PZ - Geotech Report GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR
"DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION" —
A 7.5+ ACRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
LOCATED NORTH OF WEST USTICK ROAD
AND EAST OF NORTH LINDER ROAD,
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
August 26, 2020
GTI-Project No. 2149-ID
Prepared For:
HAYDEN HOMES
2464 SW Glacier Place, Suite I 10
Redmond, OR 97756
GeoTek, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SCOPEOF SERVICES .......................................................................................................................................... I
SITEDESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................................................2
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................2
FIELDSTUDIES......................................................................................................................................................2
REGIONAL GEOLOGY......................................................................................................................................2
SITESOILS..............................................................................................................................................................3
ArtificialFill ......................................................................................................................................................3
NativeAlluvial Soils........................................................................................................................................ 3
SURFACE & GROUND WATER......................................................................................................................4
TECTONIC FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY............................................................................4
Secondary Seismic Constraints....................................................................................................................4
Summary:..........................................................................................................................................................4
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING.........................................................................................................5
CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................................................5
RECOMMENDATIONS - EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION.................................................................5
General .............................................................................................................................................................5
Demolition.......................................................................................................................................................5
Removal s/Processi ng - General...................................................................................................................6
TransitionalPads.............................................................................................................................................7
ExcavationDifficulty.......................................................................................................................................7
FillPlacement...................................................................................................................................................7
ImportMaterial............................................................................................................................................... 7
Observationand Testing...............................................................................................................................8
GroundWater................................................................................................................................................8
EarthworkSettlements..................................................................................................................................8
RECOMMENDATIONS — FOUNDATIONS.................................................................................................8
General .............................................................................................................................................................8
Conventional Foundation Recommendations..........................................................................................9
FoundationSettlement..................................................................................................................................9
PAVEMENT SECTIONS .................................................................................................................................... 10
Pavement Construction and Maintenance.............................................................................................. 10
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................... I I
SiteImprovements........................................................................................................................................ I I
Landscape Maintenance and Planting........................................................................................................ I I
GeoTek, Inc.
SoilCorrosion............................................................................................................................................... I I
TrenchExcavation........................................................................................................................................ 12
Onsite Utility Trench Backfill..................................................................................................................... 12
Drainage.......................................................................................................................................................... 12
PLANREVIEW..................................................................................................................................................... 13
LIMITATIONS...................................................................................................................................................... 13
Enclosures:
Figure #1 , Site Vicinity Map
Figure #2, Site Exploration Plan
Appendix A, References
Appendix B, Test Pit Logs
Appendix C, Field Test Results
Appendix D, Laboratory Test Results
GeoTek, Inc.
GeoTek,Inc.
320 East Corporate Drive Suite 300 Meridian,ID 83642-3511
(208)888-7010 (208)888-7924 www.geotekusa.com
August 26, 2020
Project No. 2149-ID
HAYDEN HOMES
2464 SW Glacier Place, Suite I 10
Redmond, OR 97756
Attention: Mr. Tim Mokwa
Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation for"Dennis Creek Subdivision"—a 7.5+Acre Residential
Development— Located North of West Ustick Road and East of North Linder Road,
Meridian, Idaho
Dear Mr. Mokwa,
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 five (5) exploratory test pits (Appendix B)
5. Obtaining samples of representative soils, as the exploratory test pits were advanced
6. Performing laboratory 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 I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 2
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site consists of an irregularly shaped parcel totaling approximately 7.5± acres that is
generally bound by a single-family home and Sawtooth Middle School to the north, a single-family
home and residential subdivision with associated improvements to the east,West Ustick Road to the
south, and vacant agricultural land to the west (Figures I and 2). Currently, the property consists of
farmland that has been corrugated/irrigated and cultivated for crop farming purposes over many years.
The site is bisected by a gravel road (North Llama Lane)that serves as a driveway for the single-family
residence to the north of site. Access to the site is currently possible from North Llama Lane. From
topographic maps, the site's elevation is approximately 2,568± feet to 2,577± 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 configuration(s) for the construction of a residential
subdivision of one- to two-story detached single-family residential structures with associated
improvements. It is further assumed that final site grade will be within 5 feet of existing site grade.
FIELD STUDIES
Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by using a rubber-tired backhoe. Five (5) test pits
were advanced onsite.A log of each exploration is included within this report in Appendix B. Four(4)
percolation tests were performed on the subject site as well as four (4) initial ground water
measurements (Appendix C). Field studies were completed during July of 2020 by 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) was
used to visually classify the subgrade soils during the field exploration.
