PZ - Geotechnical Evaluation GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR
" B & L TREETOP " —
1 12 + ACRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED
LOCATED WEST OF S LINDER ROAD
AND NORTH OF W AMITY ROAD , MERIDIAN , IDAHO
July 1 , 2019
GTkProject No . 2045 - 0
Prepared For :
TOLL BROTHERS
1 140 N . Town Center Dr , Suite 250
Las Vegas , Nevada 89144
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SCOPEOF SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITEDESCRIPTION . a ass 000060 * 060 00 00 * 696816 @too & & a as Sees@ 846666646 * 8 as 80000oves see * gas less a fooeatesse s0000sses ago * * a & @ awes mesa@ * was 2
PROPOSEDDEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
FIELDSTUDIES . . a a a a a 4 6 a & 0 0 4 0 a 6 a a a a a 4 a 4 0 a a 0 a a a a a a a a 4 4 4 a a 6 a 0 a a a a 0 0 a a 0 a a a a a a 6 0 a a a a 0 6 a a a a a a 4 a 6 a 0 4 a 0 a a a a a & a a a a a a 4 4 0 a a a a a a a 0 4 0 6 0 a a a a 4 6 a 6 6 6 6 a a a 4 a a 6 0 a 6 0 & 0 0 a a a a a 0 a a a 46 a 6 a a a 2
REGIONALGEOLOGY . . . 0044 * 00 0 9 a 6 A a a 0 0 0 9 0 a 9 a a 6 6 0 0 0 6 a 4 4 * 40 a 6 6 6 0 0 6 a 0 00 a 6 0 0 a 0 4 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 a 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 a a 0 a 4 0 60 0 a 6 0 0 a 4 a 0 6 6 0 0 0 a * 00 0 0 0 0 0 4 a 0 a 0 a 0 0 6 a 6 a 6 00 a a 0 6 6 0 ass 2
SITESOILS . a 0 4 4 6 6 a a a a 4 0 4 4 a 6 a 8 4 4 a & a a a a a 0 a a a a a a a a 0 a a 0 0 0 a a 0 0 a a a & 0 a a a a a a 6 a a 0 a 6 4 a a a 6 a a a a a a a a & a a a a a a 2 a a a a 4 0 a a a 8 4 0 4 a a a a a a a 0 a 0 0 6 0 6 a a a 0 0 & a 2 2 a a a a a a & 2 a a a a a a a & 6 a a 0 a 4 a 6 6 4 a 6 0 a a a a a a 0 a 3
ExistingSpread Fill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 3
NativeAlluvial Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
SURFACE & GROUND WATER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
TECTONIC FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY . . a a 2 a a a a a a a a a 0 a a a a 0 a 6 a a a a 4 4 a 4 6 a & a a 4 a 6 4 4 a a a 4 4 0 a 6 & a 0 a 0 a 0 a a & & & a a a a a 6 a 6 6 6 a a 4 a 6 a 4
Secondary Seismic Constraints . . 4 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 a 0 0 0 6 a a 0 6 6 0 a 4 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 4 a a 4 0 9 9 0 a 4 4 0 0 a a a 0 a a a 4
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 06 potatoes 0644 * 060 a a & * * * * * * * * * * @ $ 400 * 06 A 00 80860604
CONCLUSIONS . a a a a a a 0 a 6 6 a a a a 6 6 a 4 4 a 0 a a 4 a a a a 0 a a a & a a a a a a a a a 4 & a a a 6 0 a a a a a a a a 6 6 a & a a 4 a a a 4 a a 0 a a a a 6 6 2 6 a a & a a a a a a a a a a a a a a I a a a a 4 6 a a a 6 6 a 4 a 0 a 6 a a 0 4 0 0 0 a 6 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 6 a 6 0 a & a 4
RECOMMENDATIONS - EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION . . 4 4 4 6 a 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a a 0 0 6 0 a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 4 a 6 6 6 6 6 a 0 6 a 0 a a 0 a a 0 a a a a 0 a a 5
General . a a a a a A a a 4 & 4 & a a a a a a a 4 0 6 6 6 6 a a a 0 a a 6 a a a a 4 a 4 a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 a a a 4 a a 4 a a 4 a a a a a a 6 6 a a a a a 6 6 0 a 4 6 a a 4 a a 4 6 0 a a 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 4 a a a a a & & * * a a a a a a a 6 6 0 6 a a 4 a 6 4 a a 6 a a 4 a & & 4 a 4 a 0 a 0 a a 6 a 0 6 6 5
Demolition . 0 0 a a 0 0 0 0 4 a 0 a 0 0 a 0 9 0 a 5
Removals/ Processing we General . 0 a 0 0 a 6 8 4 a 0 a 9 9 a 9 0 a 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 9 0 0 0 9 a 0 0 0 4 0 0 9 0 0 a 6 0 a 0 0 a 4 a 1 9 6 0 a 1 9 0 9 9 4 4 6 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 9 0 0 a 0 0 9 a 4 0 a 0 4 a 0 0 0 a 0 6 0 a 0 a 6 6 a a 0 0 4 a 9 a 0 0 0 5
TransitionalPads . . ass & & * * * as 60 6 * 40400 4 a a a a 0 a a a a a a a a & 0 & a a a a a a a & 0 a & a a a a A a a a 0 4 0 a a 4 a 6 a a a 6 0 a 4 a a a & & a 6 a a a 4 a a & a a a a a a a a a 0 a & a 6 a 4 a & a a S a a a 0 0 0 6 6 0 6 a a a a a & & a & & a 6 6 & a a a a 6 a a a 6 6 6
Excavation Difficulty . . . . . . 00 a 0000 @ * agog 0000000004 0000000 aseeeses 84699646 asset 90000000844 84669699 0400 * * * 6
FillPlacement . . . . a 0 a 6 4 a 4 4 a 4 0 4 4 0 a 0 a a a a a 0 2 a 4 as a a 0 a a a a a 4 a 0 4 4 a 6 6 6 4 & 6 4 0 a a a a 6 4 0 a 0 a a 6 a a 0 a a & a a a 6 a & a a a a 0 a a a 6 4 0 a 0 6 6 a a a a 0 4 4 0 a a a a a 4 6 6 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 6 a a a a a 6
ImportMaterial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Observationand Testing . . 6 0 a a a 4 6 a 6 0 6 6 a a a a a 0 a a 4 a 6 0 a a 4 a & & & a 4 a 4 6 6 6 6 6 a 4 6 a 6 a 4 & 6 6 6 ft 4 4 0 & 0 6 6 a a a & a a 0 a 6 a a a a a a a a a 6 a a a 4 0 0 a a 6 a a a a a a 0 a a a a a & 0 4 4 a 4 6 a a a a a 4 0 a a a a a a a 4 0 a a & 7
GroundWater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
EarthworkSettlements , a 6 a A 0 a 4 6 a 4 a 6 a a a a 2 0 a a a a a 0 0 a 6 a a a 4 0 a 8 8 a a a a 6 a a 6 0 0 6 0 6 6 a 6 4 4 0 6 6 a 0 4 6 a 0 4 a 6 a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 a a a a 0 a 6 a 6 6 a 4 0 6 6 a a 6 6 6 0 6 6 0 a a 6 4 a 0 6 6 a a 2 a a a 0 a & a a a a a a 4 6 6 a 7
RECOMMENDATIONS — FOUNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 8
General . 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 4 a a 0 0 a a a a a a A a a a 6 0 0 4 a 4 a 6 0 0 a a a a a a a 0 a 0 a A a a a a a a 0 a 0 a a 0 a a a a a a a a a a 0 4 6 6 a 6 a 4 a & ago & * a & & about a a a a a a a a 0 a a a a a a 6 6 0 a 0 a a a & a ease a a A 6 a 4 a 0 0 a a a 4 a a a 0 a a a a 644 6 * 44 a 8
Conventional Foundation Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Foundation Settlements . . . & Seoul a a all 9 0 2 a too Sea a a Sees 0 old $ a 0004040 9 8 wooestoo a & * sea Sea fees * wee am ass 19 9
PAVEMENTSECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Pavement Construction and Maintenance . a a 0 0 0 a a 0 a 0 0 4 4 0 9 a a a 4 0 0 a a a a 4 0 0 4 0 0 9 1 9 0 4 0 6 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 a a a 9 a 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 4 0 a 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
OTHERRECOMMENDATIONS . 0 a a 4 0 a 0 a a 0 0 0 0 a a 9 0 0 6 0 0 0 a 6 a a 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 600 0 0 a 0 4 a 0 0 a a 9 0 0 0 a 0 0 a a 0 0 0 a a 6 4 6 4 0 0 0 Q 6 a a 6 0 0 0 a a a a a a a 6 4 a 0 0 a 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 a 4 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 a a a 0 a 0 0 0 0 10
SiteImprovements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Landscape Maintenance and Planting . . a 6 0 0 a 0 6 0 a a a & 6 a a a a 6 a a 0 a a a a a a a 0 a a 6 a 0 a a a 0 a a 0 a a a a a 6 6 a a 2 A a a a a a a 6 a 6 a a a 6 a a 6 6 6 6 a a a a a a a a 0 a a a a a a 0 0 6 a A a 4 a & 6 a a a a A 6 11
GeoTek, Inc .
