Loading...
PZ - Geotechnical Engineering Report GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR "PARAMOUNT INFILL" — A 13.55+ ACRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 5725 NORTH MERIDIAN ROAD MERIDIAN, IDAHO October 24, 2023 GTI-Project No. 2667-ID Prepared For: HAYDEN HOMES 2464 SW Glacier Place, Suite 110 Redmond, OR 97756 GeoTek, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPEOF SERVICES .......................................................................................................................................... SITEDESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................................................2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................2 FIELDSTUDIES......................................................................................................................................................2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY......................................................................................................................................2 SITESOILS..............................................................................................................................................................3 ArtificialFill ......................................................................................................................................................3 NativeAlluvial Soils........................................................................................................................................ 3 SURFACE & GROUND WATER......................................................................................................................3 TECTONIC FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY............................................................................4 Secondary Seismic Constraints....................................................................................................................4 Summary:..........................................................................................................................................................4 RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING.........................................................................................................4 CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................................................4 RECOMMENDATIONS - EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION.................................................................5 General .............................................................................................................................................................5 Demolition.......................................................................................................................................................5 Removals/Processing - General...................................................................................................................5 TransitionalPads.............................................................................................................................................6 ExcavationDifficulty.......................................................................................................................................6 FillPlacement...................................................................................................................................................7 Import Material and Structural Fill..............................................................................................................7 Common Subgrade Section Construction Issues....................................................................................7 Observationand Testing...............................................................................................................................7 GroundWater................................................................................................................................................7 EarthworkSettlements..................................................................................................................................8 RECOMMENDATIONS — FOUNDATIONS.................................................................................................8 General .............................................................................................................................................................8 Conventional Foundation Recommendations..........................................................................................8 FoundationSettlement..................................................................................................................................9 PAVEMENT SECTIONS ......................................................................................................................................9 Pavement Construction and Maintenance.............................................................................................. 10 OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................... 10 SiteImprovements........................................................................................................................................ 10 GeoTek, Inc. Landscape Maintenance and Planting........................................................................................................ SoilCorrosion............................................................................................................................................... I I TrenchExcavation........................................................................................................................................ Onsite Utility Trench Backfill..................................................................................................................... 