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, 199 1).
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 3
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
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, 199 1).
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
Artificial Fill
Based on our field studies, some spread fills were observed along the perimeter of the site and on the
interior maintenance roadways.This fill is generally associated with the construction of the roadways
and irrigation laterals.This spread fill shall be considered artificial fill.The majority of the property has
been cultivated for agricultural use,the upper 12 inches of material has been disturbed and consists of
sandy silt,with a moderate amount of organics and roots.This shall be considered artificial fill. Deeper
fills may be encountered onsite. The "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 consist of surficial layers of sandy silts, underlain by silty sands and
poorly graded gravels with sand and cobbles. The moisture content within the alluvial materials was
generally slightly moist to saturated at depth. The consistency of these soils ranged from soft to firm
near surface and medium dense to very dense at depth. Weakly cemented layers of soils were
encountered in the majority of 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. Although not anticipated, special excavation equipment and techniques may be necessary
dependent upon if harder materials are encountered during construction.
Much of the property has been cultivated for agricultural use. The upper 12 inches of soil has been
disturbed and consists of a brown to dark brown sandy silt containing a moderate amount of organics
and roots. Deeper fills may be encountered onsite. The upper 12 inches of soil across the site is
loose/soft, contains organics/roots and is not considered suitable for support of foundations. All of
these upper soils should be removed as described in the "Removals" section of this report.
After the upper 12 inches of soil is removed, the underlying 12 inches of the native alluvium soil will
require, at a minimum, some removal and/or processing efforts to be considered suitable for the
support of the proposed site improvements. Locally deeper processing/removals may be necessary.
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 4
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
Refer to the "Recommendations Earthwork Construction" section of this report for specific site
preparation recommendations.
SURFACE & GROUND WATER
Ground water was encountered in all of our excavations, ranging from a depth of 4.8 to 5.6 feet below
approximate existing grade in TP-4 and TP-1, respectively. 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.
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.
SecondaU 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
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 5
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
conditions and local seismicity, it is estimated that the site has a low risk associated with the potential
for these phenomena 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.The tests performed, and the 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.
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 firsthand. 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 that structures are
encountered that are not intended to remain.
GeoTek, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 6
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
1. 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.
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 very hard cemented materials are encountered during over-excavation, excavation may potentially
be terminated, but this will need to be determined on a case by case basis by a representative of GTI.
Foundations for the proposed structures may be founded on cemented material; however, in order to
avoid the potential for differential settlement, the entire foundation would need to be supported
entirely on the cemented material. If this is not possible, cemented materials should be removed to a
minimum depth of 12 inches below the bottom of the footing and replaced with compacted structural
fill. This can best be determined in the field based upon the conditions exposed. Termination of any
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 7
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
excavation on cemented soils will need to be reviewed by GTI and the owner.
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,whichever 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 90 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D 1557).
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 at least 20 percent on No. 4 screen
Maintain between 5 and 30 percent passing the No. 200 screen
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 8
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
Observation and TestLng
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 encountered in all of our excavations, ranging from a depth of 4.8 to 5.6 feet below
approximate existing grade in TP-4 and TP-1, respectively. 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
It 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.
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.
GeoTek, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 9
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
Conventional Foundation Recommendations
Column loads are anticipated to be 50 kips or less while wall loads are expected to be 3 kips per
linear 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.
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 are critical
and should adhere to the"fill placement"and "drainage"recommendations of this evaluation as well as
local building codes.
Soil Minimum Allowable Passive Maximum
Footing Expansion Footing Bearing Coefficient Earth Earth
Type Classification Depth Pressure of Friction Pressure Pressure
(inches) (Psf) (psf/ft) (Psf)
Strip/Spread Low 24 2,000 0.35 250 3,000
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
GeoTek, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 10
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
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 an R-value result of 38, Ada County
Highway District Development(ACHD) pre-assigned traffic index(s)for residential construction and
estimated traffic index(s) for commercial construction, and the guidelines presented in the latest
edition of the ACHD Development Policy Manual. 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.
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 38 2.5 4.0 5.0
TI = 6.0
Collector
Normal Traffic 38 3.0 6.0 7.0
TI = 8.0 1 1 1 1 11
*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 8 10 Class III
Plant mix. Materials shall be placed in accordance with ISPWC Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.
GeoTelk, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE I I
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
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
for structures include; low expansive soil caps, deepened foundation system, increased structural
design,and soil presaturation.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.
