Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApp D.1 FINAL GEOTECHNICAL SITE ANALYSIS FOR KALALOCHMay 18, 2016 NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC. 717 SOUTH PEABODY STREET. PORT ANGELES, WA 99352 Engineers Lirrb Sun*yOra : Gecicq�:'s Construction lnaaechGn = AA9.0enai T€s nc Phone (364) 352-8491 1.800-653.5345 Fax 352-8498 E-Maili iniodnti4u tort Blair, Church and Flynn Construction Engineers 451 Clovis Avenue, Suite 200 Clovis, California 93612 Attn: Mr. Isaac Wedam FINAL REPORT Subject: GEOTECHNICAL SITE ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW KALALOCH CABINS JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON PARCELS: 413273002, 413273004,413273005,413273006 & 413273007 1.0 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF WORK NTI Engineering and Land Surveying (NTI) were requested by Blair, Church and Flynn Construction Engineers to complete a geotechnical site analysis and foundation assessment for the proposed Kalaloch Cabins project. The proposed site for the cabins is within the five adjoining Jefferson County Parcels whose reference numbers are listed above. The site lies north of the mouth of the Queets River along a coastal bluff on the Pacific Ocean. The subject parcels, taken together, provide over 1200 feet of frontage on the ocean and an area of approximately 19 acres on the west side of Highway 101. The site is in the Southwest Quarter of Section 27 of Township 24 N., Range 13W., of the Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County, Washington. All of the building area in the subject parcels is bounded on the west by a coastal bluff. The bluff rises to an elevation of approximately 75 feet from a coastal lagoon and wild backshore area at the toe of the bluff. On average the bluff rises at a slope close to 45 degrees from the horizontal while some sections of the bluff are as steep as 55 to 60 degrees from the horizontal. The current plan calls for the construction of 20 to approximately 24 small visitor cabins within the parcels between the highway and the rim of the bluff. This study includes information on the geologic hazards of the site and recommendations for geologic hazard buffers for the proposed cabins in addition to information regarding the subsurface conditions. The geotechnical parameters for foundation design, a suggested pier - type foundation design and construction advisories are also provided below. NTI Engineering is also concurrently studying the on-site wastewater treatment and disposal options. During field work 15 test pits were excavated and logged in the proposed project area provide a design basis for wastewater system design and to provide insight into foundation conditions. Fifteen test pits were excavated by back -hoe and logged at the site on March 16, 2016, after reconnaissance work and utility locates. Soil samples were collected and tested at NTI's laboratory and field testing and observations were made for soil texture, consistency, drainage characteristics and the in-situ shear strength of the soil. Field work was completed by Glen Wade, a professional engineering geologist and Trent Adams, a geotechnical engineer in training, with the assistance of Steve Luxton, a geotechnical engineer, all employees of NTI Engineering and Land Surveying. Direct observations of the subsurface soil were made within the test pits to depths of about 6.5 feet. Exposures of the underlying formations were examined during traverses of the 1200 foot - long marine bluff. The aerial image below shows the five parcels with Parcel 413273006 on the north and 41327005 on the south. The rim of the coastal bluff corresponds approximately to the west line of the forested area in the parcels below. PHOTO #1 AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PARCELS TAKEN IN 2005 (COURTESY OFJEFFERSON COUNTY) 2.0 SITE GEOLOGY AND THE SOILS AT THIS SITE 2.1 Surficial Soil Types The Soil Conservation Service (SCS -USDA) Soil Survey classifies the local surface soils as Calawah Silt Loam. This soil, which appears to be partly derived from wind-blown sand, is high in fine particles and it has some clay content and plastic behavior due to extensive weathering by the over 100 inches of rainfall that occurs within the area on average each year. Field observations showed the Calawah Soils were limited in depth at this site and underlain by a sturdy formation of alpine glacial outwash gravel. The main soil -forming events occurred here about 15,000 years ago. Atterberg Limit testing carried out on the soil show a Plasticity Index of approximately 9. This indicates that true clay mineral content is relatively low giving the soil a semi -plastic behavior. Clayey soils of this type have persistently high moisture content and are difficult to dry. (See Appendix) 2 PHOTO #2 VIEW OF THE PACIFIC AND LAGOONS FROM NEW