Loading...
2003-GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW V REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND REVIEW Spring Valley Estates SE of Mississippi Street and Old Central Avenue Fridley, Minnesota AET Job No. 01-01784 Date: October 20, 2003 Prepared For: Profitmax 2872 - 17th Terrace NW New Brighton, MN 55112 CONSULTANTS ! 1 GEOTECHNICAL AAMERICAN .MATERIALS ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING, INC. onsw October 20, 2003 Profitmax 2872 - 17th Terrace NW New Brighton, MN 55112 Ate: Mr. John Demello RE: Geotechnical Exploration and Review Spring Valley Estates SE of Mississippi Street and Old Central Avenue Fridley, Minnesota AET Job No. 01-017$4 Dear Mr. Demello: This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering review for the referenced project. We are submitting six copies of the report to you. Please contact me if you have any questions about the report. I can also be contacted for arranging construction observation and testing services during the earthwork phase of the project. Sincerely, American Engineering Testing, Inc. 1 . Lee Engineer (651) 603-6604 mlee amen est.com MJL/ml This ramie document ei�na n..e.+.ee(na...rh except pto full without acpe�vccnAnnn+an t.,.,Engineering eigc e_10-,n T •M p TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 31 3 SUMMARY 1 Purpose 1 Scope 1 Findings 1 Recommendations INTRODUCTION 22 Scope of Services PROJECT INFORMATION 2 Foundation Design Assumptions SITE CONDITIONS 33 Surface Observations Subsurface Soils/Geology 3 Water Level Measurements 4 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 5 Review of Soil Properties 5 RECOMMENDATIONS 55 Building Grading Foundations 7 Floor Slab 7 Building Backfilling and Water Control 8 Exterior Backfilling 8 Pavement Subgrade Preparation 8 Sand Subbase 9 Pavement Thickness Designs 10 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 11 Potential Difficulties 11 Excavation Sidesloping/Retention 12 Observation and Testing 12 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 12 General 12 Drilling Methods 12 13 Sampling Methods 14 Classification Methods 14 Water Level Measurements 15 Sample Storage 15 LIMITATIONS 15 STANDARD OF CARE 15 SIGNATURES STANDARD DATA SHEETS Floor Slab Moisture/Vapor Protection Basement Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design APPENDIX A Figure 1 - Approximate Boring Locations Soil Boring Logs Gradation Curves Unconfined Compression Test Boring Log Notes Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes General Terminology Notes V: GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND REVIEW FOR SPRING VALLEY ESTATES SE OF MISSISSIPPI ST. & OLD CENTRAL AVE. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA AET JOB NO. 01-01784 SUMMARY Purpose An apartment building is proposed for construction in Fridley, Minnesota. The purpose of our work on this project is to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations to assist you and the project team in planning, design, and construction. Scope To accomplish the above purpose, you have authorized our firm to drill eight test borings at the site, conduct laboratory soil testing, and prepare this geotechnical engineering report. Findings The test borings indicate a generalized soil profile of existing fill and/or topsoil over naturally deposited alluvial sands and glacial till clayey soils. Ground water was encountered at each of the boring locations, at depths of about 61/2' to 121/2' below the surface. The ground water level may be as high as elevation 877. Recommendations These recommendations are condensed for your convenience. Please study our entire report for detailed recommendations. • Soil correction should be performed to remove the existing fill and topsoil from below the entire building footprint. Anticipated soil correction depths at the boring locations range from about ih' to as much as 10' below the surface. • Engineered fill should then be placed and compacted to reestablish design grades. Fill soils supporting foundations should be compacted to 98% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D698). Soils supporting the floor slab only can have a reduced minimum compaction level of 95%. • The structure can then be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on the competent naturally deposited soils or new engineered fill. The foundations should be designed for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot(psf). AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 2 of 15 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering review for the proposed Spring Valley Estates apartment building in Fridley, Minnesota. To protect you, American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET), and the public, we authorized use of opinions and recommendations in this report only by you and your project team for this specific project. Contact us if other uses are intended. Even�1� this ofreport pamculaz materials,o we revLde commendcient that information to accurately determine quantities your potential contractors be advised of the report availability. Scope of Services The scope of our work was outlined in our September 30, 2003 proposal, which was authorized by you on the same day. The authorized work scope includes the following: • Drill eight (8) standard penetration test borings at the site to depths of 26' to 31'. • Perform,laboratory testing of selected soils samples collected. • Conduct a geotechnical engineering analysis and prepare this report. The scope of our work is intended for geotechnical purposes only. This scope is not intended to explore for the presence or extent of environmental conrAmifaton at the site or provide opinions regarding the status of the site relative to "wetland" definitions. PROJECT INFORMATION A 100-unit senior housing building is proposed for construction at a site located south of Mississippi Street and east of Old Central Avenue in Fridley, Minnesota. We understand the proposed "C"-shaped structure will have four stories above grade and a below-grade parking level. We understand the lowest (garage) floor is proposed to be at about elevation 880. The below-grade construction will include cast-in-place concrete and/or precast concrete panels, and the above-grade levels will consist of wood framing. AET Job No. 01-01784-Page 3 of 15 Based on conversations with your structural engineer, we understand bearing wall loads may be up to 10 kips per lineal foot and maximum column loads may be up to 325 kips. Foundation Design Assumptions Our foundation design assumptions include a minimum factor of safety of 3 with respect to localized shear or base failure of the foundations. We assume the structure will be able to tolerate total settlements of up to 1", and differential settlements of up to 1/2" over a 30' distance. The presented project information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are changes from that described, so that we can evaluate whether changes in our recommendations are appropriate. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Observations Several residences are currently located at the site. These homes are generally located along the northern and southern boundaries of the site. In general, the topography of the site slopes down to the south. There are several lower elevation areas scattered about the site. Surface elevations at the boring locations ranged from about elevation 881.2 at Boring 7 up to elevation 888.5 at Boring 2. Subsurface Soils/Geology Logs of the test borings are included in Appendix A. The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, geologic description, and moisture. Relative density and consistency is also noted, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N-value). The boring logs only indicate the subsurface conditions at the sampled locations. Variations often occur between and beyond borings. Existing fill soils were encountered at the surface at the borings located in the northern half of the site. The fill consists of a variety of materials including silty sand, sandy lean clay, sand with silt, silt, and clayey sand. The existing fill contains varying amounts of gravel, as well as concrete, bituminous, and cinders. AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 4 of 15 Topsoil was encountered either at the surface or below the existing fill. The topsoil typically consists of silty sand, but also includes a little organic clay and sandy silt. In northern site areas, the fill and buried topsoil extend to depths of about 6' to 10' beneath the surface. The surficial topsoil present in the southern portion of the site ranges from about 1/2' to 2' in thickness. The underlying naturally deposited soils at this site consist of alluvium (soil deposited by water) and then glacially deposited till. Coarse alluvial sandy soils were typically encountered below the topsoil. The coarse alluvium at the site includes sand, sand with silt, and silty sand. These soils