The URL can be used to link to this page

CC - Storm Drainage Calcs Report IRN THE LAND GROUP, INC. Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle Meridian, Idaho Storm Water Engineering Drainage Report Developer Wadsworth, Inc. Engineer ,,g,pNAL EN The Land Group, Inc. �� G\ST o Gf 462 East Shore Drive, Ste. 100 If Eagle, Idaho 83616 6 Contact: James Gute, PE sT 07/28/20�� Ph: 208.939.4041 J 9Te OF�pP� `JES W.G July 28, 2020 Project No. 119025 Site Planning• Landscape Architecture•Civil Engineering•Golf Course Irrigation&Engineering•Graphic Design •Surveying 462 E.Shore Drive,Suite 100• Eagle, Idaho 83616• P 208.939.4041•F 208.939.4445•www.thelandgroupinc.com or�— Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle �� Meridian, Idaho `/—thelandgroupinc com THE LAND GROUP, INC. 1 � Storm Water Management Report Report Purpose The following report addresses the storm drainage systems for Phase 1 of the Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle. The project is located at the southwest corner of Ustick Road and Eagle Road, within the City of Meridian, Idaho. Systems are included within the work that will also serve the future Phases of the Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle, including stub-outs for future building pad storm drainage connections. Site Description The general location of the project is described above. The site is bounded to the north ACHD public roadways (Ustick Road) and East by ITD public road (Eagle Road). The site slopes generally east to west and encompasses an area of approximately 3.29-acres. Storm Drainage Routing & Treatment: Generally, collection, routing and treatment of storm drainage from the project is as follows: 1. Roadways and parking areas slope to gutters; 2. Gutters transport collected drainage to catch basins; 3. Stormwater flows from catch basins into a storm drain piping network and sand & grease traps which transports the stormwater to seepage beds for final disposal via infiltration to the native soils underlying the project site. Air Site Planning• Landscape Architecture•Civil Engineering•Surveying 462 E.Shore Drive,Suite 100• Eagle, Idaho 83616 9 P 208.939.4041•www.thelandgroupinc.com or�a— Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle �� Meridian, Idaho `/—thelandgroupinc com THE LAND GROUP, INC. 1 � Storm Water Management Report Attachment A Drainage Map Air Site Planning• Landscape Architecture•Civil Engineering•Surveying 462 E.Shore Drive,Suite 100• Eagle, Idaho 83616 9 P 208.939.4041•www.thelandgroupinc.com s Noz )-154,Sy r —W W W W W W W W �lll' 27.57' ��= T H E SS -- s _ S Fip s b SS S SS90 "n , 49 . '- '—- SS SS S �� LAN D S01°05'59�i — ' GROUP T T T T T T T — �� --- � GUY S86°01'47"E 180 5T� li ANCHOR N89°39'20"E 181.46' S � 58 3' W,TR S S —'-�'— — - - 5 5 _ S OHP OAP 8 — SS L_ S / 16 GUY 2625 _ �. (FOPMERLY 5 .01') / _ AN HOR — -8 I &GUTTER IE 2623. T I GIP I RR OX N `�_2624 GHT OF WAY DEED 24"RCP / I FT O C.:r'. BOX --- INSTRUMENT No. IRRI ATI ER SPWO (ACHD SUP) SD-619 I I I J TA: 8+56.63, 0.00' 106009522 HE DW LLB I I Q a 2625100± CUR &GU - - - - U ' 26115.32 II I W = 2 1 .%,36- (s7— Area 1 P _ _ _ Area 2 I Z Q UT: cc IN, 36-IN CP (W) 43 302-SF — — - I I � a CZ a w - - _ _ _ 0 43,253-SF EP I w _ � ET II � Q I C3 Z w w S �iL A I � z l � — W _ I CO)W U I� I a I _ z O a UJ W J ® ® ® - - - - I - Z W —S oT -1 - � I O b _ J _ H H lie \ \ 5- ..P.BOX LU Lo I I LU O �- \\ Area 3 \ ISP C T SD-619 I I — CJ R RIM: 24.550- \ I W y 24.72' ' 35 982-SF 2615.65 G J 0 \ 9 RCP(E) c'� CURB&GI I CZ R C a a w I 65,36 RCP(W) W � CONCRE W M 2 \ \SPILL I Revisions Q (Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District) GI6` �� G►R Milk Lateral �R o •* ** ** ** i — — Project Na.: 119025 + —— S8 -06'0 Date of Issuance: 07.28.2020 ************ \ I I I I I I I I I inn 11 � I I I � � ._. I \\ II * * * 51 29' Exhibits - 0 50' 100' Drainage Map Exhibits-Drainage Map �E - Horizontal Scale: 1" = 50' EX01 ��o or�a— Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle �� Meridian, Idaho `/—thelandgroupinc com THE LAND GROUP, INC. 1 � Storm Water Management Report Attachment B Drainage Calculations Air Site Planning• Landscape Architecture•Civil Engineering•Surveying 462 E.Shore Drive,Suite 100• Eagle, Idaho 83616 9 P 208.939.4041•www.thelandgroupinc.com 0K Drainage Calculations �� R Basin Developed Volume �M THE LAND GROUP,INC. Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle - Area 1 Prepared By:Jim Gute Impervious Area = 43,302 sf Date:07/28/2020 Pervious Area = 0 sf Project#: 117108 lArea = 43,302 sf lArea = 0.99 acres C Coefficient = 0.95 Drainage System Characteristics System Infiltration Rate = 8.00 in./hr Swale Top Area = - sf Swale Bottom Area = - sf Swale Depth = 0.00 ft Swale Volume = - cf Inf Trench Width = 21.00 ft Inf Trench Length = 42.00 ft Inf Trench Depth = 10.00 ft Storage Volume of trench = 3528 cf Total Volume = 3,528 cf Infiltration Area = 882 sf Infiltration Rate = 588 cf/hr Storage Volume Required (100-yr Storm) (based on Zone"A"IDF Curve, 100-yr Return Period) Intensity Time(min) Time(sec) (in/hr) Q dev.(cfs) V dev.(cf) V inf.(cf) Vs(cf) 10 600 3.11 2.94 1,762 98 1,664 15 900 2.62 2.47 2,227 147 2,080 20 1,200 2.28 2.15 2,584 196 2,388 30 1,800 1.82 1.72 3,094 294 2,800 40 2,400 1.37 1.29 3,105 392 2,713 50 3,000 1.17 1.10 3,315 490 2,825 60 3,600 1.15 1.09 3,910 588 120 7,200 0.66 0.62 4,488 1,176 3,312 180 10,800 0.48 0.45 4,896 1,764 3,132 360 21,600 0.30 0.28 6,120 3,528 2,592 720 43,200 0.19 0.18 7,751 7,056 695 1,440 86,400 0.12 0.11 9,791 14,112 -4,321 System Checks Maximum Runoff Developed = 3,322 cf Total Volume Provided = 3,528 cf System OK(Excess Capacity) System Recovery Maximum Runoff = 3,322 cf Other Sources = 0 cf Percolation Volume = 3,322 cf Recovery Time = 5.6 hours System Summary: 21.00 ft wide x a10.00 ft deep x 42.00 ft long Sand & Grease Trap: 1500-Gal 1000-Gal Trap Size 1000-Gal 7.08 sf Maximum Discharge = 2.94 cfs System OK(Excess Capacity) Velocity = 0.41 fps Number of Traps(in parallel) = 1 CD SeepageBedSizing 119025 A.xlsx 0K Drainage Calculations �� R Basin Developed Volume �M THE LAND GROUP,INC. Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle - Area 2 Prepared By:Jim Gute Impervious Area = 43,253 sf Date:07/28/2020 Pervious Area = 0 sf Project#: 117108 lArea = 43,253 sf lArea = 0.99 acres C Coefficient = 0.95 Drainage System Characteristics System Infiltration Rate = 8.00 in./hr Swale Top Area = - sf Swale Bottom Area = - sf Swale Depth = 0.00 ft Swale Volume = - cf Inf Trench Width = 21.00 ft Inf Trench Length = 42.00 ft Inf Trench Depth = 10.00 ft Storage Volume of trench = 3528 cf Total Volume = 3,528 cf Infiltration Area = 882 sf Infiltration Rate = 588 cf/hr Storage Volume Required (100-yr Storm) (based on Zone"A"IDF Curve, 100-yr Return Period) Intensity Time(min) Time(sec) (in/hr) Q dev.(cfs) V dev.(cf) V inf.(cf) Vs(cf) 10 600 3.11 2.93 1,760 98 1,662 15 900 2.62 2.47 2,224 147 2,077 20 1,200 2.28 2.15 2,581 196 2,385 30 1,800 1.82 1.72 3,090 294 2,796 40 2,400 1.37 1.29 3,102 392 2,710 50 3,000 1.17 1.10 3,311 490 2,821 60 3,600 1.15 1.08 3,905 588 3,317 120 7,200 0.66 0.62 4,483 1,176 3,307 180 10,800 0.48 0.45 4,890 1,764 3,126 360 21,600 0.30 0.28 6,113 3,528 2,585 720 43,200 0.19 0.18 7,743 7,056 687 1,440 86,400 0.12 0.11 9,780 14,112 -4,332 System Checks Maximum Runoff Developed = 3,317 cf Total Volume Provided = 3,528 cf System OK(Excess Capacity) System Recovery Maximum Runoff = 3,317 cf Other Sources = 0 cf Percolation Volume = 3,317 cf Recovery Time = 5.6 hours System Summary: 21.00 ft wide x E10.00 ft deep x 42.00 ft long Sand & Grease Trap: 1500-Gal 1000-Gal Trap Size 1000-Gal 7.08 sf Maximum Discharge = 2.93 cfs System OK(Excess Capacity) Velocity = 0.41 fps Number of Traps(in parallel) = 1 CD SeepageBedSizing 119025 A.xlsx 0K Drainage Calculations �� R Basin Developed Volume �M THE LAND GROUP,INC. Eagle Commons at Ustick and Eagle - Area 3 Prepared By:Jim Gute Impervious Area = 35,982 sf Date:07/28/2020 Pervious Area = 0 sf Project#: 117108 lArea = 35,982 sf lArea = 0.83 acres C Coefficient = 0.95 Drainage System Characteristics System Infiltration Rate = 8.00 in./hr Swale Top Area = - sf Swale Bottom Area = - sf Swale Depth = 0.00 ft Swale Volume = - cf Inf Trench Width = 20.00 ft Inf Trench Length = 45.00 ft Inf Trench Depth = 8.00 ft Storage Volume of trench = 2880 cf Total Volume = 2,880 cf Infiltration Area = 900 sf Infiltration Rate = 600 cf/hr Storage Volume Required (100-yr Storm) (based on Zone"A"IDF Curve, 100-yr Return Period) Intensity Time(min) Time(sec) (in/hr) Q dev.(cfs) V dev.(cf) V inf.(cf) Vs(cf) 10 600 3.11 2.44 1,464 100 1,364 15 900 2.62 2.06 1,850 150 1,700 20 1,200 2.28 1.79 2,147 200 1,947 30 1,800 1.82 1.43 2,571 300 2,271 40 2,400 1.37 1.08 2,580 400 2,180 50 3,000 1.17 0.92 2,754 500 2,254 60 3,600 1.15 0.90 3,249 600 2,649 120 7,200 0.66 0.52 3,729 1,200 2,529 180 10,800 0.48 0.38 4,068 1,800 2,268 360 21,600 0.30 0.24 5,085 3,600 1,485 720 43,200 0.19 0.15 6,441 7,200 -759 1,440 86,400 0.12 0.09 8,136 14,400 -6,264 System Checks Maximum Runoff Developed = 2,649 cf Total Volume Provided = 2,880 cf System OK(Excess Capacity) System Recovery Maximum Runoff = 2,649 cf Other Sources = 0 cf Percolation Volume = 2,649 cf Recovery Time = 4.4 hours System Summary: 20.00 ft wide x 8.00 ft deep x 45.00 ft long Sand & Grease Trap: 1500-Gal 1000-Gal Trap Size 1000-Gal 7.08 sf Maximum Discharge = 2.44 cfs System OK(Excess Capacity) Velocity = 0.34 fps Number of Traps(in parallel) = 1 CD SeepageBedSizing 119025 A.xlsx MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION AN ATLAS COMPANY LJ Environmental Services a Geotechnical Engineering Q Construction Materials Testing 3 Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT of Proposed Commercial Development 3085 East Ustick Road Meridian, ID Prepared for: Barclay Group 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 200 Phoenix, AZ 85016 M71 File Number B191254g 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,10 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 www,mti-id.com•mt!@Mti-id.com MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# I of 30 INSPECTION b191254"eotech AN ATLAS COMPANY 0 Environmental Services a Geotechnical Engineering U Construction Materials Testing U Special Inspections Ms. Mollie Zemer Barclay Group 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 200 Phoenix, AZ 85016 602-2244170 Re. Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Commercial Development 3085 East Ustick Road Meridian, ID Dear Ms. Zemer: In compliance with your instructions, MTI has conducted a soils exploration and foundation evaluation for the above referenced development. Fieldwork for this investigation was conducted on 12 JuIy 2019. Data have been analyzed to evaluate pertinent geotechnical conditions. Results of this investigation, together with our recommendations, are to be found in the following report. We have provided a PDF copy for your review and distribution. Often, questions arise concerning soil conditions because of design and construction details that occur on a project. MTI would be pleased to continue our role as geotechnical engineers during project implementation. Additionally, MTI can provide materials testing and special inspection services during construction of this project. If you will advise us of the appropriate time to discuss these engineering services, we will meet with you at your convenience. MTI appreciates this opportunity to be of service to you and looks forward to working with you in the future. If you have questions, please call (208) 376-4748. Respectfully Submitted, SoUNAL EH� Materials Testing & Inspection �o� \,\GENSFo Z a ,a 14898 �` A ,, s 7125120190 Jacob Schlador, P.E. Reviewed by: Elizabeth Brown, P.E. �IgBETHgRo Geotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Services Manager 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 www,mti-id.com•mti@-mti-id.com Cprgnta2019M++�: • Teshng a Intpeflim 2��u&'20]� MATERIALSTESTING & Page#2 of30 U��~�� N*|2u*u�C=Lo6 INSPECTION xwAvL*mCnWAwv U Environmental Services U GeotechnicalE i h U Construction Matedals Testing Special I io T,4BLF,OF CONTENTS ...................... ................................ ----- ..........------`-`'`'-`'`'^^^'`-^^`-''3 Project Desc ' tinw .................... ................... ................------.---- ........... __,_,,.,','.,,,_,~,,_..� Authorization........ ........................................................------------,---,._,,,_,_,~,,'.,.,,,',..,,,_.3 pwpm-,-,-.,',.,',.............................. ...................................... ..............- ...............--..,'--.,.,.,,,,',,,_'_.3 or --------_---------'----'-------..- ...--.-.4 vvmn,amy#md Lvnwmmg Cwn4/tionw------- .................................. --------------,-..-..,.,-,-,4 S|rcDrscpup1nom-..-...,......................... .......................................... -------------^`-`--~-`'`-`-`� Sit*A=ss..--~'..,~,`.—'--'----------------_-------'-------...—`,-� Regional ............................ ..........---------- .......... --'`� General Sit*Chanmct:dwticw...,-,.-,'-----, ....................................................... ---------------`� Regimma| S it*CUnailNvgy and Gowchnmistry- ............................................. ...........----------- ...........6 Ssxsw|cSITC Evwuu^Ttow............- ......... ...................................... ............ --.........----------```~'` .......6 rjwmmc:ismoic —'---------_---------------'----___ -_,_�_� Seismic _--.,-' _---_ _-_-------------------------------- ''....-..-- 8ouLsGsnuonArION --__,_,_,_.,,,,,,,,,,__,.,.,.,___.___________________________.y Exploration and Sampling pvq"dureo......................... - .........................................-----........ -------? Laboratory Testing Progmom ..................................... Soil and Sediment Pro Fi)c-,-,.-,.,.,-..,.,.,- ........... - ............................ ------------------_..& VoladleK)rpmic Scan .................................................... SITE -..................................--.............................................. ........ -_,_--_'_.8 ....'----------_-__------------JA 3m | [mfiNmahon ____...._____- FnmmDazoaN.8uA-B.AnD P*vcM ENT D|9cUssmPw AND R%coxam r-wDAYkms................................... ---.-........ -i0 Foundation 0um|QpRncmmomwn6aUmmw...................,.,- ...........- ............................................... --.-----i� Foundation Drain RecmmmnpnduUomm........................... --- ........................................... ----.------.| | Floor .......................................... ............ -----...... -------| | Recommended Pavement Sxt6ons...................,................................... ........................................... -----..|2 Flexible Pavement Sections-----,.,-,-,-,-...................................- .............. ........................ _-----.12 Pavement SubQradc .............. ..........................- ....---.13 Common Pavement Section Conmunwtion]ssw ,........,..---- ........................................... ........ ---..13 --- ............ .............................................— ....---14 2unbwmrh................. ---- ........ --------. ......... ,.,-,., ..................................................................14 Drffeotbcr- ...........--- ..........------ ............................................-- .................................................14 Wei ................- ... ..................... .......... _ .....................................................15 SoMSmbgradeSoils ----......--- .......................................................... .......................... ............ ............-As Frozen Swb8radeSoi Is--------'` ---------------_----_A5 StructuralPU|--------------,___,_,_.,..........................._ .......... __ ............... ........ ... ____16 BnckfiU| of Walls............. ---- ....... -------.,--, ........-,-,,--,-,..--- ..................................|7 Excavations...................... --------- ........ -----------..|7 Groundwater Ctmtro|--------------.--.-.,.,-,.--_.........................................----.............i7 GLwEmxLCnwwsNrs----- ..........------- ........................... - .................................................................|0 REFERENCES..........'--------------'.---_-,--,-,. ................................................................. ..|9 APPENDICES..........'------- ...... --- ....................................................................... ....... ...... ............ '20 AcronymList..................... ...... --------------, .............................................................................20 Cieotenhnkca| General]Noteu-----------,-,-,.,--..,,..--,.,., ............ ............ ..........................-.2| Ueonechnkca| Investigation Tw Pit Log, -,-,-,--- ... .................................. ...........- ...............................%% AASH7O Pavement Thickness Design 9noc:durcs .......... ...............- ................................ ...............................%? Plate |: Vicinity Map...---___-- .... .............'-- ............ ----'------%9 MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page # 3 of3Q INSPECTION b191254g_gcotech AN ATLAS COMPANY 0 Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections INTRODUCTION This report presents results of a geotechnical investigation and analysis in support of data utilized in design of structures as defined in the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). Information in support of groundwater and stormwater issues pertinent to the practice of Civil Engineering is included. Observations and recommendations relevant to the earthwork phase of the project are also presented. Revisions in plans or drawings for the proposed development from those enumerated in this report should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer to determine whether changes in the provided recommendations are required. Deviations from noted subsurface conditions, if encountered during construction, should also be brought to the attention of the soils engineer. Project Description The proposed development is in the eastern portion of the City of Meridian, Ada County, ID, and occupies a portion of the NE4NE'l4 of Section 6, Township 4 North, Range 2 East, Boise Meridian. This project will consist of construction of four commercial structures varying in size between 3,500 to 8,800 square feet. The site to be developed is approximately 3.3 acres in size, which is to be developed into four commercial lots. Total settlements are limited to 1 inch. Loads of up to 4,000 pounds per lineal foot for wall footings,and column loads of up to 50,000 pounds were assumed for settlement calculations. Additionally, assumptions have been made for traffic loading of pavements. Retaining walls are not anticipated as part of the project. MTI has not been informed of the proposed grading plan. Authorization Authorization to perform this exploration and analysis was given in the form of a written authorization to proceed from Colby Fincham of Barclay Group to Elizabeth Brown of Materials Testing and Inspection(MTI), on 26 June 2019. Said authorization is subject to terms,conditions,and limitations described in the Professional Services Contract entered into between Barclay Group and MTI. Our scope of services for the proposed development has been provided in our proposal dated 18 June 2019 and repeated below. Purpose The purpose of this Geotechnical Engineering Report is to determine various soil profile components and their engineering characteristics for use by either design engineers or architects in: • Preparing or verifying suitability of foundation design and placement • Preparing site drainage designs • Indicating issues pertaining to earthwork construction • Preparing light and heavy duty pavement section design requirements 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise.ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 Capynphl C 2919 WtWfi• ls www.mti-id.corn mti@mti-id.com Tewn9 a inspectim MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#4 of 30 INSPECTION 6191254g_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services El Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testin2 ❑Special Inspections Scope of Investigation The scope of this investigation included review of geologic literature and existing available geotechnical studies of the area, visual site reconnaissance of the immediate site, subsurface exploration of the site, field and laboratory testing of materials collected, and engineering analysis and evaluation of foundation materials. The scope of work did not include design recommendations specific to individual residences. Warranty and Limiting Conditions MTI warrants that findings and conclusions contained herein have been formulated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of foundation engineering, soil mechanics, and engineering geology only for the site and project described in this report. These engineering methods have been developed to provide the client with information regarding apparent or potential engineering conditions relating to the site within the scope cited above and are necessarily limited to conditions observed at the time of the site visit and research. Field observations and research reported herein are considered sufficient in detail and scope to form a reasonable basis for the purposes cited above. Exclusive Use This report was prepared for exclusive use of the property owner(s), at the time of the report, and their retained design consultants ("Client"). Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the agreed-upon scope of work outlined in this report together with the Contract for Professional Services between the Client and Materials Testing and Inspection("Consultant"). Use or misuse of this report,or reliance upon findings hereof, by parties other than the Client is at their own risk. Neither Client nor Consultant make representation of warranty to such other parties as to accuracy or completeness of this report or suitability of its use by such other parties for purposes whatsoever, known or unknown, to Client or Consultant. Neither Client nor Consultant shall have liability to indemnify or hold harmless third parties for losses incurred by actual or purported use or misuse of this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed. Rei)ort Recommendations are Limited and Subiect to Misinteraretation There is a distinct possibility that conditions may exist that could not be identified within the scope of the investigation or that were not apparent during our site investigation. Findings of this report are limited to data collected from noted explorations advanced and do not account for unidentified fill zones, unsuitable soil types or conditions,and variability in soil moisture and groundwater conditions. To avoid possible misinterpretations of findings, conclusions, and implications of this report, MTI should be retained to explain the report contents to other design professionals as well as construction professionals. Since actual subsurface conditions on the site can only be verified by earthwork, note that construction recommendations are based on general assumptions from selective observations and selective field exploratory sampling. Upon commencement of construction, such conditions may be identified that require corrective actions, and these required corrective actions may impact the project budget. Therefore, construction recommendations in this report should be considered preliminary, and MTI should be retained to observe actual subsurface conditions during earthwork construction activities to provide additional construction recommendations as needed. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 � www-rn1Hd.com•mtih�mtHd.com vrh�+ ao'e specu. Yes4ny 8 Inspection MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#5 of 30 INSPECTION bI91254g_georech AN ATLAS COMPANY 13 Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical Engineering ,]Construction Materials'resting O Special Inspections Since geotechnical reports are subject to misinterpretation, do not separate the soil logs from the report. Rather, provide a copy of, or authorize for their use, the complete report to other design professionals or contractors. Locations of exploratory sites referenced within this report should be considered approximate locations only. For more accurate locations, services of a professional land surveyor are recommended. This report is also limited to information available at the time it was prepared. In the event additional information is provided to MTI following publication of our report, it will be forwarded to the client for evaluation in the form received. Environmental Concerns Comments in this report concerning either onsite conditions or observations, including soil appearances and odors, are provided as general information. These comments are not intended to describe,quantify, or evaluate environmental concerns or situations, Since personnel, skills, procedures, standards, and equipment differ, a geotechnical investigation report is not intended to substitute for a geoenvironmental investigation or a Phase 11/I1I Environmental Site Assessment. If environmental services are needed, MTI can provide, via a separate contract, those personnel who are trained to investigate and delineate soil and water contamination. SITE DESCRIPTION Site Access Access to the site may be gained via Interstate 84 to the Eagle Road exit. Proceed north on Eagle Road approximately 2.5 miles to its intersection with Ustick Road. The site occupies the southwest corner of this intersection. Presently the site exists an undeveloped lot. The location is depicted on site map plates included in the Appendix. Regional Geology The project site is located within the western Snake River Plain of southwestern Idaho and eastern Oregon. The plain is a northwest trending rift basin,about 45 miles wide and 200 miles long, that developed about 14 million years ago(Ma)and has since been occupied sporadically by large inland lakes. Geologic materials found within and along the plain's margins reflect volcanic and fluvial/lacustrine sedimentary processes that have led to an accumulation of approximately l to 2 km of interbedded volcanic and sedimentary deposits within the plain. Along the margins of the plain,streams that drained the highlands to the north and south provided coarse to fine-grained sediments eroded from granitic and volcanic rocks, respectively. About 2 million years ago the last of the lakes was drained and since that time fluvial erosion and deposition has dominated the evolution of the landscape. The project site is underlain by the "Gravel of Whitney Terrace" as mapped by Othberg and Stanford (1993). Sediments of the Whitney terrace consist of sandy pebble and cobble gravel. The Whitney terrace is the second terrace above modem Boise River floodplain, is thickest toward its eastern extent, and is mantled with 2-6 feet of loess. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748-Fax(208)322-6515 'N.V'. .m to-I C.corn-mti a-mj-id com CepynghrG 2019 Mala"s Tasting&rnspectim MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#b of 30 INSPECTION b 191254"cotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections General Site Characteristics This proposed development consists of approximately 3.3 acres of relatively flat and level terrain. Throughout the majority of the site, surficial materials consisted of various gravel fill materials and native lean clays. A canal that had recently been piped was present on the southern boundary of the site. Vegetation primarily consists of bunchgrass and other native grass varieties typical of and to semi-arid environments. Regional drainage is north and west toward the Boise River. Stormwater drainage for the site is achieved by percolation through surficial soils. The site is situated so that it is unlikely that it will receive any stormwater drainage from off-site sources. Stormwater drainage collection and retention systems are not in place on the project site, but were noted in the form of curbs, gutters, and drop inlets along Ustick Road. Regional Site Climatology and Geochemistry According to the Western Regional Climate Center, the average precipitation for the Treasure Valley is on the order of 10 to 12 inches per year, with an annual snowfall of approximately 20 inches and a range from 3 to 49 inches. The monthly mean daily temperatures range from 21°F to 957, with daily extremes ranging from - 25°F to 11 l°F. Winds are generally from the northwest or southeast with an annual average wind speed of approximately 9 miles per hour(mph) and a maximum of 62 mph. Soils and sediments in the area are primarily derived from siliceous materials and exhibit low electro-chemical potential for corrosion of metals or concretes. Local aggregates are generally appropriate for Portland cement and time cement mixtures. Surface water, groundwater, and soils in the region typically have pH levels ranging from 7.2 to 8.2. SEISMIC SITE EVALUATION Geoseismic Setting Soils on site are classed as Site Class D in accordance with Chapter 20 of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)publication ASCE/SEI 7-10. Structures constructed on this site should be designed per IBC requirements for such a seismic classification. Our investigation did not reveal hazards resulting from potential earthquake motions including: slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture caused by faulting or lateral spreading. Incidence and anticipated acceleration of seismic activity in the area is low. Seismic Design Parameter Values The United States Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Maps (2008), includes a peak ground acceleration map. The map for 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years in the Western United States in standard gravity(g) indicates that a peak ground acceleration of 0.201 is appropriate for the project site based on a Site Class D. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,Id 83709-(208)3764748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com-mtiOmti-id.com copynght02mumienwa TeoffV&Inspedim MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 7 of 30 INSPECTION bI9i254g_Bwtcch AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical Engineering 0 Construction Materials Testing ©Special Inspections The following section provides an assessment of the earthquake-induced earthquake loads for the site based on the Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER). The MCER spectral response acceleration for short periods, Sets, and at 1-second period, Sari, are adjusted for site class effects as required by the 2015 IBC. Design spectral response acceleration parameters as presented in the 20I5 IBC are defined as a 5% damped design spectral response acceleration at short periods, SDs, and at l-second period, SDr. The USGS National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project includes a program that provides values for ground motion at a selected site based on the same data that were used to prepare the USGS ground motion maps. The maps were developed using attenuation relationships for soft rock sites; the source model, assumptions, and empirical relationships used in preparation of the maps are described in Petersen and others (1996). Seismic Design Values Seismic Design Parameter Design VaIue Site Class D "Stiff Soil" SS 0.297 ( ) SI 0.104 ( ) F, 1.562 Fv 2.385 ShiS 0.464 Smi 0.247 S os 0.310 SDI 0.165 SOILS EXPLORATION Exploration and Sampling Procedures Field exploration conducted to determine engineering characteristics of subsurface materials included a reconnaissance of the project site and investigation by test pit. Test pit sites were located in the field by means of a Global Positioning System (GPS) device and are reportedly accurate to within eleven feet. Upon completion of investigation, each test pit was backfilled with loose excavated materials. Re-excavation and compaction of these test pit areas are required prior to construction of overlying structures. In addition, samples were obtained from representative soil strata encountered. Samples obtained have been visually classified in the field by professional staff, identified according to test pit number and depth, placed in sealed containers, and transported to our laboratory for additional testing. Subsurface materials have been described in detail on logs provided in the Appendix. Results of field and laboratory tests are also presented in the Appendix. MTI recommends that these logs not be used to estimate fill material quantities. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)3764748-Fax(208)322-6515 Y.W+Y.mti-id.corrl Teonq E Inspection -mli mli-d Uum Cepyrpnt[2N)Matenals MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 8 of 30 INSPECTION b191234g_geutech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construcdon Materials Testing J Special Inspections Laboratory Testing Program Along with our field investigation, a supplemental laboratory testing program was conducted to determine additional pertinent engineering characteristics of subsurface materials necessary in an analysis of anticipated behavior of the proposed structures. Laboratory tests were conducted in accordance with current applicable American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications, and results of these tests are to be found on the accompanying logs located in the Appendix. The Iaboratory testing program for this report included: Atterberg Limits Testing- ASTM D4318 and Grain Size Analysis—ASTM C 117r'C I36. Soil and Sediment Profile The profile below represents a generalized interpretation for the project site. Note that on site soils strata, encountered between test pit locations, may vary from the individual soil profiles presented in the logs, which can be found in the Appendix. The materials encountered during exploration were quite typical for the geologic area mapped as Gravel of Whitney Terrace. In test pits 2 and 5, gravelly fill materials were encountered at ground surface. These fills were brown to light brown, dry, loose to dense, and contained fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. At ground surface in test pits 1, 3, and 4 and underlying the surficial fills were lean clay soils. Lean clays were dark brown to brown, dry to slightly moist, medium stiff to hard, and contained fine-grained sand. Beneath the lean clays were sandy silt soils. Sandy silts were brown to light brown, dry to slightly moist, stiff to hard, and contained fine to medium-grained sand and varying degrees of calcium carbonate cementation. At depth within all test pits except test pit 4 were poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. Poorly graded gravels with sand were light brown to brown, dry to slightly moist, dense to very dense, and contained fine to coarse- grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch-minus cobbles. Competency of test pit sidewalls varied little across the site. In general, fine grained soils remained stable while more granular sediments readily sloughed. However, moisture contents will also affect wall competency with saturated soils having a tendency to readily slough when under load and unsupported. Volatile Organic Scan No environmental concerns were identified prior to commencement of the investigation. Therefore, soils obtained during on-site activities were not assessed for volatile organic compounds by portable photoionization detector. Samples obtained during our exploration activities exhibited no odors or discoloration typically associated with this type of contamination. No groundwater was encountered. SITE HYDROLOGY Existing surface drainage conditions are defined in the General Site Characteristics section. Information provided in this section is limited to observations made at the time of the investigation. Either regional or local ordinances may require information beyond the scope of this report. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 www.mli-id-com•mtiCcamti-id.com CopY�lo2019Mafenal` To"E ImpecUm MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 9 of 30 INSPECTION bl91254U_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY 0 Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections Groundwater During this field investigation, groundwater was not encountered in test pits advanced to a maximum depth of 16.2 feet bgs. Soil moistures in the test pits were generally dry to slightly moist throughout. In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater levels are controlled in large part by residential and commercial irrigation activity and leakage from nearby canals. Maximum groundwater elevations likely occur during the later portion of the irrigation season. During a previous investigation performed on portions of the site, groundwater was not encountered within test pits advanced to a maximum depth of 15.3 feet bgs. MTI has previously performed 6 geotechnical investigations within 0.15 mile of the project site. Information from these investigations has been provided in the table below. Groundwater Data Date Approximate Distance Direction from Site Groundwater Depth from Site mile feet bgs) October 2005 0.06 North 18.0 to 21.5 April 2007 0.06 North Not Encountered to 13.7 February 2009 0.15 Northwest Not Encountered to 26.5 Se tember 2015 0.05 West '19.6 to 22.0 September 2018 0.07 South Not Encountered to 16.6 December 2018 0.07 South Not Encountered to 21.5 Based on evidence of this investigation and background knowledge of the area, MTI estimates groundwater depths to remain greater than approximately 17 feet bgs throughout the year. This depth can be confirmed through long-term groundwater monitoring. Soil Infiltration Rates Soil permeability,which is a measure of the ability of a soil to transmit a fluid, was not tested in the field. Given the absence of direct measurements, for this report an estimation of infiltration is presented using generally recognized values for each soil type and gradation. Of soils comprising the generalized soil profile for this study, lean clay soils generally offer little permeability, with typical hydraulic infiltration rates of less than 2 inches per hour. Sandy silt soils will commonly exhibit infiltration rates from 2 to 4 inches per hour; though calcium carbonate cementation may reduce this value to near zero. Poorly graded gravel with sand sediments typically exhibit infiltration values in excess of 12 inches per hour. Infiltration testing is generally not required within these sediments because of their free-draining nature. It is recommended that infiltration facilities constructed on the site be extended into native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. Excavation depths of approximately 3.9 to 6.9 feet bgs should be anticipated to expose these poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. Because of the high soil permeability, ASTM C33 filter sand, or equivalent, should be incorporated into design of infiltration facilities. An infiltration rate of 8 inches per hour should be used in design. Actual infiltration rates should be confirmed at the time of construction. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)3764748•Fax(208)322-6515 mm rr�.mti-id.com•mti0brnti-id.com copyright Maienai` Tesbrig&Inspectim MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING Fr Page# 10 of 30 INSPECTION b I9125ag_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections FOUNDATION, SLAB,AND PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Various foundation types have been considered for support of the proposed development. Two requirements must be met in the design of foundations. First,the applied bearing stress must be less than the ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils to maintain stability. Second, total and differential settlement must not exceed an amount that will produce an adverse behavior of the superstructure. Allowable settlement is usually exceeded before bearing capacity considerations become important; thus, allowable bearing pressure is normally controlled by settlement considerations. Considering subsurface conditions and the proposed construction, it is recommended that the structure be founded upon conventional spread footings and continuous wall footings. Total settlements should not exceed 1 inch if the following design and construction recommendations are observed. Foundation Design Recommendations Based on data obtained from the site and test results from various laboratory tests performed, MTl recommends the following guidelines for the net allowable soil bearing capacity: Soil Bearing Ca acity Footing Depth ASTM D1557 Net Allowable Sub grade Compaction Soil Bearing Capacity aci Footings must bear on competent, undisturbed, native sandy silt soils, poorly graded gravel with sand sediments, or compacted structural fill. Not Required for Native Existing lean clay soils and fill materials must be Soil 2,000 lbs.4F completely removed from below foundation elements.' Excavation depths ranging from roughly 95% for Structural Fill 1.7 to 2.6 feet bgs should be anticipated to expose ro er bearing soils.2 'It will be required for MTI personnel to verify the bearing soil suitability for each structure at the time of construction. 2Devending on the time of year construction takes Mace, the sub grade soils may be unstable because of high moisture contents. If unstable conditions are encountered over-excavation and replacement with granular structural fill and/or use of geotextiles may be required. The following sliding frictional coefficient values should be used: 1) 0.35 for footings bearing on native sandy silt soils and 2) 0.45 for footings bearing on granular structural fill and native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. A passive lateral earth pressure of 339 pounds per square foot per foot (psflft) should be used for sandy silt soils. For compacted sandy gravel fill and native poorly graded gravels with sand, a passive lateral earth pressure of 496 psflft should be used. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,I 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com•mti6mti-iQ.com Cop"01 P2019Matenos r,wrg A Impecum MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page # 11 of 30 INSPECTION 6191254"ecterh AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering 0 Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections Footings should be proportioned to meet either the stated soil bearing capacity or the 2015 IBC minimum requirements. Total settlement should be limited to approximately 1 inch, and differential settlement should be limited to approximately Y2 inch. Objectionable soil types encountered at the bottom of footing excavations should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Excessively loose or soft areas that are encountered in the footings subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill. To minimize the effects of slight differential movement that may occur because of variations in the character of supporting soils and seasonal moisture content, MTI recommends continuous footings be suitably reinforced to make them as rigid as possible. For frost protection, the bottom of external footings should be 30 inches below finished grade. Foundation Drain Recommendations Considering the presence of shallow cemented soils across the site, MTI recommends that a foundation drain be installed. The drain should be placed at the footing elevation and be directed to a suitable discharge point at least 10 feet away from the structure. Discharge points should be protected to prevent erosion. Floor Slab-on-Grade Uncontrolled fill was encountered in portions of the site. MTI recommends that these fill materials be excavated to a sufficient depth to expose competent, native soils. MTI personnel must be present during excavation to identify these materials. Native clay soils are moderately plastic and will be susceptible to shrink/swelI movements associated with moisture changes. The clay soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches and compacted between 92 to 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The moisture content should be within 2 percent of optimum. Structural fill should be placed as soon as possible after compaction of clay soils in order to limit moisture loss within the upper clays. Ground surfaces should be sloped away from structures at a minimum of 5 percent for a distance of 10 feet to provide positive drainage of surface water away from buildings. Grading must be provided and maintained following construction. Organic, loose, or obviously compressive materials must be removed prior to placement of concrete floors or floor-supporting fill. In addition, the remaining subgrade should be treated in accordance with guidelines presented in the Earthwork section. Areas of excessive yielding should be excavated and backfilled with structural fill. Fill used to increase the elevation of the floor slab should meet requirements detailed in the Structural Fill section. Fill materials must be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. A free-draining granular mat (drainage fill course) should be provided below slabs-on-grade. This should be a minimum of inches in thickness and properly compacted. The mat should consist of a sand and gravel mixture, complying with Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) specifications for 3/a-inch (Type 1) crushed aggregate. The granular mat should be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709-(208)376.4748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com-mti(a�mti-id.com ��nt°2pigh1W"% s.wng&1 nq)mMm MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page # 12 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY a Environmental Services Q Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections A moisture-retarder should be placed beneath floor slabs to minimize potential ground moisture effects on moisture-sensitive floor coverings. The moisture-retarder should be at least 15-mil in thickness and have a permeance of less than 0.01 US perms as determined by ASTM E96. Placement of the moisture-retarder will require special consideration with regard to effects on the slab-on-grade and should adhere to recommendations outlined in the ACI 302.1 R and ASTM E 1745 publications. Upon request, MTI can provide further consultation regarding installation. Recommended Pavement Sections MTI has made assumptions for traffic loading variables based on the character of the proposed construction. The Client shall review and understand these assumptions to make sure they reflect intended use and loading of navements both now and in the future. Based on experience with soils in the region, a subgrade California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of 3 has been assumed for near-surface lean clay soils on site. The following are minimum thickness requirements for assured pavement function. Depending on site conditions, additional work, e.g. soil preparation, may be required to support construction equipment. These have been listed within the Soft Subgrade Soils section. Flexible Pavement Sections The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) design method has been used to calculate the following pavement sections. Calculation sheets provided in the Appendix indicate the soils constant,traffic loading,traffic projections,and material constants used to calculate the pavement sections. MTI recommends that materials used in the construction of asphaltic concrete pavements meet requirements of the ISPWC Standard Specification for Highway Construction. Construction of the pavement section should be in accordance with these specifications and should adhere to guidelines recommended in the section on Construction Considerations. AASHTO Flexible Pavement S ecifications Pavement Section Component' Driveways and Parking Driveways and Parking Light Duty Heavy Duty Asphaltic Concrete 2.5 Inches 3.0 Inches Crushed Aggregate Base 4.0 Inches 6.0 Inches Structural Subbase 12.0 Inches 14.0 Inches Compacted Subgrade See Pavement Subgrade See Pavement Subgrade Preparation Section Preparation Section 'It will be required for MTI personnel to verify subgrad�petency at the time of construction. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 caorot v 2019 UffienWs www.mti-id.com•mliCg�mti-id.com T"bno&Inspecbm MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page # 13 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geaicch AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections Asphaltic Concrete: 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. Aggregate Base: Material complying with ISPWC Standards for Crushed Aggregate Materials. Structural Subbase: Granular structural fill material complying with the requirements detailed in the Structural Fill section of this report except that the maximum material diameter is no more than 213 the component thickness. Gradation and suitability requirements shall be per ISPWC Section 801, Table 1. Pavement Subgrade Preparation Uncontrolled fill was encountered in portions of the site. MTI recommends that these fill materials be excavated to a sufficient depth to expose competent, native soils. MTI personnel must be present during excavation to identify these materials. Native clay soils are moderately plastic and will be susceptible to shrink/swell movements associated with moisture changes. The clay soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches and compacted between 92 to 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The moisture content should be within 2 percent of optimum. Structural fill should be placed as soon as possible after compaction of clay soils in order to limit moisture loss within the upper clays. Common Pavement Section Construction Issues The subgrade upon which above pavement sections are to be constructed must be properly stripped, compacted (if indicated), inspected,and proof-rolled. Proof rolling of subgrade soils should be accomplished using a heavy rubber-tired, fully loaded, tandem-axle dump truck or equivalent. Verification of subgrade competence by MTI personnel at the time of construction is required. Fill materials on the site must demonstrate the indicated compaction prior to placing material in support of the pavement section. MTI anticipated that pavement areas will be subjected to moderate traffic. Submade clays and silts near and above optimum moisture contents may pump during compaction. Pumping or soft areas must be removed and replaced with structural fill. Fill material and aggregates, as well as compacted native subgrade soils, in support of the pavement section must be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 for flexible pavements and by ASTM D 1557 for rigid pavements. If a material placed as a pavement section component cannot be tested by usual compaction testing methods, then compaction of that material must be approved by observed proof rolling. Minor deflections from proof rolling for flexible pavements are allowable. Deflections from proof rolling of rigid pavement support courses should not be visually detectable. MTI recommends that rigid concrete pavement be provided for heavy garbage receptacles. This will eliminate damage caused by the considerable loading transferred through the small steel wheels onto asphaltic concrete. Rigid concrete pavement should consist of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement(PCCP) generally adhering to ITD specifications for Urban Concrete. PCCP should be 6 inches thick on a 4-inch drainage fill course (see Floor Slab-on-Grade section), and should be reinforced with welded wire fabric. Control joints must be on 12-foot centers or less. 2791 5 Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748-Fax(208)322-6515 www_rM6W.com-mikSoti4d. Cuprgm t 2019 Matenels Twmg 6 6upecbw MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 14 of 30 INSPECTION b I 91254gAeotech AN ATLAS COMPANY 0 Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Recommendations in this report are based upon structural elements of the project being founded on competent, native sandy silt soils, poorly graded gravel with sand sediments, or compacted structural fill. Structural areas should be stripped to an elevation that exposes these soil types. Earthwork Excessively organic soils, deleterious materials,or disturbed soils generally undergo high volume changes when subjected to loads, which is detrimental to subgrade behavior in the area of pavements, floor slabs, structural fills, and foundations. Brush and thick grasses with associated root systems were noted at the time of our investigation. It is recommended that organic or disturbed soils, if encountered, be removed to depths of I foot (minimum), and wasted or stockpiled for later use. Stripping depths should be adjusted in the field to assure that the entire root zone or