HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-070 Proposal - Marquess1120 EAST JACKSON STREET P.O. BOX 490 M EDFORD OREGON 97501 TELEPHON E: (503) 772-7115
FAX: (503) 779-4079
August 9, 1993
Steven P. Hall
Public Works Director
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE:
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED ADNINISTRATIVE BUILDING
CITY OF ASHLAND
ASHLAND, OREGON
NAI JOB NO. 7-10.4
Dear Mr. Hall:
Introduction
As requested, we have performed a geotechnical nvestigation for the proposed
Administrative Building for the City of Ashland. The approximate location of
the building site is shown on Drawing 1, Site Plan. The purpose of our
investigation was to evaluate the prevailing soil and foundation conditions in
the building area and develop findings and recommendations for the earthwork
and foundation engineering aspects of the project.
As shown on the preliminary drawings by Gary N. Afseth, Architect, the new
building will be located behind the existing Police Department and Justice
Center Building on East Main Street. The structure will be one story and
roughly rectangular in shape with plan dimensions of about 81x136 feet. The
building will utilize wood framing and slab-on-grade floors. Maximum column
loads are expected to be 46 kips. The finished floor will be established at
elevation 1894.45 feet.
Scope
As presented in our proposal letter dated July 2, 1993, the scope of services
for this investigation was to include:
1. Review of available published and unpublished geologic and
geotechnical information for this area.
2. Subsurface exploration consisting of three exploratory borings under
the observation of our engineer.
3. Laboratory testing of samples obtained from the borings.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 2
Geotechnical engineering analyses using the field and laboratory data
and preparation of a geotechnical investigation report. The report
presents findings and recommendations for the following:
a) Site geology.
b) Site preparation and grading for the building.
c) Building foundation type, minimum dimensions, and allowable
bearing values.
d) Estimated foundation settlements.
e) Treatment of expansive soils, as appropriate.
f) Support of interior and exterior slabs-on-grade.
Backfilling and compaction of utility trenches.
h) Surface and subsurface drainage.
i) Any other unusual design or construction conditions encountered in
the investigation.
This report has been prepared for the specific use of the City of Ashland and
their consultants in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation
engineering principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or
implied, is made. In the event that any substantial changes in the nature,
design, or location of the building is planned, the conclusions and
recommendations of this report shall not be considered valid unless such
changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in
writing.
It should also be recognized that changes in the site conditions may occur
with the passage of time due to environmental processes or man-made changes.
Furthermore, building code or state of the practice changes may require
modifications in the recommendations presented herein. Accordingly, the
recommendations of this report should not be relied on beyond a period of
three years without being reviewed by a civil engineer that is knowledgeable
and experienced in soils engineering.
Method of Investiqation
The site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration were performed by our
geotechnical engineer on July 21, 1993. Three exploratory borings were drilled
to a maximum depth of 25 feet using a truck-mounted continuous hollow stem
auger drill rig (Mobile B-80) at the locations shown on Drawing 1. A key
describing the soil classification system and soil consistency terms used in
this report is presented on Drawing 3 and the soil sampling procedures are
described on Drawing 4. Logs of the borings are presented on Drawings 6
through 9.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 3
The borings were located in the field by pacing and interpolation of the
features shown on the drawings provided us. These locations ~hould be
considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used.
Samples of the soil materials from the borings were returned to our laboratory
for classification and testing. The results of moisture content, dry density,
percent finer than No. 200 sieve, free swell, and plasticity index tests are
shown on the boring logs. Drawing ]0 presents additional information on the
plasticity tests. The laboratory test procedures followed during this
investigation are summarized on Drawing 5.
A bibliography of references consulted during this investigation is included at
the end of the text.
Site Conditions
A. Surface
The building site is a grass covered landscaped area which slopes approximately
three percent to the north. The surface grades vary from elevation 1895.0 to
]891.8 feet. There are underground storm drain and sewer pipes in the western
and southern portions of the site. The building site is generally bounded to
the west, north, and east by asphalt paved parking areas and on the south by
landscaping.
We understand that the site was previously used as a lumber mill.