SoilCorrosion , a 0 a 4 4 0 6 a a a a 4 a 0 0 0 * 0 a 4 0 0 a a a 0 0 0 0 a 4 a a 0 0 0 a 0 & 4 a 4 6 6 0 0 0 0 a 4 0 0 0 6 6 0 & a 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 0 a a 0 0 0 a 0 0 a a 6 a 0 0 a 4 4 4 a 0 & a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 a a a 4 a 0 6 a 6 6 0 a a a 4 0 a 0 0 4 0 a 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 1 1
TrenchExcavation . a a a 0 0 0 0 9 0 8 a 0 1 9 9 9 9 0 0 1 a 0 a 0 0 9 9 9 0 a 9 0 a 0 a 0 a a 6 6 0 0 4 a a 0 0 a 0 0 4 1 1 a 4 9 a 9 a 6 9 9 0 9 0 a 6 4 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 a 0 6 0 4 a 0 4 0 a a 0 a a 0 0 a 0 a 0 6 0 9 0 9 9 0 0 a 4 4 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 a 9 0 0 0 a 0 4 4 1 1
OnsiteUtility Trench Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1
Drai nage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
PLANREVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
LIMITATIONS , a 0 & a 9 9 9 9 4 0 4 0 9 9 0 0 9 0 9 a 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 6 4 0 4 9 1 9 a 0 0 0 0 0 a a 6 1 0 0 a 0 4 0 0 0 6 a a 0 a 0 4 0 0 0 0 a 4 a 0 a 0 9 0 0 a a a 0 a 9 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 V 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 9 0 a 4 0 0 9 a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 a a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a a a 4 a 0 0 a 0 0 13
Enclosures :
Figure # 1 , Site Location Map
Figure #2 , Site Plan
Appendix A , References
Appendix B , Test Pit Logs and Coring Logs
Appendix C , Field Test Results
Appendix D , Laboratory Test Results
GeoTek, Inc .
Ge T +1 ] rat ,
320 East Cor porace [give Suite 300 Meridian , ICE 83642-3S I I
July 1 , 2019
Project No . 2045 - 0
Toll Brothers
1 140 N . Town Center Dr . Suite 250
Las Vegas , NV 89144
Attention : Jeremy H . Stone
Subject : Geotechnical Evaluation for " B & L Treetop " — a 112± acre Residential
Development Located at the Northwest Corner of South Linder Road and West
Amity Road in Meridian , Idaho .
In accordance with your request, GeoTek, Inc . ( GTI ) has completed a geotechnical evaluation of the
subject property for the construction of a single -family residential development with associated
improvements . The purpose of our study was to evaluate the soils underlying the site and to provide
recommendations for project design and construction based on our findings . This report outlines the
geologic and geotechnical conditions of the site based on current data and provides earthwork and
construction recommendations with respect to those conditions .
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The scope of our services has included the following:
I . Review of soils and geologic reports and maps for the site (Appendix A) .
2 . Site reconnaissance .
3 . Review of aerial photographs .
4 . Excavating and logging of seventeen ( 17) exploratory test pits (Appendix B) .
5 . Obtaining samples of representative soils , as the exploratory test pits were advanced .
6 . Performing laboratory and chemical testing on representative soil samples (Appendix D ) .
7 . Assessment of potential geologic constraints .
8 . Engineering analysis regarding foundation design /construction , foundation settlement, and site
preparation .
9 . Preparation of this report .
GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 2
PROJECT NO . 2045 - ID
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site consists of an irregularly shaped parcel totaling approximately 1 12± acres that is
generally bound by South Linder Road to the east, agricultural land to the west, agricultural land to the
north , and neighboring single -family homes and West Amity Road to the south . Currently, the
property mainly consists of agricultural land that has been cultivated over the course of many years .
From topographic maps , the site ' s elevation is approximately 2675± to 2690± feet above mean sea
level . Historically, topography generally directs surface water to the northwest .
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
It is our understanding that site development would consist of performing typical cut and fill
earthwork to attain the desired graded configurations) for the construction of a single -family
residential development with associated improvements . It is further assumed that final site grade will
be within 3 feet of existing site grade .
FIELD STUDIES
Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by using a rubber -tired backhoe . It should be noted
that portions of the site were not accessible due to ongoing irrigation activities . Seventeen ( 17) test
pits were advanced onsite . A log of each exploration is included with this report in Appendix B . Eight
( 8 ) percolation tests were also performed on the subject site as well as ten ( 10) initial ground water
measurements (Appendix C) . Field studies were completed during June of 2019 by our field personnel
who conducted field excavation location mapping, logged the excavations , and obtained samples of
representative soils for laboratory testing . The approximate locations of the explorations are
indicated on the enclosed Site Exploration Plan ( Figure 2 ) . The Unified Soil Classification System
( USCS) Classification was used to visually classify the subgrade soils during the field evaluation .
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The subject site is situated within the Boise River Valley, which comprises the northwestern portion
of the Snake River Plain physiographic province . The western portion of the Snake River Plain is
aligned in a northwest- southeast direction and generally divides the Owyhee mountains to the south
from the Central Idaho mountains toward the north (Wood and Clemens , 2004) . The headwaters of
the Boise River are located in the Central Idaho mountains east of Boise , Idaho . The river leaves the
central mountains and enters the Snake River Plain near Barber and drains toward the west into the
Snake River near Parma . The Owyhee mountains and the Central Idaho Mountains are composed
predominantly of volcanic and igneous rocks . The western portion of the Snake River Plain is a
northwest trending complex graben formed by extension and regional uplift along the northern
boundary of the basin and range province (Wood and Clemens , 2004) . The graben generally forms a
basin which has been partially filled with younger sedimentary and volcanic rocks ( Malde , 1991 ) . The
Boise River Valley is bounded on the northeast by the Boise Front, which is a northwest trending
topographic high extending generally from Boise to Emmett, Idaho . The Boise Front consists of
Cretaceous aged granitic and metamorphic rocks cut by Tertiary aged rhyolite and overlain with
Miocene aged lake sediments (Wood and Clemens , 2004) . These units have been cut by northwest
trending faults which down drop these units toward the southwest . The faults also provide conduits
for Quaternary aged basalt intrusions and flows ( Malde , 1991 ) .
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 3
PROJECT NO . 2045 - ID
The depositional environment for the valley floor is dominantly lake laid deposits of sand , silt and clay.
These materials were deposited during two periods of lake activity, one during the Miocene and the
other during the Pleistocene . This valley infilling process has been subsequently truncated by down
faulting within the valley ranging in height from a few feet to over 50 feet . Younger alluvium has been ,
and continues to be , transported dominantly by water and deposited on the basins gently sloping valley
floor and within low- level flood plains . Portions of the alluvial deposits are being down cut by
intermittent streams to the flood plain , and as a result stream terraces are being formed .
SITE SOILS
Existing Spread Fill
Based on our field studies , spread fills were observed around the site . This fill is generally associated
with the construction of the adjacent roadways , irrigation laterals , and neighboring single -family
homes . This spread fill shall be considered artificial fill . These " Artificial Fills " are soft and contain
organics/ roots and are not considered suitable for support of foundations . All artificial fill material
should be removed as described in the " Removals " section of this report .
Native Alluvial Soils
Alluvial soils encountered generally consisted surficial layers of sandy silts and lean clays with sand
underlain by partially cemented silty sands , partially cemented sands with gravel , poorly graded sands
with gravel , and poorly graded gravels with sand . The moisture content within the alluvial materials
was generally slightly moist to moist near surface and slightly moist to moist at depth . The consistency
of these soils was soft to firm near surface and ranged from dense to moderately hard at depth . We
anticipate that the onsite soils can be excavated with conventional earthwork equipment. Partially
cemented layers of material were encountered in the majority our excavations , however, we
anticipate that the onsite soils can be excavated with conventional earthwork equipment equivalent to
CAT D9R dozers and CAT 235 excavators . Special excavation equipment and techniques may be
necessary dependent upon if harder materials are encountered during construction . Additionally, the
majority of the property has been cultivated for agricultural use . For this reason , the upper 12 inches
of material has been disturbed and consists of primarily poorly graded sands with gravel with a
moderate amount of organics and roots , some trash , and debris .