disturbed zone or topsoil are removed prior to placement and compaction of structural fill materials. Exact removal depths should be determined during grading operations by MTI personnel, and should be based upon subgrade soil type, composition, and firmness or soil stability. If underground storage tanks, underground utilities, wells, or septic systems are discovered during construction activities, they must be decommissioned then removed or abandoned in accordance with governing Federal, State, and local agencies. Excavations developed as the result of such removal must be backfilled with structural fill materials as defined in the Structural Fill section. MTI should oversee subgrade conditions (i.e., moisture content) as well as placement and compaction of new fill (if required) after native soils are excavated to design grade. Recommendations for structural fill presented in this report can be used to minimize volume changes and differential settlements that are detrimental to the behavior of footings, pavements, and floor slabs. Sufficient density tests should be performed to properly monitor compaction. For structural fill beneath building structures, one in-place density test per lift for every 5,000 square feet is recommended. In parking and driveway areas, this can be decreased to one test per lift for every 10,000 square feet. Dry Weather If construction is to be conducted during dry seasonal conditions, many problems associated with soft soils may be avoided. However,some rutting of subgrade soils may be induced by shallow groundwater conditions related to springtime runoff or irrigation activities during late summer through early fall. Solutions to problems associated with soft subgrade soils are outlined in the Soft Subgrade Soils section. Problems may also arise because of lack of moisture in native and fill soils at time of placement. This will require the addition of water to achieve near-optimum moisture levels. Low-cohesion soils exposed in excavations may become friable, increasing chances of sloughing or caving. Measures to control excessive dust should be considered as part of the overall health and safety management plan. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise, ID 83709•(208)3764748•Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com•m i cop,dgmo2o19mahr +: MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 15 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geotccb AN ATLAS COMPANY 13 Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing 0 Special Inspections Wet Weather If construction is to be conducted during wet seasonal conditions (commonly from mid-November through May), problems associated with soft soils must be considered as part of the construction plan. During this time of year, fine-grained soils such as silts and clays will become unstable with increased moisture content, and eventually deform or rut. Additionally, constant low temperatures reduce the possibility of drying soils to near optimum conditions. Soft Subgrade Soils Shallow fine-grained subgrade soils that are high in moisture content should be expected to pump and rut under construction traffic. During periods of wet weather, construction may become very difficult if not impossible. The following recommendations and options have been included for dealing with soft subgrade conditions: • Track-mounted vehicles should be used to strip the subgrade of root matter and other deleterious debris. Heavy rubber-tired equipment should be prohibited from operating directly on the native subgrade and areas in which structural fill materials have been placed. Construction traffic should be restricted to designated roadways that do not cross, or cross on a limited basis, proposed roadway or parking areas. • Soft areas can be over-excavated and replaced with granular structural fill. • Construction roadways on soft subgrade soils should consist of a minimum 2-foot thickness of large cobbles of 4 to 6 inches in diameter with sufficient sand and fines to fill voids. Construction entrances should consist of a 6-inch thickness of clean, 2-inch minimum, angular drain-rock and must be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 30 to 50 feet long. During the construction process, top dressing of the entrance may be required for maintenance. • Scarification and aeration of subgrade soils can be employed to reduce the moisture content of wet subgrade soils. After stripping is complete, the exposed subgrade should be ripped or disked to a depth of 1 V2 feet and allowed to air dry for 2 to 4 weeks. Further disking should be performed on a weekly basis to aid the aeration process. • Alternative soil stabilization methods include use of geotextiles, lime, and cement stabilization. MTI is available to provide recommendations and guidelines at your request. Frozen Subgrade Soils Prior to placement of structural fill materials or foundation elements, frozen subgrade soils must either be allowed to thaw or be stripped to depths that expose non-frozen soils and wasted or stockpiled for later use. Stockpiled materials must be allowed to thaw and return to near-optimal conditions prior to use as fill. The onsite, shallow lean clay and silty soils are susceptible to frost heave during freezing temperatures. For exterior flatwork and other structural elements, adequate drainage away from subgrades is critical. Compaction and use of structural fill will also help to mitigate the potential for frost heave. Complete removal of frost susceptible soils for the full frost depth, followed by replacement with a non-frost susceptible structural fill, can also be used to mitigate the potential for frost heave. MT] is available to provide further guidancelassistance upon request. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 cap,of 1P 2014 Ma'erms www.mti-id.com mtiCa7mti-id.com Twbng&Intpe0an MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 16 of 30 INSPECTION b 191254iLgeaiccl, AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections Structural Fill Soils recommended for use as structural fill are those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP in accordance with the Unified Soil CIassification System (USCS) (ASTM D2487). Use of silty soils (USCS designation of GM, SM, and ML) as structural fill may be acceptable. However, use of silly soils GM SM. and ML as structural fill below footings is prohibited. These materials require very high moisture contents for compaction and require a long time to dry out if natural moisture contents are too high and may also be susceptible to frost heave under certain conditions. Therefore, these materials can be quite difficult to work with as moisture-content, lift thickness, and compactioe effort becomes difficult to control. If silty soil is used for structural fill lift thicknesses should not exceed 6 inches (loose), and fill material moisture must be closely monitored at both the working elevation and the elevations of materials already placed. Following placement, silty soils must be protected from degradation resulting from construction traffic or subsequent construction. Recommended granular structural fill materials, those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP, should consist of a 6-inch minus select, clean, granular soil with no more than 50 percent oversize (greater than '.-inch) material and no more than 12 percent fines (passing No. 200 sieve). These fill materials should be placed in layers not to exceed 12 inches in loose thickness. Prior to placement of structural fill materials, surfaces must be prepared as outlined in the Construction Considerations section. Structural fill material should be moisture-conditioned to achieve optimum moisture content prior to compaction. For structural fill below footings,areas of compacted backfill must extend outside the perimeter of the footings for a distance equal to the thickness of fill between the bottom of foundation and underlying soils, or 5 feet, whichever is less. All fill materials must be monitored during placement and tested to confirm compaction requirements, outlined below, have been achieved. Each layer of structural fill must be compacted, as outlined below: • Below Structures and Rigid Pavements: A minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. • Below Flexible Pavements: A minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 or 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The ASTM D1557 test method must be used for samples containing up to 40 percent oversize (greater than inch)particles. If material contains more than 40 percent but less than 50 percent oversize particles, compaction of fill must be confirmed by proof rolling each lift with a 10-ton vibratory roller (or equivalent) until the maximum density has been achieved. Density testing must be performed after each proof rolling pass until the in-place density test results indicate a drop (or no increase) in the dry density, defined as maximum density or "break over"point. The number of required passes should be used as the requirements on the remainder of fill placement. Material should contain sufficient fines to fill void spaces, and must not contain more than 50 percent oversize particles. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 ti'{�Lmm-tl-!d.com•rn'-IdRmU-'d.cor11 Covy"01192019Macerws TesWq 61egpection MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 17 of 30 INSPECTION b 19I254Meotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Matedals Testing ❑Special Inspections Backfill of Walls Backfill materials must conform to the requirements of structural fill, as defined in this report. For wall heights greater than 2.5 feet, the maximum material size should not exceed 4 inches in diameter. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces interferes with proper compaction,and can induce excessive point loads on walls. Backfill shall not commence until the wall has gained sufficient strength to resist placement and compaction forces. Further, retaining walls above 2.5 feet in height shall be backfilled in a manner that will limit the potential for damage from compaction methods and/or equipment. It is recommended that only small hand- operated compaction equipment be used for compaction of backfill within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall, measured from the back face of the wall. Backfill should be compacted in accordance with the specifications for structural fill, except in those areas where it is determined that future settlement is not a concern, such as planter areas. In nonstructural areas, backfiIl must be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. Excavations Shallow excavations that do not exceed 4 feet in depth may be constructed with side slopes approaching vertical. Below this depth, it is recommended that slopes be constructed in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, Section 1926, Subpart P. Based on these regulations, on-site soils are classified as type "C" soil, and as such, excavations within these soils should be constructed at a maximum slope of l% feet horizontal to I foot vertical (1%z:1) for excavations up to 20 feet in height. Excavations in excess of 20 feet will require additional analysis. Note that these slope angles are considered stable for short- term conditions only, and will not be stable for long-term conditions. During the subsurface exploration, test pit sidewalls generally exhibited little indication of collapse; however, sloughing of native granular sediments from test pit sidewalls was observed. For deep excavations, native granular sediments cannot be expected to remain in position. These materials are prone to failure and may collapse, thereby undermining upper soil layers. This is especially true when excavations approach depths near the water table. Care must be taken to ensure that excavations are properly backfilled in accordance with procedures outlined in this report. Groundwater Control Groundwater was not encountered during the investigation and is anticipated to be below the depth of most construction. Special precautions may be required for control of surface runoff and subsurface seepage. It is recommended that runoff be directed away from open excavations. Silty and clayey soils may become soft and pump if subjected to excessive traffic during time of surface runoff. Ponded water in construction areas should be drained through methods such as trenching, sloping, crowning grades, nightly smooth drum rolling, or installing a French drain system. Additionally, temporary or permanent driveway sections should be constructed if extended wet weather is forecasted. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.corn-m11 mti-id.com C0 T t V 2610 ,; MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page # 18 of 30 INSPECTION b I91254g_gcotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing a Special Inspections GENERAL COMMENTS Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during this investigation and available information regarding the proposed development, the site is adequate for the planned construction. When plans and specifications are complete,and if sigLiificant changes are made in the character or location of the ro osed structure consultation with MTI must be arranged as su lementa recommendations ma be re wired. Suitability of subgrade soils and compaction of structural fill materials must be verified by MTI personnel prior to placement of structural elements. Additionally, monitoring and testing should be performed to verify that suitable materials are used for structural fill and that proper placement and compaction techniques are utilized. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376A748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.m i-i -mtiLa-mti-id.com 11a720tg�I"°""" Testuq&Inapwlm MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 19 of 30 IF INSPECTION b191254"cotech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services Ct Geolechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO)(1993). AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993. Washington D.C.: AASHTO. American Concrete Institute(ACI)(2015).Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction: ACI 302.1 R. Farmington Hills,ME ACI. American Society of Civil Engineers(ASCE) (2013). Minimum Design Loads fbr Buildin -s and Other Structures: ASCE/SEI 7-1 tt. Reston,VA: ASCE. American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)(2013). Standard Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-um(No. 200)Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washine:ASTM Cl 17.West Conshohocken,PA: ASTM, American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)(2014).Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates: ASTM C 136.West Conshohocken,PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)(2012). Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil[sing Standard Effort: ASTM D698. West Conshohocken,PA: ASTM, American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM) (2012). Standard Test Methods for L_abo_ratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort: ASTM D1557.West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2014).. Standard Test Methods for California Bearing Ratio:-ASTM D1883. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM) (2011). Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Pu oses (Unified Soil Classification System): ASTM D2487.West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM) (2010). Standard Test Methods for Liguid Limit, Plastic Limit. and Plasticity Index of Soils: ASTM D4318. West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2011). Standard Specification for Plastic Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Soil or Granular Fill Under Concrete Slabs:ASTM El745. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. Desert Research Institute. Western Regional Climate Center. [Online]Available:<http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/>(2019). International Building Code Council (2015). International Building Code,2015.Country Club Hills, IL:Author. Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) (2017). Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction, 2017. Boise, ID: Author. Othberg, K. L. and Stanford, L.A., Idaho Geologic Society(1992). Geologic Man of the Boise Valley and Adjoining Area, Western Snake River Plain, Idaho. (scale 1:100,000). Boise, ID:Joslyn and Morris. U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. CFR 29, Part 1926, Subpart P: Safety and Health Ret►ulations for Construction. Excavations(19861. [Online] Available: <www.osha.gov>(2019). U.S. Geological Survey (2019). National Water Information System: Web Interface. [Online] Available: <http://waterdata,usgs,gov/nwis>(2019). U.S. Geological Survey. (2011). U.S. Seismic Design Maps: Web Interface. [Online] Available: <https://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php>(2019). 2791 S Victory View Way•Soise, ID 83709•(208)376-4748 a Fax(208)322-6515 www,mti-id,com•mli( mti-id.com Copyr4h102019MAM815 Teong 6 Inepechm MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#20 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY 0 Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ©Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections APPENDICES ACRONYM LIST AASHTO: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACHD: Ada County Highway District ACI American Concrete Institute ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials bgs: below ground surface CBR: California Bearing Ratio D: natural dry unit weight,pcf ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load GS: grab sample IBC: International Building Code IDEQ Idaho Department of Environmental Quality ISPWC: Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction ITD: Idaho Transportation Department LL: Liquid Limit M: water content NISL: mean sea level N: Standard"N"penetration: blows per foot,Standard Penetration Test NP: nonplastic OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PCCP: Portland Cement Concrete Pavement PERM: vapor permeability PI: Plasticity Index PID: photoionization detector PVC: polyvinyl chloride QC: cone penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength,psi Qp: Penetrometer value,unconfined compressive strength,tsf Qu: Unconfined compressive strength, tsf RMR Rock Mass Rating RQD Rock Quality Designation R-Value Resistance Value SPT: Standard Penetration Test(140:pound hammer falling 30 in. on a 2:in.split spoon) USCS: Unified Soil Classification System USDA: United States Department of Agriculture UST: underground storage tank V: vane value,ultimate shearing strength,tsf 2791 S Victory View Way a Boise,ID 83709•(208)3764748 a Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com•mtitamti-id.com c4oyd"Q"19MM1 81* Teg,np&Inspeam MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page #21 of 30 INSPECTION b191254b gcolcch AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES RELATivE DENSI1r}Y AND CONSISTENCY CLASSIRICA7TION Coarse-Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N) Fine-Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N Very Loose: - 4 Very Soft: <2 Loose: 4-10 Soft: 24 Medium Dense: 10-30 Medium Stiff' 4-8 Dense: 30-50 Stiff: 5-15 Very Dense: �50 Very Stiff.. 15-30 Hard: •30 Moisture Content: Cementation Description Field Test Description Field Test Dry Absence of moisture,dusty,dry to touch Weakly Crumbles or breaks with handling orsli ght finger pressure Moist Damp but not visible moisture Moderately Crumbles or beaks with considerable finger pressure Wet Visible free water,usually soil is below Strongly Will not crumble or break with finger water tablepressure PARTICLE SIZE Boulders: >12 in. Coarse-Grained Sand: 5 to 0.6 mm silts.. 0.075 to 0.005 mm Cobbles: 12 to 3 in. Medium-Grained Sand: 0.6 to 0.2 mm Clays- <0.005 mm Gravel: 3 in.to 5 mm Fine-Grained Sand: 0.2 to 0.075 mm UNIRIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Major Dlvisions Symbol Soil Descriptions A- Gravel&Gravelly GW Well-graded gravels;gravellsand mixtures with little or no fines Soils GP Poorly-graded gravels;gravellsand mixtures with little or no fines <50°f° Coarse-Grained coarse Fraction GM Silty gravels;poorly-graded gravel/sandlsilt mixtures Soils<50"/u passes NoA sieve GC Clayey gravels;poorly-graded gravellsand/clay mixtures passes No.200 Sand&Sandy SW Well-graded sands;gravelly sands with little or no fines sieve Soils SP Poorly-graded sands gravelly sands with little or no fines >50% ,g Y coarse fraction SM Silty sands;poorly-graded sand/gravellsilt mixtures passes No.4 sieve SC Clayey sands;poorly-graded sand/gravel/clay mixtures ML Inorganic silts;sandy,gravelly or clayey silts Silts&Clays Fine Grained LL<50 CL Lean clays; inorganic,gravelly,sandy,or silty, low to medium-plasticity clays Soils>50% OL Organic, low-plasticity clays and silts passes No.200 MH Inorganic,elastic silts;sandy,gravelly or clayey elastic silts sieve Silts&Clays CH Fat clays;high-pIasticity,inorganic clays LL>50 OH Organic,medium to high-plasticity clays and silts Highly Organic Soils PT Peat,humus, hydric soils with high organic content 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748-Fax(208)322-6515 ±�w.ml.