Geotech Eng Investigation 0011'i IS61'ECIINICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED YELM1I PIiBLIC SAFETY BUILDING
204 2no A V ENU E SOUTHEAST
YELM, WASHINGTON
PRO~ecT no. 092-06153
OCTOBER 6, 2006
Prepared for:
MIt. BEN YONCPROT
ARAI JACKSOK ELLISON MURAKAMI, LLP
2300 7"'AVENUE
Sen'rrLE. WA 98121
Prepared by:
KIiAZAN & ASSOCIATES, irvC.
GE09'ECHNIC:\I. ENGINEERING DIVISION
19501 144"' Awvue NE, #F-300
WOODINVILLE, WASHINGTON 98072
(420 485-SS 7 9
~~~" I ~l'[i / ~CLL1 8 ASSOCIATES, INC.
SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
I '
II
II
I I
~~a7_ all & ASSOCIATES,INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERINGENVIftONMENTAL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
October 9, 2006 KA Project No. 092-06753
Attn: Mr. Ben Pongprot
ARAI IACKSON ELLISON MURAKAMI, LLP
2300 Ts Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98L2L
RE: Geoteehnical Engineering Investigation Report
Proposed Yelm Pablic Safety Building
204 2nd Avenue Southeast
Yelm, Washington
Dear Mr. Pongprot:
In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geoteehnieal Engineering Investigation for the
referenced site. The results of our investigation are preserved in the attached report.
[f you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do uo[ hesitate [o contact our
office.
Respectfully submitted,
KRAZAN MATES, INC.
i I
ris Behrens, .E.G.
Senior Engineering Geologist
CB/ms
Eleven OtBces Serving The Westero Cniled States
19501 IM" Avc NE pFJW Woodlnvllle, Washington 980]2. (125) 4&5-5519 • Eax_ (425) 485fi839
09}OM1[Ddec
i~
I' ~l\L~I~1 & ASSOCIATES,INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERINGENVIRONNENTAL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I '
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. ..................................................1
PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................................. ..................................................1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................... ..................................................2
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRH'TION ....................................................................... ..................................................2
GEOLOGIC SETTING .................................................................................................... ..................................................2
FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................... ..................................................3
SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................. ..................................................3
Erosion Concern/Hazard ..............................................._..........._.._............................... ..................................................3
GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................ ..................................................4
SEISMIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. ..................................................4
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... ..................................................4
Site Preparation ............................................_.._..................._...................................... .................................................._5
Temporary Excava[ions ............_.._....._.._.._.._ ........................................................... ........................................._.._.._.6
Structwal FiII .._......_..._.._ ........................................................................................... ....._......._....._.._.._._.._..............6
Erosion and Sediment Control ..................................................._.._.._..._._.._.._.._..... ._.._.............................................7
Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction ..............._.._.._.._.........._.._._...... _..._.............................................8
Drainage and Landscaping ........................................_.._......._.._.._.............._........_... ....................................................8
Utility Trench Backfill .................................................................................................. ....................................................8
Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork ........................................._......_......._........._.._..... ....._.............................................9
Shallow Foundations ................._........._.._.._............................................................... ........................._........._.._.._.._ 10
Pavement Design ........................................................................................................... ..................................................I I
Infiltration Rates Based On In Place Infiltration Tests .................................................. ......_........._.._....._.._.._......_.._ l2
Testing and Inspectian .................._........._.._............................................................... ..................................................13
LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................................................13
VICINITY MAP .................................................................................................... ................................Figure 1
S[TE PLAN ............................................................................................................ ................................Figure 2
FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ......................... ......................... Appendix A
EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................... ..........................Appendix B
PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS ....................................................................... ......................... Appendix C
Eleven Omces Serving The Western United Slates
19501 114" Avc. NE NF-3W Woodivville, Washinglou 98072 • (a25) 485-5519 • Eex: (425) 485-683"1
ovrnis~a~..
II
II
~a7_ ~1 & ASSOCIATES,INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
October 9, 2006 KA Project No. 092-06153
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED YELM PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING
2042ND AVENUE SOUTHEAST
YELM, WASHINGTON
II
This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for [he proposed Yelm
Public Safety Building located at 204 2n° Avenue Southeast in Yelm, Washington (Figure I).
Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and
recommendations pertaining [o site preparation, structural fill, utility trench baeF~ill, drainage and
landscaping, erosion control, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior Flatwork and pavement
design.
A site plan showing [he approximate exploratory test pi[ locations is presented following [he text of this
report (Pigure 2). A description of the field investigation and the laboratory testing program, [he
exploratory test pit logs and [he results of [he laboratory testing are presented in Appendix A.
Appendices B and C contain guides to aid in the development of earthwork and pavement
specifications. When conflicts in [he [ex[ of the report occur with [he general specifications in [he
appendices, the recommendations in [he text of the report have precedence.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This investigation was conducted to evaluate [he soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to develop
geotechnical engineering recommeudations for use in design of specific construction elements and to
provide criteria for site preparatiou and stmemral fill construction.
Our scope of services was performed in general accordance with our original proposal for [his project,
dated September 14, 2006 (KA Proposal No. G06-197WAW) and our supplementary proposal dated
September 21, 2006 (KA Proposal No, G06-203WAW), and included [he following:
• A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff [o evaluate [he surface conditions a[
the project site.
• Afield investigation consisting of excavating and sampling four exploratory [es[ pits that
generally cover the site to be developed. Two infiltration tests were completed in general
Eleven Offices Serving The Western United Stales
19501 Illih Awe. NE %E-3W • woodlm~ille, washinston 98072 • (425) 485-5519. Faz: (1~7 485-6379
~~a_on~.»e~.
II
II
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 2 of 14
accordance with [he EPA Falling Head Tes[ Procedure at two of [he test pit locations. The
exploratory [es[ pits extended [o depths of approximately 1 l fee[ below the existing site grades.
• Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the exploratory [es[
pits to evaluate the physical and index properties of [he subsurface soils.
• Evaluation of [he data obtained from [he investigation and completion of engineering analyses
m develop recommendations for use in the project design and p[eparalion of construction
specifications.
• Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, [he results of our analyses and our
conclusions and recommendations for [his investigation.
We have not ye[ received specific information regarding [he proposed Yelm Public Safety Building
structure or site grading. Preliminarily, it is our understanding that the proposed slruemre will be of
single story eonsWCtion with associated landscaping and parking areas. We anticipate [ha[ the structure
will be founded on shallow, spread footings. Footing loads are expected m be light m moderate.
We have not yet received a grading plan for the pmjec[, however, we anticipate [hat site grading will be
relatively limited with w[s and fills on the order of 4 feet or less. In [he even[ [ha[ the structural or
grading information detailed in [his report is inconsistent with the final design, [he geo[echnical
engineer should be notified so [ha[ we may update this writing as applicable.