range from very loose to medium dense, based on the N-values. Glacial till sandy lean clays are present below the coarse alluvium. The till soils range from soft to very stiff in consistency. Water Level Measurements The boreholes were probed for the presence of ground water, and water level measurements were taken. The measurements are recorded on the boring logs. A discussion of the water level measurement methods is presented in the SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION section of this report. Water levels were measured at each of the boring locations. Water was measured at depths ranging from about 6.8' to 12.5' below the surface, corresponding to ground water elevations of about 874.3 to 876.0. However, based on the appearance of the soil samples recovered, it is our opinion that the water level could be as high as elevation 877'. Most of the water levels were measured within relatively fast draining sandy soil. Therefore, it is our opinion that these measurements should provide a fairly reliable indication of the ground water table at those times and locations. We must caution, however, that perched water may be encountered at higher elevations. Ground water levels usually fluctuate. Fluctuations occur due to varying seasonal and yearly rainfall and snow melt, as well as other factors. AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 5 of 15 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS The following geotechnical considerations are the basis for the recommendations presented later in this report. Review of Soil Properties Fill/Topsoil The existing fill and topsoil are judged to be low strength materials which are potentially compressible. These soils range from moderate to slow draining. The fill and topsoil materials are considered at least moderately frost susceptible. Coarse Alluvium The underlying coarse alluvium is considered moderate to high strength soil, which should not be significantly compressible under the anticipated loading conditions. These soils range from moderate to fast draining. The coarse alluvial sands and sands with silt have low frost heave potential, provided they do not become wet. The coarse alluvial silty sands have moderate frost heave potential. Till The glacially deposited till soils are also considered moderate to high strength materials. It is our judgment that these soils should not be significantly compressible under the proposed construction. The till soils are considered slow draining, and they are at least moderately frost susceptible. RECOMMENDATIONS Building Grading Excavation To prepare the building area for structural support, we recommend the existing till and topsoil be excavated from below all building areas. The minimum recommended excavation depths, the estimated elevations of the excavation bottom, and the approximate ground water elevations at the boring locations are indicated in the following table: _ I Y AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 6 of 15 '" .;,mated Eie!va n: . Approximate Gerund, �uix��►ce 11�a�n►nna° ��;'.y � -�'a�r=E eQatioxi�: ,,'�. ,� ; 'T" ' • <�.-..40 E . b�' jfif tion Bottom l � Ti1�er,`'. e�t�on•� , � , 1 886.8 10' 877 875 2 888.5 91/2' 879 877 3 882.6 6/' 876 876 6' 876 875 4 881.9 _ 5 882.1 1A' 8811/2 875 6 884.9 2' 883 8751/2 7 881.2 1' 880 876 8 881.5 1/' 880 874% The depths and elevations indicated in the previous table are based on the soil conditions at the boring locations. Since conditions may vary, we recommend a geotechnical engineer or technician observe the final excavation bottom prior to new fill or footing placement. In northern areas of the site,the excavations recommended above will extend very near the water levels encountered. Water should be removed from all excavations to allow evaluation of the soils, to reduce the potential for soil disturbance, and to facilitate construction. Based on the conditions encountered at the boring locations, well points may be needed in order to dewater any excavations extending below the water table. Where fill is placed below foundation elevations, the excavation bottom should be oversized laterally from the planned outside edges of the foundations a distance equal to at least I' for each vertical foot of compacted fill required beneath the foundation at the location (i.e., a 1:1 oversize). Fill/Compaction Fill required to attain grade for footings should be uniformly compacted in thin lifts to a minimum of 98% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D698). Fill placed which supports the floor slab only (outside of the 1:1 oversize zone below footings) can have a reduced minimum compaction level of 95% of the Standard Proctor density. AET Job No. 01-01784_Page 7 of 15 Based on the conditions found at the boring locations, it is our judgment that most of the existing fill soils should not be reused as engineered fill, due to the debris and organic materia present. Compaction of the on-site clayey and silty soils may be more difficult, especially if these soils are wet. Moisture conditioning of the fill soils should be performed as need in order to achieve the recommended compaction levels. In areas where wet or unstable excavation bottoms are encountered, the initial lift of fill should be a clean, relatively coarse grained sand. This sand should contain less than 5% passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% passing the #40 sieve (by weight). We recommend fill placed below foundations also be limited to this clean coarse grained sand. Generally, this type of material is not readily available on-site and it may need to be imported. Foundations The structure can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations placed on the competent naturally deposited soils or on compacted fill. We recommend that foundations bordering heated building space be placed such that the bottom is at a depth of 42" below exterior grade. We recommend foundations for unheated building areas (such as canopy, stoop, or loading dock foundations) be extended to a minimum of 60" below exterior grade. Interior foundations in heated areas can be placed a convenient depth below the floor slab. Based on the conditions encountered at the boring locations, it is our judgment that building foundations can be designed based on a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This design pressure should have factor of safety of 3 against localized shear and base failure. We judge that total settlements under this loading should be less than 1". Based on the conditions depicted by the borings, it is our judgment that differential settlements should not exceed ih". Floor Slab Preparation of the building area as previously recommended will also prepare the building area for floor slab support. All fill supporting floor slabs should be compacted to 95% of the Standard Proctor density. This includes utility and foundation trench backfill. AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 8 of 15 Generally, it is preferable to maintain about a 4' separation between the ground water level and the lowest floor slab. For information regarding floor slab moisture/vapor protection, we refer you to the attached sheet entitled "Floor Slab Moisture/Vapor Protection". • Water Control Backfilling and Building Ba g In order to reduce the lateral loads exerted on the basement walls by the exterior backfill soils, we recommend a free draining sand or gravel be used for wall backfill. These wall backfill soils should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor density. A perimeter draintile system should be placed on the exterior side of the wall at the bottom of this free draining backfill. Please see the attached data sheet entitled "Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control" for more detailed information on preferred soil types, drainage, and lateral pressures. Generally, it is preferable to maintain at least a 4' separation between the lowest floor slab and the water table. Special attention should be paid to the design and construction of mechanical areas or elevator pits, which may extend below the lowest floor slab and nearer to the ground water table. Waterproofing should be provided for these areas, as well as a drainage system connected to a sump or other suitable means of water disposal. Exterior Backfilling Soils placed below exterior slabs/sidewalks should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor density. The design of exterior grade-supported elements, especially near doorways, should take the frost related properties of the on-site soils into consideration. For more detailed recommendations relative to placing fill below exterior/unheated slabs and frost considerations, please see the standard data sheet at the end of this report entitled "Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction". Pavement Subgrade Preparation As a background to this section, we refer you to the attached data sheet entitled "Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design," which