KALALOCH CABINS SITE 2.2 Site Geology United States Geologic Survey Geologists Roland Tabor and Bill Cady studied this region for over ten years and in 1978 they published their monumental work, the Geologic Map of the Olympic Peninsula. According to Tabor and Cady, the site is underlain by an alpine glacial outwash gravel deposit of late Pleistocene age. The sandy gravel outwash deposit exposed along the bluff contains mostly rocks from the Olympic Mountains with the granitic rocks of the Continental Glaciation largely absent. A thin soil of moist clayey silt, and silt loam overlies the outwash. These materials probably arrived at the site as wind-blown fine sand. Well logs from the area note the existence of a vertically extensive clayey formation beneath the gravels. Tabor and Cady mapped a deposit of siltstone and sandstone of Miocene age (15 million years old) that outcrops a few hundred yards to the east. Experience in this region suggests that the clayey formation at depth may be a highly weathered portion of the same siltstone/sandstone unit. The Queets River flows into the Pacific Ocean less than a mile to the south. At present, the river current runs behind a longshore sand bar before broaching the bar and flowing into the Pacific Ocean. 2.3 Test Pit Observations - The Average Soil Profile Many test pits were constructed within the 19 -acre site as shown in the attached map of the test pit locations. The test pits revealed a more or less typical, averaged soil profile as summarized below and shown in the photograph below. DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0' to V 0"+/- Dark organic detritus with silt and fine sand, very loose, damp to wet 1' -0" to 2' 0"+/- Brown to gray clayey silt with organic content ( silt or clay loam ), soft, seepage at the contact to the underlying impervious clayey silt 2'-0" to 4' 8"+/- Red -brown to yellow -gray clayey silt, soft, grading to medium stiff, moist, likely to be restrictive to percolation of water 4'- 8"+/- to Depth Gray -brown to gray sandy GRAVEL, well graded, moderately dense, moist, moderately well drained. Sandstone clasts are of Olympic origin. Wit} .y y 71 ��,^ate-F PHOTO #3 TYPICAL TEST PIT SHOWING FOREST DUFF OVERLYING CLAYEY SILTS 4 3.0 GEOHAZARDS AND SLOPE STABILITY 3.1 Observations and Information Related to Slope -Stability and Geo -Hazards The bluff at this site is approximately 70 feet in height along most of its length. Most of the escarpment has a slope of about 45 degrees from the horizontal but the uppermost ten or fifteen feet of bluff is over -steepened to nearly vertical in some reaches of the bluff's rim. One section of the bluff lying between lots 3004 and 3005 is prominent and stands at more than 55 degrees from the horizontal in some parts. The slopes here are well vegetated with an understory of evergreen huckleberry, salal, Indian plum, salmon berry, ocean spray and sword ferns. Sitka Spruce and Red Alder trees reinforce the bluff's rim and they make an important contribution to slope stability along the bluff's rim. Observations along the bluff showed that the outwash gravel formation underlies the whole site and it appears to extend down to the beach level at the backshore area above the lagoons. Although an exposure of gray clayey silt was observed near the toe of the bluff on the south, the gravel appears to be vertically extensive on the face of the bluff. There is about a foot of loose slope colluvium on the steep slopes here. x PHOTO #4 01 MOIST CLAYEY SILT UNDERLAIN BY GRAVEL IS COMMON IN THE SUBSURFACE 5 The gravel observed in test pits and the same gravel formation examined along the slope was well -graded and relatively low in clay and silt. This material has high internal friction and it offers good slope stability. A thorough examination of the bluff showed several zones of seepage along the toe with most of the saturation in the lowest 15 feet of the bluff after a very wet winter. The presence of lagoons along the toe of the bluff suggests that the Queets River may have coursed along the toe of the bluff in this area before broaching the coastal sand and gravel bars that form along this reach of the Pacific's shoreline. Recent geologic research must be considered in assessing the prudent setback and geologic hazard buffers appropriate to this bluff. Brian Atwater, a United Sates Geologic Survey geologist at the University of Washington, and other researchers have concluded that the Olympic Peninsula will experience "subduction zone" earthquakes. There is a growing body of evidence that a very large (possibly 9.0 magnitude) subduction zone earthquake and related tsunami occurred in 1700. Several other ruptures along the Juan de Fuca Plate margin have occurred since that event. These ruptures have generated large and dangerous earthquakes. This series of subduction zone