SURFACE & GROUND WATER
Ground water was not encountered in any of our excavations . According to the State of Idaho
Department of Water Resources Well Drillers ' logs , ground water in the vicinity is approximately 70
to 115 feet below the existing ground surface . Irrigation ditches exist adjacent to the site and they
transmit water on a periodic basis . Generally, irrigation ditches and canals will locally influence ground
water during the irrigation season ( i . e . , May through October) . If encountered , wet materials should
be spread out and air- dried or mixed with drier soils to reduce their moisture content as appropriate
for fill placement. Ground water is not anticipated to adversely affect planned development, provided
that earthwork construction methods comply with recommendations contained in this report or
those made subsequent to review of the improvement plan (s ) . GTI assumes that the design civil
engineer of record will evaluate the site for potential flooding and set grades such that the
improvements are adequately protected . These observations reflect conditions at the time of this
investigation and do not preclude changes in local ground water conditions in the future from natural
causes , damaged structures ( lines , pipes etc . ) , or heavy irrigation .
GeoTelc, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 4
PROJECT NO . 20454D
TECTONIC FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY
The site is situated in an area of active as well as potentially active tectonic faults , however no faults
were observed during our field evaluation . There are a number of faults in the regional area , which
are considered active and would have an affect on the site in the form of ground shaking , should they
be the source of an earthquake . It is reasonable to assume that structures built in this area will be
subject to at least one seismic event during their life , therefore , it is recommended that all structures
be designed and constructed in accordance with the International Building Code ( IBC) . Based on our
experience in the general vicinity, references in our library , field evaluation of the site , a Seismic
Design Site Class Designation of ` D ' may be used for seismic design .
Secondary Seismic Constraints
The following list includes other potential seismic related hazards that have been evaluated with
respect to the site , but in our opinion , the potential for these seismically related constraints to affect
the site is considered negligible .
* Liquefaction
Dynamic Settlements
* Surface Fault Rupture
* Ground Lurching or Shallow Ground Rupture
Summary:
It is important to keep in perspective that if a seismic event were to occur on any major fault, intense
ground shaking could be induced to this general area . Potential damage to any settlement sensitive
structures would likely be greatest from the vibrations and impelling force caused by the inertia of the
structures mass than that created from secondary seismic constraints . Considering the subsurface
soil conditions and local seismicity, it is estimated that the site has a low risk associated with the
potential for these phenomenon to occur and adversely affect surface improvements . These potential
risks are no greater at this site than they are for other structures and improvements developed on the
alluvial materials in this vicinity .
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of the onsite earth materials in order to
evaluate their physical and chemical characteristics . Results obtained are presented in Appendix D .
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our field exploration , laboratory testing and engineering analyses , it is our opinion that the
subject site is suited for development from a geotechnical engineering viewpoint . The
recommendations presented herein should be incorporated into the final design , grading , and
construction phases of development . The engineering analyses performed concerning site preparation
and the recommendations presented below, have been completed using the information provided to
us regarding site development . In the event that the information concerning proposed development is
not correct, the conclusion and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered
valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report are modified or approved in
writing by this office .
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY 1 , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 5
PROJECT NO , 2045 - ID
RECOMMENDATIONS - EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION
General
All grading should conform to the International Building Code ( IBC ) and the requirements of the City
of Meridian except where specifically superseded in the text of this report. During earthwork
construction all removals , drain systems , slopes , and the general grading procedures of the contractor
should be observed and the fill selectively tested . If unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in
the field , they should be reviewed by this office and if warranted , modified and / or additional
recommendations will be offered . It is recommended that the earthwork contractor (s) perform their
own independent reconnaissance of the site to observe field conditions first hand . If the contractor (s)
should have any questions regarding site conditions , site preparation , or the remedial
recommendations provided , they should contact an engineer at GeoTek for any necessary
clarifications prior to submitting earthwork bids . All applicable requirements of local and national
construction and general industry safety orders , the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the
Construction Safety Act should be met .
Demolition
The following recommendations are provided as guidelines in the event a structure is encountered
that are not intended to remain .
. All existing surface or subsurface structures ( not intended to remain ) , within the area to be
developed , should be razed and moved off site .
2 . If a septic tank (to be abandoned or below a proposed improvement) is located within the
project site , it is recommended that it be pumped out and with few exceptions likely removed .
Any leach lines , seepage pits , or other pipes associated with this structure should also be
removed or properly abandoned .
3 . If any wells are encountered , an attempt should be made to identify the owner and purpose of
the well . Well abandonment should adhere to the recommendations provided by the Idaho
Department of Water Resources , the Public Health Department, or any other government
agencies . If the well is located in the area of a proposed structure , these recommendations
should be reviewed by GTI and if warranted , additional geotechnical recommendations will be
offered .
Removals/ Processing - General
Presented below are removal / processing recommendations for the various soils encountered on the
project . Debris , vegetation , and other deleterious material should be stripped / removed from areas
proposed for structural improvements .
Based on a review of the exploratory logs and our site reconnaissance , after the artificial fill and
deleterious material are removed ( up to 12 inches where observed ) , a minimum removal / processing
depth of 12 inches into alluvial materials should be accomplished across the site . If the left in place
soils can be scarified to encounter a competent layer below ; they may be processed in place ;
otherwise , they should be removed to competent material . Locally deeper removals / processing may
be necessary based on the field conditions exposed . Since much of has been disturbed , it should be
anticipated that deeper fills may be encountered onsite .
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 6
PROJECT NO . 20454D
Beneath the foundations , a minimum of 12 inches of compacted structural fill , meeting the
requirements of the Structural Fill and Import Soils section of this report, should be moisture
conditioned and compacted to provide a more uniform foundation support . Structural fill should
extend a minimum of 12 inches horizontally, from the edge of the footings , for each 12 inches of
thickness placed below the footings . A minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory
maximum modified density (ASTM D 1557) at moisture content of optimum or above is necessary to
generate any near surface settlements . Locally deeper removals/ processing may be necessary based on
the conditions exposed . Removal bottoms should be checked by a representative of GeoTek, Inc . to
see if deeper removals are necessary. If existing improvements or property line restrictions limit
removals , condition specific recommendations would be provided on a case - by- case basis . During
earthwork construction , care should be taken by the contractor so that adverse ground movements
or settlements are not generated affecting existing improvements .
Transitional Pads
Transitional pads are defined in this report as pads which are partially cut and partially fill . To mitigate
some of the differential settlement which will occur on transitional pads , the cut side should be over =
excavated / processed to a minimum depth equal to 2 feet below the bottom of the footings or to the
depth of the fill , which ever is less . On transitional pads with more than 7 . 5 feet of fill , plans need to
be reviewed by GTI and site - specific recommendations will be provided .
Excavation Difficulty
We anticipate that the onsite soils can be excavated with conventional earthwork . Seasonal
conditions could cause wet soil conditions to occur onsite . Depending on the depth of cuts , it should
be expected that special excavation and fill placement measures may be necessary . Wet materials
should be spread out and air - dried or mixed with drier soils to reduce their moisture content to the
appropriate level for fill placement . Frozen soils , if encountered , should be removed and allowed to
thaw prior to any fill placement or construction . Removal bottoms should be checked by a
representative of GTI to see if deeper removals are necessary .
Fill Placement
Subsequent to completing removals/ processing and ground preparation , the excavated onsite and / or
imported soils may be placed in relatively thin lifts ( less than 8 inches thick) , cleaned of vegetation and
debris , brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum relative
compaction of 95 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D 1557) .
A sufficient number of field density tests shall be performed to provide an opinion to the degree of
compaction achieved . Field density tests should be performed at a minimum rate of one test for every
200 cubic yards of material placed , one for every vertical foot of material placed , or where there is a
change in material , whichever is greater . A minimum of two finished pad grade density tests should
also be taken .
If needed , when testing the fill for dry density and moisture content, a pothole/test pit should be
excavated to a minimum depth to remove any loose surficial material . The area should then be
leveled prior to performing a density test . A failing soil density test is based on either a dry density of
less than 90 % relative compaction and /or moisture content less than the soil ' s optimum moisture
content as determined by ASTM D - 1557 .
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 7
PROJECT NO , 20454D
Structural Fill and Import Material
Potentially, soils will be imported to the site for earthwork construction purposes . A sample of any
intended import material should first be submitted to GTI so that, if necessary, additional laboratory
or chemical testing can be performed to verify that the intended import material is compatible with
onsite soils . In general , import material should be within the following minimum guidelines :
Free of organic matter and debris .
Maintain less than 0 . 2 percent sulfate content.
Maintain less than 3 . 0 percent soluble material .
Maintain less than 0 . 02 percent soluble chlorides .
Maintain less than 0 . 2 percent sodium sulfate content.
Maintain a Plasticity Index less than 12 ( i . e . , low expansive) .
* One hundred percent passing the six - inch screen .
At least seventy -five percent passing a three - inch screen .
Maintain between 5 and 20 percent passing the #200 screen .
Maintain at least 20 percent retained on No . 4 screen .
Observation and Testing
During earthwork construction all removal / processing and the general grading procedures should be
observed and the fill selectively tested by a representative (s) of GTI . If unusual or unexpected
conditions are exposed in the field , they should be reviewed by GTI and if warranted , modified and /or
additional recommendations will be offered .