presents considerations and recommendations for subgrade preparation. AET Job No. 01-01784--Page 9 of 15 vegetation, To prepare the subgrade for new pavement, we recommend removing any surface ve g topsoil, and silt. The stability of the exposed soils should then be evaluated using a eithertest roll be lll d procedure, as described on the attached sheet. Soils found to be unstableunstable � lac e moisture conditioned and compacted back into place, or they should be removed r ep with compacted fill. The on-site inorganic soils can be used for subgrade fill, although the use of granular materials is preferred. Compaction of new fill supporting pavements should meet the requirements of Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1 (Specified Density Method). This specification requires soils placed within the upper 3' of the subgrade be compacted to a minimum of 100% of the Standard Proctor Density (ASTM:D698). The soil placed below the upper 3' zone can have a reduced minimum compaction level of 95%. Sand Subbase The existing fill soils present in some pavement areas have at least moderate frost heave potential, and they are moderately slow to slow draining. Soil with poor drainage characteristics may lead to trapped water within the upper portion of the subgrade or the aggregate base layer. This condition can accelerate subgrade softening, resulting in alligator cracking, frost distortion, and popouts. Improved long--term pavement performance can be achieved by placing a sand subbase layer as the top portion of the subgrade. The sand subbase layer will better control infiltrating water, as well as the associated frost movements. Placement of a sand subbase layer will increase initial costs. However, the use of a drained sand subbase should reduce future maintenance; extend the pavement life; and improve constructability. The decision to use a sand subbase should take into consideration the initial costs versus the expected pavement performance. We recommend consideration be given to using a 1' thick sand subbase in areas where granular soils are not already present at pavement subgrade elevations. Where there is a need to vary the thickness of the subbase, we recommend the thickness have a taper of no steeper than 20:1 (horizontal to vertical). The subcut and sand layer placement should extend slightly • AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 10 of 15 beyond the outer edge of the curb/paved edge, in order to maintain frost uniformity. If used, sand subbase material should at least meet the requirements of a Select Granular Borrow per Mn/DOT specification 3149.2B2. This refers to sand containing less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. In areas where the sand subbase layer is not in direct contact with the underlying granular soils, the subbase layer should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage, in order to prevent build up of water within the sand subbase, This can be accomplished by placing "finger drains", which are segments of properly engineered drainage lines connected to catch basins in low elevation areas. Where grades are relatively level and finger drains are infrequent, consideration should be given to placing a longer parallel drainage line through the level area, to better remove infiltrating water. Pavement Thickness Designs The thickness of the pavement section will depend on the type of material present within the upper portion of the subgrade and also on the traffic. Based on the existing fill clayey sands and sandy lean clays being the limiting subgrade soil, we estimate a subgrade R-value of 20. If a 1' thick, drained sand subbase is utilized over the on-site clayey soils, the R-value used for design can be increased to 35. This R-value is also applicable to the on-site silty sands. Traffic considerations include a standard duty pavement, which consists of automobile or light truck parking and low frequency drive areas. Additionally, a heavy duty pavement is considered for channelized drive areas and areas with heavier truck traffic (up to 50 trucks per day). Bituminous pavement thickness designs for the on-site clayey soils and for a 1' thick, drained sand subbase place over these clay soils are provided in the following table. These pavement thickness designs are based on a 20-year design life and the traffic indicated previously. • AET Job No. 01-01784--Page 11 of 15 Y Clayey Sands (SC) and 1' Sand Subbase over SC/CL Sandy Lean Clays (CL) or Silty Sands (SM) r Subgrade,R-valu 20 35 • 'Paye "t;Matef.. Standard Duty Heayy Duty' .:Standard Duty Heavy Duty Bituminous Wear 11/2" 2" 11/2" 2" Bituminous Base 11 " 2" 1'/z" 2" Class 5 Aggregate Base 6" 7" 511 511 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Potential Difficulties Groundwater may be present in the deeper excavations at the site. We recommend the excavations be dewatered prior to fill placement, pipe installation, or footing construction. The contractor should be responsible for the means and methods of dewatering. The existing fill, coarse alluvial, and glacial till soils present at this site can include oversized particles, cobbles, and/or boulders. These oversized materials may make excavating procedures more difficult than normal if they are encountered. If oversized particles are encountered at footing grade, they should be removed and replaced with compacted fill, in order to allow for full footing placement. Some of the near-surface soils at this site are slow draining. Water can perch above these slow draining soils within faster draining soil layers or within open excavations. Water should be removed from excavations in order to allow for proper fill placement or footing construction. Many of the near-surface site soils can become disturbed under repeated construction traffic, especially if the soils are wet. If soils become disturbed, they should be subcut to the underlying undisturbed soils. The subcut soils can then be dried and recompacted back into place, or they should be removed and replaced with drier imported fill. AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 12 of 1 S Excavation Sideslo in /Retention Excavations should maintain minimum sidesloping, unless they are retained. Sideslopes should be maintained in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations"), which can be found at http://www.osha.gov . Even with the required OSHA sloping, ground water seepage can induce sideslope raveling or running, which would require maintenance. Observation and Testing The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found at our test boring locations. Since soil conditions can be expected to vary away from the soil boring locations, we recommend on-site observation by a geotechnical engineer or technician during construction to evaluate these potential changes. Soil density testing should also be performed on new fill placed at the site. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION General The subsurface exploration consisted of eight standard penetration test borings, which were performed at the site between October 3 and 8, 2003. The approximate soil boring locations are shown on the attached Figure 1. The borings were located in the field by AET personnel by taping from nearby site features. The ground surface elevations at the boring locations were measured by AET personnel using an engineer's level. The benchmark reference was the top nut of the hydrant located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Old Central Avenue and 64th Avenue NE (see Figure 1). This benchmark was taken as elevation 887.45, as indicated on the site topography plan provided to us. Drilling Methods The standard penetration borings were drilled using hollow-stem auger and rotary drilling methods. In the upper portion of the soil profile, 3'4" inside diameter hollow-stem augers were used. At greater depths, drilling was performed using a tricone bit, where the borehole in AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 13 of 15 uncased and maintained with drilling mud. More specific depth information appears on the boring logs. Sampling Methods Split-Spoon Samples (SS) Standard penetration (split-spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM:D1586 with one primary modification. The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2" O.D. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped from a height of 30". The sampler is driven a total of 18" into the soil. After an initial set of 6", the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12" is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value. Our method uses a modified hammer weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer(PDA) and an instrumented rod. In the past, standard penetration N-value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy transferred to the split-spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of its potential energy due to the friction inherent in this system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N60 blow count. Most of today's drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and subsequently results in lower N-values than the traditional N60 values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100%. Therefore, the intent of AET's hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140-pound weight falling 30". The current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N-values, stating that N-values of 100% or more have been observed. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that the accuracy deviation of the N- values using this method are significantly better than the standard ASTM Method. AET Job No. 01-01784—Page 14 of 15 Sampling Limitations Unless actually observed in the sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of the samples and the action of the drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from the test borings. However, they may still be present in the ground, even if they are not noted on the boring logs. Classification Methods Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USC) system. The USC system is described in ASTM:D2487 and D2488. Where laboratory classification tests (sieve analysis and Atterberg limits) have been performed, classifications per ASTM:D2487 are possible. Otherwise, soil classifications show on the boring logs are visual-manual judgments. We have attached charts (Appendix A) illustrating the USC system, the descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs. The boring logs include judgments of the geological deposition. This judgment is primarily based on observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development can sometimes aid this judgment. Water Level Measurements The ground water measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water Level Measurements" on the logs: • Date and Time of measurement • Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at time of measurement • Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement • Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole • Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is encountered • Drilling Fluid Level: same as water level, except the liquid encountered is drilling fluid The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This is possible because several factors can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include the following: AET Job No. 01-01784--Page 15 of 15 permeability of each soil layer in the profile; presence of perched water; amount of time between water level readings; presence of drilling fluid; weather conditions; and use of borehole casing. Sample Storage We will retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30 days. The samples will then be discarded unless you notify us otherwise. LIMITATIONS The data derived through this sampling and observation program have been used to develop our opinions about the subsurface conditions at this site. However, because no explorationprogram can reveal may differ totally what is in the subsurface, conditions between borings, between samples, and at other from conditions described in this report. The exploration we conducted identified subsurface conditions only at those points where we took samples or observed ground water conditions. Depending on the sampling methodsand frequency, every nbe noted layer omay not be boring logs. � some materials or layers which are present in ground If conditions encountered during construction differ from those indicated by our borings, it may be necessary to alter our conclusions and recommendations, or to modify construction procedures, and the cost of construction may be affected. The extent and detail of information about the subsurface condition is directly related to the scope of the exploration. It should be understood, therefore, that information can be obtained by means of additional exploration. STANDARD OF CARE Our services for your project have been conducted to those standards considered normal for services of this type at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied is intended. SIGNATURES Report Prepared by: Report Reviewed by: American Engineering Testing, Inc. American Engineering Testing, Inc. 41-k1(9 ee Steve D. Koenes, PE Staff Engineer Principal Engineer MN Reg. No. 13180 FLOOR SLAB MOISTURE/VAPOR PROTEC'T'ION Floor slab design relative to moisture/vapor protection should consider or vapor type and location caIn on of two following sections,a,the granular layer and a vapor membrane(vapor retarder,water resistant barrierP and cons of the possible options regarding these elements will be presented, such that you and your specifier can make an engineering decision based on the benefits and costs of the choices. G' _ALL ' L 0' In American Concrete Institute(ACI)302.1-96,a"base material"is recommended,rather than the conventional cleaner "sand cushion" material. The manual maintains that clean sand(common"cushion" sand)materis difficultwith eastcompact to 3 `� maintain until concrete placement is complete. ACI recommends a clean,fine gra of particles passing a#100 sieve)which is not contaminated with clay, ft or organic material.We refer you to ACI 302.1- 96 for additional details regarding the requirements for the base sla In cases where potential static water levels or significant perched water sourses appear within thieakr orcab vend o e thefoorgrasl lb, an underfloor drainage system may be needed wherein a draintile system is placed soil types and rate/head of water inflow. Such a system should be properly engineered depending on subgrade v •RMEMB - ' will have vapor The need for a vapor membrane depends on whether v�fl0�slab will havev controlled area.or sensitive If they project does not sensitive items stored on the slab,or if the spaceYour decision have this vapor sensitivity or moisture control need,placement of a vapor membrane may not be necessary• will then relate to whether to use the ACI base membranematerial r �conventional sand Some floor covering systems (adhecushion layer.However,if any of sives above sensitivity issues apply,placement of a vapormaximum slab moisture content as a condition of their flooring materials)require a vapor membrane to maintain a specified warranty. V• ' •R MEMBRANE/GRA _ • ' •YER PLACEMENT A number of issues should be considered when deciding whether to place the vapor membrane above or below the granular layer.The benefits of placing the slab on a granular layer,with the vapor membrane placed below the granular layer,include reduction of the following: • Slab curling during the curing and drying process. • Time of bleeding,which allows for quicker finishing. • Vapor membrane puncturing. • Surface blistering or delamination caused by an extended bleeding period. • Cracking caused by plastic or drying shrinkage. The benefits of placing the vapor membrane over the granular layer include the following: • The moisture emission rate is achieved fasster- layer above the membrane. • Eliminates a potential,water reservoir within the granular y • Provides a"slip surface",thereby reducing slab restraint and the associated random cracking. If a membrane is to be used in conjunction with a granular layer,the approach recommended depends on slab usage and the construction schedule.The vapor membrane should be placed above the granular layer when: • Vapor sensitive floor covering systems are used or vapor sensitive items will be directly placed on the slab. • The area will be humidity controlled,but the slab will be placed before the building is enclosed and sealed from rain. • Required by a floor covering manufacturer's system warranty. The vapor membrane should be placed below the granular layer when: • Used in humidity controlled areas(without vapor sensitive coverings/stored items),with the roof membrane in place, and the building enclosed to the point where precipitation will not intrude into the slab area. Consideration should be given to slight sloping of the membrane to edges where draintile or other disposal methods can alleviate potential water sources, such as pipe or roof leaks, foundation wall damp proofing failure,fire sprinkler system activation, etc. There may be cases where membrane placement may have a detrimental effect on the subgrade support system (e.g., expansive soils).In these cases,your decision will need to weigh the cost of subgrade options and the performance AMERICAN ENGIG TESTING,INC. OIREP013(2/01) BASEMENT/RETAINING WALL BACxr'tLL AND WATER CONTROL DRAINAGE Below grade basements should include a perimeter backfill drainage system on the exterior side of the wall. The exception may be where basements lie within free draining sands where water will not perch in the backfill. Drainage systems should consist of perforated or slotted PVC drainage pipes located at the bottom of the backfill trench, lower than the interior floor grade.The drainpipe should be surrounded by properly graded filter rock. A filter fabric