B. Subsurface
The geologic map (Beaulieu and Hughes, 1977) reviewed indicates that the
site is underlain by Quaternary age alluvial fan deposits consisting of
unconsolidated mixtures of gravel, sand, silt, and clay.
The exploratory borings encountered six to seven feet of fill at the site. The
fill generally consisted of loose to medium dense silty sand and clayey sand
with occasional boulders. In Boring 2, however, loose to very loose silty sand
and debris, including brick, concrete, charred wood, wire, glass, and rags,
were encountered to five feet. The fill materials were underlain to the depths
explored in the borings by medium dense to dense silty sand and very stiff
sandy clay.
The borings and probes by Ferrero Geologic (]993) at the site encountered
roughly similar silty sand fill materials with randomly occurring debris
and organics. The subsurface information from this study is summarized on
Drawing 1].
The fill materials and underlying natural silty sands have a low plasticity
based on their classification and Atterberg Limits tests (plasticity index of
]0 percent for the clayey sand fill in Boring 1 at six feet). The results of
our Atterberg Limits testing are shown on the boring logs and on Drawing 10.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 4
The attached boring logs and related information depict subsurface conditions
only at the specific locations shown on Drawing I and on the particular date
designated on the logs. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from
conditions occurring at these locations. Also, the passage of time may result
in a change of conditions at these boring locations due to environmental
changes.
C. Groundwater
Free groundwater and wet soils were encountered during drilling at depths of
4.5, 6.5, and 5.5 feet, respectively, in Borings 1, 2, and 3. Free flowing
groundwater was encountered at depths of 10.5 to 13.5 feet in the borings. The
upper groundwater levels in the borings appear to be due to perched
groundwater.
Borings 2 and 3 were left open for two days to allow time for the water levels
in the holes to stabilize prior to backfilling. The measured water levels were
7.5 and 4.5 feet in Borings 2 and 3, respectively. Boring 1 was backfilled
upon completion of drilling. Fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur,
however, because of variations in rainfall, temperature, runoff, irrigation,
and other factors not evident at the time our observations were made and
reported herein.
Conclusions and Recommendations
From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, we conclude that the site
can be developed as proposed provided the recommendations of this report are
incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The existing
fill soils are locally weak and compressible and contain random deposits of
organic materials and building debris. In their present condition, the fill
soils are considered unsuitable for foundation support. In order to provide
adequate support for the building, we recommend that all of the fill materials
be removed from the site and replaced with approved engineered fill materials
as discussed below under "Earthwork". The building can then be supported on
conventional spread footing foundations which bear in the engineered fill
materials.
Construction dewatering of the excavated hole is expected to be required during
construction. We recommend that a gravel trench drain be installed around the
perimeter of the bottom of the over-excavation. The drain should be installed
in conjunction with the excavation operations. The recommended perforated pipe
subdrain that will be installed as part of the drain will also mitigate the
high groundwater conditions beneath the building.
The recommendations presented in the remainder of the report are contingent
on our review of the earthwork and foundation plans for the project and our
observation of the earthwork and foundation installation phases of
construction.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 5
A. Earthwork
1. Clearing and Site Preparation
The area to be graded should be cleared of utilities, landscaping, and any
other obstructions encountered during grading. Holes resulting from the
removal of underground obstructions that are deeper than the proposed
excavations should be backfilled with suitable material and compacted to
the requirements for engineered fill. Earth material that is mixed with
construction debris should not be used for engineered fill. The
backfilling operations should be performed under the observation of the
soil engineer.
2. Over-excavation and Recompaction of Existinq Fill
All existing fill materials beneath the proposed building should be
removed over their full depth. The fill materials were encountered to
depths of 7.0, 7.5, and 6.0 feet, respectively, in Borings 1, 2, and 3.
The lateral limits of the proposed over-excavation and new fill placement
should extend at least five feet beyond the layout of the building
foundations. A schematic of the recommended over-excavation and a detail
of the subdrain are shown on Drawing 2, Cross-Section A-A~.
