICES Appendix I Warranty and Limiting Conditions Appendix II Vicinity Map Appendix III Site Map Appendix IV Geotechnical Investigation Test Pit Log Appendix V Geotechnical General Notes Appendix VI AASHTO Pavement Design Appendix VII Important Information About This Geotechnical Engineering Report Atlas No. B222117g Page I ii Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents results of a geotechnical investigation and analysis in support of data utilized in design of structures as defined in the 2018 International Building Code (IBC). Information in support of groundwater and stormwater issues pertinent to the practice of Civil Engineering is included. Observations and recommendations relevant to the earthwork phase of the project are also presented. Revisions in plans or drawings for the proposed development from those enumerated in this report should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer to determine whether changes in the provided recommendations are required. Deviations from noted subsurface conditions, if encountered during construction, should also be brought to the attention of the soils engineer. 1.1 Project Description The proposed development is in the northern portion of the City of Meridian, Ada County, ID, and occupies a portion of the NE'/4NW'/4 of Section 25, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian. This project will consist of construction of a mixed-use development comprised of a 5- story wrap around structure with pre-cast deck, 3-story structures, and townhomes. Additionally, a below-grade pool will be constructed. The site to be developed is approximately 13.663 acres. Total settlements are limited to 1 inch. Loads of up to 8,000 pounds per lineal foot for wall footings, and column loads of up to 150,000 pounds were assumed for settlement calculations. At this time, the foundation recommendations provided in this report for the 5-story structure should be considered preliminary. Once foundation loading information is known, Atlas must be contacted to provide final recommendations. Additionally, assumptions have been made for traffic loading of pavements. Retaining walls are anticipated as part of the project. Atlas has not been informed of the proposed grading plan. 1.2 Authorization Authorization to perform this exploration and analysis was given in the form of a written authorization to proceed from Mr. Nicholas Sommariva of Cortland to Mary Dorroh of Atlas Technical Consultants (Atlas), on September 9, 2022. Said authorization is subject to terms, conditions, and limitations described in the Professional Services Contract entered into between Cortland and Atlas. Our scope of services for the proposed development has been provided in our proposal dated September 8, 2022 and repeated below. 1.3 Scope of Investigation The scope of this investigation included review of geologic literature and existing available geotechnical studies of the area, visual site reconnaissance of the immediate site, subsurface exploration of the site, field and laboratory testing of materials collected, and engineering analysis and evaluation of foundation materials. Atlas No. B222117g Page11 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 2. SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Access Access to the site may be gained via Interstate 84 to the Ten Mile Road exit. Proceed north on Ten Mile Road approximately 4.8 miles to its intersection with Chinden Boulevard. From this intersection, proceed east on Chinden Boulevard roughly 1.4 miles. The site is located on the south side of Chinden Boulevard. The location is depicted on site maps included in the Appendix. 2.2 Regional Geology The project site is located within the western Snake River Plain of southwestern Idaho and eastern Oregon. The plain is a northwest trending rift basin, about 45 miles wide and 200 miles long, that developed about 14 million years ago (Ma) and has since been occupied sporadically by large inland lakes. Geologic materials found within and along the plain's margins reflect volcanic and fluvial/lacustrine sedimentary processes that have led to an accumulation of approximately 1 to 2 km of interbedded volcanic and sedimentary deposits within the plain. Along the margins of the plain, streams that drained the highlands to the north and south provided coarse to fine-grained sediments eroded from granitic and volcanic rocks, respectively. About 2 million years ago the last of the lakes was drained and since that time fluvial erosion and deposition has dominated the evolution of the landscape. The project site is underlain by the "Gravel of Whitney Terrace" as mapped by Othberg and Stanford (1993). Sediments of the Whitney terrace consist of sandy pebble and cobble gravel. The Whitney terrace is the second terrace above modern Boise River floodplain, is thickest toward its eastern extent, and is mantled with 2-6 feet of loess. 2.3 General Site Characteristics The site to be developed is approximately 13.663 in size. Currently, the site exists as bare land and is relatively flat. The surrounding properties to the north, east, and west consist of existing commercial/residential properties and vacant commercial lots. Bare land is present to the south of the site. Various fill stockpiles are present in the central portion of the site. Additionally, several gravel-surfaced roads have been constructed on the site. Based on historical aerial photographs, the site was previously bisected from the east to the west/northwest by the Simpson Lateral and the North Slough. Vegetation on the site consists primarily of native weeds and grasses. Regional drainage is north and west toward the Boise River. Stormwater drainage for the site is achieved by percolation through surficial soils. The site is situated so that it is unlikely that it will receive any drainage from off-site sources. Stormwater drainage collection and retention systems are not in place on the project site, but are currently located within the adjacent roadways in the form of curb, gutter, and drop inlets. Atlas No. B222117g Page12 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 2.4 Regional Site Climatology and Geochemistry According to the Western Regional Climate Center, the average precipitation for the Treasure Valley is on the order of 10 to 12 inches per year, with an annual snowfall of approximately 20 inches and a range from 3 to 49 inches. The monthly mean daily temperatures range from 21°F to 95°F, with daily extremes ranging from roughly -25°F to 111°F. Winds are generally from the northwest or southeast with an annual average wind speed of approximately 9 miles per hour (mph) and a maximum of 62 mph. Soils and sediments in the area are primarily derived from siliceous materials and exhibit low electro-chemical potential for corrosion of metals or concretes. Local aggregates are generally appropriate for Portland cement and lime cement mixtures. Surface water, groundwater, and soils in the region typically have pH levels ranging from 7.2 to 8.2. .s. SEISMIC SITE EVALUATION 3.1 Geoseismic Setting Soils on site are classed as Site Class D in accordance with Chapter 20 of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) publication ASCE/SEI 7-16. Structures constructed on this site should be designed per IBC requirements for such a seismic classification. Our investigation did not reveal hazards resulting from potential earthquake motions including: slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture caused by faulting or lateral spreading. Incidence and anticipated acceleration of seismic activity in the area is low. ieismic Design Parameter Values The United States Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Maps (2008), includes a peak ground acceleration map. The map for 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years in the Western United States in standard gravity (g) indicates that a peak ground acceleration of 0.201 is appropriate for the project site based on a Site Class D. The following section provides an assessment of the earthquake-induced earthquake loads for the site based on the Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER). The MCER spectral response acceleration for short periods, SMs, and at 1-second period, SMI, are adjusted for site class effects as required by the 2018 IBC. Design spectral response acceleration parameters as presented in the 2018 IBC are defined as a 5% damped design spectral response acceleration at short periods, SDs, and at 1-second period, SDI. The USGS National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project includes a program that provides values for ground motion at a selected site based on the same data that were used to prepare the USGS ground motion maps. The maps were developed using attenuation relationships for soft rock sites; the source model, assumptions, and empirical relationships used in preparation of the maps are described in Petersen and others (1996). Atlas No. B222117g Page 13 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 Table 1 — Seismic Design Values Seismic Design Parameter Design Value Site Class D "Default" Ss 0.296 (g) S1 0.107 (g) Fa 1.564 F 2.385 SMs 0.462 SMi 0.256 Sos 0.308 Sol 0.171 4. SOILS EXPLORATION I Exploration and Sampling Procedures Field exploration conducted to determine engineering characteristics of subsurface materials included a reconnaissance of the project site and investigation by test pit. Test pit sites were selected by Cortland and provided to Atlas via a site map. Actual test pit sites were located in the field by means of a Global Positioning System (GPS) device and are reportedly accurate to within ten feet. Upon completion of investigation, each test pit was backfilled with loose excavated materials. Re-excavation and compaction of these test pit areas are required prior to construction of overlying structures. In addition, samples were obtained from representative soil strata encountered. Samples obtained have been visually classified in the field by professional staff, identified according to test pit number and depth, placed in sealed containers, and transported to our laboratory for additional testing. Subsurface materials have been described in detail on logs provided in the Appendix. Results of field and laboratory tests are also presented in the Appendix. Atlas recommends that these logs not be used to estimate fill material quantities. 