should then envelope the filter rock. The drain pipe should be connected to a suitable means of disposal, such as a sump bas cPi or a gravity outfall. A storm sewer gravity outfall would be preferred over exterior daylighting,as the latter may freeze during winter. For non-building, exterior retaining walls, weep holes at the base of the wall can be substituted for a drain pipe. BACKFILLING Prior to backfilling,damp/water proofing should be applied on perimeter basement walls.The backfill materials placed against basement walls will exert lateral loadings.To reduce this loading by allowing for drainage,we recommend using free draining sands for backfill. The zone of sand backfill should extend outward from the wall at least 2', and then upward and outward from the wall at a 30° or greater angle from vertical. As a minimum,the sands should contain no greater than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve, which would include (SP) and (SP-SM) soils. The sand backfill should be placed in lifts and compacted with portable compaction equipment.This compaction should be to the specified levels if slabs or pavements are placed above. Where slab/pavements are not above, we recommend capping the sand backfill with a layer of clayey soil to minimi7e surface water infiltration. Positive surface drainage away from the building should also be maintained. If surface capping or positive surface drainage cannot be maintained,then the trench should be filled with more permeable soils, such as the Fine Filter or Coarse Filter Aggregates defined in MnDOT Specification 3149. You should recognize that if the backfill soils are not properly compacted, settlements may occur which may affect surface drainage away from the building. Backfilling with silty or clayey soil is possible but not preferred. These soils can build-up water which increases lateral pressures and results in wet wall conditions and possible water infiltration into the basement. If you elect to place silty or clayey soils as backfill, we recommend you place a prefabricated drainage composite against the wall which is hydraulically connected to a drainage pipe at the base of the backfill trench. High plasticity clays should be avoided as backfill due to their swelling potential. LATERAL PRESSURES Lateral earth pressures on below grade walls vary, depending on backfill soil classification, backfill compaction and slope of the backfill surface. Static or dynamic surcharge loads near the wall will also increase lateral wall pressure. For design,we recommend the following ultimate lateral earth pressure values(given in equivalent fluid pressure values) for a drained soil compacted to 95% of the Standard Proctor density and a level ground surface. Equivalent Fluid Density Soil Type Active (pcf) At-Rest (pcf) Sands (SP or SP-SM) 35 50 Silty Sands(SM) 45 65 Fine Grained Soils (SC, CL or ML) 70 90 Basement walls are normally restrained at the top which restricts movement. In this case, the design lateral pressures should be the "at-rest" pressure situation. Retaining walls which are free to rotate or deflect should be designed using the active case. Lateral earth pressures will be significantly higher than that shown if the backfill soils are not drained and become saturated. 01REP014(7/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. FREEZING WEATHER EFFECTS ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION GENERAL Because water expands upon freezing and soils contain water,soils which are allowed to freeze will heave and lose density. Upon thawing,these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave and density/strength loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition.Heave is greater in soils with higher percentages of fines (silts/clays). High silt content soils are most susceptible, due to their high capillary rise potential which can create ice lenses. Fine grained soils generally heave about 1/4" to 3/8" for each foot of frost penetration. This can translate to I" to 2" of total frost heave. This total amount can be significantly greater if ice lensing occurs. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS and frost Clayey and silty soils can be used as perimeter backfill, although the effect of their poor drainage properties should be considered.Basement areas will have special drainage and lateral load requirements which are not discussed here.Frost heave may be critical in doorway areas. Stoops or sidewalks adjacent to doorways could be designed as structural slabs supported on frost footings with void spaces below. With this design, movements may then occur between the structural slab and the adjacent on-grade slabs. Non-frost susceptible sands (with less than 12% passing a#200 sieve)can be used below such areas. Depending on the function of surrounding areas, the sand layer may need a thickness transition away from the area where movement is critical. With sand placement over slower draining soils, subsurface drainage would be needed for thees sand layer. High density extruded insulation could be used within the sand to reduce frost penetration, eby reducing the sand thickness needed.We caution that insulation placed near the surface can increase the potential for ice glazing of the surface. The possible effects of adfreezing should be considered if clayey or silty soils are used as backfill. Adfreezing occurs when backfill adheres to rough surfaced foundation walls and lifts the wall as it freezes and heaves- This occurrence is most common with masonry block walls,unheated or poorly heated building situations and clay backfill. The potential is also increased where backfill soils are poorly compacted and become saturated. The risk of adfreezing can be decreased by placing a low friction separating layer between the wall and backfill. Adfreezing can occur on exterior piers (such as deck, fence or other similar pier footings), even if a smooth surface is provided. This is more likely in poor drainage situations where soils become saturated. Additional footing embedment and/or widened footings below the frost zones (which includes tensile reinforcement) can be used to resist uplift forces. Specific designs would require individual analysis. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Foundations,slabs and other improvements which may be affected by frost movements should be insulated from frost penetration during freezing weather.If filling takes place during freezing weather, all frozen soils, snow and ice should be stripped from areas to be filled prior to new fill placement.The new fill should not be allowed to freeze during transit, placement or compaction. This should be considered in the project scheduling, budgeting and quantity estimating.It is usually beneficial to perform cold weather earthwork operations in small areas where grade can be attained quickly rather than working larger areas where a greater amount of frost stripping may be needed. If slab subgrade areas freeze,we recommend the subgrade be thawed prior to floor slab placement. The frost action may also require reworking and recompaction of the thawed subgrade. 01REP015(2/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING,INC. BTI'UMXNOUS PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND DESIGN • GENERAL Bituminous pavements are considered layered "flexible" systems. Dynamic wheel loads transmit high local stresses through the bituminous/base onto the subgrade. Because of this, the upper portion of the subgrade requires high strength,/stability to reduce deflection and fatigue of the bituminous/base system. The wheel load intensity dissipates through the subgrade such that the high level of soil stability is usually not needed below about 2' to 4' (depending on the anticipated traffic and underlying soil conditions). This is the primary reason for specifying a higher level of compaction within the upper subgrade zone versus the lower portion.Moderate compaction is usually desired below the upper critical zone,primarily to avoid settlements/sags of the roadway. However,if the soils present below the upper 3' subgrade zone are unstable, attempts to properly compacte3upper 3' zone to level may be neededthe 100 provi l level maa noy n difficult or not possible. Therefore, control of moisture just below yielding base upon which to compact the upper subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance is dependent on the soil subgrade drainage and frost characteristics. Poor to moderate draining soils tend to be susceptible to frost heave and subsequent weakening upon thaw.This condition can result in irregular frost movements and"popouts,"as well as an accelerated softening of the subgrade. Frost problems become more pronounced when the subgrade is layered with soils of varying permeability. In this situation,the free- draining soils provide a pathway and reservoir for water infiltration which exaggerates the movements.The placement of a well drained sand subbase layer as the top of