earthquakes have been driven by disturbances along the margin of the Juan de Fuca Oceanic Plate in the offshore zone where it dives (subducts) beneath the continental rocks. The fault -line and potential rupture zone is about 65 miles offshore from the subject site -too close for any complacency. Evidence of tsunamis (tidal waves) originating along the subduction zone has been found in coastal sediments and through the offshore cores of submarine turbidity current deposits (submarine landslide deposits) along the coasts of Oregon and Washington. When such a subduction zone earthquake occurs, it may be much longer in duration, much more energetic and far more destructive than the earthquakes that have occurred in the Puget Sound Region and Western Washington within recorded memory. Due to the longer duration, higher energy and the longer vibratory period, the expected motion of the ground is very large and the potential for landslide generation is high. The probability of such an event occurring is now thought to be about 1 chance in 350 per year or about one chance in seven during the next 50 years. Some researchers suggest that the Olympic Peninsula area is "overdue" for an occurrence. 3.2 Discussion and Factors Regarding The Geo -Hazards At This Site At this site, the internal friction of the gravel formations at depth offers some protection from very large and deep-seated rotational landslides. Large rotational slides that might envelope a large width of the platform are unlikely here due to the presence of the strong well- graded gravel in the slope and relatively low groundwater saturation levels with good drainage above. 0 Some over -steepened sections along the top of the escarpment may routinely fail in prolonged wet weather leading to a sudden loss of up to perhaps ten feet of bluff width. Raveling of the gravelly slope and thin translational slides of the loose surface of the slope may also be the cause of sudden loss of a few feet of width along the rim. Due to the presence of well -drained gravels at depth and the significant age of the deposit, the site appears to have no liquefaction hazard. The potential for lateral spreading is also very low due to the apparent absence of saturated sands at depth beneath the site and the lack of confining earth materials. Although the Queets River lies a few thousand feet to the south, there is some possibility that the Queets River could re -take what may have been its former channel at the toe of the slope at this site. If this were to occur, the rate of erosion and the rate of slope recession would be greatly increased. The effects of a subduction zone earthquake at this site are difficult, if not impossible, to predict with precision. Nevertheless, it is easy to imagine that the gravelly slopes along this bluff could be loosened by five minutes of violent ground motion followed by several large tsunami waves that may momentarily reach half the height of the bluff. While the escarpment is probably high enough to avoid direct damage to cabins by tsunamis, the lower portion of the slope would be deeply washed by enormous surging waves which may follow an earthquake. Given these conditions, it is easy to imagine that 10 or 15 feet of the bluff's rim could slump downward in an earthquake along with much of the gravelly soil on the slope itself. In the over - steepened areas along the top of the bluff, an even wider zone of slumping and instability should be anticipated. 3.3 The Recommended Geo -Hazard Slope Buffer In consideration of the factors above and recognizing the limited width of the site, a geohazard buffer of twenty-five (25) feet is recommended. This buffer should remain in a natural state and the growth of native shrubs and trees should be encouraged. The Critical Areas Ordinance and Development Code of Jefferson County require a further five (5) feet of setback from the geo-hazard buffer to the foundation line of any building, so that the total setback from bluff's rim to the foundation of permanent structures is 30 feet. Modest decks that do not encroach into the geo-hazard buffer may be built within the setback zone. Some use of the geo-hazard buffer by vacationing cabin occupants who hope to enjoy the view shown in Photograph 1, above, is probably unavoidable. Due to the fact that the seismic hazard is by far the most significant reason for providing a geo-hazard buffer here, it seems that some low -impact and thoughtful uses of the buffer might be allowed since they are unlikely to affect the slope's stability. Thoughtful and low impact uses of the buffer might include narrow and natural footpaths, selected low -impact view points with rustic benches and small fire pits that are well away from native trees. In our opinion, none of these uses would significantly affect the bluffs stability so long as native trees are preserved as much as possible. 