Ground Water
Ground water was not encountered during our field evaluation . According to the State of Idaho
Department of Water Resources Well Drillers ' logs , groundwater in the vicinity is approximately 70
to 115 feet below the existing ground surface . Based on site conditions in the future , a transient high
ground water condition could develop over a clay or less permeable layer and this condition could
generate down gradient seepage . The possible effect these layers could have on this and adjacent sites
should be considered , and can best be evaluated in the field during grading . If warranted by exposed
field conditions , it may be recommended that a drainage system be established to collect and convey
any subsurface water to an appropriate location for drainage . Typically, potential areas of seepage are
difficult to identify prior to their occurrence , therefore , it is often best to adopt a " wait and see "
approach to determine if any seepage conditions do develop , at which time specific recommendation
to mitigate an identified condition can be provided .
Earthwork Settlements
Ground settlement should be anticipated due to primary consolidation and secondary compression .
The total amount of settlement and time over which it occurs is dependent upon various factors ,
including material type , depth of fill , depth of removals , initial and final moisture content , and in - place
density of subsurface materials . Compacted fills , to the heights anticipated , are not generally prone to
excessive settlement. However, some settlement of the left in - place alluvium is expected and the
majority of this settlement is anticipated to occur during grading.
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 8
PROJECT NO , 2045 - ID
RECOMMENDATIONS — FOUNDATIONS
General
Foundation design and construction recommendations are based on preliminary laboratory testing and
engineering analysis performed on near surface soils . The proposed foundation systems should be
designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines contained herein and in the International
Building Code .
Based on our experience in the area , the soils onsite should have a negligible corrosive potential to
concrete and metal , materials selected for construction purposes should be resistant to corrosion .
Where permitted by building code , PVC pipe should be utilized . All concrete should be designed ,
mixed , placed , finished , and cured in accordance with the guidelines presented by the Portland
Cement Association ( PCA) and the American Concrete Institute (ACI ) .
Based on our grading recommendations , the soils beneath the foundations are anticipated to have low
expansion potential . Therefore , foundation recommendations for low expansive soil conditions are
provided below . If more expansive soils are encountered , the pad (s ) will either need to be regraded
and the more expansive soils removed by the contractor or increased foundation recommendations
will need to be provided .
Conventional Foundation Recommendations
Column loads are anticipated to be 50 kips or less while wall loads are expected to be 3 kips per lineal
foot or less . The conventional recommendations provided are from a geotechnical engineering
perspective ( i . e . , for expansive conditions ) and are not meant to supersede the design by the project' s
structural engineer . Preliminary recommendations for foundation design and construction are
presented below . The specific criteria to be used should be verified on evaluation of the proposed
buildings , structural loads , and expansion and chemical testing performed after grading is complete .
j The bearing values indicated are for the total dead plus frequently applied live loads and may be
increased by one third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces .
When combining passive pressure and friction for lateral resistance , the passive component should be
reduced by one third . A grade beam , reinforced as below and at least 12 inches wide , should be
utilized across all large entrances . The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as the
bottom of the adjacent footings . Footings should be founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below
lowest adjacent ground surface as required by local codes to extend below the frost line .
Reinforcement for spread footings should be designed by the project' s structural engineer .
For foundations systems including a crawl space , it is recommended that it be designed so that water
is not allowed to penetrate the crawl space . Proper grading and backfill for the foundations is critical
and should adhere to the " fill placement" and " drainage " recommendations of this evaluation as well as
local building codes .
GeoTelc, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 9
PROJECT NO . 2045 - I13
Minimum
Structural Fill Minimum Allowable Passive Maximum
Footing Depth Below Footing Bearing Coefficient Earth Earth
Type Footing Depth Pressure of Friction Pressure Pressure
Bottom ( inches) (psf) (psf/ft) ( psf)
(inches)
Strip/Spread 12 24 29000 0 . 35 250 31000
The coefficient of friction and passive earth pressure values recommended are working values . Strip
footings should have a minimum width of one foot and spread footings should have a minimum soil to
concrete area of four square feet . Increases are allowed for the bearing capacity of the footings at a
rate of 250 pounds per square foot for each additional foot of width and 250 pounds per square foot
for each additional foot of depth into the recommended bearing material , up to a maximum outlined .
If the bearing value exceeds 3 , 000 psf, an additional review by GTI is recommended . As mentioned
earlier, the exposed ground surface should be moisture conditioned and compacted a minimum depth
of 12 inches below bottom of footings .
Foundation Settlement
Provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and
construction phase of development, total settlement is estimated to be less than one inch and
differential settlement is estimated to be less than 0 . 75 inches for a 25 -foot span . Two -way angular
distortions due to settlements are not estimated to exceed 1 /400 . The structures should be loaded
uniformly so as to avoid any localized settlements .
PAVEMENT SECTIONS
Pavement sections presented in the following table are based on a R-value of 12 and pre - assigned
traffic index (s ) for residential construction . These pavement sections are presented for planning
purposes only and should be verified based on specific laboratory testing performed subsequent to
rough grading of the site .
Pavement Construction and Maintenance
All section changes should be properly transitioned . If adverse conditions are encountered during the
preparation of subgrade materials , special construction methods may need to be employed . All
subgrade materials should be processed to a minimum depth of 12 inches and compacted to a
minimum relative compaction of 90 percent near optimum moisture content . All aggregate base
should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent at optimum moisture content.
The recommended pavement sections provided are meant as minimums . If thinner or highly variable
pavement sections are constructed , increased maintenance and repair should be expected . If the ADT
(average daily traffic) or ADTT (average daily truck traffic) increases beyond that intended , as reflected
by the traffic index (s ) used for design , increased maintenance and repair could be required for the
pavement section .
GeoTelc, Inc .
B & L TREETOP DULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 10
PROJECT NO . 2045 - ID
Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times . Water should not be allowed to pond or seep
into the ground . If planters or landscaping are adjacent to paved areas , measures should be taken to
minimize the potential for water to enter the pavement section .
MINIMUM MINIMUM AGGREGATE
ASSUMED TRAFFIC SUBGRADE ASPHALT THICKNESS (in . )
RIGHT - OF -AWAY R-VALUE CONCRETE Aggregate Subbase
THICKNESS Base (3 /4 " ( Uncrushed
( in . ) minus ) * Aggregate) *
Residential
Normal Traffic 12 2 . 5 4 . 0 1 1 . 0
TI = 6 . 0
Collector
Normal Traffic 12 3 . 0 6 . 0 15 . 0
TI = 8 . 0
*Aggregate Base and Subbase gradation specification requirement per the current edition of the Idaho Standards for Public
Works Construction ( ISPWC ) Manual . Asphalt mix design shall meet the requirements of ISPWC , Section 810 Class III
Plant mix. Materials shall be placed in accordance with ISPWC Standard Specifications for Highway Construction .
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
Site Improvements
As is commonly known , expansive soils are problematic with respect to the design , construction and
long-term performance of concrete flatwork. Due to the nature of concrete flatwork, it is essentially
impossible to totally mitigate the effects of soil expansion . Typical measures to control soil expansion
il caps , deepened foundation system , increased structural
for structures include ; low expansive so
design , and soil pre - saturation . As they are generally not cost effective , these measures are very
seldom utilized for flatwork because it' s less costly to simply replace any damaged or distressed
sections than to " structurally" design them . Even if " structural " design parameters are applied to
flatwork construction , there would still be relative movements between adjoining types of structures
and other improvements (e . g . , curb and sidewalk) . This is particularly true as the level of care during
construction of flatwork is often not as meticulous as that for structures . Unfortunately, it is fairly
common practice for flatwork to be poured on subgrade soils , which have been allowed to dry out
since site grading . Generally, after flatwork construction is completed , landscape irrigation begins ,
utility lines are pressurized , and drainage systems are utilized ; presenting the potential for water to
enter the dry subgrade soils , causing the soil to expand .
Recommendations for exterior concrete flatwork design and construction can be provided upon
request . If, in the future , any additional improvements are planned for the site , recommendations
concerning the geological or geotechnical aspects of design and construction of said improvements
could be provided upon request . This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement,
grading, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed . This includes any grading, utility
trench and retaining wall backfills .
GeoTelc, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JUL Y I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE I I
PROJECT NO , 2045 - ID
Landscape Maintenance and Planting
Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of all earth materials . Slope stability is
significantly reduced by overly wet conditions . Graded slopes constructed within and utilizing onsite
materials would be erosive . Eroded debris may be minimized , and surficial slope stability enhanced by
establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover as soon as possible after construction .