4.2 Laboratory Testing Prograrr Along with our field investigation, a supplemental laboratory testing program was conducted to determine additional pertinent engineering characteristics of subsurface materials necessary in an analysis of anticipated behavior of the proposed structures. Laboratory tests were conducted in accordance with current applicable American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications, and results of these tests are to be found in the Appendix. The laboratory testing program for this report included: Atterberg Limits Testing —ASTM D4318 and Grain Size Analysis —ASTM C117/C136. Atlas No. B222117g Page14 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 4.3 Soil and Sediment Profile The profile below represents a generalized interpretation for the project site. Note that on site soils strata, encountered between test pit locations, may vary from the individual soil profiles presented in the logs, which can be found in the Appendix. The materials encountered during exploration were quite typical for the geologic area mapped as Gravel of Whitney Terrace. Silty gravel with sand fills were encountered at ground surface in test pits 6 through 8, 12, and 14. These materials were brown, dry, and medium dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. Sandy lean clay fills were observed at ground surface in test pits 4, 13, 15, 17, and 18. These materials were dark brown to brown, dry to slightly moist, and medium stiff to very stiff, with fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. Organic debris was noted within the fill materials in test pits 13 and 15. Native lean clay with sand soils were encountered at ground surface in the remaining test pits and beneath fill materials in test pits 13, 14, and 18. These soils were brown, dry to slightly moist, and medium stiff to very stiff, with fine-grained sand. Organics were generally noted to depths of up to 1.0 foot bgs. However, an organic layer was encountered in test pit 14 from 2.8 to 3.8 feet. Silt with sand soils were found beneath fill materials in the remaining test pits and beneath native lean clays with sand in all the test pits except test pit 14. These soils were brown, dry to slightly moist, and medium stiff to hard, with fine to medium-grained sand. Weak to moderate cementation was encountered within this horizon in portions of the site. Poorly graded gravel with sand sediments were encountered at depth in the test pits. These sediments were light brown or brown, dry to slightly moist, and medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 8-inch minus cobbles. According to Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) well logs within approximately '/4-mile of the site, these gravels are anticipated to extend to depths ranging from 25 to 35 feet bgs. Competency of test pit sidewalls varied little across the site. In general, fine grained soils remained stable while more granular sediments readily sloughed. However, moisture contents will also affect wall competency with saturated soils having a tendency to readily slough when under load and unsupported. 4.4 Volatile Organic Scan No environmental concerns were identified prior to commencement of the investigation. Therefore, soils obtained during on-site activities were not assessed for volatile organic compounds by portable photoionization detector. Samples obtained during our exploration activities exhibited no odors or discoloration typically associated with this type of contamination. No groundwater was encountered. Atlas No. B222117g Page 15 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 5. SITE HYDROLOGY Existing surface drainage conditions are defined in the General Site Characteristics section. Information provided in this section is limited to observations made at the time of the investigation. Either regional or local ordinances may require information beyond the scope of this report. 5.1 Groundwater During this field investigation, groundwater was not encountered in test pits advanced to a maximum depth of 15.2 feet bgs. Soil moistures in the test pits were generally dry to slightly moist throughout. In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater levels are controlled in large part by residential and commercial irrigation activity and leakage from nearby canals. Maximum groundwater elevations likely occur during the later portion of the irrigation season. Atlas has previously performed 6 geotechnical investigations within 0.25 mile of the project site. Information from these investigations has been provided in the table below. Table 2 — Groundwater Data lApproximate Distance Direction from Site Groundwater Depth from Site (mile) �& (feet bgs) A September 2021 0.05 West Not Encountered to 15.2 September 2015 0.10 East Not Encountered to 15.5 November 2021 0.20 Northwest Not Encountered to 14.0 February 2015 0.23 Northeast Not Encountered to 15.0 December 2011 .24 Northwest Not Encountered to 21.5 October 2019 0.25 Northwest Not Encountered to 6.2 Furthermore, according to Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) well logs within approximately 0.20 mile of the project site, groundwater was measured at depths ranging between 23 and 32 feet bgs. For construction purposes, groundwater depth can be assumed to remain greater than 20 feet bgs throughout the year. ;oil Infiltration Rates Soil permeability, which is a measure of the ability of a soil to transmit a fluid, was tested in the field. For this report, an estimation of infiltration is also presented using generally recognized values for each soil type and gradation. Of soils comprising the generalized soil profile for this study, lean clay with sand and silt with sand soils generally offer little permeability, with typical hydraulic infiltration rates of less than 2 inches per hour; though calcium carbonate cementation may reduce this value to near zero. Poorly graded gravel with sand sediments typically exhibit infiltration values in excess of 12 inches per hour. Atlas No. B222117g Page 16 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 5.3 Infiltration Testing Infiltration testing was conducted using an open test pit method. Test pit areas will need to be re- excavated and compacted prior to construction of structures that will be sensitive to settlement. Test locations were presoaked prior to testing. Pre-soaking increases soil moistures, which allows the tested soils to reach a saturated condition more readily during testing. Saturation of the tested soils is desirable in order to isolate the vertical component of infiltration by inhibiting horizontal seepage during testing. Details and results of testing are as follows: Table 3 — Infiltration Test Results Mill TP-13 12.5 Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand >12.0 8.0 TP-15 10.2 Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand >12.0 8.0 TP-22 8.4 Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand >12.0 8.0 Appropriate factors of safety have been applied to the stabilized infiltration rates achieved during testing to obtain the design infiltration rates listed above. The reason for the decreased infiltration rate is to account for long term saturation of the soils and the potential for less permeable soils to settle into the bottom of the infiltration facilities. Atlas recommends that all infiltration facilities be constructed in accordance with the local municipality requirements. i. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Retaining, below-grade, or basement walls will be subject to lateral earth pressures. The magnitude of earth pressure is a function of both type and compaction of backfill behind walls within the "active" zone, and allowable rotation of the top of the wall. The active zone is defined as the wedge of soil between the surface of the wall and a plane inclined 31 degrees from vertical passing through the base of the wall. All clayey soils must be completely removed from within the active zone. The following recommendations should be used when dealing with lateral earth pressures on a gravity block: 1) a sliding frictional coefficient of 0.35 is appropriate considering native lean clay with sand soils and silt with sand soils, and 2) a sliding frictional coefficient of 0.45 is appropriate considering native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments and granular structural fill under typical conditions. Atlas No. B222117g Page 17 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants A state of plastic equilibrium is when the subject material is considered to be 1) homogeneous and unbounded and 2) at the point of incipient instability. This state is evaluated on the basis of unit weight, mechanical properties, and the definition of instability. For the purpose of this report, it is assumed that native relatively free draining soils and imported granular fill material will be the materials of concern regarding lateral earth pressures. If other materials are considered for use, Atlas must be contacted to provide alternate lateral earth pressure information. Furthermore, changes in natural soil moisture, such as can be imposed by site stormwater systems, can change the values listed below. Below-grade restrained walls, such as basement walls, should be designed based on at-rest pressures. Active pressures are appropriate under conditions where the wall moves or rotates away from the soil mass at failure. Passive pressures are used for conditions where the wall moves toward the soil mass at failure. Rotation, or lateral movement, of the top of the wall equal to 0.002 times the height of the wall will be necessary for on-site soil backfill to achieve an "active" loading condition. Lateral movement of the top of the wall equal to 0.001 times the height of the wall will be necessary for the "active" pressure condition for imported granular structural backfill. 6.1 Retaining Wall Backfill Materials For lateral earth pressure analysis, Atlas anticipates that the soils of interest will be the onsite native silt with sand soils. Clayey soils are not suitable for use as backfill on the soil side of walls. Seismic lateral earth pressures have also been provided in the following tables, and were calculated per the Whitman method. For silt with sand soils, the following values are applicable under non-surcharged, drained conditions. Table 4— Lateral Earth Pressure Values for Native Soil Soil Type: Silt with Sand Internal Friction Angle: 28 ° Dry Unit Weight: 105 pcf Cohesion: 100 psf Bouyant Unit Weight: 68 pcf Natural Void Ratio: 0.7 Natural Moisture: 16 % Ground Acceleration 2: 0.201 Backfill Slope: 0 ° At rest lateral earth pressure: 65 pcf Ko= 0.53 Active lateral earth pressure: 44 Pcf1 Ka= 0.36 Passive lateral earth pressure: 337 Pcf1 Kp= 2.77 Seismic active lateral earth pressure: 62 Pcf1 Kae= 0.51 Seismic passive lateral earth pressure: 270 Pcf1 Kpe= 2.21 'Lateral earth pressure values are in pounds per square foot,per foot of wall(psf/ft). Alternately,the values presented may also be considered as equivalent fluid with units of pounds per cubic foot(pcf). 2Ground acceleration obtained from the USGS Seismic Design Maps. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 18 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �/��M" ■ p �TrT-G7T-*1. Native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments and imported, compacted, structural material, which is used to backfill the soil side of walls, must demonstrate the following characteristics: Table 5 — Lateral Earth Pressure Values for Native Sediments and Fill Materials GradedSoil Type: Poorly Sandy Internal Friction Angle: 35 ° Dry Unit Weight: 128 pcf Cohesion: N/A Bouyant Unit Weight: 83 pcf Natural Void Ratio: 0.4 Natural Moisture: 5 % Ground Acceleration2: 0.201 Backfill Slope: 0 ° At rest lateral earth pressure: 57 Pcf' Ko= 0.43 Active lateral earth pressure: 36 Pce Ka= 0.27 Passive lateral earth pressure: 496 Pcf' Kp= 3.69 Seismic active lateral earth pressure: 57 Pce Kae= 0.42 Seismic passive lateral earth pressure: 396 Pce Kpe= 2.95 'Lateral earth pressure values are in pounds per square foot,per foot of wall(psf/ft). Alternately,the values presented may also be considered as equivalent fluid with units of pounds per cubic foot(pcf). 2Ground acceleration obtained from the USGS Seismic Design Maps. Please note that the values for seismic lateral earth pressures are calculated using both the static and seismic coefficients. The effect of seismic conditions alone is the difference between the static and seismic lateral earth pressures presented above. In the case that another material is used for backfill, Atlas should be consulted for alternate lateral earth pressure values. Granular structural fill should consist of 4-inch-minus select, clean, granular soil with no more than 30 percent oversize (greater than 3/4-inch) material and no more than 5 percent non-plastic fines (passing the No. 200 sieve). Retaining wall and basement backfill must be placed in accordance with recommendations in the Structural Fill section of this report and must be properly compacted and tested. Lateral earth pressure values do not incorporate specific factors of safety, and are only applicable for non-surcharged, drained conditions. Factors of safety, if applicable, should be integrated into the structural design of the wall. The preceding values are presented for idealized conditions relating to simple shallow structures. For complex structures, deep structures, or structures with significant perimeter landscaping, a soils engineer should be retained as part of the design team in developing appropriate project design parameters and construction specifications. Atlas No. B222117g Page 19 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T��. 