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site of the proposed Yelm Public Safety Building is located a[ 204 2ntl Avenue Southeast in Yelm,
Washington. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map (Figure l). The proposed
site to be developed is currently undeveloped and relatively flat. The subject property is located in
Section l9, Township 17 North, Range 2 East. The site is bordered m the north by 2n° S[ree[ Southeast,
[o [he east and south by public and residential properties, and ro [he west by Southeast Mckenzie
Avenue.
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The site lies within [he central Puget Lowland. The lowland is part of a regional north-south [rending
[rough [ha[ extends from southwes[em British Columbia to near Eugene, Oregou. North of Olympia,
Washington, [his lowland is glacially carved, with a depositional and erosional history including at leas[
four separate glacial advances/retreats. The Puget Lowland is bounded to [he west by the Olympic
Mountains, and to the east by the Cascade Range. The lowland is filled with glacial and uouglacial
sediments consisting of interbedded gravel, sand, silS till, and peat lenses.
The Washington State Department oC Natural Resources Washingon Division of Geology and Forth
Resources Opeu Pile Report 87-11 Geologic Map of The Centralia Quadrangle, Washington indicates
Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States
i~
I
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 3 of 14
that the property is underlain by Vashon Ou[wash Gravel. The Vashon Ou[wash Gravel deposits consist
primarily of sVa[ified ou[wash gravels and sand with variable amounts of silt, cobbles and boulders.
With local silt and clay in[erbeds, deposited by melt water in front of the advancing and receding
Vashon Glacier (glacioFluvial environments).
FIELD INVESTIGATION
A field inves[iga[iou consisting of excavating and sampling four exploratory test pits that provided
general coverage of [he areas ro be developed was completed to evaluate [he subsurface soil and
groundwater conditions. The exploratory test pits extended [o depths of approximately L 1 feet below
[he existing site grades. Su[hedand Distributors (a Krazan subcontractor) performed the excavation
work on September 21, 2006. The exploratory [es[ pits were excavated with a Kabota KH 170E
Excavator. Representative samples of the subsurface soil were collected in the [es[ pits and sealed in
plastic bags. These samples were transported [o our laboratory for further examination and verification
of [he field classifications. The soils encountered in [he exploratory test pits were continuously
examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (OSCS). A
more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A.
Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate [heir physical characteristics and
engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was fommlated with an emphasis on the
evaluation of natural moisture content and gradation of the mamrials encountered. Details of [he
laboratory testing program and results of [he laboratory tests are summarized in Appendix A. This
information, along with [he field observations, was used to prepare the final exploratory test pit logs,
which are presented in Appendix A.
SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The soils eneoumered in [he exploratory test pits were generally typical of [hose found in the described
geologic units. Exploratory Tes[ Pits TP-I through TP-4, below the approximate 3 to 6 inches of
topsoil, contained approximately Ito 2 feet of loose to medium dense, silty gravel with variable
amounts of fine [o coarse grained sand (Weathered Vashon Ou[wash Gravel). The above soils were
underlain by medium dense gravel with variable amounts of fine to coarse grained sand (Vashon
Outwash Gravel) down ro the termination depths of TP-1 through TP-4 (approximately l l fee[ below
the existing site grades). For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer [o [he logs
of [he exploratory test pits in Appendix A.
Erosion Concern/hazard
The Natural Resources Conservation Services (NAGS) indicates that [he site is within the contacts of
Spanaway Gravelly Sandy Loam (LIQ, 0 to 3 percent slopes) with "SlighP' erosion potential in a
disturbed state and Spanaway Stony Sandy Loam Q l2, 0 to 3 percent slopes) with "Slight" erosion
potential is a disturbed state. I[ has been our experience that soil erosion potential can be minimized
through landscaping and surface water runoff eomrol. I[ is our undersmnding that [he main soil work
will consist of cons[me[ing [he building pad, parking lo[ and driveway areas. Typically erosion of
Eleven OtTices Serving The Wes[em United Stares
o~>on.me~.
i~
I
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 4 of 14
exposed soils will be most noticeable during periods of rainfall and may be controlled by the use of
normal tempprary erosion control measures, i.e., silt fences, hay bales, mulching control ditches or
diversion trenching, and contour furrowing. Erosion control measures should be in place before [he
onset of wet weather.
GROUNDWATER
The exploramry [es[ pits were checked for [he presence of groundwater during and immediately
following the excavation operations. Groundwater was not encountered a[ the date and time of our field
investigation.
I[ should be recognized [ha[ water [able elevations may tluema[e with time. The groundwater level will
be dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions, as well as other
factors. Therefore, water levels at the time of the field investigation may be different from those
encountered dining [he consWC[ion phase of the project. The evaluation of such faemrs is beyond the
scope of this report.
Groundwater flow may become heavier during constmetion, which takes place during the we[ weather
season. This may cause difficulties with the grading and excavation work. Certain remedial and/or d~
watering measures may be required.
SEISMIC CONDITIONS
The site soil profile has been identified according to the 2003 In[ema[ional Building Code QBC). The
glacial soils encountered in the exploramry test pits, primarily below a depth of about 1 to 2 fee[, were
generally medium dense to dense. The overall soil profile generally corresponds [o a site class soil
profile of D as defined by Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code. A site class soil
profile of D applies [o a profile consisting primarily of medium dense [o dense or stiff soils within [he
upper 100 feet.
General
Based on the findings of [his investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed public safety building
s[rucmre may be supported on shallow, spread footing foundation systems. The spread footings may be
founded on the medium dense to dense native soil or compacted structural fill, placed above medium
dense m dense native soil. These bearing soils were encountered in [he exploratory test pits at depths
ranging from about I to 2 fee[ below [he existing ground surface.
If loose native soils and/or undocumented fill is encountered a[ footiug grades, recommendations for
overexeava[ion and/or re-compaction will be provided a[ [he time of the site inspection work.
Eleven Offices Serving The Western United Stales
ur_ueuse,..
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 5 of L4
Site Preparation
General site clearing should include removal of vegetation; trees and associated root systems; wood;
existing utilities; structures including foundations, basement walls and floors; rubble; and rubbish. Site
stripping should extend ro a minimum depth of 3 fn 6 inches (preliminary, based on our ms[ pi[
locations), or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed. These materials will not
be suitable for use as structural fill However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in
landscape or non-structural areas.
After stripping operations and removal of any undocumented fill, [he building pad areas should be
visually suspected to identify any loose areas. Any remaining loose soils should be overexeavated to [he
level of [he medium dense to dense, native soils. The resulting excavations should be filled with
approved on site material, or imported structural fill. Strucmml fill material should be within ± 2
percent of the optimum moisture content, and the soils should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
of [he maximum dry density based on ASTM Tes[ Method D1557.