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 are capable of surviving 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 planter 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.
GeoTek, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 12
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
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 Backfill
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
backfill 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 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. 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.
GeoTek, Inc.
DENNIS CREEK SUBDIVISION AUGUST 26, 2020
HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 13
PROJECT NO. 2149-ID
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.
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.
.S\oN L ':-/V0'
VS. S
(P 2.
0 F
J. WO
Steven Huber, El Luke J. Landriani, PE
Staff Professional Senior Engineer
GeoTek, Inc.
W MCAMNW�rLL. t mcmiman Pco
:3
'3
M
CL
Setilers Park H E I
W:U sik*Rd E Usl!�WRd
z z
ML
ri
CL :0
PU
CL
Meridlan Middl-e School E rqirviei�Ave
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION JIV
Source:Google Maps, 2020. GeoTek Field Observations, 2020.
Not to Scal
FIGURE I
SITEVICINITY MAP
Dennis Creek Subdivision
NE of W Ustick Rd & N Linder Road
GEOTEK Meridian, Idaho
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS Prepared for: H�yden Homes
Project No.: Report Date: Drawn By:
320 E.Corp rate Dr,Suite 300, Meridian,ID 83642 2149-ID July 2020 SJ H
(208)888-7010 (phone)/(208)888-7924(FAX) �1
E
z
tick Rd
APPROXIMATETEST PIT LOCATIONS
Source:Google Earth 2018, GeoTek Field Observations, 2020.
Not to Scale
FIGURE 2
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
Dennis Creek Subdivision
NE of W Ustick Rd & N Linder Rd
GEOTEK Meridian, Idaho
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS Prepared for: H�yden Homes
Project No.: Report Date: Drawn By:
320 E.Corporate Dr,Suite 300, Meridian,ID 83642 2149-ID July 2020 SJ H
(208)888-7010 (phone)/(208)888-7924(FAX)
APPENDIX A
GeoTek, Inc.
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., 199 1. 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 Exceeclance
in 50 years.
GeoTek, Inc.
APPENDIX B
GeoTek, Inc.
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 Value(SS)Blows/Ft Relative Density
Strength,Qu,psf Value(SS)Blows/Ft
<Soo <2 Very Soft 0-3 Very Loose
Soo- 1,000 2-3 soft 4-9 Loose
1,001 -2,000 4-7 Firm 10-29 Medium Dense
2,001 -4,000 8- 16 Stiff 30-49 Dense
4,001 -8,000 17-32 Very Stiff 50+ Very Dense
>8,001 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.
Very Stiff to Moderately Hard Partially Cemented Fine-Grained Soil-Can be carved with a knife and broken with force by
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
FIEL Artificial Fill
--- ----- GP or GW Poorly/Well graded GRAVEL
GM Silty GRAVEL
GC Clayey GRAVEL
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
...........
S -sm
C Silty Clayey SAND
ML SILT
MH Elastic SILT
CL-ML Silty CLAY
CL Lean CLAY
CH Fat CLAY
PCEM PARTIALLY CEMENTED
CEM CEMENTED
BDR BEDROCK
EziSAMPLING
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 1, 1 1 1
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: SjH
PROJECT#: 2149-ID METHOD: Backhoe
'O"WGI144-1 PROJECT: Dennis Creek Subdivision EXCAVATOR: just Dig It
CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 7/2120
GE 0 T E K LOCATION: NE of N Linder Rd&W Ustick Rd Intersection ELEVATION:
SAMPLES —
C 0
0 E C
a: >- TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-I S REMARKS
CL V) 4
CL U) ;n
C
E U 0
to .2 wo) V) — — '
3 r MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
ML Brown to Dk.Brown,Sandy SILT,Moist So rganics oots upper 1.0'
hl� F
SM Tan to Lt.Brown,Silty SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist MD Weak cementation throughout
2
3
a G P Tan to Lt.Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL w/Sand&Cobbles,Moist to Saturated D Percolation testing conducted @ 4.0'on 7-7-20
5 Ground water measured @ 5.6'on 7-7-20
6
7
8 END OF TEST PIT 8.0- Piezometer installed @ 8.0'
9
10-
11 —
12-
13—
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19