12 Drainage.......................................................................................................................................................... 12 PLANREVIEW..................................................................................................................................................... 12 LIMITATIONS...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Enclosures: Figure #1 , Site Vicinity Map Figure #2, Site Exploration Plan Figure #3, Proposed Site 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 83642-351 1 (208)888-7010 (208)888-7924 www.geotekusa.com October 24, 2023 Project No. 2667-ID HAYDEN HOMES 2464 SW Glacier Place, Suite 110 Redmond, OR 97756 Attention: Mr. Eric Scheck Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation for "Paramount Infill" — a 13.55± Acre Residential Development— Located at 5725 North Meridian Road, Meridian, Idaho 83646 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 six (6) 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 PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 2 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID SITE DESCRIPTION The project Site consists of two irregularly shaped parcels totaling approximately 13.55 acres.The Site is currently developed with a single-family residence with associated improvements on the east parcel and agricultural land on the west parcel. The Site is generally bound by single-family residential developments to the north, south and west and Meridian Road to the east (Figures I and 2). A small irrigation canal borders the site to the south. From topographic maps the Site elevation is between 2,580±to 2,590±feet above mean sea level. Historically,topography generally directs surface water to the west-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 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.Six(6)test pits were advanced onsite. A log of each exploration is included with this report in Appendix B. Six (6) percolation tests were performed on the subject site as well as six (6) initial ground water measurements (Appendix C). Field studies were completed during October of 2023 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) Classification was used to visually classify the subgrade soils during the field evaluation. REGIONAL GEOLOGY The subject site is situated within the Boise River Valley, which comprises the northwestern portion of the Snake River Plain physiographic province. The western portion of the Snake River Plain is aligned in a northwest-southeast direction and generally divides the Owyhee mountains to the south from the Central Idaho mountains toward the north (Wood and Clemens, 2004). The headwaters of the Boise River are located in the Central Idaho mountains east of Boise, Idaho. The river leaves the central mountains and enters the Snake River Plain near Barber and drains toward the west into the Snake River near Parma. The Owyhee mountains and the Central Idaho Mountains are composed predominantly of volcanic and igneous rocks. The western portion of the Snake River Plain is a northwest trending complex graben formed by extension and regional uplift along the northern boundary of the basin and range province (Wood and Clemens, 2004). The graben generally forms a basin which has been partially filled with younger sedimentary and volcanic rocks (Malde, 1991). The Boise River Valley is bounded on the northeast by the Boise Front,which is a northwest trending topographic high extending generally from Boise to Emmett, Idaho. The Boise Front consists of Cretaceous aged granitic and metamorphic rocks cut by Tertiary aged rhyolite and overlain with Miocene aged lake sediments (Wood and Clemens, 2004). GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 3 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID These units have been cut by northwest trending faults which down drop these units toward the southwest. The faults also provide conduits for Quaternary aged basalt intrusions and flows (Malde, 1991). 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 throughout the site (up to 3.0' where encountered). This fill is generally associated with historical farming, existing developments and surrounding improvements. 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 mainly of lean clay, with a moderate amount of organics and roots. 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 consisted surficial layers of lean clays with varying amounts of sand, underlain by a partially cemented and cemented gravels and poorly graded gravels with varying amounts of silts and sands. The moisture content within the alluvial materials was generally slightly moist to moist near ground surface and at depth. The consistency of these soils was typically firm near the surface and medium dense to dense at depth. Partially cemented and cemented layers of material were encountered in a majority of our excavations at depths as shallow as 4.0 feet below existing grade. The consistency of the partially cemented soils was typically moderately hard and the consistency of the cemented layers of soil was typically hard. Special excavation equipment and techniques may be necessary dependent upon depths of cuts and if these harder materials are encountered during construction. SURFACE & GROUND WATER Ground water was not encountered in any of our excavations. According to the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources Well Drillers' logs,ground water in the vicinity is approximately 12 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. Irrigation ditches exist adjacent to the site and they transmit water on a periodic basis. Generally, irrigation ditches and canals will locally influence ground water during the irrigation season (i.e.,April 