6.2 Retaining Wall Drainaae Atlas recommends that a drainage system be incorporated into the retained soil mass. This can be accomplished by installing wall and toe drains as a part of each soil-supporting wall system. In areas where there is potential for significantly high soil moistures within the supported soil mass, installation of drains within the soil mass is recommended. Particular consideration of roof drain effluent and irrigation water must be made. Further, these drainage systems must be separate from other retaining wall/foundation systems. If the granular structural fill option to reduce lateral pressures is used, a compacted low permeability soil cap is recommended within the upper 2 feet of the surface to limit surface water infiltration behind the walls. . FOUNDATION AND SLAB DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Various foundation types have been considered for support of the proposed structures. Two requirements must be met in the design of foundations. First, the applied bearing stress must be less than the ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils to maintain stability. Second, total and differential settlement must not exceed an amount that will produce an adverse behavior of the superstructure. Allowable settlement is usually exceeded before bearing capacity considerations become important; thus, allowable bearing pressure is normally controlled by settlement considerations. Considering subsurface conditions and the proposed construction, it is recommended that the structures be founded upon conventional spread footings and continuous wall footings. Total settlements should not exceed 1 inch if the following design and construction recommendations are observed. The following recommendations are not specific to the individual structures, but rather should be viewed as guidelines for the overall development. 7.1 Foundation Design Recommendations — 3 Story Structures, Townhomes, and Pool Based on data obtained from the site and test results from various laboratory tests performed, Atlas recommends the following guidelines for the net allowable soil bearing capacity: Atlas No. B222117g Page110 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Table 6 — Soil Bearing Capacity WE . . -.0. M IM Footings must bear on competent, undisturbed, 1,5001bs/ft2 native lean clay with sand soils, silt with sand soils, poorly graded gravel with sand sediments, or Not Required for Native A'/3 increase is allowable compacted structural fill. Existing fill materials and Soil for short-term loading, organics must be completely removed from below o which is defined by foundation elements. Excavation depths ranging 95/o for Structural Fill seismic events or from roughly 0.4 to 3.8 feet bgs should be anticipated to expose proper bearing soils.2 designed wind speeds. 'It will be required for Atlas personnel to verify the bearing soil suitability for each structure at the time of construction. 2Depending on the time of year construction takes place,the subgrade soils may be unstable because of high moisture contents. If unstable conditions are encountered,over-excavation and replacement with granular structural fill and/or use of geotextiles may be required. 7.2 Preliminary Foundation Design Recommendations — 5 Story Structure At this time, the foundation recommendations provided in this report for the 5-stow structure should be considered preliminary. Once foundation loading information is known, Atlas must be contacted to provide final recommendations. Based on data obtained from the site and test results from various laboratory tests performed, Atlas recommends the following guidelines for the net allowable soil bearing capacity: Table 7 — Soil Bearing Capacity AllowableFooting Depth ASTM D1557 Net M M Subgracle Compaction Bearing Capacity Footings must bear on competent, undisturbed, 3,000Ibs/ft2 native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments or compacted structural fill. Existing fill materials, lean Not Required for Native A% increase is allowable clay with sand soils, and silt with sand soils must be Soil for short-term loading, completely removed from below foundation which is defined b elements.' Excavation depths ranging from roughly 95% for Structural Fill seismic events or 3.2 to 6.7 feet bgs should be anticipated to expose designed wind speeds. proper bearing soils. 'It will be required for Atlas personnel to verify the bearing soil suitability for each structure at the time of construction. 2Depending on the time of year construction takes place,the subgrade soils may be unstable because of high moisture contents. If unstable conditions are encountered,over-excavation and replacement with granular structural fill and/or use of geotextiles may be required. 7.3 General Foundation Information The following sliding frictional coefficient values should be used: 1) 0.35 for footings bearing on native lean clay with sand soils and silt with sand soils and 2) 0.45 for footings bearing on native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments and granular structural fill. A passive lateral earth pressure of 307 pounds per square foot per foot (psf/ft) should be used for lean clay with sand soils, and 337 psf/ft should be used for silt with sand soils. For native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments compacted sandy gravel fill, a passive lateral earth pressure of 496 psf/ft should be used. Atlas No. B222117g Page 111 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Footings should be proportioned to meet either the stated soil bearing capacity or the 2018 IBC minimum requirements. Total settlement should be limited to approximately 1 inch, and differential settlement should be limited to approximately '/2 inch. Objectionable soil types encountered at the bottom of footing excavations should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Excessively loose or soft areas that are encountered in the footings subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill. To minimize the effects of slight differential movement that may occur because of variations in the character of supporting soils and seasonal moisture content, Atlas recommends continuous footings be suitably reinforced to make them as rigid as possible. For frost protection, the bottom of external footings should be 30 inches below finished grade. 7.4 Floor Slab-on-Grade Uncontrolled fill, which contained debris, was encountered in portions of the site. Atlas recommends that these fill materials be removed to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade. If fill materials remain after excavation, all debris must be removed, and the exposed subgrade must be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Once final grades have been determined, Atlas is available to provide additional recommendations. It is noted that debris-containing fill materials will remain below the improved 2 foot zone (specified above) in portions of the site. If water or increased moisture conditions occur within these fill materials, settlement or vertical movement may occur. This risk must be recognized and accepted by the project owner. Otherwise, complete removal of the fill zone will be required. Organic, loose, or obviously compressive materials must be removed prior to placement of concrete floors or floor-supporting fill. In addition, the remaining subgrade should be treated in accordance with guidelines presented in the Earthwork section. Areas of excessive yielding should be excavated and backfilled with structural fill. Fill used to increase the elevation of the floor slab should meet requirements detailed in the Structural Fill section. Fill materials must be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. A free-draining granular mat should be provided below slabs-on-grade to provide drainage and a uniform and stable bearing surface. This should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and properly compacted. The mat should consist of a sand and gravel mixture, complying with Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) specifications for %-inch (Type 1) crushed aggregate. The granular mat should be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. A moisture-retarder should be placed beneath floor slabs to minimize potential ground moisture effects on moisture-sensitive floor coverings. The moisture-retarder should be at least 15-mil in thickness and have a permeance of less than 0.01 US perms as determined by ASTM E96. Placement of the moisture-retarder will require special consideration with regard to effects on the slab-on-grade and should adhere to recommendations outlined in the ACI 302.1 R and ASTM E1745 publications. Upon request, Atlas can provide further consultation regarding installation. Atlas No. B222117g Page112 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T��. 8. PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Atlas has made assumptions for traffic loading variables based on the character of the proposed construction. The Client shall review and understand these assumptions to make sure then reflect intended use and loading of pavements both now and in the future. Based on experience with soils in the region, a subgrade California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of 4 has been assumed for near-surface clayey and silty soils on site. The following are minimum thickness requirements for assured pavement function. Depending on site conditions, additional work, e.g. soil preparation, may be required to support construction equipment. These have been listed within the Soft Subgrade Soils section. 8.1 Flexible Pavement Sections The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) design method has been used to calculate the following pavement sections. Calculation sheets provided in the Appendix indicate the soils constant, traffic loading, traffic projections, and material constants used to calculate the pavement sections. Atlas recommends that materials used in the construction of asphaltic concrete pavements meet requirements of the ISPWC Standard Specification for Highway Construction. Construction of the pavement section should be in accordance with these specifications and should adhere to guidelines recommended in the section on Construction Considerations. Table 8 —AASHTO Flexible Pavement Specifications PW Pavement Section Component Wrilv`=wyays and Parking Driveways and Parkin 17 Light Duty Heavy Duty 91 Asphaltic Concrete 2.5 Inches 3.0 Inches Crushed Aggregate Base 4.0 Inches 4.0 Inches Structural Subbase 10.0 Inches 12.0 Inches Compacted Subgrade See Pavement Subgrade See Pavement Subgrade Preparation Section Preparation Section 'It will be required for Atlas personnel to verify subgrade competency at the time of construction. Asphaltic Concrete: Asphalt mix design shall meet the requirements of ISPWC, Section 810. Materials shall be placed in accordance with ISPWC Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Aggregate Base: Material complying with ISPWC Standards for Crushed Aggregate Materials. Structural Subbase: Granular structural fill material complying with the requirements detailed in the Structural Fill section of this report except that the maximum material diameter is no more than 2/3 the component thickness. Gradation and suitability requirements shall be per ISPWC Section 801, Table 1. Atlas No. B222117g Page113 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 8.2 Pavement Subgrade Preparation Uncontrolled fill, which contained debris, was encountered in portions of the site. Atlas recommends that these fill materials be removed to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade. If fill materials remain after excavation, all debris must be removed, and the exposed subgrade must be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM. Once final grades have been determined, Atlas is available to provide additional recommendations. It is noted that debris-containing fill materials will remain below the improved 2 foot zone (specified above) in portions of the site. If water or increased moisture conditions occur within these fill materials, settlement or vertical movement may occur. This risk must be recognized and accepted by the protect owner. Otherwise, complete removal of the fill zone will be required. 