Compaction to the face of fill slopes would tend to minimize short-term erosion until vegetation is
established . Plants selected for landscaping should be lightweight, deep - rooted types , which require
little water and can survive the prevailing climate . From a geotechnical standpoint leaching is not
recommended for establishing landscaping . If the surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding
amendments , they should be recompacted to 90 percent compaction . Only the amount of irrigation
necessary to sustain plant life should be provided . Over watering the landscape areas could adversely
affect proposed site improvements . We recommend that any proposed open bottom planter areas
adjacent to proposed structures , be eliminated for a minimum distance of 5 feet and desert landscape
using xeriscape technology be used outside of this buffer zone . As an alternative , closed bottom type
planters could be utilized . An outlet, placed in the bottom of the planter, could be installed to direct
drainage away from structures or any exterior concrete flatwork. Irrigation timers should be adjusted
on a monthly basis .
Soil Corrosion
Based on our experience in the area , the soils onsite should have a negligible corrosive potential to
concrete and metal , materials selected for construction purposes should be resistant to corrosion .
Where permitted by building code PVC pipe should be utilized . All concrete should be designed ,
mixed , placed , finished , and cured in accordance with the guidelines presented by the Portland
Cement Association ( PCA) and the American Concrete Institute (ACI ) .
Trench Excavation
All footing trench excavations should be observed by a representative of this office prior to placing
reinforcement . Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations
should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent if not removed from the site .
Considering the nature of the onsite soils , it should be anticipated that caving or sloughing could be a
factor in excavations . Shoring or excavating the trench walls and slopes to the angle of repose
(typically 25 to 45 degrees) may be necessary and should be anticipated in non - cemented soils . All
excavations should be observed by one of our representatives and conform to national and local safety
codes .
Onsite Utility Trench Backfiill
Considering the overall nature of the soil encountered onsite , it should be anticipated that materials
will need to be imported to the site for use as pipe bedding and pipe zone material . All utility trench
bacicfill should be brought to near optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a
minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard . Compaction testing and
observation , along with probing should be performed to verify the desired results . Sand backfill , unless
excavated from the trench , should not be used adjacent to perimeter footings or in trenches on
slopes . Compaction testing and observation , along with probing should be performed to verify the
desired results . Sand bacl<fill , unless excavated from the trench , should not be used adjacent to
perimeter footings or in trenches on slopes .
GeoTek, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY I , 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 12
PROJECT NO , 2045 - ID
Compaction testing and observation , along with probing should be performed to verify the desired
results . Offsite utility trenches should be compacted to a minimum of 90 relative compaction .
Compaction testing and observation , along with probing should be performed to verify the desired
results .
Drainage
Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times in accordance with the IBC . Drainage should
not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope . Water should be directed away from foundations
and not allowed to pond and /or seep into the ground . Pad drainage should be directed toward the
street or other approved area . The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped
away from the building at a minimum of 5 = percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured
perpendicularly to the face of the wall . If physical obstructions prohibit 10 feet of horizontal distance ,
a 5 - percent slope shall be provided to an approved alternate method of diverting water away from the
foundation . Swales used for this purpose shall be sloped a minimum of 2 - percent where located
within 10 feet of the building foundation . Impervious surfaces within 10 feet of the building foundation
shall be sloped a minimum of 2 - percent away from the building . Roof gutters and down spouts should
be utilized to control roof drainage . Down spouts should outlet onto paved areas or a minimum of
five feet from proposed structures or into a subsurface drainage system . Areas of seepage may
develop due to irrigation or heavy rainfall . Minimizing irrigation will lessen this potential . If areas of
seepage develop , recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon request .
PLAN REVIEW
Final grading, foundation , and improvement plans should be submitted to this office for review and
comment as they become available , to minimize any misunderstandings between the plans and
recommendations presented herein . In addition , foundation excavations and earthwork construction
performed on the site should be observed and tested by this office . If conditions are found to differ
substantially from those stated , appropriate recommendations would be offered at that time .
GeoTelc, Inc .
B & L TREETOP JULY 19 2019
TOLL BROTHERS PAGE 13
PROJECT NO , 20454D
LIMITATIONS
The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory study are believed
representative of the area ; however, soil materials vary in character between excavations and
conditions exposed during mass grading. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other
factors . GeoTek, Inc . assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing, or recommendations
performed or provided by others . Since our study is based upon the site materials observed , selective
laboratory testing and engineering analysis , the conclusions and recommendations are professional
opinions . These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no
warranty is expressed or implied . Standards of practice are subject to change with time .
The opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated . If you have any questions concerning this
report or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned .
Respectfully submitted ,
GeoTek, Inc . � G�STEA
10884
OF 1®
Taylor S. Hedrick, El ;?yvler S . Lydeen , El David C . Waite, PE
Staff Professional Staff Professional Senior Engineer
GeoTek, Inc .
_ f
' =J'.
15
'.
, `tt � P ik
�i
I,u�J
I
I
arari Morldlan
Wt; ter, Pal
�30 U7I •- WES1
kfiko i-a , ItiIT
* APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION JCV
Source : Google Maps 2019, GeoTek Field Observations , 2019 .
Not to Scale
FIGURE I
SITEVICINITY MAP
B & LTreetop GEO
T IF K West Amity Road and South Linder Road
Meridian , Idaho
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS
Project No . : Drawn By :
320 E . Corporate Dr, Suite 300, Meridian , ID 83642 2045 - 1D � une 2019 TSH
(208) 8884010 (phone) 1 (208) 888-7924 (FAX)
Y
LP
It
• r = - -
N
tj
I LL
_ m
INK
rr
��{ J
33
ti- - - - -
14
dd
PP
K.
14
6.
.. ' ' 4 r '
Alm
r �^
I I ±,
rim
Ic
1
;�. �,�
W AMITY RD '
APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATIONS 5v
Source : Google Earth 2019 .
Not to Scale
FIGURE 2
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
B & L Treetop Geo
West Amity Road and South Linder Road
E T E Meridian , Idaho
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRWIMENTAL I MATERIALS Prepared for : TbII Brothers
Project No . : Report Date: Drawn By :
320 E . Corporate Dr, Suite 300, I'�`leridian , ID 83662 2045 - 0 June 2019 TSH
(208) 888=7010 (phone) / (208) 888 -7924 ( FAX)
APPENDIX A
GG eeo a e � , nco
REFERENCES
Ada County Highway District Development Policy Manual , Revised by Resolution No . 690 , October
2003
ASTM , 200 , " Soil and Rock: American Society for Testing and Materials , " vol . 4 . 08 for ASTM test
methods D =420 to D =4914 , 153 standards , 1 , 026 pages ; and vol . 4 . 09 for ASTM test method D -
4943 to highest number .
Breckinridge , R . M . , Lewis , R . S . , Adema , G . W . , Weisz , D .W. , 2003 , Map of Miocene and Younger Faults
in Idaho , Idaho Geological Survey, University of Idaho
Collett, Russell A . , 1980 , Soil Survey of Ada County, Eastern Part, United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Conversation Service , United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land
Management , Idaho Soil Conservation Commission , University of Idaho College of Agriculture .
Day, Robert W. , 1999 , Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering — Design and Construction
Day, Robert W. , 2002 , Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Handbook
GeoTek, Inc . , In - house proprietary information .
Idaho Department of Water Resources , Treasure Valley Hydrology — Geology, January 2003
Idaho Department of Water Resources , Well Information , Well Driller Reports , 2002
Idaho Transportation Department CD - ROM Publications , September 2003
Johnson , Bruce R . and Raines , Gary L . , 1995 , Digital representation of the Idaho state geologic map : a
contribution to the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project . USGS Open - File
Report 95 - 690
Malde , H . E . , 1991 . Quaternary geology and structural history of the Snake River Plain , Idaho and
Oregon . In : The Geology of North America , Quaternary Nonglacial Geology: Conterminous
U . S . , Vol . K- 2 , 252 - 281 pp .
Othberg, K . L . , 1994 . Geology and geomorphology of the Boise Valley and adjoining areas , western
Snake River Plain , Idaho . Idaho Geological Survey Bulletin 29 : 54 pp .
USGS , Cloverdale Quadrangle , 7 . 5 - Minute Series Topographic Map , 1979 .
USGS , 2003 , Seismic Hazard Map of Idaho , Peak Acceleration (%g) with 2 % Probability of Exceedance
in 50 years .
GeoTelc, Inc .
APPENDIX
Geo T enp. , nc .
LOG GENERAL NOTES
CONSISTENCY OF FINE - GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Standard
Standard Penetration (SPT) or N
Compressive Penetration or N - Consistency Relative Density
Value (SS) Blows/ Ft
Strength , Qu , psf Value ( SS) Blows/ Ft
< 500 < 2 Very Soft 0 - 3 Very Loose
500 - 1 , 000 2 - 3 Soft 4 - 9 Loose
1 , 001 - 2 , 000 4 - 7 Firm 10 - 29 Medium Dense
21001 - 4, 000 8 - 16 Stiff 30 - 49 Dense
41001 - 8 , 000 17 - 32 Very Stiff 50 + Very Dense
> 81001 32+ Hard
SPT penetration test using 140 pound hammer, with 30 inch free fall on 2 inch outside diameter ( I - 3 /8 ID) sampler
For ring sampler using 140 lb hammer, with a 30 inch free fall on 3 inch outside diameter (2- 1 /2 ID ) sample ,
use N -value x 0 . 7 to get Standard N -value
For fine grained soil consistency, thumb penetration used per ASTM D -2488
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND & GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Descriptive Term of other constituents Percent of Dry Major Component Particle Size
Weight of Sample
Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 inches
With 15 - 29 Cobbles 3 inches to 12 inches
Modifier > 30 Gravel #4 Sieve to 3 inches
Sand #200 Sieve to #4 Sieve
Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve
RELATIVE HARDNESS OF CEMENTED SOILS (CALICHE)
Description General Characteristics
Very Dense to Moderately Hard Partially Cemented Granular Soil - Can be carved with a knife and broken with force by hand .