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). GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 4 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID 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. Secondary Seismic Constraints The following list includes other potential seismic related hazards that have been evaluated with respect to the site, but in our opinion,the potential for these seismically related constraints to affect the site is considered negligible. * Liquefaction * Dynamic Settlements * Surface Fault Rupture * Ground Lurching or Shallow Ground Rupture Summary It is important to keep in perspective that if a seismic event were to occur on any major fault, intense ground shaking could be induced to this general area. Potential damage to any settlement sensitive structures would likely be greatest from the vibrations and impelling force caused by the inertia of the structures mass than that created from secondary seismic constraints. Considering the subsurface soil conditions and local seismicity, it is estimated that the site has a low risk associated with the potential for these 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. GeoTelc, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 5 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID 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. I. 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. GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 6 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID Based on a review of the exploratory logs and our site reconnaissance, after the artificial fill and deleterious material are removed (up to 36 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. We recommend that all surficial clays and deleterious soils be removed from beneath the foundations and building pads and replaced with a minimum of 12 inches of compacted low expansive structural fill. The exposed ground surface should be moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum depth of 12 inches to provide uniform foundation support. Also, a minimum of 12 inches of compacted structural fill below the bottom of footings should be provided.A minimum relative compaction of 95 percent of the laboratory maximum modified density (ASTM D 1557) at a 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 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 Moderately hard to hard cemented layers of soil were encountered throughout a majority of our explorations. Moderately hard to hard materials that are 24 inches thick or less may be excavated with heavy equipment. Seasonal conditions could cause wet soil conditions to occur onsite. 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. GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 7 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID Fill Placement Subsequent to completing removals/processing and ground preparation, the excavated onsite and/or imported soils may be placed in relatively thin lifts (less than 8 inches thick),cleaned of vegetation and debris, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D 1557). Import Material and Structural Fill 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 20 percent passing the No. 200 screen. Common Subgrade Section Construction Issues The subgrade upon which building foundations, slabs, and 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 minimum 10 ton heavy rubber-tired, fully loaded, tandem-axle dump truck,or equivalent. Verification of subgrade competence by GTI personnel at the time of construction is required. Pumping or soft areas must be removed and replaced with structural fill. Minor deflections from proof rolling are allowed under flexible pavements. Deflections from proof rolling of building foundations or slabs and rigid pavement support courses should not be visually detectable. Observation and Testing During earthwork construction all removal/processing and the general grading procedures should be observed, and the fill selectively tested by a representative(s) of GTI. If unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field,they should be reviewed by GTI and if warranted, modified and/or additional recommendations will be offered. Ground Water Ground water was not encountered in any of our excavations. According to the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources Well Drillers' logs,ground water in the vicinity is approximately 12 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. Based on site conditions in the future, a transient high ground water condition could develop over a clay or less permeable layer and this condition could generate down gradient seepage. GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 8 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID The possible effect these layers could have on this and adjacent sites should be considered and can best be evaluated in the field during grading. If warranted by exposed field conditions, it may be recommended that a drainage system be established to collect and convey any subsurface water to an appropriate location for drainage. Typically, potential areas of seepage are difficult to identify prior to their occurrence; therefore, it is often best to adopt a "wait and see" approach to determine if any seepage conditions do develop, at which time specific recommendation to mitigate an identified condition can be provided. Earthwork Settlements Ground settlement should be anticipated due to primary consolidation and secondary compression. The total amount of settlement and time over which it occurs is dependent upon various factors, including material type, depth of fill, depth of removals, initial and final moisture content, and in-place density of subsurface materials. Compacted fills,to the heights anticipated,are not generally prone to excessive settlement. However, some settlement of the left-in-place alluvium