The existing fill materials can be selectively stockpiled off-site for
re-use as engineered fill. Limited observations and tests were performed
on the existing fill soils at the site. These findings indicate that the
brown silty sands and clayey sands (see Borings 1 and 3) appeared to be
free of organics and construction debris and can probably be re-used as
engineered fill. The gray, dark brown, and black soils, however, contain
significant undesirable materials (see Boring 2) and should not be re-used
as fill. In general, the fill soils may be re-used provided that
deleterious materials, such as construction debris and organics, are not
present.
If the existing fill soils are re-used as fill, the soils will require
considerable drying and processing (particularly the lower portion of the
existing fill) in order to achieve satisfactory compaction.
The exposed bottom of the over-excavation should be protected from
softening due to excessive traffic and moisture. Therefore, we recommend
that the subdrain discussed above be installed during the excavation
process. In addition, we believe a large backhoe or excavator should be
used to dig the hole and trench drain since it could move at surface
grades and cause less disturbance to the bottom of the hole than a
bulldozer.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 6
Loosened soil at the bottom of the over-excavation should be compacted
with light equipment. After these soils are compacted, the
over-excavation can then be brought up in lifts with approved fill
materials that are compacted to the requirements for engineered fill.
The lower three feet of the fill in the over-excavation should consist of
approved compacted shale fill. Shale fill (or equivalent) should meet the
requirements of Item A-5 below. All other imported fill materials should
meet the requirements for engineered fill.
3. Dewatering During Construction
Groundwater was encountered at depths of 4.5 to 6.5 feet. It is expected
that the dewatering can be accomplished by using a trench drain with
crushed gravel around the west, south, and east sides of the excavation as
shown on Drawing 1. A sump pump may also be required in the northern
portion of the excavation.
4. Temporary Cutslopes
The excavations of the fill will be at least 5.0 to 7.5 feet deep. We
anticipate that temporary cutslopes will be stable at inclinations of one
horizontal to one vertical (1:1) or flatter. The slopes will have to be
laid back further if the slopes are weakened by substantial groundwater
seepage. The actual temporary slope inclination used during construction
should be selected by the contractor since the stability of the cutslopes
will depend on many factors, some of which they can control.
5. Fill Placement and Compaction
All approved on-site soils with an organic content of less than three
percent by volume and free of construction debris are suitable for use as
fill. The gray, dark brown, and black existing fill soils are not
suitable for re-use as structural fill. Fill material should not contain
rocks or lumps larger than six inches in greatest dimension with no more
than 15 percent larger than 2.5 inches. Imported fill materials should be
predominantly granular with a plasticity index of 12 or less.
All fill placed at the site should be compacted by mechanical means only
to at least 90 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test
Designation D1557. Fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding eight
inches in uncompacted thickness. Compaction should be performed using
heavy compaction equipment such as a sheepsfoot or self-propelled
vibratory compactor.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 7
Three-inch minus crusher-run shale
used to fill the over-excavation.
below:
rock (or approved equivalent) may be
The shale should meet the requirements
TABLE I - Recommended Material
Specifications for Shale Fill
Sieve Size
Percent Passing
3" 100
2-1/2" 30 - 100
#4 20 - 50
#200 10 - 30
Sand Equivalent = 25 Min.
Plasticity Index = 12 Max.
L.A. Rattler Resistance : 45 Max.
Compaction of the shale should be performed with a heavy self-propelled
vibratory roller. Each thin lift should be compacted with at least four
passes of a vibratory roller capable of producing at least 18,000 pounds
dynamic force. The compaction should be evaluated by proof rolling with a
lO-yard loaded lO-wheel gravel dump truck.
6. Surface Drainaqe
Positive surface gradients of at least one percent on paved surfaces and
two percent on unpaved surfaces should be provided adjacent to the
building to direct surface water toward suitable collection facilities.
Water from roof gutters and downspouts should be tied into closed pipes
that drain into suitable discharge facilities. Water on paved surfaces
next to the building should be directed to drain inlets that also drain to
approved facilities. Surface water drainage systems should be maintained
separately from underground subdrainage systems.