Partially Cemented Fine- Grained Soil - Can be carved with a knife and broken with force by
Very Stiff to Moderately Hard
hand .
Moderately Hard Moderate hammer blow required to break a sample
Hard Heavy hammer blow required to break a sample
Very Hard Repeated heavy hammer blow required to break a sample
LOG LEGEND
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Soil Pattern USCS Symbol USCS Classification
FILL Artificial Fill
GP or GW Poorly/Well graded GRAVEL
GM Silt GRAVELf � r Y
r„oioiicar�ri/r�oo. rio„ irrar�iilJ,io., irJJ.i.
GC Clayey GRAVEL
UM
GP- GM or GW- GM Poorly/Well graded GRAVEL with Silt
GP- GC or GW- GC Poorly/Well graded GRAVEL with Clay
SP or SW Poorly/Well graded SAND
SM Silty SAND
SC Clayey SAND
SP-SM or SW- SM Poorly/Well graded SAND with Silt
SP-SC or SW-SC Poorly/Well graded SAND with Clay
SC- SM Silty Clayey SAND
tltl ML SILT
MH Elastic SILT
N \ZV ,`
� 1 t ti CL- ML Silty CLAY
\1 \\`
� Nno�� CL Lean CLAY
\E�� CH Fat CLAY
PCEM PARTIALLY CEMENTED
CEM CEMENTED
BDR BEDROCK
SAMPLING
SPT
Ring Sample
NR No Recovery
Bulk Sample
Water Table
CONSISTENCY
Cohesionless Soils Cohesive Soils Cementation
VL Very Loose So Soft MH Moderately Hard
L Loose F Firm H Hard
MD Medium Dense S Stiff VH Very Hard
D Dense VS Very Stiff
VD Very Dense
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
cr PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR : JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
u
s N TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - I 4j REMARKS
C c.
D E c ro ( o
m MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3
4 PCEM Lt. Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Silty Sand , Slightly Moist MH
5
6
SP Brown , Poorly graded SAND , Slightly Moist D
7
8
9 PCEM Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand , Slightly Moist MH
10
I GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
12 END OF TEST PIT @ 12 . 0 '
13 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 -7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 &7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
Ew PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
O
s No N TEST PIT NUMBER : TP = 2 REMARKS
�
p E o • o ( o
m m MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics / Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3
4 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
5
6 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
7
8
9 Percolation Test Conducted
at 9 . 5 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 945 ' Piezometer Installed at 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 -7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 -7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
A2 a
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD . Backhoe
vim
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
. . LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
L .a V
s Fm TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 3 REMARKS
�
o o • o L o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
4
5 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
6
7
8
9
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive, Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 & 7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR : JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
TLOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES C
�
s TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 4 1411 REMARKS
aam
C o • o � o
m D U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
3
4 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
Percolation Test Conducted
5 at 4 . 5 '
6
7
8
9
Piezometer Installed at 9 . 5 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6/24/ 19
GE T E K LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION .
SAMPLES
s Fm � > TEST PIT NUMBER: TP - S J REMARKS
D c o 0 o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand , Slightly Moist MH
4 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD Perc @ 4 . 5 '
5
6
7
8
9 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 0 '
10 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300 , Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
: :PROJECT 2045 - 11D
Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR, JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE . 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION .
SAMPLES
%4J �a c c
a TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 6 N REMARKS
p c •o C o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
1 CL Brown , Lean CLAY with Sand , Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
1N
F
2 SM Lt. Brown , Silty SAND , Slightly Moist D
3 Percolation Test Conducted
at 3 .0
4 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
5 GP Lt. Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
6
7
8
9
Piezometer Installed at 9 . 5 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT M 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
mom
PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR . JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
ELOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
O
a� i no u
s I-
4 TEST PIT NUMBER : TP = 7 J41 REMARKS
an o. `� a c
p E o •o ( o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
V) U
L CL 7Brown ,7777 CLAY with Sand , Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
ML Lt. Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist F
2
3
SP Tan , Poorly graded SAND , Slightly Moist D
4
5
6
7 GP Lt. Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
8
9
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 & 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 20454D METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
woo CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
s %0 TEST PIT NUMBER: TP - 8 J REMARKS
G. ^ CL
D o :o V o
m N V
D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
FILL Brown , Artificial Fill Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist L
1 \� CL Brown , Lean CLAY with Sand , Slightly Moist F
2
3 GP Tan , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand & Silt, Slightly Moist D
4
Percolation Test Conducted
at 4 . 0 '
5
6
7
8
9
Piezometer Installed at 9 . 5 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 931
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 &7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - I1D METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR : JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION .
SAMPLES
so U
s No TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 9 J REMARKS
D c :o ( o
CA
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 ,
I F
2 SM Lt. Brown , Silty SAND , Slightly Moist D
3
4
5
6 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
7 GP Lt. Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist VD
8
9
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 9 . 5 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive, Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT , B& L Tree Top EXCAVATOR : JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES ONFES
a = W .° _
MCN TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 10 REMARKS
C o ro un o
BENNO m (AD MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
FILL Brown , Artificial Fill Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist L
I
2 SOMME SP Lt. Brown , Poorly graded SAND with Gravel , Slightly Moist D
3
4 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand & Silt with Gravel , Slightly Moist
5
SP Lt. Brown , Poorly graded SAND with Gravel , Slightly Moist D Percolation Test Conducted
at 5 . 0 '
6 SEMEN
7 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Slightly Moist D
8 SEEMS
9
Piezometer Installed at 10 . 0 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 10 . 0 '
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 & 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT: B &L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
EZ., LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES 0
a m .c c
s Fm % TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - I I J REMARKS
C o. `" a N
D c • o 0 o
mD U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
SM Brown , Silty SAND , Slightly Moist L Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I
SP Brown , Poorly graded SAND with Gravel , Moist D
2
3
4
5
6 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Moist D
7 END OF TEST PIT @ 7. 0 '
8 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 &7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - I1D METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR . JustDiglt
10
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
GE 0 T E K LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION .
SAMPLES
O
s TEST PIT NUMBER: TP - 12 REMARKS
am n.
D o :a 0 o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
CL Brown , Lean CLAY with Sand , Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
\\\�\
2 PCEM Lt. Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand , Slightly Moist MH
3 SP Brown , Poorly graded SAND , Slightly Moist D
4
5
6
7 PCEM Lt. Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist H
8
9
10
GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Moist VD Percolation Test Conducted
at 1 1 . 0 '
12 END OF TEST PIT @ 12 . 0 , Piezometer Installed at 1 1 . 8 '
13 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 & 7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6124/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
� W L O.0 U
N TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 13 REMARKS
a
c. c
p E c 'o WEEK ( o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I
SP Brown , Poorly graded SAND with Gravel , Slightly Moist D
2
3
4 PCEM Lt. Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Gravel , Slightly Moist MH
5 PCEM Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Silty Sand , Moist MH Percolation Test Conducted
at 4 . 5 '
6 WEE
7
8
9
10
II
Piezometer Installed at 1 1 . 5 '
12 END OF TEST PIT @ I I as ,
NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300 , Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 -7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR . JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
� e. c -° c
s 4 TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 14 REMARKS
a.
G o • o ( o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Lt. Brown , SILT, Slightly Moist to Moist So Organics/Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3 PCEM Brown , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sand with Varying amonts of Silt, Moist MH
4
5
6
7
8 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL, Moist VD
9
10
I I m END OF TEST PIT @ 11 . 0 '
12 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY. TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT : Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
GE 0 T E K LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
O
�-' a c � •n c
MC14
TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - 15 REMARKS
aai 2. (A (A
N
p o • o ( o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist to Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3
4
SP Brown , Poorly graded SAND , Moist D
5 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Moist VD
6
7
8
9
Piezometer Installed at 10 . 0 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 10 . 0 '
I NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300 , Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 &7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 88 & 7924
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
aim
PROJECT : B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR: JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION :
SAMPLES
n. s
s TEST PIT NUMBER : TP - I6 4JREMARKS
p o • o U o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown , Sandy SILT, Slightly Moist to Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
Percolation Test Conducted
3 at 2 . 0 '
SP Reddish Brown , Poorly graded SAND , Moist D
4
5 GP Brown , Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand , Moist VD
6
7
8
9
Piezometer Installed at 9 . 65 '
10 END OF TEST PIT @ 10 . 0 '
I I NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300, Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 888 - 7010 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
TEST PIT LOG
LOGGED BY: TSH /TSL
A2 0
PROJECT #: 2045 - ID METHOD : Backhoe
PROJECT: B & L Tree Top EXCAVATOR , JustDiglt
CLIENT: Toll Brothers DATE : 6 /24/ 19
GE T E K LOCATION : NWC of S . Linder Road and W. Amity Road ELEVATION .