During we[ weather conditions, typically Oe[ober through May, subgrade stability problems and grading
diffiwlties may develop due to excess moisture, disturbance of sensitive sails and/or the presence of
perched groundwater. Construction during the extended wet weather periods could create [he need to
overexeavate exposed soils if [hey become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated
moisture contents. Although the on site native soils are gravelly, they may have variable silt comm~ts
and may be moisture sensitive. If overoxeavation is necessary, i[ should be confirmed through
continuous monitoring and testing by a qualified geomchnical engineer or senior geologist. Soils that
have became unstable may require drying and recompaction. Selective drying may be accomplished by
scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry, warm weather (typically
during the summer months). If the soils cannot be dried back ro a workable moisture condition,
remedial measures may be required. General project site winterization should consist of the placement
of aggregate base and [he protection of exposed soils during [he construction phase. It should be
understood [ha[ even if Bes[ Management Practices (BMP's) for wintertime soil protection are
implemented and followed, [here is a significant chance [hat soil mitigation work will still be required.
Any buried swetures encoumered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled.
8xcavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below the planned finish subgrade levels
should be cleaned m firm undisturbed soil, and backfilled with structural fill In general, any septic
ranks, underground storage tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should be completely
removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed
footing elevations or as recommended by [he geotechnical engineer The rosulting excavations should
be backfilled with structural fill.
A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and
observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service, as
acceptance of earthwork constmction is dependent upon compaction and stability of the material. The
geotechnical engineer may reject any material [ha[ does not meet compaction and stability requirements.
Further recommendations, contained in this' report, are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork
Eleven Ofliccc Serving The Western United Sams
ov ooiare,~.
i~
I
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 6 of 14
constmction will conform to the recommendations set forth in this section and in the Structural Pill
Section.
Temoorarv Excavations
The on site native soils have variable cohesion strengths; therefore, [he safe angles to which these
materials may be cut for temporary excavations is limited, as [he soils may be prone [o caving and slope
failures in temporary excavations deeper than 4 feet Temporary excavations in the medium dense to
dense uative soils should be sloped no steeper than IH: LV (horizontal [o vertical) where room permits.
If the soil in [he excavation is subject [o vibration from heavy traffic, [he temporary excavation should
be sloped no steeper than l.SHa V. All temporary cuts should be in accordance with Washington
Adminis[m[ive Code (WAC) Par[ N, Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring. The temporary slope w[s
should be visually inspected daily by a qualified person during construction work activities and [he
results of the inspections should be included in daily reports. The contractor is responsible for
maintaining [he stability of the temporary cut slopes and minimizing slope erosion during construction.
The temporary cut slopes should be covered with visqueen to help minimize erosion during wet weather
and the slopes should be closely monitored until the permanent retaining systems are complete.
Materials should no[ be stored and equipment operated within 10 fee[ of the top of any temporary cut
slope.
A Krazan & Associates geologist or geo[echnical engineer should observe, a[ leas[ periodically, the
temporary cut slopes during the excavation work. The reasoning for [his is that all soil conditions may
no[ be fully delineated during [he previous geo[echnical exploratory work. In [he case of temporary
slope cuts, [he existing soil conditions may not be fully revealed until [he excavation work exposes the
soil. Typically, as excavation work progresses the maximum inclination of the temporary slope will
need m be reevaluated by [he geo[echnical engineer so [ha[ supplemental recommendations can be
made. Soil and groundwater conditions can be highly variable. Scheduling for soil work will need to be
adjustable, to deal with unanticipated conditions, so that the project can proceed smoothly and required
deadlines can be met.
If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction Krazan & Associates
should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made.
Structural Fill
Best Management Practices (BMP's) should be followed when considering [he suitability of uative
material fo[ use as stmctural fill. Native soils with variable fines (silt and clay) contents will be
moisture sensitive. The native, Vashon Ou[wash Gravel deposits are generally considered suitable for
reuse as structural fill, provided the soil is relatively free of o[ganic material and debris, and it is within
x 2 percent of [he optimum moisture content. If the native soils are stockpiled for later use as s[mctural
Fill, the stockpiles should be covcred to protect the soil from we[ weather conditions. We recommend
that a representative of Krazan & Associates be on site during [he excavation work to determine which
soils are suitable for structural fill.
Eleven Off¢:es Saving The Western Uttiled States
oi-otri.~.
ii
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 7 of 14
It should not be taken for granted that the onsite soils may be used as the sole source for
structural till (especially during winter construction activities). Dnring wet weather conditions
the soils with higher silt and clay contents will be moisture sensitive, easily disturbed and most
likely will not meet compaction requirements. Furthermore, during the winter the native soils
typically have elevated natural moisture contents, which will limit the use of these materials as
structural ti6 without proper mitigation measures. The contractor should use Best Management
Practices to protect the soils during construction activities and be familiar with wet weather and
wintertime soil work. An allowance for importing structural fill should be incorporated into the
construction cost of the project (for wintertime construction this may be as high as 100 percent
import).
Imported structural fill material should consist of well-graded gravel or a sand and gravel mixture with a
maximum grain size of V/z inches and less than 5 percent fines (material passing the U.S. Standard No.
200 Sieve). All structural fill material should be submitted for approval to [he geo[echnical engineer at
least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site.
Fill soils should be placed in horizontal lifts no[ exceeding 8 inches loose thickness, moisture-
condi[ioned as necessary, (moisture couten[ of soil shall not vary by more than m2 percent of optimum
moisture) and the material should be compacted to a[ leas[ 9S percent of the maximum dry density based
on ASTM Test Method DISS7. In place density tests should be performed on all s[memral fill to verify
proper moisture content and adequate compaction. Additional lifts should no[ be placed if [he previous
lift did not meet the compaction requirements or if soil conditions are not considered stable.
Erosion and Sediment Control
Erosion and sediment control (ESC) is used [o minimize the transportation of sedimwt [o wetlands,
streams, lakes, drainage systems, and adjacent properties. Erosion and sediment control measures
should be taken and these measures should be in general accordance with local regulations. A[ a
minimum, [he following basic recommendations should be incotporated into [he design of the erosion
and sediment control features of [he site:
Q Phase the soil, foundation, u[iliry, and other work, requiring excava[iou or the disturbance of the
site soils, to take place during the dry season (generally May through September). However,
provided precautions are taken using Bes[ Management Practices (BMP's), grading activities
can be undertaken during the wet season (generally October through April), bra i[ should also be
known [ha[ [his may increase [he overall cost of [he project.
2) All site work should be completed and stabilized as quickly as possible.
3) Additional perimeter erosion and sediment control features may be required ro reduce [he
possibility of sediment entering the surface water This may include additional silt fences, silt
fences with a higher Apparent Opening Size (AOS), construction of a berm, or other filtration
systems.
I' lSrazan K Assoua[cs, Inc.
Eleven Offmes Servivg The Western Cnited Sm[es
KA No. 092-06f53
October 9, 2006
Page No. 8 of 14
4) Any runoff generated by dewatering discharge should be treated through construction of a
sediment trap if there is sufficient space. If space is limited other filtration methods will need m
be incorporated.
Grormdwater IuFlaence on Structures/Construction
Groundwater was not encountered a[ [he date and time of our field investigation.
If groundwater is encountered during construction, i[ is most likely perched groundwater Perched
groundwater develops where vertical infiltration of surface precipitation is impeded by a relatively
impermeable soil layer, resulting in horizontal migration of [he groundwater within overlying more
permeable soils.