subgrade can minimize trapped water,smooth frost movements significantly reduce subgrade softening. In wet, layered and/or poor drainage situations, the long-term performance gain should be significant.If a sand subbase is placed,we recommend it be a"Select Granular Borrow" which meets Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2E2. PREPARATION Subgrade preparation should include stripping surficial vegetation and organic soils. Where the exposed soils are within the upper "critical" subgrade zone (generally 21/2' deep for "auto only" areas and 3' deep for "heavy duty" areas), they should be evaluated for stability. Excavation equipment may make such areas obvious due to deflection and rutting patterns. Final evaluation of soils within the critical subgrade zone should be done by test rolling with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck.Soils which rut or deflect 1"or more under the test roll should be corrected by either subcutting and replacement; or by scarification,drying, and recompaction. Reworked soils and new fill should be compacted per the "Specified Density Method" outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1 (a minimum of 100% of Standard Proctor density in the upper 3' subgrade zone, and a minimum of 95% below this). • Subgrade preparation scheduling can be an important consideration.Fall and Spring seasons usually have unfavorable weather for soil drying.Stabilizing non-sand subgrades during these seasons may be difficult,and attempts often result in compromising the pavement quality. Where construction scheduling requires subgrade preparation during these times, the use of a sand subbase becomes even more beneficial for constructability reasons. SUBGRADE DRAINAGE If a sand subbase layer is used, it should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage to prevent water build-up. This can be in the form of draintile lines which dispose into storm sewer systems, or outlets into ditches.Where sand subbase layers include sufficient sloping,and water can migrate to lower areas,draintile lines can be limited to finger drains at the catch basins.Even if a sand layer is not placed, strategically placed draintile lines can aid in improving pavement performance. This would be most important in areas where adjacent non-paved areas slope towards the pavement. Perimeter edge drains can aid in intercepting water which may infiltrate below the pavement. 01REP016(02/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Appendix A Figure 1 - Boring Locations Soil Boring Logs Boring Log Notes Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes General Terminology Notes ite Iii gRJ9 -~ 4.'i \ —7__ '' --.-.__-ill Et 1 , i� l I I I I I I 1 _— s1 se l i,. 0 IN 4 ■ i _ r. /H..Aruu..u.ir iiu/ wrworra,_ r r . 01 ..,....=1 r4,ltJ : 6mssi1q7 1m IE4r �- Ei;: n If/ ' 1 Itillinhf+ . 4.' .. ,,,,, paN� �F ll 11 + am ■ • ..0� ' fin•/'?\ �mii9(f411/p �_:�:r�.� r,Ml�iw��� llgir 41 7 t` 1116111 1111 �* , .•l •i. ��,�CAMun A / ,r' , t 1 - ii ---11 1, jai / */ ,..., , .1.*„.„...ilopek i H I \ 1. i fli -WNS MT 1=• Top Nut Hydrant -- - TBM=887.45 *- m kr. - PROJECT Spring Valley Estates AFT JOB NO. SE of Mississippi St. &Old Central Ave., Fridley,Minnesota 01-0178 AMERICAN ' SUBJECT DATE ENGINEERING October 23,200: TESTING,INC. A• .roximate Soil Boris_ Locations SCALE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY Figure MJL -- See Above AAMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG . momTESTING,INC. AET JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 (p 1 of 1_�_ PROJECT: S 1 rim 'Valle Estates - SE of Mississi I i i St & Old Central Ave- FridleFIELD NEN DESURFACE ELEVATION: TORY TES $86.8 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC Q TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL /o-. r'rrT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ' 1 _ FILL,mixture of silty sand and sandy lean clay, 23 M X SS 16 a little gravel,dark brown and brown TT 2 FILL 14 M X SS 16 3 - 4 — FILL,mixture of sand with silt and silty sand,a 5 — little gravel,trace roots,brown and a little dark }nom 6 M SS 16 6 — 7— 8 M SS 16 8 SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,black to • TOPSOIL 9 — dark brown,moist,loose to medium dense(SM) 1. 10 M SS 16 SAND,trace roots,fine grained,light grayish i 11 — brown,moist,medium dense(SP) 12 - 7 W SS 20 13 - 14 — SAND,fine grained,brownish gray to gray, - COARSECOLUVIUM waterbearing,loose to medium dense(SP) 15 - 17 W X SS 16 16 - 17 a 18 - 19 - 20 W SS 16 20 — r SAND,fine grained,gayish brown, 1 21 — waterbearing,medium dense to loose(SP) t 22 - ( 23 - 24 - 25SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff/%1,TILL 9 W SS 16 26--�(CL) END OF BORING *Water level may come up to about 12', based on the sample appearance. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD I WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER T1 DATE I TIMESAMPLED CASING CAVE-1N DRILLING WATER TTHEATTACHEI 0-12' 3.25"HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL I LEVEL 12•2* SHEETS FOR At . 12-24W RD�uv/DM 10/6/03 2:10 I 14.0 I 12.0 12.3 s8 EXPLANATION C ' 10/7/03 7:50 I 21.0 I 12.0. TE BORING 10/7/03 I ITHIS LOG rr• GT. re. R7. Pia. Vic' AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG . ___ TESTING,INC. AET JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. 2 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St & Old Central Ave; Fridley, MN SAMPLE RE FIELD&LABORATORY TES' DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 888.5 GEOLOGYIN N MC TYPE IN , WC DEN LL PL %-: FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 22 M X SS 18 1 — I 2 — 3 — FILL,mixture of silty sand,silt and clayey sand FILL 55/.5 M X SS 10 4 — with gravel,pieces of concrete,trace roots, \ . 5 _ brown and dark brown 12 M X SS 10 7 - 8 — 16 M X SS 1 9 — Ti 10 — SILTY SAND,fine grained,brown and dark 1. 13 M/WX SS 18 11 — brown mottled,moist,medium dense(SM) 1 li 12 — SAND,trace roots,light grayish brown, _ \/ -\waterbearing,loose(SP) / 6 W X SS 16 13 — SANDY SILT,trace roots,grayish brown,wet, I 14--� , \ loose lenses of silty sand(ML) / I` i 15 — COARSE 14 W X SS 16 3 — ALLUVIUM 16SAND,trace roots,fine grained,light grayish 17 — brown to brown,waterbearing,medium dense 18 -, (SP) 19— 20— 25 W SS 16 21 — 22 — 23 %�� L 25 — 6 M vn SS 18 26 — SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,firm TIL / 27 — (CL) 28— 29 — 30 — X 8 M X SS 22 31 — 4, / \ END OF BORING *Water level may come up to about 11%', based on the sample appearance. . DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TC DATE TIME I SAMPLED CASING I CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACIIED 0-12' 3.25"HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 1 , 10/3/03 11:55 14.0 12.0 I 12.6 I _ 12.5* SHEETS FOR AN 12-29/z RD w/DNI I I EXPLANATION 0 TERMINOLOGY C COMP ETED: 10/3/03 I ` � THIS LOG r�. CT ,... 1zr n__. 'Ir. .. . AAMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG pm= TESTING, INC. AE'f Jos No: 01-017$4 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St& Old Central Ave; Fridley, MN SAMPLE REC FIELD&LABORATORY TES" DEPTH SURFACE FJ,FVATION: 882.6 GEOLOGY N MC IN TYPE IN. WC DEN LL FL q FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION . . 15 M , SS 12 1 — FILL,mostly silty sand,a little gravel,pieces of 2 - bituminous pavement and cinders,dark brown, 10 M , SS 10 3 _ brown and black FILL 1 4FILL,mostly silty sand,trace roots,dark grayish 5-- brown / 1 j- TOPSOIL 26 M , SS 16 6 _ SILTY SAND, fine grained,dark brown and { 1 „black,moist,medium dense jSMI . ' SAND WITH SILT,fine grained,grayish 12 T iSS 18 8 - brown,waterbearing,medium dense(SP-SM) 9 . 10- 9 W 1 SS 18 11 — SAND,fine grained,gray to grayish brown, COARSE 1212 — waterbearing,loose to medium dense(SP) LUVIUM ,i4 - 17 W ' SS 16 13 - 14 - 15 - 9 W ' SS 16 16 - 17- SAND WITH SILT,a little gravel,possible cobbles,fine to medium grained,grayish brown,i ,f,j2 m4 SS 20 18 —\wet,very loose(SP-SM) TW 24 19 114 10( 19— SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,soft 20 - to firm,laminations of waterbearmg sand %TLi.L 11 _ (CL/SC) % 7 M SS 20 22 23 - j- 24_ SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff I (CL) 25 - j 12 M SS 22 26 END OF BORING *Water level may come up to about 6%z, based on the sample appearance. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER T( DATE I TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED 0-9W 3.25"USA _ DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL -�— 9.0* SHEETS FOR AN 9%-24'/Z RD w/DM 10/3/03 2:20 11.5 9.5 9.5 7.8 EXPLANATION C 10/6/03 7:50 - 11.5 9.5 8.8 TERMINOLOGY C BORING COMPLETED: 10/6/03 1 I THIS LOG CC: GL CA: BL Rig: 3C . A. AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG momTESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01417$4 LOG OF BORING NO. 4 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St & Old Central Ave; Fridley, MN FIELD&LABORATORY TES'1 DEPTH SURFACE FJ.FVATION: 881.9 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC N MC IN TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL %-2 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 1 - 16 M X SS 14 FILL,mostly silty sand,a little gravel,pieces of FILL Ig 2 - bituminous pavement and cinders,dark brown 12 M SS 15 3 - and black 4TOPSOIL ORGANIC CLAY WITH SAND,black,stiff, 5 - laminations of sand(OL/OH) 9 M SS 20 6 SILTY SAND, trace roots,fine grained,grayish 7brown,moist,loose,lenses of sandy lean clay I – 8�(SW 1 12 W SS 18 SAND WITH SILT,fine grained,gray, 9—waterbearing,medium dense(SP-SM) / 10– 16 W SS 14 11 - SAND,fine grained,gray to light grayish brown, COARSE 12 -- waterbearing,medium dense(SP) . ALLUVIUM 21 W SS 16 13 - 14 15 - 19 W SS 16 16 -- 17 — ///, 10 W SS 6 19 SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff 20 - (CL/SC) TILL 12 M , SS 12 21 - 22 - - t 23 = SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff 24 (CL) 25 - j//%// 13 M x SS 17 26 END OF BORING / DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD 1 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TC DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN 1 DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED 0-7' 3.25"ASA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 7-24.5' RD w/DM 10/6/03 11:20 9.0 7.0 7.8 7.2 SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION 0 - BORING TERMINOLOGY 0 COMPLETED: 10/6/03 I THIS LOG CC: GL CA: BL Rig: 3C • AAMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG momTESTING, INC. ABT JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. 5 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates -SE of Mississippi St& Old Central Ave; Fridley, M DEPTH 882.1 FIELD&LABORATORY TES' SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY IN N MC S TYPE INC WC DEN LL PL "/o-a FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,dark .TOPSOIL i —\brown,moist,loose(SM) / 9 M SS 14 2 — SILTY SAND,trace roots,brown and reddish 19 M ' SS 16 3 — brown mottled,moist,loose to medium dense 4 — (SM) 1 5 SILTY SAND, fine grained,brown and gray 9 M ' SS 14 6 — mottled,moist,loose,lenses of silt(SM) 7 Y2 SAND,fine grained,brown and light brown COARSE 8 — mottled,moist to about 7.5'then waterbearing, . ALLUVIUM 7 M/ SS 18 9 loose(SP) 10— SAND,fine grained,brown,waterbearing, 18 W SS 17 11 _ medium dense(SP) 12 22 W 4 SS 16 13 — SAND,fine grained,grayish brown, •. _ 14 — waterbearing,medium dense(SP) 15 — 27 W , SS 17 16 -- • 17 — v 18 — 19 — SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff TILL 14 M SS 18 20 — to very stiff(CL) , 21 — j 22 — 23 — � i 24 — �j 1 25 — 24 M ' SS 16 26 — END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TC DATE TIME SAMPLEDCASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED 0-7' 3.25"HSA DEPTH I DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 7-24'/z RD w/DM 10/8/03 12:50 I 9.0 I 7.0 7.5 7,4 SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION O' BORING I TERMINOLOGY 0 COMPLE rev: 10/8/03 rr• [,T. ra• RT. Rio- 3r I I I I THIS LOG • AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG . MIMI TESTING,INC. AET JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. 6 (p. 1 of 1) PROTECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St& Old Central Ave; Fridley,MN 884.9 FIELD&LABORATORY TES' DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL %-: H'rkT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION _ SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,dark TOPSOIL 4 M SS 16 1 - brown to brown,moist,very loose(SM) 2 3 - SAND WITH SILT, fine grained,brown,moist, 4 M W SS 16 4_ very loose(SP-SM) .. 5 SILTY SAND,fine grained,light brown and 13 M , SS 18 6 - light reddish brown mottled,moist,medium 11 7 _ dense(SM) 13 M 1 SS 18 g- SAND,fine grained,light brown,moist,medium COARSE 9 � dense(SP) T. It 10 - 9 W " SS 18 3 11 - SAND,fine grained,light brown,moist to about II 12 - 9.5'then waterbearing,loose to medium dense 13 - (SP) 12 W FA SS 12 14 - V 15 -- 18 W " SS 16 16 - V 17 -- lg.- SAND,fine grained,light grayish brown, 17 W 0t SS 16 waterbearing,medium dense(SP) - P1 19 - 20 "7 12 W ri SS 16 SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff 21 - (CL/SC) 22 /TILL 23 SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff 24 - (CL) i 25 9 M " SS 18 26 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TC DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED 0-9%' 3.25"HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 9'/Z-24'/z' RD w/DM 10/8/03 8:20 11.5 1 9.5 9.6 1 9,5 SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION C - I I I TERMINOLOGY C RING COMMEl btu: 10/8/03 THIS LOG rr. f T. re- RT. v;..- le ._ AAMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG =mum TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. - 7 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St & Old Central Ave; Fridley, MN DEPTH 881.2 FIELD&LABORATORY TES SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SEE INC WC DEN LL PL I%- FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,dark .TOPSOIL 2 1 —\brown,moist,medium dense(SM) / . 16 M SS 22 2 - SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,brown, 12 M SS 18 3 - reddish brown and gray mottled,moist to about 4- 5'then wet,medium dense to loose,lenses of l l 5 - sandy silt(SM) 1 i 6 M/W 55 18 6- SAND,fine grained,brown mottled, -\waterbearing,loose(SP) / . T. 7 - SAND WITH SILT, COARSE fine grained,reddish brown ALLUVIUM 16 W SS 18 $ – and brown mottled,wet,medium dense(SP-SM) 9 l 11 10 - 23 W SS 16 11 - SAND,fine grained,light brown to brown, 12– waterbearing,medium dense(SP) 25 W SS 16 13 - 14- 15 - 25 W SS 16 17 - -/ 1$- 19 - 20 - SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff TILL 14 M SS 18 21 - (CL) 22 - 23 24 - 25 - j 15�M SS 18 r 26 - END OF BORING *Water level may come up to about 5', based on the sample appearance. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TC DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN I DRILLING WATER THE ATTACKED 0-7' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 10/8/03 10:50 8.5 7.0 7.2 6.8* SHEETS FOR AN 7-24W RD w/DM EXPLANATION 0] BORING I I I TERMINOLOGY 0: COMPLETED: 10/8/03 THIS LOG cr. ar, (A• RI, Ric- Ar -, it, AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG - INN= TESTING,INC. AET JOB NO: 01-01784 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p• 1 of 1) PROJECT: Spring Valley Estates - SE of Mississippi St& Old Central Aye; Fridley, MN FIELD&LABORATORY TE57 SURFACE ELEVATION: 881.5 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE RBC DEPTH TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL /�2 FE 1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SANDY SILT,trace roots,dark brown,very TOPSOIL 4 M SS 18 1 — loose(ML/SM) 2- SILTY SAND,trace roots,fine grained,brown 16 M SS 18 3 _ and brown mottled,very loose to medium dense, lenses of sand(SM) 4 5 — 18 M SS 16 7 — SAND,fine grained,brown mottled,moist to COARSE 8 _ about 7'then waterbearing,medium dense(SP) . ALLUVIUM 25 W SS 15 9 - 10 — 30 W SS 15 11 — 2 13 — • 19 W SS 15 13 — 14 15 - SAND WITH SILT,fine grained,grayish2b W X SS 5 brown,wet,medium dense(SP-SM) � 16 — — 17 — 13 M SS 18 18— 19 SANDY LEAN CLAY,a little gravel,gray,stiff TILL 18 20 — (CL) 13 M SS 21 - 22 - 0 23 - 24 - 25 - jam, 12 M SS 18 26 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WA1hK LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE. REFER TC SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED DATE I TIME DEPTH I DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL 0-7' 3.25"HSA 7.2 SHEETS FOR AN 7-241/a' RD w/DM 10/8/03 I 8:55 8.5 7.0 7.7 EXPLANATION 0 BORING - TERMINOLOGY C COMPLETED: 10/8/03 i i I I THIS LOG CC: GL CA- EL Rig-- 3C U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN1NCI ES 1 U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 3 4 6 8 10 1416 30 ,i 50 70 100 140 200 100 I 1 1 I 1 1 It 1 III ! 95 90 85 • SO . .:\ • ANRP Ili 7° C . E 65 • - _ iit F• 60 - '- I 55 • N : E 50 ' R E 45 11,1111111 Y 40 W E 35 ' I _ G 30I T 25 ' ; 207 • 151 \ : 10 s : . . \ 1 Co° 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS GRAVEL SANDcoarse SILT OR CLAY I COBBLES I e I coarse 1 medium I fine Specimen Identification t Classification MC% LL PL P1 Cc Cu • 2 15.3 POORLY GRADED SAND SP NP NP NP 1.04 2.1 m 6 10.5 POORLY GRADED SAND SP NP NP NP 1.14 2.5 A 7 1.0 SILTY SAND SM I NP NP NP Specimen Identification I P D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • 2 15.3 0.85 0.26 0.185 0.1249 0.0 96.7 3.3 I 6 10.5 0.85 0.25 I 0.173 0.1026 0.0 97.5 2.5 A 7 1.0 9.50 0.20 0.084 0.1 73.1 26.8 PROJECT Spring Valley Estates-SE of Mississippi St& Old JOB NO. 01-01784 Central Ave;Fridley,MN DATE 10/8/03 nAMERICAN = ENGINEERING GRADATION CURVES 1,100 1,000 mill 900 800 700 / _ S T R 600 E S S P 500 /1S F 400 11 300. 