7. Trench Backfill
Utility trenches should be backfilled with engineered fill placed in lifts
not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness, except thicker lifts
may be used with the approval of the soil engineer provided satisfactory
compaction is achieved. If on-site soil is used, the material should be
compacted to at least 85 percent relative compaction by mechanical means
only. Imported clean sand can also be used for backfilling trenches
provided it is compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. In
building, slab, and pavement areas, the upper three feet of trench
backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction
for on-site soils, and 95 percent where imported clean sand backfill is
used.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 8
8. Construction Observation
Grading and earthwork should be monitored and tested by our representative
for conformance with the project plans/specifications and our
recommendations. This work includes site preparation, selection of
satisfactory fill materials, and placement and compaction of the fill.
Sufficient notification prior to commencement of earthwork is essential to
make certain that the work will be properly observed.
B. Foundations
The building can be supported on conventional continuous and isolated spread
footings bearing in the engineered fill materials that will underlie the
structure. Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent
finished grade. Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 15 inches
and isolated footings should be at least 24 inches square. Footings located
adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces below an
imaginary 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected upward from the edge
of the bottom of the trench.
At the above depths, footings may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure
of 2000 psf due to dead loads with a one-third increase for dead plus live
loads and a 50 percent increase for total design loads including wind and
seismic. All continuous footings should be provided with at least two number
four reinforcement bars, top and bottom, to provide structural continuity and
to permit spanning of local irregularities. Soil conditions in the footing
bottoms should be inspected by our representative prior to placing reinforcing
steel or concrete.
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction between the foundation bottoms and
the supporting subgrade. A friction coefficient of 0.30 is considered
applicable. As an alternative, an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf can be
taken against the side of footings poured neat.
Settlements under the anticipated loads are expected to be within tolerable
limits for the proposed construction.
C. Retaining Walls
Any retaining walls at the site should be designed to resist lateral earth
pressures from the backfill and any surcharge loads. Unrestrained walls should
be designed to resist an active equivalent fluid pressure of 45 pounds per
cubic foot for level backfill conditions. Restrained walls should be designed
to resist an equivalent fluid pressure of 45 pcf plus an additional uniform
lateral pressure of 8H pounds per square foot where H = height of backfill
above the top of the wall footing in feet.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page 9
Lateral surcharge loads may also develop on the walls from live areal loads on
the wall backfill. Where these loads are anticipated, the walls should be
designed for an additional uniform pressure equivalent to one-third or one-half
the anticipated areal surcharge load depending on whether the wall is
unrestrained or restrained, respectively.
The preceding pressures assume that sufficient drainage is provided behind the
walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface or
subsurface water infiltration. Adequate drainage may be provided by means of a
backdrainage system consisting of a four-inch diameter, rigid perforated pipe
placed at the base of the wall with the perforations down, and a 12-inch wide,
3/4 inch drain rock section carried to within one foot of the top of the wall.
The upper one foot should be backfilled with compacted impermeable soil or
surfaced with impermeable paving materials. The drain rock should be backed
with filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140. Water collected from behind the walls
should drain to approved discharge facilities.
Details regarding locations and heights of retaining walls were unavailable at
the time of this report.
D. Slabs-on-Grade
Slab-on-grade construction will be used for the building floors. Just prior to
final preparation for the slabs, the slab subgrade surface should be proof
rolled to provide firm, smooth support. The slab should be underlain by four
inches of 3/4 inch free draining crushed rock or gravel and an impervious
membrane such as 6 mil visqueen that is placed over the gravel in order to
provide a capillary moisture break. The membrane should be covered with two
inches of sand to protect it during construction. The sand should be lightly
moistened just prior to placing the concrete. Exterior walkway slabs should be
supported on a minimum of four inches of compacted imported non-expansive fill
consisting of granular soil with a plasticity index of twelve or less and no
more than ten percent finer than #200 sieve.
Reinforcement of slabs should be provided in accordance with the anticipated
use and loading, but as a minimum, slabs should be reinforced with 6x6
W2.9xW2.9 welded-wire mesh or number three bars at 16 inches on center, both
ways.