8.3 Common Pavement Section Construction Issues The subgrade upon which above pavement sections are to be constructed must be properly stripped, compacted (if indicated), inspected, and proof-rolled. Proof rolling of subgrade soils should be accomplished using a heavy rubber-tired, fully loaded, tandem-axle dump truck or equivalent. Verification of subgrade competence by Atlas personnel at the time of construction is required. Fill materials on the site must demonstrate the indicated compaction prior to placing material in support of the pavement section. Atlas anticipated that pavement areas will be subjected to moderate traffic. Subgrade clayey and silty soils near and above optimum moisture contents may pump during compaction. Pumping or soft areas must be removed and replaced with structural fill. Fill material and aggregates in support of the pavement section must be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 for flexible pavements and by ASTM D1557 for rigid pavements. If a material placed as a pavement section component cannot be tested by usual compaction testing methods, then compaction of that material must be approved by observed proof rolling. Minor deflections from proof rolling for flexible pavements are allowable. Deflections from proof rolling of rigid pavement support courses should not be visually detectable. Atlas recommends that rigid concrete pavement be provided for heavy garbage receptacles. This will eliminate damage caused by the considerable loading transferred through the small steel wheels onto asphaltic concrete. Rigid concrete pavement should consist of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP) generally adhering to ITD specifications for Urban Concrete. PCCP should be 6 inches thick on a 4-inch drainage fill course (see Floor Slab-on-Grade section), and should be reinforced with welded wire fabric. Control joints must be on 12-foot centers or less. Atlas No. B222117g Page114 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 9. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Recommendations in this report are based upon structural elements of the project being founded on competent, native lean clay with sand soils, silt with sand soils, poorly graded gravel with sand sediments, or compacted structural fill. Structural areas should be stripped to an elevation that exposes these soil types. 9.1 Earthwork Excessively organic soils, deleterious materials, or disturbed soils generally undergo high volume changes when subjected to loads, which is detrimental to subgrade behavior in the area of pavements, floor slabs, structural fills, and foundations. Grasses with associated root systems were noted at the time of our investigation. It is recommended that organic or disturbed soils, if encountered, be removed to depths of 1 foot (minimum), and wasted or stockpiled for later use. Stripping depths should be adjusted in the field to assure that the entire root zone or disturbed zone or topsoil are removed prior to placement and compaction of structural fill materials. Exact removal depths should be determined during grading operations by Atlas personnel, and should be based upon subgrade soil type, composition, and firmness or soil stability. If underground storage tanks, underground utilities, wells, or septic systems are discovered during construction activities, they must be decommissioned then removed or abandoned in accordance with governing Federal, State, and local agencies. Excavations developed as the result of such removal must be backfilled with structural fill materials as defined in the Structural Fill section. Atlas should oversee subgrade conditions (i.e., moisture content) as well as placement and compaction of new fill (if required) after native soils are excavated to design grade. Recommendations for structural fill presented in this report can be used to minimize volume changes and differential settlements that are detrimental to the behavior of footings, pavements, and floor slabs. Sufficient density tests should be performed to properly monitor compaction. For structural fill beneath building structures, one in-place density test per lift for every 5,000 square feet is recommended. In parking and driveway areas, this can be decreased to one test per lift for every 10,000 square feet. 9.2 Dry Weather If construction is to be conducted during dry seasonal conditions, many problems associated with soft soils may be avoided. However, some rutting of subgrade soils may be induced by shallow groundwater conditions related to springtime runoff or irrigation activities during late summer through early fall. Solutions to problems associated with soft subgrade soils are outlined in the Soft Subgrade Soils section. Problems may also arise because of lack of moisture in native and fill soils at time of placement. This will require the addition of water to achieve near-optimum moisture levels. Low-cohesion soils exposed in excavations may become friable, increasing chances of sloughing or caving. Measures to control excessive dust should be considered as part of the overall health and safety management plan. Atlas No. B222117g Page115 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T_�. 9.3 Wet Weather If construction is to be conducted during wet seasonal conditions (commonly from mid-November through May), problems associated with soft soils must be considered as part of the construction plan. During this time of year, fine-grained soils such as silts and clays will become unstable with increased moisture content, and eventually deform or rut. Additionally, constant low temperatures reduce the possibility of drying soils to near optimum conditions. 9.4 Soft Subgrade Soils Shallow fine-grained subgrade soils that are high in moisture content should be expected to pump and rut under construction traffic. During periods of wet weather, construction may become very difficult if not impossible. The following recommendations and options have been included for dealing with soft subgrade conditions: • Track-mounted vehicles should be used to strip the subgrade of root matter and other deleterious debris. Heavy rubber-tired equipment should be prohibited from operating directly on the native subgrade and areas in which structural fill materials have been placed. Construction traffic should be restricted to designated roadways that do not cross, or cross on a limited basis, proposed roadway or parking areas. • Soft areas can be over-excavated and replaced with granular structural fill. • Construction roadways on soft subgrade soils should consist of a minimum 2-foot thickness of large cobbles of 4 to 6 inches in diameter with sufficient sand and fines to fill voids. Construction entrances should consist of a 6-inch thickness of clean, 2-inch minimum, angular drain-rock and must be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 30 to 50 feet long. During the construction process, top dressing of the entrance may be required for maintenance. • Scarification and aeration of subgrade soils can be employed to reduce the moisture content of wet subgrade soils. After stripping is complete, the exposed subgrade should be ripped or disked to a depth of 1'/2 feet and allowed to air dry for 2 to 4 weeks. Further disking should be performed on a weekly basis to aid the aeration process. • Alternative soil stabilization methods include use of geotextiles, lime, and cement stabilization. Atlas is available to provide recommendations and guidelines at your request. 9.5 Frozen Subgrade Soils Prior to placement of structural fill materials or foundation elements, frozen subgrade soils must either be allowed to thaw or be stripped to depths that expose non-frozen soils and wasted or stockpiled for later use. Stockpiled materials must be allowed to thaw and return to near-optimal conditions prior to use as structural fill. Atlas No. B222117g Page116 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants The onsite, shallow clayey and silty soils are susceptible to frost heave during freezing temperatures. For exterior flatwork and other structural elements, adequate drainage away from subgrades is critical. Compaction and use of structural fill will also help to mitigate the potential for frost heave. Complete removal of frost susceptible soils for the full frost depth, followed by replacement with a non-frost susceptible structural fill, can also be used to mitigate the potential for frost heave. Atlas is available to provide further guidance/assistance upon request. 9.6 Structural Fill Soils recommended for use as structural fill are those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (ASTM D2487). Use of silty soils (USCS designation of GM, SM, and ML) as structural fill may be acceptable. However, use of silty soils (GM, SM, and ML) as structural fill below footings is prohibited. These materials require very high moisture contents for compaction and require a long time to dry out if natural moisture contents are too high and may also be susceptible to frost heave under certain conditions. Therefore, these materials can be quite difficult to work with as moisture content, lift thickness, and compactive effort becomes difficult to control. If silty soil is used for structural fill, lift thicknesses should not exceed 6 inches (loose), and fill material moisture must be closely monitored at both the working elevation and the elevations of materials already placed. Following placement, silty soils must be protected from degradation resulting from construction traffic or subsequent construction. Recommended granular structural fill materials, those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP, should consist of a 6-inch minus select, clean, granular soil with no more than 50 percent oversize (greater than %-inch) material and no more than 12 percent fines (passing No. 200 sieve). These fill materials should be placed in layers not to exceed 12 inches in loose thickness. Prior to placement of structural fill materials, surfaces must be prepared as outlined in the Construction Considerations section. Structural fill material should be moisture-conditioned to achieve optimum moisture content prior to compaction. For structural fill below footings, areas of compacted backfill must extend outside the perimeter of the footings for a distance equal to the thickness of fill between the bottom of foundation and underlying soils, or 5 feet, whichever is less. All fill materials must be monitored during placement and tested to confirm compaction requirements, outlined below, have been achieved. Each layer of structural fill must be compacted, as outlined below: • Below Structures and Rigid Pavements: A minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. • Below Flexible Pavements: A minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 or 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. Atlas No. B222117g Page117 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants The ASTM D1557 test method must be used for samples containing up to 40 percent oversize (greater than%-inch) particles. If material contains more than 40 percent but less than 50 percent oversize particles, compaction of fill must be confirmed by proof rolling each lift with a 10-ton vibratory roller(or equivalent) until the maximum density has been achieved. Density testing must be performed after each proof rolling pass until the in-place density test results indicate a drop (or no increase) in the dry density, defined as maximum density or"break over" point. The number of required passes should be used as the requirements on the remainder of fill placement. Material should contain sufficient fines to fill void spaces, and must not contain more than 50 percent oversize particles. 