If grouudwater is encountered during construction, we should observe [he conditions to determine if
dewatering will be needed. Design of temporary dewatering systems m remove groundwater should be
the responsibility of [he contractor.
If eanhwork is performed during or soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade soils may become
saturated. These soils may "pump," and the materials may no[ respond [o densifiea[ion techniques.
Typical remedial measures include: discing and aerating [he soil during dry weather; mixing the sail
with drier materials; and/or removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material. A qualified
geotechnical engineering firm should be consulted prior ro implememing remedial measures to observe
[he unsmble subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations.
Drainase and Landscaoine
The ground surface should slope away from building pads and pavement areas, toward appropriate drop
inlets or other surface drainage devices. II is recommended [hat adjacent exterior grades be sloped a
minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 fee[ away from structures. Roof drains should be
tightlined away from foundations and slope surfaces'. Roof drains should no[ be connected to the
footing drains, but may use [he same ou[fall piping if connected well away from [he structure such [ha[
roof water will not backup into [he footing drains. subgrade soils in pavement areas should be sloped a
minimum of I percent and drainage gradients should be maintained [o carry all surface water to
collection facilities, and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project.
Specific recommendations for and design of storm water disposal systems or septic disposal systems are
beyond [he scope of our services and should be prepared by other consultants [ha[ are familiar with
design and discharge requirements.
Utility Trench Backtill
U[iliry trenches should be excavated according to aceepted engineering practices fallowing OSHA
(Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards, by a contractor experienced in such work
The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by [he con[mctor. TmfFc and
vibration adjacent ro trench walls should be minimized; cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side
I , nrazau ~ essoctates, mc.
Eleven Offices Serving The Weetam Unihxl Smtes
ne_ n,,.m e..
i~
n
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 9 of 14
slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater
flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of
precipitation.
Gravelly and sandy soil conditions were encountered a[ shallow depths in [he exploratory test pits a[ [his
site. These soils have low cohesion and have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or
sloping back trench sidewalk may be required within these soils.
All utility trench backfill should consist of imported struemml fill or suitable on-site material. Utility
trench backfill placed in or adjacent [o buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at leas[ 95
percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method DI557. The upper 5 fee[ of utility
trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted [o at leas[ 95 peceeo[ of the maximum dry
density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Below 5 feet, utility trench backfill in pavement areas
should be compacted m at leas[ 90 percent of [he maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method
D1557. Pipe bedding should be in accordance with [he pipe manufacturer's recommendations.
The contractor is responsible for removing all wateo-sensi[ive soils from [he trenches regardless of the
back£II location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and
methods to avoid damage [o [he utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction.
Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork
if slab on grade s[memres are proposed and reducing floor dampness is desired, such as in areas covered
with moisture sensitive Floor coverings, we recommend that concrete slab-on-grade floors be underlain
by a water vapor retarder system. The water vapor retarder system should be installed in aceordance
with ASTM Specification E164-94 and Standard Specifications E1745-97. According to ASTM
Guidelines, the water vapor retarder should consist of a vapor retarder sheeting underlain by a minimum
of flinches of compacted clean (less than 5 percent passing [he U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve), open-
graded coarse rock of/a-inch maximum size. The vapor remrder sheeting should be protected from
puncture damage.
The exterior Floors should be placed separately in order [o ac[ independently of the walls and foundation
system. All fills required to bring [he building pads to grade should be structural fill.
It is recommended that the utility trenches within [he structures be compacted, as specified in our report,
to minimize [he transmission of moisture through [he utility trench backfill. Special atmntion [o [he
immediate drainage and irrigation around [he buildings is recommended. Positive drainage should be
esmblished away from the structures and should be mainmiued throughout the lives of the structures.
Ponding of water should no[ be allowed adjacent [o [he structures. Oveo-iaiga[ion within landscaped
areas adjacent ro the structures should not be performed [n addition, ventilation of [he structures (i.e.
ventilation fans) is recommended ro reduce [he accumulation of interior moisture.
Bleven Offices Serving The Western United States
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 10 of 14
Shallow Foundations
The proposed Yelm Public Safety Building s[mc[ure may be supported on shallow foundation systems
bearing on [he medium dense [o dense native soils or properly compacted, struemml fill, placed on
medium dense to dense native soils. Continuous wall or column footings may be designed far a net
allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (pst) dead plus live load, if the footings bear
directly on medium dense m dense native soils, or properly compacted structural fill placed on the
medium dense to dense native soils.
A I/3 increase in [he above values may be used for short duration, wind and seismic loads. Structural
fill placed on bearing, native subgrade should be compacted to at leas[ 95 percent of the maximum dry
density based on ASTM Tes[ Method D1557. Footing excavations should be inspected to verify [ha[ the
foundations will bear on suitable material.
Exterior footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or
adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Interior footings should have a minimum depth of l2
inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Footings should
have a minimum width of l2 inches regardless of load.
!f constructed as recommended, the toml settlement is not expected to exceed I inch. Differential
settlement, along a 20-foot exterior wall footing, or between adjoining column footings, should be less
than Yz inch, producing an angular distortion of 0.002 Mos[ settlement is expected [o occur during
construction, as the loads are applied However, additional pos[coustruc[ion settlement may occur if
the foundation soils are flooded or saturated or if a strong seismic even[ results in liquefaction of [he
underlying soils. I[ should be noted that the risk of liquefaction is considered low, given the
composition and density of the native, on site soils.
Seasonal rainfall, water run-0ff, and the normal practice of watering trees and landscaping areas around
the proposed structures, should not be permitted to flood and/or saturate footings. To prevent the
buildup of water within the footing areas, continuous footing drains (with deanou[s) should be provided
at [he bases of [he footings. The footing drains should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter perforated
pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed dawn and enveloped by 1-inch sized washed rock in all
directions and filter fabric [o prevent [he migration of fines.
Resistance [o lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.32
acting between the bases of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance far footings
can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 290 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf) acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The allowable friction factor and
allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure values include a factor of safety of L5. The frictional and
passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining [he total lateral
resistance. A 1/3 increase in [he above values may be used for short duration, wind and seismic loads.
I' Hra~xn Y Associates, lnc.
Eleven Offices Serving The Wes[em United Stales
i~
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 11 of 14
Pavement Desien
The near surface subgrade soils generally consist of gravel with variable amounts of fine to coarse
grained sand. These soils are rated as good for pavement subgrade material. Based on our California
Bearing Ratio test results the subgrade will have a Califomia Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of 18 and a
modulus of subgrade reaction value of k = 240 pounds per cubic inch (pci), provided the subgrade is
prepared in general accordance with our recommendations.