Plan Review and Construction Observation
We should review the foundation and grading plans and specifications for the
project. We should also be retained to provide monitoring and testing services
during the grading and foundation installation phases of the project. This
will provide the opportunity for correlation of the subsurface conditions found
in our investigation with those actually encountered in the field, and thus
permit any necessary modifications in our recommendations resulting from
changes in anticipated conditions.
Mr. Steven P. Hall
August 9, 1993
Page lO
If you have any questions regarding this report, please call.
Sincerely,
MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Rick Swanson, P. E.
Geotechnical Engineer (California)
Randy C~eveland, P. E.
RS, RCC/pc ~ ,E.,'(PIRES: 12/31/93
Copies: Addressee (5)
Attachments:
Bibliography
Site Plan, Drawing 1
Cross-Section A-A*, Drawing 2
Key to Boring Logs, Drawing 3
Summary of Field Sampling Procedures, Drawing 4
Laboratory Testing Procedures, Drawing 5
Logs of Exploratory Borings 1-3, Drawings 6-9
Plasticity Chart, Drawing lO
Summary of Borehole and Testhole Data by Others, Drawing 11
RS-14
Biblioqra~h¥
Beaulieu, John D., and Paul W.
Jackson County, Oregon,
Industries, Bulletin 94.
Hughes, 1977, Land Use Geology of Central
State of Oregon Dept. of Geology and Mineral
Ferrero Geologic, 1993, Geologic Investigation of Foundation Site, New City
of Ashland Administrative Building, Ashland City Building Complex, Mountain
and East Main Streets.
ELEVATION IN FEET
? ~
~ m m~ //~ !~ /
m Z 0
00~,
oO
~Z
)>
GROUP
PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS
GRAVELS Cl.[AN C~W Well graded gravels, grovel-sand mixtures, little or
..I OR AV~LS no fines.
U~, < MORE I~'IAN HALF (LESS 'n-lAN Poorly graded gravels, or gravel-sand mixtures, little
0~3 ~ ~ OF COARSE 5X FINES) GP or no fines.
Silty grovels, gravel-send-slit mixtures,
· 6 FRACTION IS ORA~I"[- (~M non-plastic fines.
No. 4 SIEVE FINES (~C clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures,
-- ~lastic fines.
~ ~;~ SANDS CLEAN SW , well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines.
~ SANDS
~ MORE I~tAR HALF (Ir'SS ~IAR PooHy graded sands or gravelly sands, little or
~ ~ OF COARSi; 5~, FINES) SP no fines.
~ ~ . FRAC~ON IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mlxtrues, non-plastic fines
0
No. 4 SIE~/[ FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
cn I~ SILTS AND CLAYS ME Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or
..I clayey fine sands or clayey silts with sli,qht plasticity.
h ~ UQUID UMIT IS CL inorganic clays of iow to medium plasticity, gravelly
~ 3: O~ LESS THAN ~ clays, sandy clays, silty cloys, lean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of Iow plasticity.
~ -- Inorganic silts, m~caceous or diatomaceous fine
.~ SILTS AND CLAYS MH sandy or silty soilsr elastic silts.
~ I~ U(~JID U~,T IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
z GREA'IER 1HAN
· · OH OrganiCor~anic silts.Clays of medium to high plasticity,
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic sells.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487~
U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS
200 40 10 4 3/4" 3' 12"
SAND GRAVEL
SILTS AND CLAYS ;OBBLE$ BOULDERS
SANDS & GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT1' SILTS & CLAYS !STRENGTH=l: BLOWS/FOOT1'
VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 'v~Y SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2
LOOSE 4- 10 ~ SOFT 1/4- 1/2 2 - 4
RRM I/2 - 1 4 - 8
MEDIUM DENSE 10 - .30
STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16
DENSE 50 - 50 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32
I
i VERYDEN~ OVER 50 HARD OVER4 I 0~R32I
RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY
~Number of blows of 140 pound hammer failing 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D.
(1-3/8 inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM D-1586).
=~=Unconfined compressive strength in tons/sq, ft. as determined by laDoratory testing or approximated
by the standard penetration test [ASTM D-1586), pocket penetrometer, torvone, or visual observation.