3.4 Final Positions of Cabins To Be Verified By Engineering Geologist NTI's land surveyors have mapped the bluff's rim at the site and planned positions of the proposed cottages. In Computer Aided Drafting drawings some of the proposed cabins have been positioned on the plans 30 feet from the bluff's rim. Due to the zig-zagging and undulations along the bluff and differing amounts of over -steepening that were not seen in the site survey, the bluff's rim setbacks scaled from site design drawings may be significantly more or less than 30 feet once they are staked in the field. To ensure that all local conditions are fully considered, the final positions of the cottages should be reviewed by NTI after they are staked from the drawings. Thus, we recommend that the final positions of the cottages be verified and adjusted as required within the recommended 30 foot structure setback by the undersigned Engineering Geologist once their graphic footprints have been staked in the field. 4.0 BUILDING FOUNDATION AND DRAINAGE DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Prescriptive Spread Footings Under The International Building Code Typical spread strip footings for foundation tee -walls and isolated footings may be designed and constructed in accordance with the prescriptive requirements of the current International Building Code. The design criteria outlined below will lead to a good result if carefully followed. The New Kalaloch Cabin's site is overlaid with a layer of loose organic forest duff and loose clay and silt loam soil that must be removed prior to placing any foundation. All excavations for foundation footings must be carried down to a minimum depth of two feet (24 inches) from the top of the soil. The silty clay soil at the bottom of the excavation should be compacted if it is sufficiently dry in fair weather. Compaction effort in trenches and excavations for footings should result in relative density of at least 91% of the Modified Proctor under ASTM D 1557. All of the resulting prepared surface should feel uniformly firm under foot prior to placing concrete footings. All footings should be a minimum of 18 inches in width. • Vertical Bearing Capacity of Soil Spread footings installed on soil prepared as noted above may be designed for an allowable vertical load of 1500 pounds per square foot of bearing area. 8 • Lateral Load Capacity of Soil Allowable lateral load on adjoining soil may be taken as 100 pounds per square foot per foot of depth for the native silt soils at this site. Backfill should be compacted into place. If additional lateral bearing is required, backfill the footings with imported clean pit -run sandy gravel with less than 8 % fines passing the 200 sieve meeting the requirements for "Gravel Borrow" under the Washington State Department of Transportation's Standard Specification (WSDOT) #9- 03.14(1). The lateral bearing capacity of this imported backfill material may be taken as 200 pounds per square foot per foot of depth if the gravel has been compacted in place to a relative density of 92% under the ASTM D1557 testing procedure. Native well -graded gravel quarried from the south end of the project area may meet this specification. Refer to the attached Soil Classification & Gradation Report # 16070 in the Appendix. • Sliding Resistance Resistance to lateral sliding is governed by cohesion in the clayey silt soils of this site at a depth of 24 inches. Design footings for a lateral sliding (shearing) resistance of 150 pounds per square foot of foot basal area resulting from soil -to -footing cohesion. • Seismic Site Class "D" Due to the presence of moderately stiff alpine glacial sediments and underlying soft and weathered rocks of Miocene age at depth, this site is assigned a Seismic Site Class D • Wet Weather Procedure If water occurs in footing excavations during winter work or if weak, muddy soil is encountered, over -excavate the affected footing areas to a depth of three (3) feet and fill the bottom of the trench with a foot of clean pit -run gravel replacement fill meeting the WSDOT specification for "Gravel Borrow." Replacement fill should be compacted until it reaches a firm condition and placed so that the top of the fill is 24 inches beneath the original surface of the ground. Do not over -compact this fill if it is placed on wet clayey soil. Excessive compaction may weaken the soil and the foundation. 