200 1000/ 4 8 12 16 STRAIN,% Specimen Identification I Classification DD MC% • 3 19.0 CLAYEY SAND(SC) 114 19 1 PROJECT I Spring Valley Estates I SE of Mississippi St&Old JOB NO. 01-01784 Central Ave; Fridley,MN DATE 10/6/03 AAME ENGINERICAANERING UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST rr. cmn rn TAW' -* - A BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS Symbol Definition Symbol Definition B,H,N: Size of flush joint casing CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test CA: Crew Assistant(initials) DEN: Dry density, pcf CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in DST: Direct shear t st Modulus, tsf inches CC: Crew Chief(initials) HYD: Hydrometer analysisLL: Liquid T.imit, % COT: Clean-out tube DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure,tsf DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry OC: Organic Content, % DR: Driller (initials) PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F-Field; DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights L-Laboratory FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in PL: Plastic Limit, % inches qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf(approximate) Static cone bearing pressure, tsf HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter q,: Unconfined compressive strength,psf HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside q„ diameter in inches R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cros LG: Field logger(initials) RQD: Rock Quality Designator in percent (aggregate len of core pieces 4" or more in length as a MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of of total core run) samples and for the ground water level symbols percent N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in SA: Sieve analysis blows per foot(see notes) TRX: Triaxial compression test NQ: NQ wireline core barrel - VSR: Vane shear strength, remoulded(field), psf PQ: PQ wireline core barrel VSU: Vane shear strength,undisturbed(field),psf RD: Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight REC: In split-spoon (see notes) and thin-walled tube %-200: Percent of material finer than#200 sieve sampling, the recovered length (in. inches) of TEST NOTESsample.In rock coring,the length of core recovered STANDARD(CalibratedPENETRATION Hammer Weight) (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered. The standard penetration test consists of driving a split-spoon REV: Revert drilling fluid sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to SS: Standard split-spoon sampler (steel; 13/5" is inside provide N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated in each of three 6" increments of penetration.If the sampler is otherwise driven less than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), SU Spur-up sample from hollow stem auger permitted in ASTM:D1586, the blows for each complete 6" TW: in Thin-walledctube; number indicates inside diameter increment o pial i femen�partial number of blows is shown tois on the boring tog. he in inches WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning nearest 0.1' below the slash. rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside the borehole after falling through drilling fluid The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC" WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N hammer column.The disparity is because the N-value is recorded below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel ASTM:D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample V Water Level directly measured in boring recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even C7: Estimated water level based solely on sample extend more than 18"). appearance 01FLD012C(09/03) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES AMERICAN ENGINEER]] RE 3' ASTM Designation: D 2487 TESTING, INC. (Based on Unified Soil Classification System) Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests'^ Group Group Nome Symbol Coarse-Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu3L-4 and 1t:Cc.e35 GW Well graded gra% More than 50%retained on More than 50%coarse Less than 5%fines° No.200 sieve fraction retained on Cu+r4 and/or 1aCcy3E GP Poorly graded gr No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines Pines classify as ML or MH GM SIlty gravelFAH More than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelPo'r Sands Clean Sands Cush and 15 Cc536 SW Well-graded sand 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%fines° fraction passes No. Cu-46 and/or 1aCc"35 SP Poorly graded sal 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sande" More than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand'".1 Fine-Grained Soils Slits and Clays inorganic PIa7 and plots on or above CL Lean cls LM 50%or more passes the Liquid limit less than SO "A"lines No.200 sieve P1<4 or plots below"A" ML Silt/LLbf line'' organic Liquid limit-oven dned OL Organic clayi•LM" <0.75 KLM.o Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A"line CH Fat clayA." Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic siltiu M organic Liquid limit-oven dried<0.75 OH Organic cls AAP Liquid limit-not dried Organic siltI LM.o Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat 'III Atterberg limns plot in hatched area,soil is a CL-ML °(3ased on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm)sieve. E iD,gpf Cu -, D /D Co p x° silty clay. °If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add so ro pi0 K11 soil contains IS to 29%plus No.200.add"with san "with cobbles or boulders,or both"to group name. °Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: Flf soil contains 15%sand,add"with sand"to group or"with gravel."whichever is predominant. GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt name_ 111 soil contain SO%plus no.200,predominantly sand GW-GC well-graded gravel with day glf fines classify as CL-ML use dual symbol GC-GM.or add"sandy"to to group name. GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt SC-SM. "tlf sols contains&30r%plus No.200,predominantly „ GF-GC poorly graded gravel with clay Ii fines are organic,add"with organic tines"to group gravel,add"gravelly"to group name_ °Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: name. NPIa•4 and plots on or above"A"line. SW-SM wall-graded sand with silt /If soil contamss-15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group 0PI-e4 or plots below"A"line. SW-SC well-graded sand with Clay name. • PPI plots on or above"A"lane. SP-SM poorly graded sand with sat 0PI plots below"A"line. SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay SIEVE ANALYSIS 60 r SCREEN-IN I SIEVE Na I For classification of fine grained sails ,/ 3 z iv,i i v e ID xo 40 so 140 zoo and-fine-grained traction of course-grained / loo 11ui■■■a..1 a 50_ soils_ �'/ wa„'�U.� a Equation of'A"-line �a/ 0 xo Horizontal at P1=4 to LL-25.5, �;/ ��1������1 z x 40_ a� m w then PI-0t 1 20) ! Q .p m t Da-lar,,. ` I a z Equation af'U"-line qt` a so��` ao — Vertical at LL=16 to P1=7 ,�� Cr� a ,����� sa s > then PI=0.9ILL-81 2 40��' I 60 Z . 30~ / U ■„�� 0��2Smm I I W / V r f ! �/ W 1110�11 Q U, o a xa 80 a zO` ,' MH i OH ��■ aro�nA7E d f,/ Vv 0 I '100 1d- /. _ t....' I.,..r r.•,T io a LO 0.5 0.10 r �s MLD OL. PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 7 /or � I _r x t GENERAL TERMINOLOGY NOTES FOR SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION GRAIN SIZE GRAVEL PFACNTAGES Terns Particle Size Term Percept Over 12" A Little Gravel 3%-15% Cobbles 3" to 12"Boulders With Gravel 15%-30% 30%-50% Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Gravelly Sand #200 to#4 sieve Fines (silt&clay) Pass#200 sieve CONSISTENCY OF PLASTIC SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF NON-PLAySTIC SOILS Term N-Value, BPF Term N-Value, BPF 2 Very Loose 0-4 less than Very Soft Loose 5-10 Soft 2-4 Finn(Medium) 5-8 Medium Dense 11-30 9-15 Dense 31-50 Stiff Very Stiff 16-30 VeryDense Greater than 50 Hard Greater than 30 MOISTURE/FROST CONDI'T'ION LAYERING NOTES (MC Column) D (Dry): Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to touch. Laminations: Layers less than 1/2" thick of differing material M(Moist): Damp, although free water not visible. or color. Soil may still have a high water content (over "optimum"). W(Wet/ Lenses: Pockets or layers greater than 1/2" thick of Waterbearing): Free water visible. Intended to describe differing material or color. non-plastic soils. Waterbearing usually relates to sands and sands with silt. F(Frozen): Soil frozen. FIBER CONTENT OF PEAT ORGANIC/ROOTS DESCRIPTION Term Fiber Content'Visual Estimate) Soils are described as organic,if soil is not peat and is judged to have sufficient organic fines content to influence the soil Fibric: Greater than 67% properties. Hemic: 33-67% roots to Sapric: Less than 33% With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity influence the soil properties. Trace roots: Small roots present, but not judged to be in sufficient quantity to significantly affect soil properties. - AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING,INC. 01CLS011(08/02)