KEY TO BORING LOGS
MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADMINISTRA1WE BUILDING
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
1120 East Jackson Street (50,3) 772-7115 ASHLAND, OREGON
MEDFORD, OREGON 97504 PROJECT NO. DA'IE ORA~JNG NO.
7-10.4 AUGUST. 1993
SANDS & ORAVELS BLOWS/FOOT1'
VERY LOOSE 0 - 4
LOOSE 4 - 10
MEDIUM DENSE 10 - .30
DENSE 50 - 50
VERY DEN~ OVER 50
SILTS & CLAYS STRENGTH=l: BLOWS/q:'OOT1'
'v~RY SOFT O- 1/4 O- 2
SOFT 1/4- 1/2 2 - 4
RRM I/2 - 1 4 - 8
STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16
VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32
HARD OVER 4 OVER 32
FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The soils encountered in the borings were continuously logged in the
field by our representative and described in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487).
Representative soil samples were obtained from the borings at selected
depths appropriate to the soil investigation. All samples were returned
to our laboratory for classification and testing.
In accordance with ASTM- D1586 procedure, the standard penetration
resistance blow counts were obtained by dropping a 140 pound hammer
through a 50-inch free fall. The 2-inch O.D. split spoon sampler was
driven 18 inches or to practical refusal and the number of blows were
recorded for each 6-1rich penetration Interval. The blows per foot
recorded on the boring logs represent the accumulated number of blows
required to drive the penetration sampler the final 12 inches. In
addition, ,3.0 inch O.D. x 2.42 inch I.D. drive samples were obtained
using a Modified California Smapler and a 140 pound hammer. Blow
counts for the Modified California Sampler are shown converted to
standard penetration resistance by multiplying by 0.6. The sample
type is shown on the boring logs in accordance with the designation
below.
6" x 2.42" liners%
Bag Sample---...~
Modified California Sampler
Standard Split Spoon Sampler
Where obtained, the shear strength of the soil samples using either
Torvane (TV) or Pocket Penetrometer (PP) devices is shown on the
boring logs in the for right hand column.
MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
1120 East Jackson Street (50.3) 772-7115
MEDFORD, OREGON 97504
SUMMARY OF FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING
ASHLAND, OREGON
PROJECT NO. I OA]E I DRA~INO NO.
7-10.4 AUGUST, 1993 4
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
The laboratory testing program was directed toward a quantitative evaluation of
the physical and mechanical properties of the soils underlying the site.
The natural water content was determined on 31 samples of the materials
recovered from the borings in accordance with the ASTM D2216 Test Procedure.
These water contents are recorded on the boring logs at the appropriate sample
depths.
Dry density determinations were performed on 18 samples to measure the unit
weight of the subsurface soils in accordance with the ASTM D2937 Test
Procedure. The results of these tests are shown on the boring logs at the
appropriate sample depths.
An Atterberg Limit determination was performed on a sample of the existing fill
soils in accordance with the ASTM D4318 Test Procedure to determine the range
of water content over which the materials exhibited plasticity. The Atterberg
Limits are used to classify the soil in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System and to evaluate the soil's expansion potential. The
results of these tests are presented on Drawing 10 and on the Log of Boring 1
at the appropriate sample depth.
The percent soil fraction passing the #200 sieve was determined on nine samples
of the subsurface soils in accordance with the ASTM Dl140 Test Procedure to aid
in the classification of the soils. The results of these tests are shown on
the boring logs at the appropriate sample depths.
Free swell tests were performed on three samples of the soil materials to
evaluate the swelling potential of the materials. The tests were performed
by pouring ten grams of the dry material into a 100 mL graduated cylinder
containing about 40 mL of distilled water. The mixture was stirred repeatedly
and allowed to equilibrate for 24 hours, then distilled water was added up to
the 100 mL mark. The graduated cylinder was stoppered and left undisturbed to
equilibrate. The free-swell volume was then noted. The percent free swell was
calculated by dividing the free-swell volume by ten and multiplying by 100
percent. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs.