is expected, and the majority of this settlement is anticipated to occur during grading. RECOMMENDATIONS — FOUNDATIONS General Foundation design and construction recommendations are based on preliminary laboratory testing and engineering analysis performed on near surface soils. The proposed foundation systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines contained herein and in the International Building Code. Based on our experience in the area, the soils onsite should have a negligible corrosive potential to concrete and metal, materials selected for construction purposes should be resistant to corrosion. Where permitted by building code, PVC pipe should be utilized. All concrete should be designed, mixed, placed, finished, and cured in accordance with the guidelines presented by the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and the American Concrete Institute (ACI). Based on our grading recommendations,the soils beneath the foundations are anticipated to have low expansion potential. Therefore, foundation recommendations for low expansive soil conditions are provided below. If more expansive soils are encountered, the pad(s) will either need to be regraded and the more expansive soils removed by the contractor—or increased foundation recommendations will need to be provided. Conventional Foundation Recommendations Column loads are anticipated to be 50 kips or less while wall loads are expected to be 3 kips per 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. GeoTelc, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 9 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID 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. Minimum Structural Fill Depth Minimum Allowable Passive Maximum Footing Below Footing Bearing Coefficient Earth Earth Type Depth Pressure of Friction Pressure Pressure Footing (inches) (psf) (psf/ft) (psf) Bottom (Inches) Strip/Spread 12 24 1,500 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, a minimum of 12 inches of compacted structural fill should be placed below bottom of footings. Foundation Settlement Provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction phase of development, total settlement is estimated to be less than one inch and differential settlement is estimated to be less than 0.75 inches for a 25-foot span. Two-way angular distortions due to settlements are not estimated to exceed 1/400. The structures should be loaded uniformly so as to avoid any localized settlements. PAVEMENT SECTIONS Pavement sections presented in the following table are based on an R-value result of 5, 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. GeoTelc, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 10 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID 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 95 percent near optimum moisture content. All aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent at optimum moisture content. MINIMUM MINIMUM AGGREGATE ASSUMED TRAFFIC SUBGRADE ASPHALT THICKNESS (in.) RIGHT-OF-AWAY R-VALUE CONCRETE Aggregate THICKNESS Base (3/4" Subbase Pitrun)* (in.) minus)* ( Residential Normal Traffic 5 2.5 4.0 13.0 TI = 6.0 Collector Normal Traffic 5 3.0 6.0 17.0 TI = 8.0 *Aggregate Base and Subbase gradation specification requirement per the current edition of the Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) Manual.Asphalt mix design shall meet the requirements of ISPWC, Section 810 Class III Plant mix. Materials shall be placed in accordance with ISPWC Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. 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. 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. GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE I I PROJECT NO. 2667-ID 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. 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 95 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. GeoTelc, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 12 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID Onsite Utility Trench BacHiill 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 95 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. Drainage Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times in accordance with the IBC. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope.Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward the street or other approved area. The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the building at a minimum of 5-percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured perpendicularly to the face of the wall. If physical obstructions prohibit 10 feet of horizontal distance,a 5-percent slope shall be provided to an approved alternate method of diverting water away from the foundation. Swales used for this purpose shall be sloped a minimum of 2-percent where located within 10 feet of the building foundation. Impervious surfaces within 10 feet of the building foundation shall be sloped a minimum of 2-percent away from the building. Roof gutters and down spouts should be utilized to control roof drainage. Down spouts should outlet onto paved areas or a minimum of five feet from proposed structures or into a subsurface drainage system. Areas of seepage may develop due to irrigation or heavy rainfall. Minimizing irrigation will lessen this potential. If areas of seepage develop, recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon request. PLAN REVIEW Final grading, foundation, and improvement plans should be submitted to this office for review and comment as they become available, to minimize any misunderstandings between the plans and recommendations presented herein. In addition,foundation excavations and earthwork construction performed on the site should be observed and tested by this office. If conditions are found to differ substantially from those stated, appropriate recommendations would be offered at that time. 