SAMPLES
o. Sm ma
s � 4TEST PIT NUMBER : TP = 17 REMARKS
D o •o ( o
m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Lt. Brown , SILT, Slightly Moist So Organics/ Roots to 1 . 0 '
I F
2
3
4
5 PCEM Tan , PARTIALLY CEMENTED Silty Sand , Slightly Moist VD
6
7
8
9
10
Piezometer Installed at I I . 0 '
I I END OF TEST PIT @ I I . 0 '
12 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
320 E . Corporate Drive , Suite 300) Meridian , Idaho 83642 Office : ( 208 ) 88 & 7010 1 Fax : ( 208 ) 888 - 7924
APPENDIX C
GeoTek , Inc .
FIELD TESTS AND OBSERVATIONS ( 20454Q)
PERCOLATION TESTS
The infiltration rate was determined by conducting percolation tests for onsite earth materials . The infiltration
rate was determined in inches per hour in general accordance with the City of Meridian requirements .
Infiltration rate results are presented below.
LOCATION INFILTRATION RATE
( Inches/ Hour)
TP - 2 @ 9 . 5 ' 24 . 00 +
TP -4 @ 4 . 5 ' 24 . 00 +
TP- 6 @ 3 . 0 ' 5 . 28
TP - 8 @ 4 . 0 ' 24 . 00 +
TP- 10 @ 5 . 0 ' 24 . 00 +
TP- 12 @ 1 1 . 0 ' 15 . 96
TP = 13 @ 4 . 5 ' 3 . 61
TP- 16 @ 2001 2024
GROUND WATER MONITORING RESULTS
Ground water monitoring results are presented below . Ground water elevation results are recorded
in feet below existing grade .
LOCATION GROUNDWATER LOCATION GROUNDWATER
ELEVATION ELEVATION
TP- 2 9 . 5 ' + TP- 12 1 1 . 8 ' +
TPA 9 . 5 ' + TP- 13 1 1 . 5 ' +
TP- 6 9 . 5 ' + TPm 15 10 . 0 ' +
TP- 8 9 . 5 ' + TP- 16 9 . 65 ' +
TP- I 0 10 . 0 ' + TP- 17 1 1 . 0 + '
+ Indicates a dry reading at the bottom of the piezometer
n /a Indicates that the piezometer was damaged /missing in the field
and no measurements were obtained .
GeoTek, Inc .
APPENDIX D
GeoTek , Inc .
LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS ( 2045 = ID )
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Atterberg limits were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM D 4318 .
The results are shown in the following plates .
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
Sieve analyses were performed in general accordance with AASHTO test method T 27 . It should be
noted that materials over 3 inches in size were selectively screened to better reflect the native
materials that will be left after processing efforts of the contractor . Test results are presented in the
following plates .
RESISTANCE R-VALUE TESTING
Tests were conducted on representative soil samples , in general accordance with Idaho test method
T- 8 and AASHTO T - 190 , to determine the soil ' s performance when placed in the base , subbase , or
subgrade of a road subjected to traffic .
LOCATION R-VALUE @ 200
psi
TP-4 @ 1 . 0 ) — 2 . 09 12
GeoTek, Inc .
Particle Size Distribution Report
C C O O O
C C C C C C O O CD O O O O 4t O
CO
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 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 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
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 I I I
z 60LL
I I
I I I I I I I I 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 I I I I
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
11� 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
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 JiLL0 I I I I 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 0 . 0 0 . 0 6 . 0 10 . 7 18 . 5 64 . 8
Test Results (ASTM C136 & ASTM C117 ) Material Description
Opening Percent Spec .* Pass ? sandy silt
Size Finer ( Percent) (X= Fail )
1 /2 " 100 . 0
3 /8 " 100 . 0 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 )
#4 100 . 0 PL= 26 . 3 LL= 39 . 4 Pl = 13 . 1
#8 95 . 2
# 16 90 . 6 Classification
#30 85 . 7 USCS ( D 2487 )= ML AASHTO ( M 145 ) = A - 6 (7 )
#50 81 . 0 Coefficients
# 100 75 . 4 D90 = 1 . 0748 D85= 0 . 5420 D60 =
#200 64 . 8 D50 = D30 = D15 =
D10 = Cu = cc=
Remarks
F . M .=0 . 72
Date Received : 6/24/ 19 Date Tested : 6/26/ 19
Tested By : Colton Bunn
Checked By : Tyler Lydeen , EI
Title : Staff Professional
(no specification provided)
Source of Sample : TP4 Depth : 1 . 0 ' -2 . 0 ' Date Sampled : 6/24/ 19
- Sample Number : 3633
Boise Office Client : Toll Brothers
320 E Corporate Drive Suite 300
Meridian, ID 83642 Project : B &L Tree Top
Phone (208) 8884010
Fax (208) 8884924
G E 0 T E K www.geotekusaxom Project No : 20454D Figure
Particle Size Distribution Report
CI C O O O
C C '- O O CD O O V' O
C C C C �p �. N M V CD 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I
70 I I
ry
I I I
W I I I
Z 60 I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
L.L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I 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
W
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
0� 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
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
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
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 31 . 7 7 . 5 6 . 9 25 . 8 16 . 3 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 Pl = NP
1 " 7205
if Classification
3 /4
1 /2 " 66 . 4 6803 USCS ( D 2487 )= SP - SM AASHTO ( M 145 ) = A- 1 -b
3 /8 " 64 . 9 Coefficients
#4 60 . 8 D90 = 32 . 3558 D85= 30 . 3994 D60 = 4 . 2783
#8 55 . 1 D50= 1 . 2394 D30 = 0 . 4561 D15 = 0 . 1406
# 16 49 . 4 D10= Cu = Cc=
#30 37 . 2
#50 20 . 3 Remarks
# 100 15 . 2 F .M .=4 . 29
#200 11 . 8
Date Received : 6/24/ 19 Date Tested : 6/26/ 19
Tested By . Colton Bunn
Checked By : Tyler Lydeen, EI
Title : Staff Professional
(no specification provided)
Source of Sample : TP - 11 Depth : 3 . 0 ' -4 . 0 ' Date Sampled : 6/24/ 19
- Sample Number : 3634
Boise Office Client : Toll Brothers
320 E Corporate Drive Suite 300
Meridian, ID 83642 Project : B &L Tree Top
Phone (208) 888 -7010
Fax (208) 8887924
G E 0 T E K www.geotekusa.com Project No . 20454D Figure
Particle Size Distribution Report
_ o00
co
O N CDV (O O N
(O M 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 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
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
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 I I I
z 60 I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
t.L I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
z 1 I I
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
Q� 40 1 1
W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I
30 1 I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1 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 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
10 1 I
I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I
I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1
0 1
100 10 1 0 . 1 0 . 01 0 . 001
GRAIN SIZE - mm .
oho *3 „ % Gravel % Sand % Fines
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay
0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 1 0 . 1 2 . 9 17 . 3 79 . 6
Test Results (ASTM C136 & ASTM C117 ) Material Description
Opening Percent Spec .* Pass ? lean clay with sand
Size Finer ( Percent) (X= Fail )
1 /2 " 100 . 0
3 /8 " 100 . 0 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 )
#4 99 . 9 PL= 21 . 5 LL= 34 . 4 P1 = 12 . 9
#8 99 . 9
# 16 99 . 5 Classification
#30 98 . 1 USCS ( D 2487 ) = CL AASHTO ( M 145 ) = A- 6 ( 9 )
#50 95 . 3 Coefficients
# 100 89 . 9 D90 = 0 . 1511 D85= 0 . 1047 D60 =
#200 79 . 6 D50 = D30 = D15 =
D10 = COCc=
Remarks
F .M .=0 . 17
Date Received : 6/24/ 19 Date Tested : 6/26 / 19
Tested By : Colton Bunn
Checked By : Tyler Lydeen , EI
Title : Staff Professional
(no specification provided)
Source of Sample : TP- 7 Depth : 0 . 5 ' - 1 . 5 ' Date Sampled : 6/24/ 19
- Sample Number : 3635
Boise Office Client : Toll Brothers
320 E Corporate Drive Suite 300
Meridian, ID 83642 Project : B &L Tree Top
Phone (208) 888 ^7010
Fax (208) 8884924
G E 0 T E K Wvvw'geOtekusa.com Project No : 2045 -ID Figure
Particle Size Distribution Report
1.