Drawing No. 5
EQUIPMENT 8' HOLLOW STEM AUGER~ ELEVATION 1892':1:: LOGGED BY RS
DEPTH TO GROUNDWA3ER 13.5':~: DEPTH TO BEDROCK NOT ENCOUNTERED DATE DRILLED 7-21-93
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH ~ ~ <z~ C
SO~L (FEET) ~ ~ ~ ~
DESCRIP~ON AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. TYPE ~< ~ ~ o~ ~ z~ ~ ~z .~
SILTY SAND, dry to moist in upper Brown Loose SM
2', moist below (fill) to 1 -~ ,~ 98
Medium
- ~ 20 6 102
0 1.5': Finer than ~200 = 26% Dense
Free Swell = 10~ 2
traces of free water at 4-.5' during - 3 -X 17 7
drilling
- · -I~ 12 121
CLAYEY SAND, wet, with silt Brown Loose SC - s
to
Medium - s - 20 13
Fill I Dense
SILTY SAND. very moist, locally Brown Dense SM- _
very silty to ML ~
Gray ~ 21 112
~ 8.5': Finer then #200 = 49~[ Brown
e ~ 40 22 104
0 6': Liquid Limit == 25~ - ~0 -
Plasticity Index = 10~ -X 37 19
Finer than ~200 = 18% .
Free Swell = 15~[
~rilling
- X 34 12
-X 46 16
-- 3D
LOG OF BORING 1
MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ADMINIS'I~ATIVE BUILDING
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
ASHLAND, OREGON
1120 East Jackson Street (503) 772-7115
MEDFORD. OREGON 97504- PROJECT NO. DATE ORA~tNO NO.
7-10.4 AUO~JST, 199;3 6
EQUIPMENT 8' HOt. LOW STEI~ AUGER* ELEVATION 1892'+ LOGGED BY RS
DEPTI'I TO GROUNDWATER 13.5'v~* DEPTI'I TO BEDROCK NOT ENCOUNTERED DATE DRILLED 7-21-93
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DE:pm ~ z~
(FEE~) ~
SO~L
z
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. TYPE v~ u:-~
SILTY SAND, very moist Brown Dense SM
SANDY CLAY, moist Brown Very CL" I_
22
Stiff - 23 -
- 24 -
22 21
Bottom of Boring = 25' - 2~ -
*Drilled with Mobile B-80 - 27 -
** Boring wos bockfllled upon completion of drilling. - 2~ -
Groundwoter level in borehole wos not given
sufficient time to stobilize.
- 32 -
- 37 -
LOG OF BORING 1
MAROUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING
CONSUL'I1NG ENGINEERS
ASHLAND,
OREGON
1120 East Jackson Street (50,3) 772-7115
IdEDFORD, OREGON 97504. PROJECT NO. DATE DR^~ING NO.
7-10.4 AUOUST, 199,3
E~UIPMENT 8" HOI.LOW STEId AUGER* ELEVA~ON 1893.3'~: LOGGED BY RS
DEPTH TO GROUNDWA'I-cR 7.5' DEPTH TO BEDROC~ NOT ENCOUNTERE~ DATE DRILLED 7-21-93
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPTH ~ ~< ~ ~
SILTY SAND, moist, with brick and Brown, Loose SM
concrete fragments, charred wood, Dark to ~ -~1 9 94
rags, boulders 3.5'-5', glass, Brown Very -I 9 14 92
wire (fill) and Loose
Black
~ - X 4 ',NO :£COVEI ~Y)
5
SILTY SAND, moist, wet at 6.5' Gray Medium SM -~/ 16 96
free water at 6.5' during drilling Dense - s -~I 14 28 95
-X 28 12 after tilling)
SILLY SAND, moist to very moist, Brown Medium SM - ~
very silty at 10' Dense
9
~ 6': Finer than #200 --
SM-
~ 11': Finer than ~200 -- 4,t~ ML
- ~ - 25 17
SILTY SAND, moist Brown Dense SM
~ 14.5': Finer than ]~200 -- 24%
-X 41 12
*Drilled with Mobile B-80 _ ~? _
Bottom of boring = 20' -X 38 17
LOG OF BORING 2
MAROUESS & ASSOClAT[S, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS ADMINISTRA~VE BUILDING
ASHLAND,
OREGON
1120 East Jackson Street (505) 772-7115
MEDFORD, OREGON 97504 PROdECT NO. DATE DRA~ING NO.