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. GeoTek, Inc. PARAMOUNT INFILL OCTOBER 24, 2023 HAYDEN HOMES PAGE 13 PROJECT NO. 2667-ID Respectfully submitted, GeoTek, Inc. �ENle 40 T Lttle- �-� LAND I° LLr/2- Kyle C. Miley, PE Luke J. Landriani, PE Staff Professional Senior Engineer GeoTek, Inc. Z -F Eagle Galewd} Parks Tr G4- Slate Park TWO RIVERS / BANBUEY Ln Meridian Idaho Tempie :BanRqTy.'Golf C o u rs�'Ea g I e: Fred Meyei Ho I y Apostles Harbor Church Coslco Wholesale Catholic Church Intermountain Pet WKCo Fjo-d8- -b] : Er tL C T, CLI Z Walmarl SupeTcente.r 9 Dutch Bros Coffee 55 YN M.-W!an Fd N KI M"IEri Rd Albertg&la, W E 7!Fd WEST CLOVERDA'-:-: HERITAGE ick Rd 13RDVE Ust ljrtick Pd Se� rk U*t;-k Rd Trader Joe's Tully lark i 73 Z IN IN The Village at Mefidf.an YV Ch,-4 L-ri iE 9 =1iM"Ave Idaho Pizza CaFnpafly Wa l-M-a r-t S F'61 I er.:,Park -n Ir -.je Meridian E F 1C .A— APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION JCV Source: Google Maps, 2023. GeoTek Field Observations, 2023. Not to Scale FIGURE I SITEVICINITY MAP 1E Paramount Infill 5725 North Meridian Road ra E 0 T E K Meridian, Idaho GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS Pre ared for: Ha den Homes Project No.: Report Date: Drawn By: 320 E. Corporate Dr, Suite 300, Meridian, ID 83642 2667-ID October 2023] KCM (208)888-7010 (phone)/(208)888-7924 (FAX) fd O L cd T : • * 'W k z O J N tit ' o^ I L' I a� • - t k- r r r. IYA All a 1b ik R1 * ipIF - - � yy�l77 � w of APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATIONS Source: Google Earth, 2023. GeoTek Field Observations, 2023. Not to Scale FIGURE 2 SITE EXPLORATION PLAN Paramount Infill 5725 North Meridian Road ra E 0 T E K Meridian, Idaho GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS Prepare for: Ha den Homes 320 E. Corporate Dr, Suite 300, Meridian, ID 83642 Project No.: Report Date: Drawn By:2667-ID October 2023 KCM (208)888-7010 (phone)/(208)888-7924 (FAX) LoAkYlGlap C�rr y C i Fr :Z-L I--d=Ir 1 C30M 2-2,-T-4" Ilk -1 E A 0-41DM U.0c MPE31MM fm� LMOL^H. ALEX& -MC3-LIM-F-Wr 11360+0 2 In 23 411 Tu� I I RUT 74 L, 3 ? L--- # ---- A t-k! L 46-- 4$a f 7 ps Rd. Wdefft FH W'1j'f' 1 IL Source: Site Concept Plan Provided by Hayden Homes FIGURE 3 SITE CONCEPT PLAN Paramount Infill 5725 North Meridian Road G E 0 T E K Meridian, Idaho GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS Prepared for: Ha den Homes Project No.: Report Date: Drawn By: 320 E. Corporate Dr,Suite 300, Meridian, ID 83642 2667-ID October 2023 KCM (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., 1991. Quaternary geology and structural history of the Snake River Plain, Idaho and Oregon. In: The Geology of North America, Quaternary Nonglacial Geology: Conterminous U.S., Vol. K-2, 252-281 pp. Othberg, K.L., 1994. Geology and geomorphology of the Boise Valley and adjoining areas, western Snake River Plain, Idaho. Idaho Geological Survey Bulletin 29: 54 pp. USGS, Cloverdale Quadrangle, 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, 1979. USGS, 2003, Seismic Hazard Map of Idaho, Peak Acceleration (%g)with 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 years. GeoTek, Inc. APPENDIX 6 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 Relative Density Strength,Qu,psf Value(SS) Blows/Ft Value(SS) Blows/Ft <500 <2 Very Soft 0- 3 Very Loose 500- 1,000 2-3 Soft 4-9 Loose 1,001 -2,000 4-7 Firm 10-29 Medium Dense 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 FILL 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 SC-SM Silty Clayey SAND ML SILT MH Elastic SILT CL-ML Silty CLAY CL Lean CLAY CH Fat CLAY PCEM PARTIALLY CEMENTED CEM CEMENTED BDR I BEDROCK SAMPLING SPT Ring Sample PNRL No Recovery Bulk Sample Water Table CONSISTENCY Cohesionless Soils Cohesive Soils Cementation VL Very Loose So Soft MH Moderately Hard L Loose F Firm H Hard MD Medium Dense S Stiff VH Very Hard D Dense VS Very Stiff VD Very Dense TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/1 1/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES ate+ r � N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-14-1 REMARKS N 7 m c to N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill,Sandy Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist to Moist So Roots to 0.5' I CL Brown, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F 2 SC Lt.Brown,Clayey SAND,Slightly Moist MD Light Cementation 3 Percolcation Test Performed at 4 3.5' 5 PCEM Lt.Brown,PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sands and Gravels,Slightly Moist MH 6 GP-GM Brown, Poorly graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand,Slightly Moist to D 7 Moist 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 END OF TEST PIT @ 15.0' Piezometer Installed at 15.0' 16 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 17 18 19 20 TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/11/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES v s � N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-2 1 a REMARKS 0. 