We recommend [hat, at a minimum, 12 inches of the existing subgrade material be moisture conditioned
(as necessary) and recompacted m prepare for the construction of pavement sections. The subgrade
should be compacted to at least 95 pemen[ of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Tes[
Method DI557. In place density tests shonld be performed to verify proper moisture convent and
adequate compaction. However, if [he subgrade soil consists of firm and unyielding native glacial soils
a proof roll of [he pavement subgrade soil may be performed in lieu of re-compacting [he subgrade and
compaction tests. The recommended Flexible and rigid pavement sections are based on design CBR and
modulus of subgrade reaction (k) valves [hat are achieved, only following proper subgrade preparation.
I[ should be noted [ha[ subgrade soils that have relatively high silt contents may be highly sensitive to
moisture conditions. The snbgmde strength and performance characteristics of a silty subgrade material
may be dramatically reduced if [his material becomes wet.
ESAL As ha16c Concrete A re ate Base* Com acted Sub rade* **
80,000 2.5 in. 4.5 in. 12.0 in.
Traffic loads were not provided, however, based on our lmowledge of the proposed project, we expect
the traffic to range from light duty (passenger automobiles) to heavy duty (delivery trucks). The
following tables show the recommended pavement sections far light duty and heavy duty use.
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (FLEXIBLE) PAVEMENT
LIGHT DOTY
* 95°b compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557
"* A proof rot! may, be pe¢ormed in lieu of in place density tests
HEAVY DUTY
ESAL As haltic Concrete A re ate Base* Com acted Sub rade* **
300,000 4.0 in. 8.0 in. 12.0 in.
* 95`k compaction based on ASTM Test Method Ol55]
** A proof roll may be performed in lieu of In place density tests
PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (RIGID) PAVEMENT
LIGHT DUTY
ESAL Min. PCC De th Com acted Sub rade* **
80,000 5.0 in. 12.0 in.
* 95`Yo comparGOn based on ASTM Test Method D1557
* * A proof roll mac be -e¢orrned in Geu of irz glare density tests
I' nrazaa a assoaares, mc.
Eleven Offices Serving The Western Uniteu Stales
„e,.mivs.~e
i~
~J
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. l2 of 14
HEAVY DiITY
ESAL Min. PCC De th Com acted Sub rade* **
300,000 7.0 in. 12.0 in.
* 9J `k [ampaHiatt bas¢0 on AJ [ M 1 ¢s( Melttod UOJ /
** A proof roll may be performed in lieu of in -face density tests
The Asphaltic Concrete (AC) is based on a minimum surface course type asphalt (Washington
Department of Transportation (WsDOT) ~/z Inch HMA). The rigid pavement design is based on a
Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) mix [ha[ has a 28 day compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per
square inch (psi). The design is also based on a concrete Flexural strength or modulus of rupture of 550
psi.
Intiltration Rates Based On In Place Infiltration Tests
In place infiltration tests were completed a[ Exploratory Tes[ Pi[ TP-l and TP-2 locations, based on
Thurston County Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual Palling Head Percolation Tes[
Procedure (Appendix L). The Infiltration tests were run a[ approximately 6 feet below the existing site
grades. Representative samples of the subsurface soil were collected in the test pits and sealed in plastic
bags. These samples were transported to our laboratory for further examination and verification of the
field classifications. The laboratory testing program was formulated with au emphasis on the evaluation
of the gradation of the materials encountered for [he United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Textural Triangle Classification. Results of [he laboratory sieve/hydrometer tests are summarized in
Appendix A.
The exploratory test pits were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately
following [he excavation operations. Groundwater was not encountered in [he exploratory test pits at
the date and time of our investigation.
The soil infiltration tales a[ the exploratory test pi[ locations, based on the EPA Palling Head
Percolation Test Procedure, are presented in [he following table.
INFH,TRATION RATE
Test Pit Test Elevation Infiltration Rate USDA Soil Classifcation
Nnmber (feet) (mfn/In.) BASED ON SIEVE/HYDROMETER TEST
No Factor of Safet
TP-1 -6 d Sand* **
TP-2 -6 d Sand* **
"USDA Soll Classification does oot take into nccount particle sizes grcetu than the No. 10 sieve p2mm iv diameter).
*'Please refer to Pertlclc Size Disoihution Reports Figures 6 and 7 for the actual grain size dis[ribmion of the rested samples.
The Falling Head Percolation Tests and [he soil classifications indicate [hat [he underlying outwash
soils have a very rapid rate of permeability (greater than 20 inches per hour) in [heir current conditions.
The infiltration rates presented in this report are based on textural analysis and field testing with clear
water and do not incorporate a factor of safety. Therefore, a[ a minimum the above infilua[ion rates
I' nrazaa oc nssomaws, roc.
Eleven Offices Saving The Western United States
moo m.
KA No. 092-06153
October 9, 2006
Page No. 13 of 14
should be divided by a factor of safety of two for [he infiltration system design [o account for possible
soil clogging, which may result from water impurities.
TestinE and Inscection
A representative of Kmzan & Associates, Inc. should be present a[ [he site during [he earthwork
activities m confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory fieldwork.
This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent
upon compaction testing and stability of [he material. This represenm[ive can also verify that the intent
of these recommendations is incorporated into [he project design and constmc[ion. Kmzan &
Associates, Inc. will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is [he responsibility of the Prime
Contractor. Furthermore, Krazan & Associates is not responsible for the contractor's procedures,
methods, scheduling or management of the work site.
LIMITATIONS
Geo[echnical engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil
Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improves.
Although your site was analyzed using [he most appropriate wrtent techniques and methods,
undoubtedly [here will be substantial furore improvements in [his branch of engineering. In addition [o
improvements in [he field of geo[echnical engineering, physical changes in the site either due [o
excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after
the time of completion of [he soils report may require [he soils report [o be professionally reviewed. In
light of this, [he owner should be aware that [here is a practical limit to [he usefulness of [his report
without critical review. Although [he time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that
two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report.
Foundation and earthwork constmc[ion is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk [ha[ soil and
groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is
derived f[om the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited
sampling of the earth. Our report, design conclusions' and interpretations should no[ be construed as a
warranty of the subsurface conditions. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes
significantly, from [hose indicated in this report. The recommendations made in [his report are based on
[he assumption [ha[ soil conditions do not vary significantly from [hose disclosed during our field
investigation. The findings and conclusions of [his report can be affected by [he passage of time, such
as seasonal weather conditions, manmade influences, such as construction on or adjacent to the site,
natural events such as earthquakes, slope insmbility, flooding, or groundwater flucma[ions. If any
variations or undesirable conditions are encountered dining construction, the geo[echnical engineer
should be notified so [hat supplemental recommendations can be made.
The conclusions of [his report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed
constmction. If [he proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, [he conclusions in this report may
not be valid. The geotechnical engineer should be notified of any changes so that the recommendations
can be reviewed and reevaluated.
Kmzan & Associates, Inc.