9.7 Backfill of Walls Backfill materials must conform to the requirements of structural fill, as defined in this report. For wall heights greater than 2.5 feet, the maximum material size should not exceed 4 inches in diameter. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces interferes with proper compaction, and can induce excessive point loads on walls. Backfill shall not commence until the wall has gained sufficient strength to resist placement and compaction forces. Further, retaining walls above 2.5 feet in height shall be backfilled in a manner that will limit the potential for damage from compaction methods and/or equipment. It is recommended that only small hand-operated compaction equipment be used for compaction of backfill within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall, measured from the back face of the wall. Backfill should be compacted in accordance with the specifications for structural fill, except in those areas where it is determined that future settlement is not a concern, such as planter areas. In nonstructural areas, backfill must be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. 9.8 Excavations Shallow excavations that do not exceed 4 feet in depth may be constructed with side slopes approaching vertical. Below this depth, it is recommended that slopes be constructed in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, Section 1926, Subpart P. Based on these regulations, on-site soils are classified as type "C" soil, and as such, excavations within these soils should be constructed at a maximum slope of 1'/2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (11/2:1) for excavations up to 20 feet in height. Excavations in excess of 20 feet will require additional analysis. Note that these slope angles are considered stable for short-term conditions only, and will not be stable for long-term conditions. During the subsurface exploration, test pit sidewalls generally exhibited little indication of collapse; however, sloughing of native granular sediments from test pit sidewalls was observed. For deep excavations, native granular sediments cannot be expected to remain in position. These materials are prone to failure and may collapse, thereby undermining upper soil layers. This is especially true when excavations approach depths near the water table. Care must be taken to ensure that excavations are properly backfilled in accordance with procedures outlined in this report. Atlas No. B222117g Page118 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 9.9 Groundwater Control Groundwater was not encountered during the investigation and is anticipated to be below the depth of most construction. Special precautions may be required for control of surface runoff and subsurface seepage. It is recommended that runoff be directed away from open excavations. Silty and clayey soils may become soft and pump if subjected to excessive traffic during time of surface runoff. Ponded water in construction areas should be drained through methods such as trenching, sloping, crowning grades, nightly smooth drum rolling, or installing a French drain system. Additionally, temporary or permanent driveway sections should be constructed if extended wet weather is forecasted. 10. GENERAL COMMENTS Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during this investigation and available information regarding the proposed development, the site is adequate for the planned construction. When plans and specifications are complete, consultation with Atlas must be arranged as supplementary recommendations may be required. Suitability of subgrade soils and compaction of structural fill materials must be verified by Atlas personnel prior to placement of structural elements. Additionally, monitoring and testing should be performed to verify that suitable materials are used for structural fill and that proper placement and compaction techniques are utilized. Atlas No. B222117g Page119 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants 11. REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO)(1993). AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993. Washington D.C.: AASHTO. American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2015). Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction: ACI 302.1 R. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI. American Society of Civil Engineers (2021). ASCE 7 Hazards Tool: Web Interface [Online] Available: <https://asce7hazardtool.online/> (2021). American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2013). Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures: ASCE/SEI 7-16. Reston, VA: ASCE. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2017). Standard Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-um (No. 200) Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washing: ASTM C117. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2014). Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates: ASTM C136. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2012). Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort: ASTM D698. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2012). Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort: ASTM D1557. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2014). Standard Test Methods for California Bearing Ratio: ASTM D1883. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2017). Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes(Unified Soil Classification System):ASTM D2487.West Conshohocken, PA:ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2017). Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils: ASTM D4318. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2011). Standard Specification for Plastic Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Soil or Granular Fill Under Concrete Slabs: ASTM E1745. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. Desert Research Institute.Western Regional Climate Center. [Online]Available: <http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/> (2021). International Building Code Council (2018). International Building Code, 2018. Country Club Hills, IL: Author. Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) (2017). Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction, 2017. Boise, ID: Author. Othberg, K. L. and Stanford, L. A., Idaho Geologic Society (1993). Geologic Map of the Boise Valley and Adjoining Area, Western Snake River Plain, Idaho. (scale 1:100,000). Boise, ID: Joslyn and Morris. U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. CFR 29, Part 1926, Subpart P: Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, Excavations (1986). [Online] Available: <www.osha.gov> (2021). Atlas No. B222117g Page120 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Appendix I WARRANTY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS Atlas warrants that findings and conclusions contained herein have been formulated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of foundation engineering, soil mechanics, and engineering geology only for the site and project described in this report. These engineering methods have been developed to provide the client with information regarding apparent or potential engineering conditions relating to the site within the scope cited above and are necessarily limited to conditions observed at the time of the site visit and research. Field observations and research reported herein are considered sufficient in detail and scope to form a reasonable basis for the purposes cited above. Exclusive Use This report was prepared for exclusive use of the property owner(s), at the time of the report, and their retained design consultants ("Client"). Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the agreed-upon scope of work outlined in this report together with the Contract for Professional Services between the Client and Atlas Technical Consultants ("Consultant"). Use or misuse of this report, or reliance upon findings hereof, by parties other than the Client is at their own risk. Neither Client nor Consultant make representation of warranty to such other parties as to accuracy or completeness of this report or suitability of its use by such other parties for purposes whatsoever, known or unknown, to Client or Consultant. Neither Client nor Consultant shall have liability to indemnify or hold harmless third parties for losses incurred by actual or purported use or misuse of this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed. Report Recommendations are Limited and Subject to Misinterpretation There is a distinct possibility that conditions may exist that could not be identified within the scope of the investigation or that were not apparent during our site investigation. Findings of this report are limited to data collected from noted explorations advanced and do not account for unidentified fill zones, unsuitable soil types or conditions, and variability in soil moisture and groundwater conditions. To avoid possible misinterpretations of findings, conclusions, and implications of this report, Atlas should be retained to explain the report contents to other design professionals as well as construction professionals. Since actual subsurface conditions on the site can only be verified by earthwork, note that construction recommendations are based on general assumptions from selective observations and selective field exploratory sampling. Upon commencement of construction, such conditions may be identified that require corrective actions, and these required corrective actions may impact the project budget. Therefore, construction recommendations in this report should be considered preliminary, and Atlas should be retained to observe actual subsurface conditions during earthwork construction activities to provide additional construction recommendations as needed. Atlas No. B222117g Page 121 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Since geotechnical reports are subject to misinterpretation, do not separate the soil logs from the report. Rather, provide a copy of, or authorize for their use, the complete report to other design professionals or contractors. Locations of exploratory sites referenced within this report should be considered approximate locations only. For more accurate locations, services of a professional land surveyor are recommended. This report is also limited to information available at the time it was prepared. In the event additional information is provided to Atlas following publication of our report, it will be forwarded to the client for evaluation in the form received. Environmental Concerns Comments in this report concerning either onsite conditions or observations, including soil appearances and odors, are provided as general information. These comments are not intended to describe, quantify, or evaluate environmental concerns or situations. Since personnel, skills, procedures, standards, and equipment differ, a geotechnical investigation report is not intended to substitute for a geoenviron mental investigation or a Phase II/III Environmental Site Assessment. If environmental services are needed, Atlas can provide, via a separate contract, those personnel who are trained to investigate and delineate soil and water contamination. Atlas No. B222117g Page 122 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Vicinity Map Figure 1 MAP NOTES: WV�ka,"v.