4.2 Concrete Pier Foundation Alternatives Defined Concrete or other structural piers may used at this site to take advantage of the much stronger gravel soil typically lying at depths of more than five (5) feet at this site. If concrete or similar piers are selected, please ensure that the Contractor follows the procedures and understands the specifications below in completing the piers. si PROCEDURES FOR INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE PIERS AT THE NEW KALALOCH CABINS • Standard Method Pier post holes may be augured into the soil by tractor -mounted post hole augers. Clear duff and top soil away before auguring holes for the piers. Holes for piers must be carried down into the underlying gravel layer. In most areas of the site, the gravel will be encountered at about 5 feet of depth, but all holes should be deepened until the gravelly soil is encountered below the silt and clayey soils. 16 -inch augers that are capable of 6 feet of depth are best for this work but a 12 -inch auger with less depth capacity could be used if pier holes are started by hand excavation work. Please see attached drawing; Version 2.0, of the "Typical Foundation Pier" for New Kalaloch Cabins. If desired, concrete may be poured against the ground in the resulting post holes. Use 6 -sack concrete for the piers below ground level to restrict water penetration and retard rebar corrosion. Concrete for piers may be mixed on site by hand if the work schedule requires it or if time -dependent sloughing of augured holes is a problem. Use a rich concrete mixture and be sure that the concrete is well consolidated by using a concrete vibrator or by actively rodding the concrete as it is being placed. Steel reinforcing "cages" may be prefabricated using #4 rebar and #3 ties and stirrups as shown on the attached drawing. Stub out 30 inches of rebar to continue reinforcement into the column above. Cages may be "plunged" into the fresh concrete and braced into plumb and accurate alignment. Be sure that the rebar cages are centered within the holes so that the rebar are well away from the surrounding soil. Keep soil and debris off of the fresh concrete at the top -of -pier so that concrete to be placed later has direct contact with the clean surface of the new concrete in the augured holes. Column forms may be placed on the resulting piers and the form height adjusted to meet the architectural requirements and to allow for embedment of anchorage for the cabin substructure. Piers should not rise higher than 5 feet from the ground using the design provided here. Continue the same concrete reinforcing to the column as noted on the drawing with 30 inches of dowel lap to the upper "cage". Concrete for the upper columns should be at least 3000 psi -28 day strength with air content at least 5% to not more than 7% to improve frost resistance. In most cases, piers over 3 feet in height will require bracing to resist lateral loads. This should be assessed by the project architect or structural engineer. 10 • Alternative Method If post holes are unstable and sloughing cannot be overcome by improved using site -mixed concrete to quickly fill the pier holes, tube forms may be inserted into the excavations immediately after auguring the holes. Forms may then be aligned and plumbed and braced. Tubes should be backfilled with imported %-inch crushed rock that is at least 60% fractured and with less than 6% of silt and clayey fines. Crushed rock backfill should be tamped into place beside the tube forms to improve the friction and to provide more lateral support. Complete vigorous compaction of the area around the piers after the concrete is placed in the tube forms. Rebar cages may then be inserted into the forms using galvanized wire centralizers to keep the rebar cages centered in the tube forms. (If you have questions about this, please contact the undersigned Geotechnical Engineer.) Concrete for the upper columns should be at least 3000 psi -28 day strength with controlled air content at least 5% to not more than 7%. Consolidate and vibrate the concrete to avoid "honey- combing". • Design Data For Foundation Piers Piers installed as outlined above will be able to carry the following loads to the soil. (Be sure that a compatible anchorage design for the cabin substructure is provided by the Structural Engineer or Project Architect.) • Allowable downward vertical load per pier 5.5 kips ( 5500 # ) per pier • Allowable upward uplift load per pier - 0.8 kips (800 #) per pier • Lateral force capacity per pier at ground level - 1.75 kips ( 1700 #) in any direction • Unbraced lateral force capacity per pier 5 ft above ground - 0.35 Kips 350 pounds • Seismic Site Class "D" • Total compression settlement of soil • Differential settlement expected 4.3 Slab -On -Grade Construction Approximately W when footing substrate is prepared as directed above Approximately %" to W when footing substrate is prepared as directed above . Pier type foundation construction methods are recommended for this site rather than integral slab and footing arrangements. If slab on grade construction is required follow these recommendations. Prepare slab areas by removing all dark duff and organic soils to a depth of at least one foot. 11 Backfill the resulting excavation