Pleven Otiices Serving The Western United States
~: SP dac
i~
I
KA No. 09 2-06 1 5 3
October 9, 2006
Page No. l4 of 7 4
Misinterpretations of this report by other design team members can result in project delays and cos[
overtuns. These risks can be reduced by having Kmzan & Associates, Inc. involved with the design
teams meetings and discussions after submitting [he report. Kmzan &, Associates, [nc. should also be
retained for reviewing pertinent elements of [he design team's plans and specifica[icns. Contractors can
also misinmrpre[ [his report. To reduce this, risk Krazan & Associates. Inc. should participate in pre-bid
and preconslrucCion meetings, and provide construction observations during [he site work.
This report is a gec[echnical engineering investigation with [he purpose of evaluating [he soil conditions
in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site
assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or
atmosphere, or [he presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this [eport or on
any test pi[ log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for
descriptive purposes and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous
and/or toxic assessments.
The geo[echnical information presented herein is based upon professional interpretation utilizing
standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project I[ is no[
wartanted that such information and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geo[echnical
developments. We emphasize [ha[ [his report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should no[
be used for any other site. Our report is prepared for the exclusive use of our client No other party
may rely on the product of our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in writing.
B you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our
office at (425) 485-55 L9.
Respectfully submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
_`
Chris Behrens, ., L.E.G.
Senior Engineering Geologist
CB/ms/ks:
~ CHRIS J. BEHRENS ~
I ' Krazan & Associates, Inc.
Bleven Offices Serving The Wes[em Uaited Stales
°C=
~n_~~nis~e~..
e~PE: •~i_
Engineering Manager
I '
~;
c~ p i
~ ~ej ~
o, , /'
/'
~~ /
~F
e/= ~v ~x
c x~ \ ~i
x~ ~ ~e~ ~'' ~ ~~ ~ :`
x g', tg
~ i .;
,e
x z _ ~:,
x~ ~ _xE _ ~~~..
~ 4 . ~
~x ~ 6
x
s~a~ wr
i`.. hi
f-
-- ~..
o[e: Eigute ganeta2d from TOPO ^SA~.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES FicoxF i - viciNrTY uinr
I9i011d4`"9venue Northeast Location: Yelm, Washington
NF~300 Job Na. :092-06113
Woodinville, WA Y8072 Client Arai Jaeksoa Hlliwa
J?i-481-iil9 ~[uraknmi. LLP
~ Dntr. Oc[ 6, 200fi
Second Avenue SE
3
n
m
3
m
D
N
3
C
N
Vi
m
TP-3
(Proposed Development Area)
TP-4
TP-Z
Inf-2
TP-1
Inf-1
LEGEND
' Test Pit TP-1
Locntbn
' Test Pit
Inflltrntlon TP-1
Locntlon Inf-1
1
Third Street SE
~ ~ t\
~z,^_
0
N
3
3
h
0
3
D
N
3
C
N
VI
f'l
Site Plan
Proposed Yelm Public Safety Building Figure 2
ra xalr Job Numbers 092-06153
_,~ = I
°°~ °~ . °ffi ~ I<razan
a .s so einee s. i~v c. D-aaYp Types Lb Man
ii
i~
Appendix A
Page A. I
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Field Investieation
The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and wbsurfaee exploration program for [he
proposed Yelm Public Safety Building. Four exploratory [es[ pits were excavated and sampled for
subsurface exploration a[ this site. The exploratory test pits extended to depths of approximately I 1 fee[
below the existing site grades. The approximate exploratory test pit locations are shown on the site plan
(Figure 2). The depths shown on the attached test pi[ logs aze from the existing ground surface a[ the
time [he test pits were excavated.
The soils encountered were logged in the field during [he exploration and, with supplementary
laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
All samples were remmed [o our Woodinville laboratory for evaluation. The logs of [he exploratory
test pits along with the laboratory [es[ results ace presented in this appendix.
Laboratory Testine
The laboratory testing program was developed primarily to determine the in sim moistum condition and
grain size distribution of the soils. The sieve analysis tests were performed for the purpose of soil
classification Tes[ results were used as criteria for determining [he engineering suitability of the
surface and subsurface materials encountered.
The resnlts of [he moisture content tests are preserved on the Logs of Tes[ Pi[s (presented in this
appendix). The sieve analysis test results are presented in this appendix.
Krazan & Associates, Inc.
Llevev Offices SerJing the Wemem United Slates
Project: Yelm Public Safety Bldg LOg Of Test Pit TP-1 Project No: 092-06153
Client: ARIA Jackson Elision Murakami, LLP Surtace Elevation: 0 Figure No: A-1
Location: Yelm, Washington Datum: Lagged By: JEG
Depth to Water: Initial: Nat Encountered At Completion:
SUBSURFACE PROFILE S AMP LE
a ~ Dynamic Cone
E n ~ Penetration Water Content
2 ~ ~ Test (% )
a Description o n J (Blowsll-3l4
L . d ?' in
)
O rn rn ~ in ~ ...__5
~._..._ . 10 20 30
Ground u ace
-- -
0
SILTY SAND (SM) '
Loose, fne to medium grained sand with gravel,
~
silt, and some clay, dark brown, moist. a S-1 Grab ~
-~n~~qq1°~ POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP)
'LT Medium dense, fne to coarse grained sand with
-. . trace silt brown, moist. '.
_ ~ POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRA VEL (SP)
~,,-~ Medium dense, fine to coarse grained sand with
S-2
Grab
~
,
trace silt
ellowish brown
moist
, y
,
.
5
.,:::
~z~~
_________________________________ ___ ____
04;° POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITN SAND (GP) S-3 Grab ~
°'(J' M
di
d
f
i
d
d
i
h '
e
um
ense,
ne to coarse gra
ne
san
w
t .
;oC>8~ trace to no silt, yellowish brown, moist I.
$a, - Infltration testing conducted at 6 feet
.:,:6`. I
ti
z"
it
~,
-f
4a.. .
',
4
10 "~ U -
de
End of Test Pit
15
I '
Excavation Method: Trackhoe Krazan and Associates Test Pit Date: 21 Sept, 2006
19501 144th Ave. NE #F-300 Sample Method: Grab
Woodinville, WA 98072
Contractor: Keith Southerland Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Yelm Public Safety Building LOg Of Test Pit TP-2 Project No: 092-06153
Client: ARAI Jackson Ellison Murakami, LLP Surtace Elevation: 0 Figure No: A-2
Location: Yelm, Washington Datum: Logged By: JGE
Depth to Water: Initial: Not Encountered At Completion:
SUBSURFACE PROFILE S AMP LE
n ~ Dynamic Cone
E n m Penetration Water Content
z' ~ 'm Test (%)
° Description a o J (Blows/1-3/4
L
n a
E E o. .
E ~ in)
o ~ m F rn 3 5 10 10 20 30
0 Ground Surface
SILTY SAND (SMJ
Loose, fine to coarse grained sand with silt and
clay, dark brown, moist.
" ~ ~°,-Extensive organics.
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL
GP
'
(
J ~
,
`, Medium dense
fine to coarse grained sand with S-1 Grab ~
,
',trace silt, brown, moist.
~~~ POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SPJ
'~"t' Medium dense, fine to coarse grained sand with
some gravel and silt, brown, moist.
5 '~
<.
WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GWJ S-2 Grab c
Medium dense, medium to very coarse grainetl
sand and trace to no silt, dark yellowish brown,
moist.
- Infiltration testing conducted at 6 feet
10 .•
"°'
-
End of Test Pit
15
i~
Ezcava[ion Me[hod: Trackhoe Krazan and Associates Test Pit Dale: 21 Sept 2006
19501 144th Ave. NE 7tF-300
Woodinville, WA 98072 Sample Method: Grab
Contractor: Keith Southerland Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Yelm Public Safety Building Log Of Test Pit TP-3 Project No: 092-06153
Client: ARAI Jackson Ellison Murakami, LLP Surface Elevation: 0 Figure No: A-3
Location: Yelm, Washington Datum: Logged By: JGE
Depth to Water: Initial: Not Encountered At Completion:
SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE
a ~ Dynamic Cone
E o. ~ Penetration Water Content
z' ~ 'm Test (% )
o Description o v ~ (Blows/1-3/4
v°
i
m ~
>°.
~
..
°'
1° in
5 )10
10 20 30
o .
m rn t- w 3 - ~.... __~.__.._.
Ground Surface
0
SILTY SAND (SM) _ _ _
Loose, fne to coarse sand with gravel and some
silt, dark brown, moist
i
` (Topsoil)
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP)
,
`, Medium dense, fine to coarse grained sand with
\trace silt li
ht brown
moist ~
g
,
.
,
______ ________ ______ __________
POORLYGRADED SAND (SP) S-1 Grab ~
ine to coarse grained sand with
Medium dense '
, , ,
some silt, dark yellowish brown, moist.
5
S-2 Grab ~
i
10
End of Tes[ Pit '.
15
Excavation Method: Trackhce Krazan and Associates Test Pit Date: 21 Sept 200fi
19501 144th Ave. NE #F-300 Sample Method: Grab
Woodinville, WA 98072
Contractor: Keith Southerland Sheet: 1 of 1
Project: Velm Public Safety Building Log Of Test Pit TP-4 Project No: 092-06753
Client: ARAI Ellison Murakami, LLP Surtace Elevation: 0 Figure No: A-4
Location: Yelm, Washington Datum: Logged By: JGE
Depth to Water: Initial: Not Encountered At Completion:
SUBSURFACE PROFILE S AMP LE
n =. Dynamic Cone
E n -y PeneVation Water Content
z r 'v Test (%)
° Description n a J (Blows/1-3/4
t a ~ ~' in
)
o rn ~ F N ~ ___ 6-
10 10 20 30
Ground Surtace
_- _
..-_. ____-.
0 SILTYSAND (SM) .
Loose, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel '.
~
and Vace sill, dark brown, moist. S-1 Grab ~
' T
l
~ .
(
opsoi
)
, `
'
'
POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) .
- Medium dense, fine to coarse grained sand with
some gravel and silt, light brown, moist.
5
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SPJ S-2 Grab ~
i
nd
M
di
d
fi
t
d
d
e
um
ense,
ne
o coarse gra
ne
san
a
some silt, dark yellowish brown, moist.
+ + POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) S-3 Grab ~ ~
Medium dense, fine to coarse grained sand with
'
10 gravel and trace to no silt, yellowish brown, moist '.
End of Test Pit '.
1 ',,
5
Excavation Method: Trackhoe Krazan and Associates Test Pit Date: 21 Sept 2006
19501 144th Ave. NE #F-300 Sample Method: Grab
Woodinville, WA 98072
Contractor: Keith Southerland Sheet: 1 of 1
II
Particle Size Distribution Report
tno
9e - -
,o - - -
Z 60
I i
LL
I I
Z 50
~
!
~
~
I
I
U ~~
I ~ I I I
I I I ', I I
W 40
a
I
I
I
~
I
I '~
I
I
'.
3a
I
zo
I
I
I
I
I
to -
I
0
I I
I
too
to t o.t o. t . m
GRAIN SIZE - mm
x s •• % Gravel % Sand % Silt
cone ~
Y. 3
C
oarse
M
edwm Fine
.Crs.
Crs.
M
ed.
.rm
Fine
Crs. ~~ Fine % Clay
0.0 0.0 69.7 11.0 2.6 1.7 3.7 S.S 3.8 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.8
0.0 0.0 36.7 49.2 4.4 1.3 4.0 2.8 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.3
LL PL D D D D D D C C
nv n 65.6975 48.9689 40.8457 18.6805 1.0071 0.4173 17.08 117.35
nv n 23.7886 18.3250 15.8349 10.1412 5.1708 2.2460 2.50 8.16
Material Description USCS AASHTO
o Dark brownish-yellow poorly graded GRAVEL with sand. GP A-1-a
Dark brownish-yellow well-graded GRAVEL with sand. GW A-1-a
Project No. 09206153 Client: Arai Jackson Ellison Murakami, LLP Remarks:
Project: Yelm Public Safety Building o Sample ID: 24062-B.
Location: Test Pit 1 Depth: 6' Sample Number: 24062-B TP-1 @ 6'
Location: Test Pit 2 Depth: 6' Sample Number: 24062-C ^Sample [D: 24062-C.
TP-2 @ 6'
y+ ~ ~r'~ y~
tested By: BM __ Checked By:
Percent Sand
SOIL DATA
Sample Depth Percentages cram malenai vassmg azio sie.e
Source No. fi. Sand Silt Clay Classification
• Test Pit Samples 24062-B 6' 92.8 2.4 4.8 Sand
^ Test Pit Samples 24062-C 6' 93.8 3.1 3.1 Sand
~~~ Project: Yelm Public Safety Building
I ,Checked By:
KRAZAN & ASSOC. USDA Soil Classification
COMPACTION TEST REPORT
155 '. '
145
135 I i
U
d
C
N
a
r i
o
1zs - ~
-
- - - - ZAV for
S
G
_
P.
.
2.65
i
115
'_- . _
_ _ _
105
1 3 5 7 9 11 13
Water content,
Test specification: ASTM D 1557-91 Procedure C Modified
Oversize correction a lied to each oint
Elev/ Classification Nat. °/,> ^^/o<
Depth USCS AASHTO Moist. Sp.G. LL PI 3/4 in. No.200
2.65 vv 36
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS UNCORRECTED MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 135.9 pcf
Optimum moisture = 5.8 % 123.5 pcf
9.0 Brown gavelly sand with silt.
Project No. 09206153 Client: Arai Iackson Ellison Murakami, LLP
Project: Yelm Public Safety Building
Date: 9-22-06
• location: Bulk Sample Remarks:
Sample ID: 24062-A.
Bulk Sample
==~Kr-azan
n
BEARING RATI O TEST REPORT
ASTM D 1883-99
loon CBR at 700 % Max. Density = 21.1
I '~ for 0.10 in. Penetration
zs
--- '---- --- -- 'S 661ows
20
--
600
e E5b
~ 15
V
~
'w +z Blow: I
1n
~ 600
c i
w 5
~w 105 110 115 120 125 130
~ Molded Density (pcf)
c
o I
m
400
m
c
m
a
zoo ~ } -
o
0 0. 1 0.2 0.3 04 Qb
Penetration Depth (in.)