20
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: SJH
PROJECT#� 2149-ID METHOD: Backhoe
As:z."' PROJECT: Dennis Creek Subdivision EXCAVATOR: just Dig It
CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 7/2/20
GE 0 T E K LOCATION: NE af N Linder Rd&W Ustick Rd Intersection ELEVATION:
SAMPLES —
1V 0
CL E .0 U
0 E C
.0 TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-2
REMARKS
C
E 0
0 .2 1A U
(M ca n F MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
ML Brown,Sandy SILT,Moist So Organics1roots upper Iff
SM Lt.Brown to Brown,Silty SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist MD Weak cementation throughout
Percolation testing conducted @ 2.0'on 7-7-20
2
3 GP Tan to Lt Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL w/Sand&Cobbles,Moist to Saturated D
4
5 Ground water measured @ 5.4'on 7-7-20
6
I Piezometer installed @ 8.0'
8 END OF TEST PIT Q 8.0-
9
10—
I I =
12-
13 -a
14—
Is-
16-
17-
18 -
19=
L
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: SJH
PROJECT#. 2149-ID METHOD: Backhoe
PROJECT: Dennis Creek Subdivision EXCAVATOR: just Dig It
CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 7/2/20
GE 0 T E K LOCATION: NE of N Linder Rd&W Ustick Rd Intersection ELEVATION:
SAMPLES —
C 0
V
E
>- TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-3
FA U REMARKS
CL
ul U)
E U 0
it .2 (on (A V
co n F— MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
ML Brown,Sandy SILT,Moist So Organicsiroots upper 1.0'
11�11 — F
SM Lt.Brown to Brown,Silty SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist MD
2
3
ODOM GP Brown to Reddish Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL w/Sand&Cobbles,Moist to Saturated D
Ground water seepage noted 5.5'
6
7
8 END OF TEST PIT @ 8.0'
9
10-
11 —
12-
13—
14—
Is-
16-
17-
18-
19=
20—
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: SJH
PROJECT M 2149-ID METHOD: Backhoe
Arx:4" PROJECT: Dennis Creek Subdivision EXCAVATOR: just Dig It
CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 7/2/20
GE 0 T E K LOCATION: NE of N Linder Rd&W Ustick Rd Intersection ELEVATION:
SAMPLES : -6
--w—— C
CL d L. .0
C
TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-4
REMARKS
12".
0 E U 0
to .2 (on 0 — U
in 0 1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
ML Brown,Sandy SILT,Moist So 7rganics/roots upper 1.0-
SM Tan to Lt.Brown,Silty SAND w/Gravel,Slightly Moist to Moist MID Weak cementation throughout
2
Percolation testing conducted @ 2.5'on 7-7-20
3
4 GP Brown to Reddish Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL w/Sand&Cobbles,Moist to Saturated D
5 Ground water measured @ 4.8'on 7-7-20
6
7 END OF TEST PIT @ 7.0' Piezometer installed @ 7.0'
8
9
10-
11 —
12-
13 —
14-
15 -
16 -
17-
18-
19-
20—
TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: SjH
PROJECT#: 2149-ID METHOD: Backhoe
PROJECT: Dennis Creek Subdivision EXCAVATOR: just Dig It
CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 7/2120
GE 0 T E K LOCATION: NE of N Linder Rd&W Ustick Rd Intersection ELEVATION:
SAMPLES
E A
E E
TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-5
REMARKS
C
U 0
kv .2 US W)
W n I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS U
ML Brown to Dk. grown,Sandy SUr,Moist So rganicsi oots upper 1.6'
_X �F
..... SM Lt.Brown to Brown,Silty SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist MD
2
Percolation testing conducted @ 3.0'on 7-7-20
3
GP Brown to Reddish Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL w/Sand&Cobbles,Moist to Saturated D
5 Ground water measured @ 4.9'on 7-7-20
6
7
8
9 VD Piezometer installed @ 10.0'
10— END OF TEST PIT @ 10.0-
11 —
12-
13 —
14-
15 —
16-
17-
18-
19 M
20—
APPENDIX C
GeoTek, Inc.
FIELD TESTS AND OBSERVATIONS (2149-ID)
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.The infiltration rates provided below should be used for design and
not exceeded.
USCS Soil INFILTRATION RATE
LOCATION Classification (inches/Hour)
Symbol
TP-I @ 4.0' GP 12.5
TP-2 @ 2.0' SM 5.8
TP-4 @ 2.5' SM 6.5
TP-5 @ 3.0' SM 5.5
GROUND WATER MONITORING RESULTS
Ground water monitoring results are presented below. Ground water elevation results are recorded in feet
below existing grade.