0 a 3 r U o D ° V) N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist to Moist So I CL Brown, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F 2 3 CL Lt. Brown, Lean CLAY with Sand,Slightly Moist F 4 PCEM Lt. Brown, PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sands and Gravels,Slightly Moist MH 5 GP-GM Brown, Poorly graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand,Slightly Moist to Moist D 6 Percolcation Test Performed at 7 6.0' 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 END OF TEST PIT @ I S.0' Piezometer Installed at 15.0' 16 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 17 18 19 20 TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/1 1/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES ate+ r � N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-34-1 REMARKS N 7 m c to N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist to Moist So Roots to 0.5' I CL Brown, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F 2 Light Cementation 3 CL Lt.Brown,Sandy Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F Percolcation Test Ferformed at 4 X3.0' 5 CEM Lt.Brown,CEMENTED Sands and Gravels,Slightly Moist H 6 7 GP-GM Brown, Poorly graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand,Slightly Moist to D Moist 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Bottom of Test Pit Caving;Could Not Reach 15.0' 15 END OF TEST PIT @ 14.5' Piezometer Installed at 14.5' NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 16 17 18 19 20 TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/1 1/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES ate+ r � N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-44-1 REMARKS N 7 m c to N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist to Moist So I CL Brown, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F 2 SC Lt.Brown,Clayey SAND,Slightly Moist MD Light Cementation 3 4 PCEM Lt.Brown,PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sands and Gravels,Slightly Moist MH 5 6 GP-GM Brown, Poorly graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand,Slightly Moist to D Moist Percolcation Test Performed at 7 6.0' 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 END OF TEST PIT @ 15.0' Piezometer Installed at 15.0' 16 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 17 18 19 20 TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/1 1/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES ate+ r � N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-S4-1 REMARKS N 7 c to N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist to Moist So I CL Brown, Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist F 2 SC Lt.Brown,Clayey SAND,Slightly Moist MD Light Cementation 3 4 5 6 PCEM Lt.Brown,PARTIALLY CEMENTED Sands and Gravels,Slightly Moist MH 7 8 erco cation Test Performed at SM Brown,Silty SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist MD 9 8.0' GP-GM Brown, Poorly graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand,Slightly Moist to Moist D 10 11 12 13 14 15 END OF TEST PIT @ 15.0' Piezometer Installed at 15.0' 16 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 17 18 19 20 TEST PIT LOG LOGGED BY: KCM PROJECT#: 2667-ID METHOD: Backhoe PROJECT: Paramount Infill EXCAVATOR: Just Dig It CLIENT: Hayden Homes DATE: 10/1 1/23 G E 0 T E K LOCATION: 5725 North Meridian Road ELEVATION: SAMPLES ate+ r %04-1 N TEST PIT NUMBER: TP-6 REMARKS .N C a CL _ 7 m c to N U N m D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS FILL Brown,Artificial Fill,Sandy Lean CLAY,Slightly Moist So Trash/Debris Upper 3.0' I 2 3 SC Lt.Brown to Brown,Clayey SAND,Slightly Moist to Moist 4 5 PCEM Lt.Brown,PARTIALLY CEMENTED,Slightly Moist MH 6 erco ation Test Performed at GP Lt.Brown,Poorly graded GRAVEL with Sand,Slightly Moist to Moist MD 7 6.0' 8 9 10 11 12 13 Bottom of Test Pit Caving;Could 14 Not Reach 15.0' END OF TEST PIT @ 14.0' Piezometer Installed at 14.0' 15 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED 16 17 18 19 20 APPENDIX C GeoTek, Inc. FIELD TESTS AND OBSERVATIONS (2667-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. LOCATION USCS Soil Classification INFILTRATION RATE Symbol (Inches/Hour) TP-I @ 3.5' SC 1.5 TP-2 @ 6.0' GP-GM 24.0+ TP-3 @ 3.0' CL 0.6 TPA @ 6.0' GP-GM 16.0 TP-5 @ 8.0' SM 3.5 TP-6 @ 6.0' GP-GM 24.0+ 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-3 TP-4 TP-5 TP-6 PIEZOMETER # 10/12/23 15.0'+ 15.01+ 14.5'+ 15.0'+ 15.0'+ 14.0'+ + Indicates a dry reading at the bottom of the piezometer n/a Indicates that the piezometer was damaged/missing in the field and no measurements were obtained. GeoTelc, Inc. APPENDIX D GeoTek, Inc. LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS (2667-ID) ATTERBERG LIMITS Atterberg limits were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM D 4318. The results are shown in the following plates. PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS Sieve analyses were performed in general accordance with 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-3, 1.0'-2.0' <5 GeoTek, Inc. GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S01 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample Description: ' Sample ID 23-01079-S01 CL, Lean clay with sand Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-2, 3.0'-4.0' Atterberg - - Liquid Limit: 36 Plastic Limit: 19 Plasticity Index: 17 Particle Size Distribution Grading: ASTM C 136,ASTM C 117 - Date Tested: Tested By: %Passing Sieve Size % Passing Limits 90 ............... ........................... ............................. 2in 100 13/4in 100 80 ..................................................... .................. 1in 100 3/in 100 70 ......................................................................... '/zin 100 3/8in 99 60 ......................................................................... No.4 98 N o.8 97 eo ........................................................................ No.16 93 40 ......................................................................... No.30 86 N o.50 79 30 ......................................................................... No.100 73 No.200 71 20 ......................................................................... 10 ......................................................................... 