_ 0 0 0
C C C C C C Co V N co V' (o N
to (M N r \ M
100
INN
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 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 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 I I
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 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 I I
U
0� 40
W
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
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 El
I I I I
0 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 0 . 0 1 . 2 1 . 9 6 . 8 16 . 5 73 . 6
Test Results (ASTM C136 & ASTM C117 ) Material Description
Opening Percent Spec .* Pass ? lean clay with sand
Size Finer ( Percent) (X= Fail )
1 /2 " 100 . 0
3 /8 " 99 . 3 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318 �
#4 98 . 8 PL= 23 . 6 LL= 34 .4 Pl = 10 . 8
#8 97 . 5
# 16 94 . 7 Classification
#30 91 . 5 USCS ( D 2487 )= CL AASHTO ( M 145 ) = A4 (7 )
#50 88 . 7 Coefficients
# 100 84 . 4 D90= 0 . 4166 D85 = 0 . 1585 D60 =
#200 73 . 6 D50= D30 = D15 =
D10= Cu = Cc=
Remarks
F . M . = 0 . 45
Date Received : 6/24/ 19 Date Tested : 6/26/ 19
Tested By : Colton Bunn
Checked By : Tyler Lydeen, EI
Title : Staff Professional
(no specification provided)
Source of Sample : TP - 12 Depth : 0 . 5 ' - 1 . 5 ' Date Sampled : 6/24/ 19
- Sample Number : 3636
Boise Office Client : Toll Brothers
320 E Corporate Drive Suite 300
Meridian, ID 83642 Project : B &L Tree Top
Phone (208) 8884010
Fax (208) 888-7924
G E 0 T E K www.geotel<usa.coni Project No : 2045 -ID Figure
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
60
1-4-Lis6-ied line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural Soils '
50 '
e
40
X '
w
o
z
U 30 '
I= '
,
2
20
10
CL -ML LorOL MH or OH
i
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT
Material Description Sampled Tested Technician LL PL PI %<#40 USCS
• sandy silt 6/24/ 19 39 . 4 26 . 3 13 . 1 83 . 3 ML
■ lean clay with sand 6/24/ 19 34 . 4 21 . 5 12 . 9 96 . 9 CL
♦ poorly graded sand with silt and gravel 6/24/ 19 NV NP NP 28 . 1 SP- SM
♦ lean clay with sand 6/24/ 19 34 . 4 23 . 6 10 . 8 90 . 1 CL
Project No . 2045 -ID Client : Toll Brothers
Project : B &L Tree Top
OSource of Sample : TP4 Depth : 1 . 0 ' -2 . 0 ' Sample Number : 3633
❑Source of Sample : TP -7 Depth : 0 . 5 ' - 1 . 5 ' Sample Number : 3635
ASource of Sample : TP - 11 Depth : 3 . 0 '-4 . 0 ' Sample Number : 3634
OSource of Sample : TP - 12 Depth : 0 . 5 '4 . 5 ' Sample Number : 3636
Boise Office Checked by :
320 E Corporate Dr. Suite 300 Meridian, ID 83642
Phone (208) 8884010 Fax (208) 8884924 Title :
G E 0 T E K www.geotekusa.com Figure
Sabrina Durtschi
From : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Sent : Friday, January 17 , 2020 11 : 25 AM
To : Sabrina Durtschi
Cc : Sonia Daleiden ; Lauren Nuxoll
Subject : RE : BL Tree Top
Attachments : 24207_ B & L Tree Top Subdivision TIS_for ACHD review . pdf; BL Tree Top Response to
ACHD Comments FINAL . pdf
Hi Sabrina ,
Here you go . I also included our response to ACHD comments . Please let us know if you need anything further .
Regards ,
Sonia
Sonia Hennum Daleiden , PE PTOE
Principal Engineer
Kittelson & Associates , InIc .
Transportation Engineering / Planning
101 South Capitol Boulevard , Suite 600
Boise , ID 83702
208 , 472 . 9803 ( direct )
208 . 850 . 4073 ( cell )
From : Sabrina Durtschi < sdurtschi@tollbrothers . com >
Sent : Friday, January 17 , 2020 10 : 42 AM
To : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Subject : RE : BL Tree Top
Hello Sonia ,
I was wondering if you could send me the traffic study for Tree -top , I was unable to locate one .
Thanks, Sabrina
From : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Sent : Thursday, November 21 , 2019 10 : 40 AM
To : Sabrina Durtschi < sdurtschi@tollbrothers . com > ; Adam Capell < acapell@tollbrothers . com >
Cc : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com > s Lauren Nuxoll < Inuxoll@kittelson . com > s Jane Suggs
<JSuggs@whpacific . com >
Subject : FW : BL Tree Top
EXTERNAL EMAIL
1
Hi Sabrina and Adam ,
We received confirmation from ACHD that they have accepted the traffic study for the Tree Top project . They won ' t
issue a staff report until they have direction from the City of Meridian but we expect the key off site mitigation condition
will be related to the Linder Road /Victory Road intersection . They will likely have a condition to construct a temporary
improvement ( northbound left -through and through - right lane please two receiving lanes on the north leg ) at that
location if the ultimate improvements ( widening to 5 lanes and adding a roundabout ) have not already been
implemented by ACHD or another developer with the 280th building permit for Tree Top . The remaining conditions will
be related to the site frontage and collector connection .
Please let us know if you have any questions or need any additional details at this time .
Regards,
Sonia
Sonia Hennum Daleiden , PE PTOE
Principal Engineer
Kittelson & Associates , Inc .
Transportation Engineering / Planning
101 South Capitol Boulevard , Suite 600
Boise, ID 83702
208 . 472 . 9803 ( direct )
208 . 850 . 4073 ( cell )
Ll�li
From : Mindy Wallace < Mwallace@achdidaho . org >
Sent : Friday, November 15 , 2019 3 : 50 PM
To : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Cc : Bill Parsons < bparsons@meridiancity . org >
Subject : RE : BL Tree Top
Hi Sonia ,
ACHD accepts the TIS for Tree Top .
Please let me know if you have any questions .
Mindy
Mindy Wallace , AICP
Planning Review Supervisor
Ada County Highway District
208 - 387 - 6178
ACHD Development Services is open for business at our new location at 1301 N. Orchard Street, Suite
200 in the CSC building. Parking and building entrance are located on west side of building.
2
From : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Sent : Thursday, November 14, 2019 11 : 17 AM
To : Mindy Wallace < MwaI lace @achdidaho . orR >
Cc : Lauren Nuxoll < Inuxoll@kittelson . com > ; Jeff Borchardt < iborchardt@tollbrothers . com > ; Sonia Daleiden
< sdaleiden@kittelson . com > ; Sabrina Durtschi < sdurtschi@tollbrothers . com >
Subject . RE : BL Tree Top
[ THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED EXTERNALLY . PLEASE USE CAUTION WHEN OPENING ATTACHMENTS OR LINKS INSIDE THIS
EMAIL . ]
Hi Mindy,
Just following back up on the Tree Top project . Does ACHD need any additional information to accept the TIS ? Thank
you !
Regards,
Sonia
Sonia Hennum Daleiden , PE PTOE
Principal Engineer
I< ittelson 8: Assoc id ies , h l ( : 4
Transportation Engineering / Planning
101 South Capitol Boulevard , Suite 600
Boise , ID 83702
208 . 472 . 9803 ( direct )
208 . 850 . 4073 ( cell )
' r
. " A
U0
From : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Sent : Wednesday, October 16 , 2019 5 : 46 PM
To : Mindy Wallace < Mwallace@achdidaho . org >
Cc : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com > ; Lauren Nuxoll < Inuxoll@kittelson . com > ; Jeff Borchardt
<jborchardt@tollbrothers . com >
Subject : RE : BL Tree Top
Hi Mindy,
Attached please find our responses to ACHD ' s comment on the TIS for the BL Tree Top project . Please let us know if you
have any questions or need any additional information . Thank you !
Regards ,
Sonia
Sonia Hennum Daleiden , PE PTOE
Principal Engineer
3
Kittelson & Associates Inc .
Transportation Engineering / Planning
101 South Capitol Boulevard , Suite 600
Boise , ID 83702
208 . 472 . 9803 ( direct )
208 . 850 . 4073 ( cell )
I
From : Mindy Wallace < MwaI lace @achdidaho . org >
Sent : Friday, October 11 , 2019 2 : 02 PM
To : Sonia Daleiden < sdaleiden@kittelson . com >
Subject : BL Tree Top
Sonia ,
Attached are ACHD ' s comments on the TIS for BL Tree Top .
Please let me know if you have any questions .
Mindy
Mindy Wallace , AICP
Planning Review Supervisor
Ada County Highway District
208 - 387 - 6178
ACHD Development Services is open for business at our new location at 1301 N. Orchard Street, Suite
200 in the CSC building. Parking and building entrance are located on west side of building.
4