STAND-PIPE TP-I TP-2 TP-4 TP-5
PIEZOMETER #
7-7-20 5.6 5.4 4.8 4.9
Indicates a dry reading at the bottom of the piezometer
46 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 (2149-ID)
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Atterberg limits were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM D 43 18. The
results are shown in the following plates.
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
Sieve analyses were performed in general accordance with ASTM test method C 136 and ASTM C 1 17. Test
results are presented in the following plates.
RESISTANCE R-VALUE AND EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOILS
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-I @ 2.0'-3.0' 38
GeoTek, Inc.
GeoTek-Idaho
320 Corporate Drive,Ste#300 7950 Meadowlark Way, Ste E
Meridian, ID 83642 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83815
Phone: (208)888-7010 (208)888-7924
Fax: (208)904-2980 (208)904-2981
Report No: MAT:20-02845-SO2
Material Test Report
Client: Hayden Homes CC:
2464 SW Glacier Place
Redmond OR 97756
Project: 2149-ID
Dennis Creek Subdivision
THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN
Sample Details Sample Description:
Sample ID 20-02845-SO2 SM, Silty SAND w/Gravel
Date Sampled 7/2/2020
Specification General Sieve Set
Sampled By Steven Huber
Location TP-4, 1.0'-2.0' Atterberg
Liquid Limit: N/A
Plastic Limit: NP
Plasticity Index: NP
Particle Size Distribution Grading: ASTM C 136,ASTM C 117MM
Date Tested:
Tested By:
%Passing
100 .............................................................. Sieve Size % Passing Limits
90 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... ..... . ...... 2in 100
1 1/4i In 100
80 —....................... .................. —....... ........... — lin 100
1/4i In 100
70 . ...... . ...... ....... . ..... ..... . ...... 1/2i In 93
3/8in 89
60 . ...... . ...... ................... .......................... No.4 82
No.8 76
50 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . . ...... No.16 69
40 .......................... ....................... ....... . .......... No.30 59
No.50 48
30 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . ...... . ...... ..... No.100 38
No.200 27
20 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . ...... . .......
10 ..........................................................
01 'i...
N �2 cl� 1� 2
�0- 0 6
Z, 6
Z Z
Sieve
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND INES(26.8%) D85: 6.3930 D60: 0.6420 D50: 0.3403
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt � Clay D30: 0.0906 D15: N/A D10: N/A
(0.0%) (0.0%) (17.5%) (8.5%) (20.3%) (26.9%)
Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:20-02845-SO2 Q 2000-2020 QESTLab by SpectraQEST com Page I of 2
GeoTek-Idaho
320 Corporate Drive,Ste#300 7950 Meadowlark Way, Ste E
Meridian, ID 83642 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83815
Phone: (208)888-7010 (208)888-7924
Fax: (208)904-2980 (208)904-2981
Report No: MAT:20-02845-SO3
Material Test Report
Client: Hayden Homes CC:
2464 SW Glacier Place
Redmond OR 97756
Project: 2149-ID
Dennis Creek Subdivision
THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN
Sample Details Sample Description:
Sample ID 20-02845-SO3 ML, Sandy SILT
Date Sampled 7/2/2020
Specification General Sieve Set
Sampled By Steven Huber
Location TP-5, 0.0'-1.0' Atterberg
Liquid Limit: 34
Plastic Limit: 25
Plasticity Index: 9
Particle Size Distribution Grading: ASTM C 136,ASTM C 117MM
Date Tested:
Tested By:
%Passing
100 ......................................... Sieve Size % Passing Limits
90 . ...... ...... ...... ..... . .......... 2in 100
11/4in 100
80 —....................... ....................... ....... — lin 100
3/4in 100
70 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ....... ..... . ...... 1/2in 100
77 3/8in 100
60 . ...... . ...... ....... . ..... ..... ... No.4 100
No.8 99
50 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . ...... . ...... No.16 94
40 .......................... ....................... ................... — No.30 87
No.50 79
30 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . ...... . ....... No.100 71
No.200 58
20 . ...... . ...... ....... . . ..... . ...... . .......
10 ..........................................................
01 'i...
N �2 cl� 1� 2
�0- 0 6
Z, 6
Z Z
Sieve
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND INES(57.9%) D85: 0.5045 D60: 0.0834 D50: N/A
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt � Clay D30: N/A D15: N/A D10: N/A
(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.3%) (2.1%) (14.7%) (25.0%)
Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:20-02845-SO3 Q 2000-2020 QESTLab by SpectraQEST com Page I of 2