7-10.4 AUGUST, 1993
EQUIPMENT 8° HOLLOW S'l~ AUG~~ ELEVAI~ON 1893.7"1' LOGGED BY RS
DEP~I TO GROUNOWA'IER 4.5' DEPI~'t TO BED~OC}< NOT ENCOUNTERED DATE DRILLED 7-21-95
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DEPm ~
DESCRIP~ON AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. TYPE m a m ,_
SILTY SAND, moist, with pebbles Gray Medium SM
Brown Dense ~ -I~j B 119
~ 2
O 1.5': Finer than ~200 = 20%
O 4': Finer than ~200 = 2.~% Brown
- 3 -X 25 8
Free Swell = 4.0~
Free water on soil particles at 5.5' t ~1~ , 126
during drilling I - '~ -I ~2
SILTY SAND. moist, v~ry ,~ilty locally Brown Medium SM
Dense - ~ -X 24 15
~ 9': Finer than ~200 = 54%
7 -
8 -
~Free water tit 15'
· Drilled with Mobile B-80 - ~7 -
Bottom of boring = 20' X 35 15
LOG OF BORING
MAROUESS & ASSOCIA'I~S, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING
ASHLAND,
OREGON
1120 East J~ckaon Street (505) 772-7115
IdEDFORD. OREGON 97504 PROJECT NO. DATE DR^~INO NO.
7-10.~- AUGUST. 1995
6O
C3_z CL ~
U3 20 or
<~ / OH
~ ~-JL ~ ~ ~ ML or OL
I
0
0 10 20 ~ ~ ~ 60 70 ~ 90 1 O0
LIQUID LIMIT (~)
UNIR~
NA~R~ P~NG
KEY B~NG S~P~ WA~ U~ID P~Q~ NO. 2~ U~lOl~ ~L
S~B~ NO. ~ ~NT UMIT IND~ ~E~ IN~X ~S~RCA~ON
(~t) ~ ~ ~ ~ S~
~ 1 6.0 13 25 10 18 --0.2 SC*
*Clessifi ~d as cia ~y send s ~ce fracti ,n finer ti an ~200 rove is le: s than 5( percent
PLAS~CITY CHART
MARQUESS · ASSOClA~S, INC.
ADMINIS~A~ BUI~ING
CONSUL~NG ENGINEERS
1120 East Jecks~ Street (503) ~2-7115 A~L~D, OREG~
MEDFORD, OREGON 97504 PR~CT NO. DA~ DRAMNG NO.
7-10.4 AU~, 1993 1 0
'~ or
oH
O_-UL ,' ,~ ML or OL
I
P1
Depth (Feet)
0-5
5-9.2
Material Description
Silty Sand and Sand (SM, SW) (Fill)
Low to high plasticity Silt (ML to MH)
L2
Depth (Feet)
0-6
6-9.2
Material Description
Sand and Silty Sand (SW, SM) with rocks at 4'
Silty Sand (SM)
(Fill)
Depth (Feet)
0-7.5
7.5-8.4
Material Description
Sand and Silty Sand (SW, SP, SM) with minor Silt (ML) (Fill)
Very dense Silty Sand (SM)
P4
Depth (Feet)
0-5.5
5.5-6.5
Material Description
Sand and Silty Sand (SW, SM,
Very dense Silty Sand (SM)
SP) with organics (Fill)
Depth (Feet)
0-5.5
5.5-5.8
Material Description
Sand and Silty Sand (SP,
(Fill)
Very dense Silty Sand (SM)
SW, SM) with organic
lense
at 2'
Depth (Feet)
0-4.1
4.1-4.8
Material Description
Sand (SW, SP) with organics
Very dense Silty Sand (SM)
(Fill)
P_Z7
Depth (Feet)
0-4
Material Description
Sand and Silty Sand (SM, SW) with rocks (Fill)
Summary of Borehole and
Testhole Data by Others
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING
Ashland, Oregon
HAI Job No. 7-10.4 Drawing 11