0 _ a m �2 0 0 0 2 W Z Z \ Z Z Z 6 Z Z Sieve COBBLES GRAVEL SAND FINES(71.4%) D85: 0.5434 D60: N/A D50: N/A Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt ClayD30: N/A D15: N/A D10: N/A (0.0%) (0.0%) (1.9%) (2.2%) (13.1%) (11.4%) Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S01 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 1 of 2 GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S01 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample ID 23-01079-S01 Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-2, 3.0'-4.0' Other Test Results - Description Method Result Limits Group Symbol ASTM D 2487 CL Group Name Lean clay with sand Approximate maximum grain size ASTM D 4318 Material retained on 425um(No.40)(%) Method of Removal Grooving Tool Type Specimen preparation method Drying Method Special selection process Rolling Method for PL Hand As Received Water Content(%) Liquid Limit Device Type Manual Liquid Limit 36 Plastic Limit 19 Plasticity Index 17 Liquid Limit Procedure Multipoint(A) Comments N/A Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S01 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 2 of 2 GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S02 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample Description: ' Sample ID 23-01079-S02 CL, Sandy lean clay Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-3, 3.0'-4.0' Atterberg Liquid Limit: 29 Plastic Limit: 21 Plasticity Index: 8 Particle Size Distribution Grading: ASTM C 136,ASTM C 117 _ Date Tested: Tested By: %Passing 100 .............................................................. Sieve Size % Passing Limits 90 ............... ..... ................................... 2in 100 13/4in 100 80 ..................................................... .................. 1in 100 3/in 92 70 .............................................................. .......... '/2in 92 3/8in 91 60 ......................................................................... No.4 90 N o.8 90 eo ........................................................................ No.16 89 40 ......................................................................... No.30 87 N o.50 79 30 ......................................................................... No.100 70 No.200 63 20 ......................................................................... 10 ......................................................................... 0 _ a m �2 0 0 0 2 W Z Z \ Z Z Z 6 Z Z Sieve COBBLES GRAVEL SAND FINES(62.7%) D85: 0.5045 D60: N/A D50: N/A Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt ClayD30: N/A D15: N/A D10: N/A (0.0%) (8.2%) (1.4%) (0.7%) (6.8%) (20.1%) Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S02 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 1 of 2 GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S02 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample ID 23-01079-S02 Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-3, 3.0'-4.0' Other Test Results - Description Method Result Limits Group Symbol ASTM D 2487 CL Group Name Sandy lean clay Approximate maximum grain size ASTM D 4318 Material retained on 425um(No.40)(%) Method of Removal Grooving Tool Type Specimen preparation method Drying Method Special selection process Rolling Method for PL Hand As Received Water Content(%) Liquid Limit Device Type Manual Liquid Limit 29 Plastic Limit 21 Plasticity Index 8 Liquid Limit Procedure Multipoint(A) Comments N/A Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S02 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 2 of 2 GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S03 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample Description: ' Sample ID 23-01079-S03 CL, Lean clay Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-3, 1.0'-2.0' Atterberg Liquid Limit: 42 Plastic Limit: 21 Plasticity Index: 21 Particle Size Distribution Grading: ASTM C 136,ASTM C 117 - Date Tested: Tested By: %Passing Sieve Size % Passing Limits 90 ......................................................................... 2in 100 13/4in 100 80 ......................................................................... tin 100 3/in 100 70 ......................................................................... '/zin 100 3/8in 100 60 ......................................................................... N o.4 100 N o.8 100 eo ........................................................................ No.16 100 40 ......................................................................... No.30 100 N o.50 99 30 ......................................................................... No.100 97 No.200 94 20 ......................................................................... 10 ......................................................................... 0 _ a m �2 0 0 0 2 W Z Z \ Z Z Z 6 Z Z Sieve COBBLES GRAVEL SAND FINES(94.3%) D85: N/A D60: N/A D50: N/A Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay D30: N/A D15: N/A D10: N/A (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.5%) (5.2%) Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S03 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 1 of 2 GeoTek-Boise 320 Corporate Drive,Suite#300 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208)888-7010 Fax: (208)888-7924 Report No: MAT:23-01079-S03 Material Test Report Client: Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC CC: 2464 SW Glacier Place Redmond OR 97756 Project: 2667-ID Paramount Infill THIS DOCUMENT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL Sample Details Sample ID 23-01079-S03 Date Sampled 10/11/2023 Specification General Sieve Set Sampled By Kyle Miley Location TP-3, 1.0'-2.0' Other Test Results - Description Method Result Limits Group Symbol ASTM D 2487 CL Group Name Lean clay R Value ASTM D 2844 Approximate maximum grain size ASTM D 4318 Material retained on 425um(No.40)(%) Method of Removal Grooving Tool Type Specimen preparation method Drying Method Special selection process Rolling Method for PL Hand As Received Water Content(%) Liquid Limit Device Type Manual Liquid Limit 42 Plastic Limit 21 Plasticity Index 21 Liquid Limit Procedure Multipoint(A) Comments N/A Form No:18909,Report No:MAT:23-01079-S03 ©2000-2023 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com Page 2 of 2