�7 tRrChnyfckessn^`h N •Not to Scale pretkn a• �+ irle•r C.eM-ar nnesia� d. x LEGEND Yt�Y 1�r■9�0�;� �j 'i°e Approximate Site Location eibier x W�rd`4 CL x'SandYr' S��Dr u � Site Location H`+AuFvrn�IRII y 4 h W ,h:• SMSugrrpen]'Dr � a o � x H A!wde OF f+nA 2 W r svye.E�x •ksydc,CvNU,, ti + �q h t a i K Sy Fox 51 N 0 x � e �'rMe14 L� rY Cadbyry d' F � xsti---W Chinden Shrd U 20 W Chinden Blvd x E Chinden Blvd z f W E-f-I to .�, A 80Ldder 6w Or W tunny Cave St a z ar St �mAfpR iahyaz A W 5wa Te=n OF .fie lH C g ,x piraFt Q . ..� W 7wsw cm D+ �l` N n w Elestin OF ERj*CdLnr.OF 4'P 4 P r W Lost Rapids D' ar-1 W Glaeree d Ck Se 2 IV Ba�R SI = I � Q w Woy Ra g x Wearrn an D Fy d C A '0 �7ery Calk DF = W C,y °ryf -Pr +� E%gund-sl S O rn a•Jp g W k'Hrl[h[ork SF wk �F z f Can PMrn _ [aruae Ce.k 9r OP ie V W Anatole D+ W A eF SF Q3xk Cent Or C a.6 E Giant w Roo Creek SI s °i Z W Gdar GRWIP S ry Q �+' E Nashua T i w Coda Gmve S: Go yk § y °�� A W Diuh Crft Dr eeiRl•r=► Cortland at the Orchard : �w n�wia rra..k ctj W Dkide[rcea SI w Amu se 4 907&991 West Chinden Boulevard W wqw p r E Ensan+'° Meridian,ID 2 i ee W D-,C—A It Ws E sa b Mrrato a W Kelly Crk Dr Q WLaughfoa Dr Q = Modified b CCW w"pgar[FeekOF September 27,2022 21 5 '_+�• W Ra —k 5t s z Drawing:B222117g x temp Cena4 W McWft n Rd - _ --� z W MFMd4r Rd Lemp C.anal 4 7AcMillan 11d— w MA-0 W W t avaw F,db SF E H--Fallz St y d hr 5 W quinrah 4 N Sije+M St E Coppe•R,dge Si T . IL y °b N 9 g pie rlpud Way ee W Pd rv�s Spri Sr n W W Scr z H'Anonta•a N x r Wturn Falls pr E 3 lA'Ta—m S! W Hmrtr Sands D+ w elk a,.yMea W ar w w Eorena St 3 E Red Rock Or2791 S.Victory View Way Phone: (208)376-4748 '4 yr While Sandi DF x x Boise,ID 83709 Fax: (208)322-6515 E Har pis S� W,, w Oren aa,in or � „m`! � Web: oneatlas.com Site Map Figure 2 NOTES: __ •Not to Scale =1 = R 711ir�. r�.cs _ CHINDEN BOUEEL LEVARD ��►�t -r LEGEND - - � � T -•, ._.- + Approximate Site ��• _. _ �...�.r� Boundary TP-8 L j TP-6 _ '�*• Approximate Atlas Test m Pit Location 8 i� a TP 4 TP-7 TP-3 . ! TP-9 ` 1V TP-10 TP-11 *. TP-5 TP-12 al TP-2 4iT ❑� TP-14 a — � TP 15 TP-13 ❑ �❑ 'J TP 16 TP-17 TP-24 •�, 8 Y m TP-19 TP-21 - ® w T: TP-18 Cortland at the Orchard TP 23 ' 907&991 West Chinden Boulevard ' TP-22 TP-20 Meridian,ID Modified by:CCW September 27,2022 Drawing:B222117g ORCHARD PARK DRIVE n 2791 S.Victory View Way Phone: (208)376-4748 - ► Boise,ID 83709 Fax: (208)322-6515 Web: oneatlas.com Appendix IV GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-1 Latitude: 43.661630 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406472 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 15.2 feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil • .$) Sediment Classification • bgs) QP Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.8 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-2.75 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 1.8-5.1 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 5.1-15.2 brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. B222117g Page125 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-2 Latitude: 43.661672 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405708 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 8.2 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.9 slightly moist, medium stiff to stiff, with fine- 1.0-1.75 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.4 foot bgs. Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff to 1.9-6.7 hard, with fine to medium-grained sand. --Intermittent weak cementation encountered throughout. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to 6 7 8 2 dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. --Some silt content noted from 6.7 to 7.5 feet bgs. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 126 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-3 Latitude: 43.662096 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405570 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 7.9 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.1 slightly moist, stiff, with fine-grained sand. 1.5 --Organics noted to 0.5 foot bgs. 2.1-4.8 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very 1.5-3.5 stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to 4 8-7 9 dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. --Some silt content noted from 4.8 to 6.0 feet bgs. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 127 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-4 Latitude: 43.662198 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405166 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 15.4 feet bgs Depth Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Sandy Lean Clay Fill (CL-FILL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.5 slightly moist, medium stiff to stiff, with fine to 1.0-1.5 medium-grained sand. --Organics noted to 1.0 foot bgs. 2.5-4.8 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 4.8-15.4 brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 128 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-5 Latitude: 43.661775 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405313 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 7.9 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.2 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-3.0 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.5 foot bgs. 2.2-5.4 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 5.4-7.9 brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 129 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-6 Latitude: 43.662385 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404804 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 9.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): Brown, 0.0-1.9 dry, medium dense, with fine to coarse- grained sad and fine to coarse gravel. 1.9-4.7 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.7-9.1 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 130 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-7 Latitude: 43.662152 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404608 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.5 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): Brown, 0.0-1.8 dry, medium dense, with fine to coarse- grained sad and fine to coarse gravel. 1.8-3.2 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 3.2-6.5 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 131 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-8 Latitude: 43.662416 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404054 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 15.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): Brown, 0.0-1.5 dry, medium dense, with fine to coarse- grained sad and fine to coarse gravel. 1.5-4.8 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to 4.8-15.1 coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. --Some silt content noted from 4.8 to 5.8 feet bgs. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 132 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-9 Latitude: 43.662073 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404041 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.8 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.3 slightly moist, medium stiff to very stiff, with 1.0-3.5 fine-grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.5 foot bgs. 2.3-4.4 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.4-6.8 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 133 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-10 Latitude: 43.661960 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404956 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 9.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.5 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-3.25 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.4 foot bgs. 1.5-6.5 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, stiff to very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 6.5-9.1 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 134 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-11 Latitude: 43.661807 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405328 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 15.2 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.7 slightly moist, medium stiff to very stiff, with 1.0-3.5 fine-grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.4 foot bgs. 1.7-5.7 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 5.7-15.2 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 135 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-12 Latitude: 43.661761 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404129 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 7.4 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): Brown, 0.0-2.2 dry, medium dense, with fine to coarse- grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. 2 2 4 2 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 4.2-7.4 brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. B222117g Page 136 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-13 Latitude: 43.661476 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404127 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 12.5 feet bgs Depth ield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab ••s)�A Sediment Classification • bgs) Test ID Sandy Lean Clay Fill (CL-FILL): Dark brown to brown, slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine 0.0-2.2 to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse 1.5-2.0 gravel. --Organic debris noted from 1.0 to 2.2 feet bgs. 2.2-3.0 Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, slightly GS 2.5-3.0 A moist, very stiff, with fine-grained sand. 3.0-6.3 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 6.3-12.5 brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Infiltration testing conducted at a depth of 12.5 feet bgs. Passing)Lab Test ID • 1 #40 #100 A 14.5 33 14 100 99 96 92 85.8 Atlas No. 13222117g Page 137 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-14 Latitude: 43.661529 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404725 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 9.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): Brown, 0.0-2.8 dry, medium dense, with fine to coarse- grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, slightly 2.8-4.5 moist, stiff, with fine-grained sand. GS 1.7-2.2 B --Organics noted from 2.8 to 3.8 feet bgs. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine 4.5-9.1 to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. --Some silt content noted from 4.5 to 6.5 feet bgs. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. • • Test ID Moisture LL _,M� Sieve B 17.0 31 13 100 99 93 88 83.8 Atlas No. 13222117g Page 138 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-15 Latitude: 43.661450 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405259 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 10.2 feet bgs Depth Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Sandy Lean Clay Fill (CL-FILL): Brown, dry to 0.0-3.2 slightly moist, very stiff, with fine to coarse- 2.5 grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. --Organic debris noted from 2.7 to 3.2 feet bgs. 3.2-6.7 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 6.7-10.2 brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Infiltration testing conducted at a depth of 10.2 feet bgs. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 139 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TF Test Pit Log #: TP-16 Latitude: 43.661192 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405213 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 14.9 feet bgs V. Depth eld Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth a .. bgs) rTe tsl e . Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.9 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-2.0 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 1.9-4.2 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.2-14.9 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 8-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page140 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TF Test Pit Log #: TP-17 Latitude: 43.661211 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.404794 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.8 feet bgs V. Depth eld Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth L IS .. .. e . Test Sandy Lean Clay Fill (CL-FILL): Brown, 0.0-2.1 slightly moist, very stiff, with fine to coarse- grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, hard, with fine 2.1-4.3 to medium-grained sand. --Intermittent weak cementation encountered throughout. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 4.3-6.8 brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 141 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-18 Latitude: 43.660819 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405381 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.9 feet bgs Depth ield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab �AL•• • • • bgs) Test ID ON. Mmmmmim Sandy Lean Clay Fill (CL-FILL): Brown, 0.0-0.5 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. --Organics noted throughout. Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.5-1.6 slightly moist, medium stiff to stiff, with fine- 1.0-1.5 grained sand. 1.6-4.5 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.5-6.9 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page142 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-19 Latitude: 43.660975 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405549 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 7.8 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 1..25- 0.0-2.4 slightly moist, stiff, with fine-grained sand. 1.75 --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 2.4-4.2 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4 2 7 8 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page143 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-20 Latitude: 43.660676 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.405697 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.8 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.0 slightly moist, medium stiff to very stiff, with 1.0-3.0 fine-grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.5 foot bgs. 2.0-4.6 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.6-6.8 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page 144 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-21 Latitude: 43.660885 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406225 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 7.6 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.4 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-3.0 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.7 foot bgs. Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff to 1.4-5.7 hard, with fine to medium-grained sand. GS 3.1-3.6 C --Weak to moderate cementation encountered from 4.0 to 5.7 feet bgs. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 5.7-7.6 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. • Test ID Moisture LL dMIS& Sieve Analysis (% Passing) C 10.5 NP NP 97 95 89 81 73.8 Atlas No. 13222117g Page145 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TF Test Pit Log #: TP-22 Latitude: 43.660671 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406352 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 8.4 feet bgs V. Depth eld Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth .. .. it e . Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.2 slightly moist, medium stiff to stiff, with fine- 1.0-1.5 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.5 foot bgs. Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, hard, with fine 2.2-6.4 to medium-grained sand. --Weak cementation encountered throughout. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 6.4-8.4 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Infiltration testing conducted at a depth of 8.4 feet bgs. Atlas No. 13222117g Page146 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-23 Latitude: 43.660760 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406836 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 15.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.5 slightly moist, medium stiff to very stiff, with GS 2.0-2.5 1.0-3.0 D fine-grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 2.5-6.6 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 6.6-15.1 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 8-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. D 12.2 30 11 100 100 97 92 85.2 Atlas No. 13222117g Page147 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-24 Latitude: 43.661099 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406373 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 6.5 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-2.4 slightly moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine- 1.5-3.5 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 2.4-4.6 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 4.6-6.5 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page148 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7T�1 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-25 Latitude: 43.661570 Date Advanced: September 20, 2022 Longitude: -116.406892 Excavated by: Turn of the Century Homes Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Logged by: Mason Allen Total Depth: 8.1 feet bgs Depth .,Eield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab •• Jiment Classification • bgs) Test ID Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Brown, dry to 0.0-1.7 slightly moist, medium stiff to stiff, with fine- 1.0-1.75 grained sand. --Organics noted to 0.6 foot bgs. 1.7-5.1 Silt with Sand (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff, with fine to medium-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown, 5.1-8.1 dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch minus cobbles. Notes:See Site Map for test pit location. Atlas No. 13222117g Page149 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants �TrT-G7Tdr-W1 Appendix V GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES Unified Soil Classification System Major Divisions Symbol Soil Descriptions Gravel & GW Well-graded ravels; ravel/sand mixtures with little or no fines Coarse- Gravelly Soils GP Poorl - raded ravels; ravel/sand mixtures with little or no fines Grained < 50% GM Silty gravels; poorly-graded ravel/sand/silt mixtures Soils < coarse GC Clayey gravels; poorly-graded gravel/sand/clay mixtures 50% Sand & Sandy SW Well-graded sands; gravelly sands with little or no fines passes Soils > 50% SP Poorl - raded sands; gravelly sands with little or no fines No.200 coarse SM Silty sands; poorly-graded sand/gravel/silt mixtures sieve fraction Sc Clayey sands; poorly-graded sand/gravel/clay mixtures Fine- ML Inorganic silts; sandy, gravellyor clayey silts Grained Silts & Clays CL Lean clays; inorganic, gravelly, sandy, or silty, low to medium- Soils > LL < 50 plasticity clays 50% OL Organic, low-plasticity clays and silts passes MH Inorganic, elastic silts; sand ravel) or clayey elastic silts No.200 Silts &Clays CH Fat clays high-plasticity, inorganic clays sieve LL > 50 OH Organic, medium to high-plasticity clays and silts Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, humus, h dric soils with high organic content Relative Density • Consistency • • and Cementation • • Coarse-Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N Description Field Test VeryLoose: <4 Dr Absence of moisture, dryto touch Loose: 4-10 Slightly Moist Damp, but no visible moisture Medium Dense: 10-30 Moist Visible moisture Dense: 30-50 Wet Visible free water VeryDense: >50 Saturated Soil is usual) below water table Fine-Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N Description Field Test Very Soft: <2 Weak Crumbles or breaks with handling or Soft: 2-4 slight finger pressure Medium Stiff: 4-8 Moderate Crumbles or breaks with Stiff: 8-15 considerable finger pressure Very Stiff: 15-30 Strong Will not crumble or break with finger Hard: >30 pressure Particle Size& ]�� Acronym List Boulders: > 12 in. GS grab sample Cobbles: 12 to 3 in. LL Liquid Limit Gravel: 3 in. to 5 mm M moisture content Coarse-Grained Sand: 5 to 0.6 mm NP non-plastic Medium-Grained Sand: 0.6 to 0.2 mm PI Plasticity Index Fine-Grained Sand: 0.2 to 0.075 mm Qp penetrometer value, unconfined compressive Silts: 0.075 to 0.005 mm strength, tsf Clays: < 0.005 mm V vane value, ultimate shearing strength, tsf Atlas No. B222117g Page 150 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants Appendix VI AASHTO PAVEMENT DESIGN Pavement Section Design Location: Cortland at the Orchard, Light Duty Average Daily Traffic Count: 500 All Lanes&Both Directions Design Life: 20 Years Percent of Traffic in Design Lane: 50% Terminal Seviceability Index(Pt): 2.5 Level of Reliability: 95 Subgrade CBRValue: 4 Subgrade Mr: 6,000 Calculation of Design-18 kip ESALs Daily Growth Load Design Traffic Rate Factors ESALs Passenger Cars: 227 2.0% 0.0008 1,611 Buses: 0 2.0% 0.6806 0 Panel&Pickup Trucks: 20 2.0% 0.0122 2,164 2-Axle,6-Tire Trucks: 2 2.0% 0.1890 3,352 Emergency Vehicles: 1.0 2.0% 4.4800 39,731 Dump Trucks: 0 2.0% 3.6300 0 Tractor Semi Trailer Trucks: 0 2.0% 2.3719 0 Double Trailer Trucks 0 2.0% 2.3187 0 Heavy Tractor Trailer Combo Trucks: 0 2.0% 2.9760 0 Average Daily Traffic in Design Lane: 250 Total Design Life 18-kip ESALs: 46,858 Actual Log(ESALs): 4.671 Trial SN: 2.61 Trial Log(ESALs): 4.862 Pavement Section Design SN: 2.61 Design Depth Structural Drainage Inches Coefficient Coefficient Asphaltic Concrete: 2.50 0.42 n/a Asphalt-Treated Base: 0.00 0.25 n/a Cement-Treated Base: 0.00 0.17 n/a Crushed Aggregate Base: 4.00 0.14 1.0 Subbase: 10.00 0.10 1.0 Special Aggregate Subgrade: 0.00 0.09 0.9 Atlas No. B222117g Page 151 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants AASHTO PAVEMENT DESIGN Pavement Section Design Location: Cortland at the Orchard, Heavy Duty Average Daily Traffic Count: 500 All Lanes&Both Directions Design Life: 20 Years Percent of Traffic in Design Lane: 50% Terminal Seviceability Index(Pt): 2.5 Level of Reliability: 95 Subgrade CBRValue: 4 Subgrade Mr: 6,000 Calculation of Design-18 kip ESALs Daily Growth Load Design Traffic Rate Factors ESALs Passenger Cars: 196 2.0% 0.0008 1,391 Buses: 0 2.0% 0.6806 0 Panel&Pickup Trucks: 40 2.0% 0.0122 4,328 2-Axle,6-Tire Trucks: 10 2.0% 0.1890 16,762 Emergency Vehicles: 1.0 2.0% 4.4800 39,731 Dump Trucks: 1 2.0% 3.6300 32,193 Tractor Semi Trailer Trucks: 1 2.0% 2.3719 21,035 Double Trailer Trucks 1 2.0% 2.3187 20,563 Heavy Tractor Trailer Combo Trucks: 0 2.0% 2.9760 0 Average Daily Traffic in Design Lane: 250 Total Design Life 18-kip ESALs: 136,003 Actual Log(ESALs): 5.134 Trial SN: 3.01 Trial Log(ESALs): 5.235 Pavement Section Design SN: 3.02 Design Depth Structural Drainage Inches Coefficient Coefficient Asphaltic Concrete: 3.00 0.42 n/a Asphalt-Treated Base: 0.00 0.25 n/a Cement-Treated Base: 0.00 0.17 n/a Crushed Aggregate Base: 4.00 0.14 1.0 Subbase: 12.00 0.10 1.0 Special Aggregate Subgrade: 0.00 0.09 0.9 Atlas No. B222117g Page 152 Copyright©2022 Atlas Technical Consultants IMPOPIOnt InfOPM81100 Rhout ■ GeolechnicalmEngineeping Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help. The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) will not likely meet the needs of a civil-works constructor or even a has prepared this advisory to help you—assumedly different civil engineer.Because each geotechnical-engineering study a client representative—interpret and apply this is unique,each geotechnical-engineering report is unique,prepared geotechnical-engineering report as effectively as solely for the client. possible. In that way, you can benefit from a lowered Likewise,geotechnical-engineering services are performed for a specific exposure to problems associated with subsurface project and purpose.For example,it is unlikely that a geotechnical- conditions at project sites and development of engineering study for a refrigerated warehouse will be the same as them that,for decades, have been a principal cause one prepared for a parking garage;and a few borings drilled during of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, a preliminary study to evaluate site feasibility will not be adequate to and disputes. If you have questions or want more develop geotechnical design recommendations for the project. information about any of the issues discussed herein, contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer. Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it: Active engagement in GBA exposes geotechnical • for a different client; engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation • for a different project or purpose; techniques that can be of genuine benefit for • for a different site(that may or may not include all or a portion of everyone involved with a construction project. the original site);or before important events occurred at the site or adjacent to it; e.g.,man-made events like construction or environmental Understand the Geotechnical-Engineering Services remediation,or natural events like floods,droughts,earthquakes, Provided for this Report or groundwater fluctuations. Geotechnical-engineering services typically include the planning, collection,interpretation,and analysis of exploratory data from Note,too,the reliability of a geotechnical-engineering report can widely spaced borings and/or test pits.Field data are combined be affected by the passage of time,because of factors like changed with results from laboratory tests of soil and rock samples obtained subsurface conditions;new or modified codes,standards,or from field exploration(if applicable),observations made during site regulations;or new techniques or tools.If you are the least bit uncertain reconnaissance,and historical information to form one or more models about the continued reliability of this report,contact your geotechnical of the expected subsurface conditions beneath the site.Local geology engineer before applying the recommendations in it.A minor amount and alterations of the site surface and subsurface by previous and of additional testing or analysis after the passage of time-if any is proposed construction are also important considerations.Geotechnical required at all-could prevent major problems. engineers apply their engineering training,experience,and judgment to adapt the requirements of the prospective project to the subsurface Read this Report in Full model(s). Estimates are made of the subsurface conditions that Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical- will likely be exposed during construction as well as the expected engineering report did not read the report in its entirety.Do not rely on performance of foundations and other structures being planned and/or an executive summary.Do not read selective elements only.Read and affected by construction activities. refer to the report in full. The culmination of these geotechnical-engineering services is typically a You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer geotechnical-engineering report providing the data obtained,a discussion About Change of the subsurface model(s),the engineering and geologic engineering Your geotechnical engineer considered unique,project-specific factors assessments and analyses made,and the recommendations developed when developing the scope of study behind this report and developing to satisfy the given requirements of the project.These reports may be the confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys. titled investigations,explorations,studies,assessments,or evaluations. Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include Regardless of the title used,the geotechnical-engineering report is an those that affect: engineering interpretation of the subsurface conditions within the context - the site's size or shape; of the project and does not represent a close examination,systematic inquiry,or thorough investigation of all site and subsurface conditions. the elevation,configuration,location,orientation, function or weight of the proposed structure and Geotechnical-Engineering Services are Performed the desired performance criteria; the composition of the design team;or for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects, . project ownership. and At Specific Times Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific As a general rule,always inform your geotechnical engineer of project needs,goals,and risk management preferences of their clients.A or site changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer impact.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical conspicuously that you've included the material for information purposes engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise only.To avoid misunderstanding,you may also want to note that would have considered. "informational purposes"means constructors have no right to rely on the interpretations,opinions,conclusions,or recommendations in the Most Of the "Findings" Related in This Report report.Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific Are Professional Opinions project requirements,including options selected from the report,only Before construction begins,geotechnical engineers explore a site's from the design drawings and specifications.Remind constructors subsurface using various sampling and testing procedures.Geotechnical that they may perform their own studies if they want to,and be sure to engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific allow enough time to permit them to do so.Only then might you be in locations where sampling and testing is performed.The data derived from a position to give constructors the information available to you,while that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities who then applied professional judgement to form opinions about stemming from unanticipated conditions.Conducting prebid and subsurface conditions throughout the site.Actual sitewide-subsurface preconstruction conferences can also be valuable in this respect. conditions may differ-maybe significantly-from those indicated in this report.Confront that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer Read Responsibility Provisions Closely to serve on the design team through project completion to obtain Some client representatives,design professionals,and constructors do informed guidance quickly,whenever needed. not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines.This happens in part because soil and rock on This Report's Recommendations Are project sites are typically heterogeneous and not manufactured materials Confirmation-Dependent with well-defined engineering properties like steel and concrete.That The recommendations included in this report-including any options or lack of understanding has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have alternatives-are confirmation-dependent.In other words,they are not resulted in disappointments,delays,cost overruns,claims,and disputes. final,because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily TO confront that risk,geotechnical engineers commonly include on judgement and opinion to do so.Your geotechnical engineer can finalize explanatory provisions in their reports.Sometimes labeled"limitations,' the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' exposed during construction.If through observation your geotechnical responsibilities begin and end,to help others recognize their own engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, responsibilities and risks.Read these provisions closely.Ask questions. the recommendations can be relied upon,assuming no other changes have Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. occurred.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume responsibility or liabilityfor confirmation-dependent recommendations fyou Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation. The personnel,equipment,and techniques used to perform an environmental study-e.g.,a"phase-one"or"phase-two"enviromnental This Report Could Be Misinterpreted site assessment-differ significantly from those used to perform a Other design professionals'misinterpretation of geotechnical- geotechnical-engineering study.For that reason,a geotechnical-engineering engineering reports has resulted in costly problems.Confront that risk report does not usually provide environmental findings,conclusions,or by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a continuing member of recommendations;e.g.,about the likelihood of encountering underground the design team,to: storage tanks or regulated contaminants.Unanticipated subsurface • confer with other design-team members; environmental problems have led to project failures.If you have not • help develop specifications; obtained your own environmental information about the project site, review pertinent elements of other design professionals'plans and ask your geotechnical consultant for a recommendation on how to find specifications;and environmental risk-management guidance. • be available whenever geotechnical-engineering guidance is needed. Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this Moisture Infiltration and Mold report.Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater, prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction- water infiltration,or similar issues in this report,the engineer's phase observations. services were not designed,conducted,or intended to prevent migration of moisture-including water vapor-from the soil Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance through building slabs and walls and into the building interior,where Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift it can cause mold growth and material-performance deficiencies. unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting Accordingly,proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's the information they provide for bid preparation.To help prevent recommendations will not of itself be sufficient to prevent the costly,contentious problems this practice has caused,include the moisture infiltration.Confront the risk of moisture infiltration by complete geotechnical-engineering report,along with any attachments including building-envelope or mold specialists on the design team. or appendices,with your contract documents,but be certain to note Geotechnical engineers are not building-envelope or mold specialists. GEOPROFESSIONAL BUSINESS SEA ASSOCIATION Telephone:301/565-2733 e-mail:info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org Copyright 2019 by Geoprofessional Business Association(GBA).Duplication,reproduction,or copying of this document,in whole or in part,by any means whatsoever,is strictly prohibited,except with GBAs specific written permission.Excerpting,quoting,or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA,and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review.Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any kind. Any other firm,individual,or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent or intentional(fraudulent)misrepresentation.