with Gravel Borrow meeting WSDOT specification 9-03.14(1) to adjust floor height well above the native ground grade. Compact the fill to 95% of the Modified Proctor Optimal Density under ASTM D 1557 in thin lifts of not more than one foot. To ensure a dry floor, provide a final lift of 4 -inches of Hillcar 7/8" to 3/8" Capillary Break Washed Crushed Gravel from the Hillcar Quarry near Forks, Washington, or equal capillary break product. This material should be compacted with a vibratory plate compactor until the resulting surface is dense and unyielding. When prepared for concrete, the capillarity break gravel should have a 96% relative density under ASTM D 1557. Once near the slab bottom grade, cover the base rock with a 6 mil minimum thickness vapor barrier or as specified by the project Architect. A leveling course of 1 or 2 inches of well drained sand may be placed over the vapor barrier at the discretion of the Contractor or Architect to enhance the adsorption of concrete bleed water and improve concrete cure and finishing. Reinforce the concrete slab as specified by the Structural Engineer or Architect. Ensure the specified clear cover for floor reinforcement is observed. 4.4 Roof and Driveway Drainage May Be Routed To Dry Wells A gray to light brown well -graded gravel was identified in all test pits from depths of about 5 feet downward. The attached sieve analysis of the material (Appendix 1) indicates that less than 2% of the material passes the 200 sieve and well -graded composition indicating good drainage. Observations of this gravel in outcrops along the bluff suggest that this gravel is extensive in depth and widespread under the area and that it will safely accept drainage water at moderate rates in all weather conditions. Thus, this material may receive drainage from parking lots and downspouts. Infiltration galleries of imported drain rock or free -draining crushed rock should extend down through the overlying soil well into the gravel below. Use filter fabrics to avoid contamination of the drain rock by silt and clay from the overlying soil. 4.5 Parking and Driveway Design Recommendations To prepare the existing soil beneath parking and driveway areas, begin by removing dark organic detritus (top soil) and excessively soft or wet soil. The resulting surface should be rough graded and compacted (if it is dry enough to compact) to 88 percent of the Modified Proctor Density under ASTM D 1557 prior to placing any aggregate base or embankment materials. Some areas of the site are already ballasted with gravel that was likely to have been quarried from the pit at the south end of the project area. 4.6 Pavement Sub -base Recommendations Place a woven geotextile fabric as specified by the project Civil Engineer over the prepared subgrade. In the areas where ballast has not already been placed, build up with 16 -inches of Hillcar Quarry 2 -inch minus ballast or 16 -inches of "Gravel Borrow" meeting WSDOT specification 9-03.14(1). 12 This material should be compacted in 12 -inch lifts with a plate compactor or vibratory roller to a firm unyielding condition. When in this condition, the pavement sub -base gravel would have a 95% relative density under ASTM D 1557. If wet weather work is required, 24 or more inches of ballast or gravel may be required to obtain enough stability for equipment operation. In the event of wet weather work, the sub -base thickness should be reviewed at the time of construction by the Engineering Geologist or the Geotechnical Engineer. 4.7 The Geotechnical Engineer's Paving Recommendations Parking lot paving and paving base will be as specified by the project Civil Engineer. The suggestions below are those of the Geotechnical Engineer. A grading base of 7/8 inch minus free -draining crushed rock (Hillcar 7/8"minus clean crushed rock) or alternative product meeting WSDOT 9-03.9(3) for "Top Course" should be placed on the sub -base for grading. A 6 -inch lift of this product should be shaped and compacted to 98% of the ASTM D 1557 relative density. The Geotechnical Engineer recommends paving the resulting surface with at least 2.5 inches of asphaltic concrete to ensure a sufficiently hot mix for better compaction and to obtain a longer pavement life. The resulting pavement should have a minimum life of 25 to 30 years. 4.8 Avoid Winter Work Winter or wet season work will be difficult and excessively expensive at this site. Therefore, excavation and grading work should be planned for dry summer weather. 