Molded Soaked CBR Y. Llnearlty Maz.
Density I Percent of Moisture
~
Density
PercentM
Moisture
10 i
E0 i
0
0
Correction Surcbarga
Pbs
)
Swell
IPe0 ~ Maz. Dens.
(%) (PCQ Maz. Dens. (%) n.
n.
.
. (in.) . (%)
1 0 123.6 LOO.I 9.4 123.6 100.1 11.8 21.1 28.8 0-015 l0 0
2 0 117.6 95.2 9.4 117.6 95.2 12.5 18.4 26.4 0.025 10 0
3 ^ 110.9 89.8 ~ 9.4 110.9 89.8 I6.8 11.3 13.8 -0.003 IO 0
Material Description
USCS Maz.
Dens Optimum
Moisture
LL
PI
.
c %
Brown gavelly sand with silt.
123.5 9.0 nv
Project No: 09206153 Test Description/Remarks:
Project: Yelm Public Safety Building *Bulk Sample*
Location: Bulk Sample
Sample Number: 24062-A Sample [D: 24062-A.
Date: 9-22-06
yea ` ~l GV /GLL~
I^
i~
~i
Appendix B
Page B. I
APPENDIX B
EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
GENERAL
When the text of the report conFlicts with [he general specifications in [his appendix, the
recommendations in the report have precedence.
SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork
associated with the site rough grading, including but no[ limited ro [he furnishing of all labor, tools, and
equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for
receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to [he
lines and grades shown on [he project grading plans, and disposal of excess mamrials.
PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all
earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and
tested by a representative of Krazan and Associates, Inc., hereinafter known as the Geotechnical
Engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by
the project Civil Engineer. Both [he Geotechnical Engineer and Civil Engineer are the Owner's
represenmtives. If the contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in
this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is
deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Geotechnical Engineer and Civil Engineer. No deviation
from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Geoteehnical Engineer,
Civil Engineer ar project Architect.
No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Geotechnical
Engineer The Contractor shall notify the Geotechnical Engineer at least 2 working days prior to the
commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork.
The Con[racmr agrees that he shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions
doting the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this
requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and [ha[ [he
Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold [he Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all
liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability
arising from the sole negligence of the Owner of the Engineers.
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be compacted to a density not less
than 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Tes[ Method D1557 as specified in
[he technical portion of [he Geotechnical Engineering Report. The results of these tests and compliance
with these specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged
by [he Geotechnical Engineer.
SOIL AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and
to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the
soil report.
Krazan and 9ssuciates, Inc.
Ele.en Ofllces SeM~ The Western C~imd Stales
i~
i~
Appendix B
Page 132
The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the dam contained in said report, and the Contractor
shall no[ be relieved of liability under [he contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance
between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered
during the progress of the work.
DOST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any
dust nuisance on or about the site or [he borrow area, or ofF-site if caused by the Contractor's operation
either during [he performance of [he earthwork or resulting from [he conditions in which the Contractor
leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including Court casts of codefendants, For all
claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work.
SITE PREPARATION
Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grabbing and preparations of foundation materials for
receiving fill.
CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept [he site in this present condition and
shall demolish and/or remove from [he area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface
and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the
Geotechnical Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the propery of the Coutractor
and shall be removed from the site.
Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed [o a minimum depth of I foot and m
such an extern which would permit removal of all rooLC larger than 1 inch Backfill or tree root
excavation should not be pertitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and [he Geotechnical
Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas,
which are [o receive fill materials, shall no[ be permitted.
SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive S[mcmml fill shall be prepared as outlined above,
excava[ed/scarified [o a depth of 12 inches, moisture~omdi[iomed as necessary, and compacted [0 95
pemen[ compaction.
Loose aud/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture couditioued and compacted [0 95 percent
compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading
prior [o placement of any fill material. All areas scheduled [o receive fill materials shall be approved by
[he Geotechnical Engineer prior to [he placement of any of [he fill material.
EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished ro the tolerance normally defined by [he Civil
Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. All over excavation below [he grades specified shall be
backfilled at [he Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with [he applicable
technical requirements.
FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the
presence of [he Geotechnical Engineer. Material from [he required site excavation may be utilized far
construction site fills provided prior approval is given by [he Geotechnical Engineer. All materials
utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetable or other deleterious matter as determined
by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Krazau and Associates. Inc.
Eleven Offices Serving The Western Unltetl Smtes
oe_nn~se,.
i~
i~
Appendix 6
Page B 3
PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill
materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be [he
responsibility of [he Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by Flooding ponding, or jetting
shall no[ be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Geotechnical Engineer.
Both eu[ and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of [he Geo[echmical Engineer prior to
final acceptance.
SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or [hawing
or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When [he work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill
operations shall mot be resumed until the Geo[echnical Emgimeer imdica[es that [he moisture content and
density of previously placed FII areas specified.
Krazan and Assnciales, Inc
Ele~e~ OI I ices Sewin_ The W esiem U~itetl Swies
i~
i~
Appendix C
Page C.I
APPENDIX C
1. DEFINITIONS -The term "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surf'aeing, untreated
aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of [he area on which
surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed.
2. SCOPE OF WORK -This portion of [he work shall include all labor, materials, tools and
equipment necessary for and reasonable incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the
plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as "Work Not Included."
3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE -The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various
subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses m [he lines, grades, and dimensions given on [he
plans. The upper 12 inches of [he soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted m a
minimum compaction of 95% of maximum dry density as determined by test method ASTM DI557.
The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Geo[echnical Engineer prior to the
placement of additional pavement of additional pavement courses.
4. AGGREGATE BASE -The aggregate base shall be spread and compacted on the prepared
subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate base
should conform [o WSDOT Standard Specification for Crushed Surfacing Base Course or Top Course
(Item 9-03.9(3)). The base material shall be compacted to a minimum compaction of 95% as
determined by ASTM D 1557. Each layer of subbase shall be tested and approved by [he Ceo[echmical
Engineer prior m [he placement of successive layers.
5. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING -Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a
mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at central mixing plan[ and spread and
compacted on a prepared base in conformity with [he lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans.
The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shall be WSDOT Class B.
The drying, proportioning, and mixing of [he materials shall conform [o WSDOT Specifications.
The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting [he mixture shall
conform to WSDOT Specifications, with the exception that no surface course shall be placed when [he
atmospheric temperature is below 50 degrees F. The surfacing shall be rolled with combination steel-
wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in WSDOT Specifications. The surface course shall be
placed with au approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine.
6. TACK COAT -The tack (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall conform [o and be applied in
accordance with [he requirements of WSDOT Specifications
Rrazan and Associates, Ivc.
Eleven O~Tices Serving The Wcs[an Gn'uM Smtcs
uvxanis~ a,~~