-id.ccrT-L-mGi�mJ-id:carrr caaYriq�lO2o19M-t-a-In Te-tmp d inspection MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#22 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geu1cch AN ATLAS COMPANY J Environmental Services a Geotechnical Engineer!22 U Construction Materials Testing Q Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-1 Date Advanced: 12 July 2019 Logged by: Jacob Schlador, F.E. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.633300 Longitude: -116.355006 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 16.2 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Lab feet b s Sediment Classification I T� a ,eet b s QP Test ID Lean Clay (CL): Dark brown to brown, dry 0 0-1 8 to slightly moist, very stiff to hard, with fine- 2.54.5 grained sand. --Organics to a depth of 0.5 Foot b s. Sandy Silt (ML): Brown, dry, very stiff to hard, with fine to medium-grained sand. 1.8-4.9 --Moderate to strong calcium carbonate cementation encountered from 1.8 to 4.9 feet b s. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Brown to light brown, di), to slightly moist, 4.9-16.2 dense to very dense, with fine to coarse- grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6- inch-minus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515•� www.mti-id.com•rrntiftti-id.com °°°r "`"AInSP iOM MATERIALS 25 July 2019 40 TESTING & Page# 23 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY U Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing U Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-2 Date Advanced: 12 July 2019 Logged by: Jacob Schlador, RE. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.633584 Longitude: -116.354920 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 8.3 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Lab Feet b s Sediment Classification Type (Feet b s QP Test ID Silty Gravel with Sand Fill (GM-FILL): 0.0-1.0 Brou!n, d y, meduun dense to dense, ivith fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse ravel, Lean Clay with Sand (CL): Dark broil ii to 1.0-2.6 brown. diy to slightly moist, stifJ'to very stiff, ivith one- rained sand. Sandy Silt (ML): Browi!r to light brown, dry to slightly ntoist, stiff to hard, with fine to 2.6-6.9 niedhan-graured sand. --Moderate calchnn carbonate cementation encountered rom 3.3 to 6.9 feet b s. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): 6 9-8 3 Brown to light brown, diy, dense to very dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand,fine to coarse gravel, and 5-inch-ininus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 Cepyd www.mti-id.eom•mtit7a mti id.com gN02019Matends Tesbnq#Inwecum MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 24 of 30 INSPECTION 6191254g._geotech AN ATLAS COMPANY U Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering U Construction Materials Testing J Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-3 Date Advanced: 12 July 2019 Logged by: Jacob Schlador, P.E. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.633264 Longitude: -116.355525 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 8.1 Feet bgs Depth Yield Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Lab Meet b s Sediment Classification Type _(Feet b s Qp Test ID Lean Clay(CL):Brown, dhy to slightly moist, ruedhun stiff to very stiff, with fine-grained 0.0-l.8 sand. 1 0.2 0 --1 to 2 inch layer of poorly graded sand fill materials were encountered at ground stu ace. Sandy Silt (ML): Brown to light brown, dry to slightly moist, very stiff to hard with fine 1.8-4.0 to niediunr-grained sand. --Moderate to strong calcium carbonate cementation encountered from 1.8 to 4.0 feet b s. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 4.0-8.1 brown, dry, dense to very dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch-minus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748•Fax(208)322-6515 +Nury`m1�.ad Cvm•rni�rnli-id.cvrn Copyriphtc201SMatenele TnWV 6lnspectw MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#25 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_gcolech AN ATLAS COMPANY O Environmental Services ❑Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-4 Date Advanced: 12 July 2019 Logged by: Jacob Schlador, P.E. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.633528 Longitude: -116.356192 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 6.9 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Lab (Feet bgs) . Sediment Classification Type Feet bgs Qp Test ID Lean Clay (CL): Dai k brown, dq to slightly 0 0-1 7 moist, stiff' to very stiff, with fire-grained GS 1.0-1.5 1.5-3.0 A sand. --Organics to a depth of 0.4 foot bgs. Sandy Silt (ML): Brown to light brown, dry to slightly moist, stiff to bard, with fine- grained sand. 1.7-6.9 --Moderate to vei3J strong calcium carbonate cementation fi-om 3.0 to 6.9 feet bgs. --Refusal on ver}, strong calcium carbonate cementation at 6.9 feet bgs. Lab Test ID M LL PI Sieve Analysis % assin % - - #4 #10 #40 #100 #200 A 21.9 42 23 100 100 99 97 94.3 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376-4748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com-mti mti-id.com nn msh-cis a MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page#26 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g-�eatcch AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services ©Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing a Special Inspeclions GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log#: TP-5 Date Advanced: 12 July 2019 Logged by: Jacob Schlador, P.E. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.633009 Longitude: -116.355694 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 7.8 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Lab __(Feet b Sediment Classification Ti a Feet b s Qp Test ID Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand Fill (GP- 0.0-0.5 FILL): Light brown, dry, loose to medium dense, svith fine to coarse-grained sand and fine to coarse gravel. Lean Clay (CL): Dark brown to brown, dry 0.5-2.1 to slightly moist, stiff�to very stiff, with fine- rained sand. Sandy Silt (ML): Brawn, dry to slightly 2.1-3.9 moist, stiff to very stiff, with fine-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): 3.9-7.8 Brown to light brown, dry, dense to very dense, with fine to coarse grained sand,fine to coarse gravel, and 6-inch-minus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)376.4748•Fax(208)322-6515 Maleriais www,mti-id.com-mli(}mti-id.com CapyrdTestin &Inspectim n0 n.axuon MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING F: Page# 27 of 30 INSPECTION b I 91254g_gcolecii AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing 0 Special Inspections AASHTQ PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN PROCEDURES Pavement Section Design Location: Proposed Commercial Development,Light Duty Average Daily Traffic Count: 500 All Lanes S Both Directions Design Life: 20 Years Percent of Traffic in Design Lane: 5001 Terminal Seviceabinily irides[Pill. 2.5 Level of Reliability: 95 Subgrade CBR Value: 3 Subgrade 111r: 4,500 Calenlalion of Design-I8 kip ESAL% Daily Growth Load Design Traffic Rate Factors ESALs Passenger Cats• 166 2.00o 0,0008 1,179 Buses- 0 2.000 0.6806 0 Panel&Pickup Trucks: 80 2.00o 0.0122 9,656 2-Axle,6-Tire Trucks; 3 2.00o 0.1890 5,028 Emergency Vehicles; 1.0 2000 4.4800 39,731 Dump Trucks; 0 2 0°.0 3.6390 0 Tractor Semi Trader Trucks; 0 2.000 2.3719 0 Double Trailer Trucks 0 2.00o 2.3187 0 Ilemy Tractor Trailer Combo Trucks: 0 2.00e 2.9760 0 Average Daily Traffic in Design Lane- 250 Total Design Life 18-kip ESALs: 54 593 Actual Log(ESALs): 4 737 Trial SN: 2.78 Trial Log(ESALs): 4.737 Pavement Section Design SIV: 2.81 Design Depth Structural Drainage Inches Coefficient Coefficient Asphaltic Concrete: 2.50 0.42 nla Asphalt-Treated Base: 0.00 0.25 nla Cement-Treated Base: 000 0.17 n/a Crushed Aggregate Base: 400 0.14 1.0 Subbase: 1200 0.10 1.0 Special Aggregate Subgrade: 0.01) 009 09 2701 S Victory View Way•Boise,ID 83709•(208)3764748•Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com•mWEDrriti-id.com copyright c 2010 6kaisnel2 TesUng E Inspeebw MATERIALS 25 July 2019 TESTING & Page# 28 of 30 INSPECTION b191254g_geolech AN ATLAS COMPANY ❑Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering ❑Construction Materials Testing ❑Special Inspections AASHTO PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN PROCEDURES Pavement Section Design Location: Proposed Commercial Development,Heavy Duty Average Daily Traffic Count: 500 All Lanes R Both Directions Design Life: 20 }'cars Percent of Traffic in Design Lane: 500= Trminal Scs iteibility Indci tPtl: 25 Level of Reliability: 95 Subgrodc CBR Value: 3 Subgrade Mr: 4,500 Calculation of Design-18 kip ESALs Daily Gro%vih Load Design Traffic Rate Factors ESALs Passenger Cars: 150 2 00"a 00008 1,064 Buses: 1 201. 0 6806 6,036 Panel&Pickup Trucks; 84 2 0 00122 9,088 2-Axle.6-Tire Trucks: 10 2 0% 01890 16,762 EmergencyVchtcics: 1.i1 2.Wo 4.4800 39,731 Dump Trucks: 2 2.0% 3.6300 64,386 Tractor Semi Trailer Trucks: 2 2.0% 2.3719 42,071 Double Trailer Trucks 0 2,0% 2.3187 0 Heavy Tractor Trailer Combo Trucks 0 2.0% 2.9760 it Average Daily Traffic rn Design Lane 250 Total Design Life IS-kip ESALs: 179.137 Actual Lag(ESALs): 5 253 Trial SN: 3.39 Trial Log(ESALs): 5 257 Pavement Section Design SN: 350 Design Depth Structural Drainage Inches Coefficient Coefficient Asphaltic Concrete: 300 0.42 nla Asphalt-Treated Base: 0.00 0.25 n/a Cement-Treated Base: 0.00 0,17 nla Crushed Aggregate Base: 6.00 0.14 1.0 Subbase: 14.00 0.10 1.0 Special Aggregate Subgrade: 0.00 0.09 0.9 2791 S Victory View Way-Boise,ID 83709-(208)3764748-Fax(208)322-6515 www.mti-id.com-mtit-a?mti-id.com Copyright c2019Matenal: Tntinq d inip000n m rTl CA D r•F S [ IAN ,s CD n Z CL32 C i to to v� m .. .i c z ut w C� vs 2 G UZI3 ifm.9 S. tl M!DV3-S"- W.T A `r G b ti IN LOVECLOVERDALE RD N CLOVER lb . RAG 3 S, M 3 f v `D a P N FIVE MILE RD rl I � � � z T A S MAPLE pVF fop N f,IAPLE GROVE RD p N MAP GROVE RD N _ V � + 0 cc_" " 2, tp C@ . c u ,n Ch ia ato N Q. y i 0 lz 6 z v G CDf/J { ! 2 N v � ��-' rt > Z m _7 to O C6 = IYIS' D Q S UlC. m m -r1 `"m j Z N m ■emu [� � � I �. i• y— ■ N■ old '' ' ' • rl � I 1 1 11 1� 1 , 11 1III = I _ S i � 11 • 11 r j I w ■ t 1 n r Ir 11 cn � II 11 I t If n f , r) �� I K 1 Ig � I I . I j cn At N - r --7IN _ N LC�YIiY�11Y1\I-� 1 _ � f 1 t I 'p • ^ 1 I 1 J rr L.1 1 L J 1Ln f f x oil , I f � � �� h�N I � ■ EAGLE ROAD N r- !no� m p O C d CJ1 0� G1 1 a n m m Wow a Cl) � 5 N n m m CD A7 ai0 �? m to � m N r n m Z m ac s O m w Z N ' CD n1%