5.0 CLOSURE If excessively wet or soft soils are observed in foundation areas or if conditions in the subsurface vary significantly from those described herein, please notify the undersigned Engineering Geologist immediately for on-site assistance. NTI Engineering offers on-site testing of compaction, concrete and aggregates testing and building code construction inspections that may be requested for this project. Sincerely yours, For NTI Engineering and Land Surveying Glen Wade, PG, LEG Lead Engineering Geologist Steve S. Luxton MSc. PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer 13 opll— A. Q ;A, Robert A. Leach MBA, PE Principal Engineer APPENDIX DOCUMENTS OF THE APPENDIX: 1. Drawing of Typical Pier -Type Foundation - Version 2.0 2. Laboratory Soil Test Reports Soil Classification Gradation # 16070 Atterberg Limits # 16073 Moisture Content # 16073 Atterberg Limits # 16072 Moisture Content # 16072 Atterberg Limit # 16071 3. Map of Test Pit Locations 14 APPENDIX 1 DRAWING OF TYPICAL PIER -TYPE FOUNDATION VERSION 2.0 VEIC51014 4 o MAX �iF4 5.5 k/ AWCHoR �� AeW/7feroR MAX 4Arr e z,:51fz> ?r'b/ /�" 1�/fl 5cy�oTv�E ,�o�zMEo cacv�� �yPlC�1 L �a�GTiD�li ':�3Cf OCLOW. 30 DoWE11-5, Mi jLfw(;rN oo, vmr EA` S/LT LOJ'�M 5a/L "AuG�ieEO - �'05T Ho LE elmYEY5/47— G, 6,RAVC4 ``7 7-YPIC.AL, ev-&710n1 0*CXC44 1 VAC To FA4r L 4` �� VEiFr ; 5A GfC �oRT�,,4 47 �tfi�TGa►��?PT�' ;., Si�N, To ---,x = J2 al'/�91�'fET�•? `---- falTfi�lD P05T f�DLE K,41-ALaCAl cAz?/Iv5 ro �,AV T^YPlC�1L �oUNb�IT�o�I ��'�� a C� lowee var S T R I DATE: NTI ENGINEERING & SURVEYING DESIGNED BY: 5, LLJXTon/ NORTHWESTERN TERRITORIES, INC. PROJECT: AIW ,(mss 4A,6DCN CARia/5 Engineers ■Land Surveyors ■Geologists �' ' Construction Coordination ■Materials Testing FOR: RCIc- 6o VST, ,EN5/,V>fE/Z5 717 SOUTH PEABODY . PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON 98362 a (360)452-8491 SHT• OF / NTI www.nti4u.com info@ntKu.com APPENDIX 2 LABORATORY SOILS TEST REPORTS NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY. Specimen Control # 16070 „y,,,«„ - �� --y-- --y-, Construction Inspection - Materials Testing iN�P 7 717 SOUTH PEABODY, PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON 983&'t,(360)4524491 SUIL GLASslrl%;A i IVN i WET GRADATION/ USCS Client: ��Blair, Church, and FI nn Date: 3/17/2016 Project. Kalaloch Cabins Sample taken by: G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account #: BCFC1601-03 Source_: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Client Contact: Tested By: BC/ SRW Email: Date Tested: 3/21/2016 Phone#: Test requested: Wet / Dry Sieve: Wet Remarks: Sample #3 taken from TP -15; Brown Sandy Gravel Reviewed: ieve Die (mm) Sieve Size Dry Wt. (grams) % Retained % Passing 125.0 5" 0.0 0.0% 100.0% Dry start weight: 11277.3 75.0 3" 1621.2 14.4% 85.6% Dry weight after wash: 11089.9 50.0 37.5 2" 1.5" 1272.4 1217.3 11.3% 10.8% 74.3% 63.5% Minus #200 Weight: D10: 187.4 0.00 25.0 1" 1530.4 13.6% 50.0% D30: 0.00 19.0 3/4" 938.6 8.3% 41.7% D60: 0.00 12.5 1/2" 1432.4 12.7% 29.0% Cu: #DIV/0! 9.5 3/8" 673.3 6.0% 23.0% Cc: #DIV/0! 4.75 #4 320.8 2.8% 20.1% Soil Classification: 2.00 #10 652.0 5.8% 14.4% Moisture Content: 0.85 #20 403.7 3.6% 10.8% .425 1Y40 379.8 3.4% 7.4% .250 #60 355.1 3.1% 4.3% 0.15 #100 182.4 1.6% 2.6% 0.075 #200 110.5 1.0% 1.7% 0 Pan 187.4 1.7% 0.0% 100.00 ILI l l I I ! l _ I _-�-- �- -- -- 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 >` LL M C p i L. 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 4 L I L 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 Grain Size (mm) REMARKS: r.. fop NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY Engineers - Land Surveyors - Geologists Construction Inspection - Materials Testing NT/ 717 SOUTH PEABODY, PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON 98362, '360)452-8491 Spec 011 Control # 116073 A178ROMG LIMITS • ASTM D4318 Client: 1131air, Church, and Flynn Date: 3/17/2016 Project: IKalaloch Cabins Sample taken by: G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account M BCFC1601-03 Source: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Project Manager: G. Wade Tested by: BC/TA Client Contact: Isaac Wedam Email & Phone: iwedam bcf-en r.com ; 559 326-1400 y line, Gray Clayey Silt Sam le #4 taken from Toe of slope at North Propert LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Wet Soil (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil (g) Mass ofMass Dry Soil of Water (g) % Water Content Number of Drops 1 4 13.8 27.7 25.0 11.2 2.7 24.1 23 2 H3 13.8 1 28.8 25.9 12.1 2.9 24.0 28 3 H2 13.8 29 26.2 12.4 2.8 22.6 31 4 G1 13.8 29.1 26.1 12.3 3.0 24.4 26 PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Wet Soil (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil (g) Dry Soil Mass of (g) Mass of Water (g) % Water Content Number of Drops 1 H2 13.8 45.8 41.3 27.5 4.5 16.4 N/A 2 H3 13.8 42.3 1 38.4 1 24.6 3.9 15.9 N/A 3 G3 14.4 43.5 1 40.0 1 25.6 3.5 13.7 1 N/A RESULTS LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION 25.0 8 • LIQUID LIMIT 24 24.0 - PLASTIC LIMIT 23.0 z L) - • 15 22.0 o! a PLASTICITY INDEX 3 21,0 20.0 10 100 NUMBER OF DROPS 9 ti NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY Engineers — Land Surveyors — Geologists qW Construction Inspection — Materials Testing AfTl 717 SOUTH PEABODY, PORTMGElES, WASHNGTOH OM Gaol 4511.8481 Specimen Control # I 16073 MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D2216 Client: Blair, Church, and Flynn Consulting Engineers Date: 3/17/2016 Project Kalaloch Cabins Sample Taken By: G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account: BCFC1601-03 Source: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Project Manager: Glen Wade Tested By: B. Carey Client Contact: Isaac Wedam Date Tested: 3/18/2016 Email: iwedam@bcf-engr.com Phone #: (559) 326-1400 Remarks: None RESULTS Wet Sample Weight (g) Oven Dry Sample Weight (g) Weight of Water in Sample (g) Moisture Content N 905.6 743.2 162.4 1 21.85 NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY qjw Engineers — Land Surveyors — Geologists Construction Inspection — Materials Testing JVW 717SOUTH PMMY, PM MWIEs. WASH TON K16Z (W) 452-W1 Specimen Control # 16072 MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D2216 Client: Blair, Church, and Flynn Consulting Engineers Date: 3/17/2016 Project Kalaloch Cabins Sample Taken By: G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account: BCFC1601-03 Source: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Project Manager: Glen Wade Tested By: B. Carey Client Contact: Isaac Wedam Date Tested: 3/18/2016 Email: iwedam@bcf-engr.com Phone #: (559) 326-1400 Remarks: INone RESULTS Wet Sample Weight (g) Oven Dry Sample Weight of Water in Weight (g) Sample (g) Moisture Content N 224.0 166.3 57.7 34.7 NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY Engineers — Land Surveyors — Geologists Construction Inspection — Materials Testing NTAI 717 SOUTH PEABODY, PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON 98362, 360 452-8491 Specimen Control # 116072 ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D4318 Client: 1131air, Church, and Flynn Date: 3/17/2016 Project: Kalaloch Cabins Sample taken by., G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account #: BCFC1601-03 Source: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Project Manager: G. Wade/ T. Adams Tested by: Client Contact: Isaac Wedam Email & Phone: iwedam bcf-en r.com, 569 326-1400 Remarks: Sam le could not be rolled to required thread thickness for plastic limit test. (Non -plastic) Sam le #2 taken from TP -3; Yellow Brown Silty Clay LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (9) Mass of Can/Lid + Wet Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil Soil 19) (9) Mass of Dry Soil (g) Mass of % Water Water Content (9) Number of Drops Ps 1 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! 2 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! 3 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Wet Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil (g) Soil (g) of D Mass soli Dry S Mass of Water (g) % Water Content Number of Drops 1 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! N/A 2 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! N/A 3 0.0 0.0 #DIV/0! N/A RESULTS 13.0 0 o 0 le a 3 LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION 5 I f ji ! �i LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT NP PLASTICITY INDEX 12.0 1 10 NUMBER OF DROPS 100 NTI MATERIALS TESTING LABORATORY Engineers - Land Surveyors - Geologists Construction Inspection - Materials Testing /VTI 717 sovrH PEABODY, PORT mGELES, wAsHINGTON 98362, 360)452 -mi Specimen Control # 116071 ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D4318 Client: 1131air, Church, and Flynn Date: 3/17/2016 Prci ect: I Kalaloch Cabins Sample taken by: G. Wade / T. Adams BILLING INFORMATION Material: Native Lab Account #: BCFC1601-03 Source: New Kalaloch Cabins Site Project Manager: G. Wade/ T. Adams Tested by: JBC Client Contact: Isaac Wedam Email & Phone: wedam bcf-en r.com; 559 326-1400 Remarks: Sample #1 taken from TP -1; Gray Clayey Silt LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (g) Mass of CantLid + Wet Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil (g) Soil (g) Mass of Dryg))oil Mass of Water (g) % Water Content Number of Drops 1 B 13.8 24.5 19.8 6.0 4.7 78.3 31 2 A3 1 14.6 1 26 20.9 6.3 5.1 81.0 21 3 C4 13.8 1 25.1 20.1 6.3 5.0 79.4 23 4 PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION Sample # Moisture Can/Lid # Mass of Can/Lid (g) Mass of Can/Lid + Wet Mass of Can/Lid + Dry Soil (g) Soil (g) Mass of Dry ,oll Mass of Water (g) % Water Content 1 13.5 41.7 32.3 18.8 9.4 50.0 2 14.6 44.0 35.1 20.5 8.9 43.4 3 1 13.7 1 43.4 1 34.1 20.4 9.3 45.6 4 13.9 26.8 1 22.8 8.9 4.0 44.9 RESULTS 82.0 81.5 81.0 80.5 U0 80.0 a79.5 3 79.0 78.5 78.0 10 LIQUID LIMIT DETERMINATION I LIQUID LIMIT l 1 I 79 E PLASTIC LIMIT i ; 1 45� PLASTICITY INDEX f i JJ j 34 NUMBER OF DROPS 100 APPENDIX 3 MAP OF TEST PIT LOCATIONS