Loading...
Old Town-SY100520KL E/NFEL OER Bright People. Right Solutions. May 20, 2010 Project 110996 Mr. Brett Bristow, P.E. Freese and Nichols, Inc. 1701 N. Market Street, Suite 500 Dallas, Texas 75202 Subject: Geotechnical Study Main Street Park Improvements Coppell, Texas Dear Mr. Bristow: This report transmits the findings of our geotechnical study for the Main Street Park improvements in Coppell, Texas. The results of study are included along with our recommendations for use during the design of the improvements. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If we can be of additional assistance as the design progresses, please do not hesitate to contact us at (817)868 -5900. Sincerely, KLEINFELDER CENTRAL, INC. Texas Registered Engineering Firm F -5592 Daniel M. Harborth, P.E. Mar T. Miller, P.E. Copies Submitted: 1 110996 / DFW10R108 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder May 20, 2010 7805 Mesquite Bend, Suite 100, Irving, TX 75063 p 1972.868.5900 f 1972.409.0008 A Report Prepared for: Freese and Nichols, Inc. Dallas, Texas GEOTECHNICAL STUDY Main Street Park Improvements Coppell, Texas Project 110996 May 20, 2010 Prepared by: Daniel M. Harborth, P.E. Project Engineer P�E OF T � - �1 I BORTH wo : ........... .... ...,....� (9 105000 1��,�s <�CE N SE� •���,,r WV� Marc T. Miller, P.E. Principal Engineer KL E/NFEL DER Bright People, Right Solutions. 7805 Mesquite Bend Dr., Suite 100 Irving, Texas 75063 pl 972.868.5900 f 1972.409.0008 Texas Registered Engineering Firm F -5592 This document was prepared for use only by the client, only for the purposes stated, and within a reasonable time from issuance, but in no event later than one year from the date of the report. Non - commercial, educational, and scientific use of this report by regulatory agencies is regarded as a "fair use" and not a violation of copyright. Regulatory agencies may make additional copies of this document for internal use. Copies may also be made available to the public as required by law. The reprint must acknowledge the copyright and indicate that permission to reprint has been received. Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solelyfor the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one — noteven you — should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set of Project - Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project- specific fac- tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth- erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes —even minor ones —and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer- ing report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man -made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ — sometimes significantly — from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual r Geotechnical Engineering Report ---) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PREFACE Important Information about Your Geotechnical Report .............................. ............................... iii 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... ..............................1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................... ..............................1 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ....................................................... ..............................1 2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .................. ..............................2 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION .......................................................... ..............................2 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING ...................................................... ..............................3 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................... ..............................4 3.1 GEOLOGY ............................................................................. ..............................4 3.2 SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY .......................................... ..............................4 3.3 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS ..................................... ..............................5 3.4 EXPANSIVE SOIL CHARACTERISTICS ............................... ..............................6 4 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... ..............................8 4.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION ................................................ ..............................8 4.2 SLAB -ON -GRADE FOUNDATION ......................................... ..............................9 4.3 SURFACE DRAINAGE ......................................................... .............................10 4.4 LANDSCAPING .................................................................... .............................11 4.5 IBC SEISMIC SITE CLASS .................................................. .............................11 5 EARTHWORK ................................................................................. .............................12 5.1 SITE PREPARATION ........................................................... .............................12 5.2 MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS AND VERIFICATION TESTING .........................12 6 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................. .............................14 APPENDIX VicinityMap ........... ............................... Plan of Borings ...... ............................... General Notes ........ ............................... Logs of Borings ...... ............................... Summary of Laboratory Test Results.... Absorption Pressure Swell Test Results ........................................... ............................... Plate 1 ........................................... ............................... Plate 2 ........................................... ............................... Plate 3 ..................................... I............................ Plates 4 — 6 ........................................... ............................... Plate 7 ................................. ............................... Plates 8 — 10 110996 / DFW10R108 vi May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder GEOTECHNICAL STUDY MAIN STREET PARK IMPROVEMENTS COPPELL, TEXAS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of a geotechnical study for the Main Street Park improvements in Coppell, Texas. Main Street Park is still in the planning phase, but will be located on the southwest corner of South Coppell Road and West Bethel Road in the City of Coppell, as presented on the Vicinity Map in the Appendix. The improvements will consist of constructing a new pavilion and restroom. The pavilion will be approximately 4,200 square feet in plan area and the restroom will be approximately 1,000 square feet in plan area. Both structures will be lightly loaded, and supported on a shallow slab -on -grade foundation system. The site is presently undeveloped with vegetation consisting of grass and weeds. Based on visual observations the site is relatively level. Stock piles of fill were observed on the eastside of the park boundary. 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of the geotechnical study has been to provide recommendations for use during foundation design of the pavilion and restroom structures. To accomplish this purpose, the scope of the study included: 1. Drilling sample borings to assess the general subsurface conditions and to obtain samples for testing; 2. Performing laboratory tests on appropriate samples to assess pertinent engineering properties of the subsurface materials; and 3. Performing engineering analyses, using the field and lab data to develop recommendations for use in the foundation design of the pavilion and restroom structures. 110996 / DFW1OR108 Page 1 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder 2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION Subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by three borings drilled with a truck - mounted drilling rig. A schedule of these borings and approximate surface coordinates are presented in Table 2.1. The boring locations are presented on the Plan of Borings in the Appendix, along with the Logs of Borings. TABLE 2.1 - SCHEDULE OF BORINGS Boring No. Depth Date Drilled Latitude* Longitude* B -01 25 feet May 2, 2010 32.95259 - 97.00626 B -02 25 feet May 2, 2010 32.95234 - 97.00645 B -03 25 feet May 2, 2010 33.21900 - 97.72292 " NAD83 Coordinate System Kleinfelder established the boring locations in the field using the site plan provided by William Peck & Associates, Inc. and existing landmarks. Coordinates presented in Table 2.1 were determined with a hand -held GPS unit. These locations were not surveyed by a land surveyor, and should be considered accurate only to the extent implied by the technique used in their determination. Continuous - flight auger drilling and push /drive sampling techniques were used without drilling fluids to complete the borings. When present, seepage and groundwater levels were recorded, as discussed in a following section. At the completion of the field exploration program, each boring was backfilled with soil cuttings. Relatively undisturbed samples of cohesive soils were collected by using the drilling rig to push a seamless, steel tube sampler into the soil (generally based upon ASTM D1587). The depths at which these samples were collected are indicated on the boring logs. After a tube was recovered, the sample was extruded in the field, examined and logged. The sample was then sealed in a plastic bag to reduce moisture loss and protect the sample. During logging, an estimate of sample consistency was obtained using a hand penetrometer to provide an approximate indicator of shear strength. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 2 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder A sample was collected by driving a split -spoon sampler in conjunction with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT). This technique involves driving the spoon sampler a distance into the soil using a free - falling hammer (based upon ASTM D1586). During the test the logger records the number of blows required to drive the spoon sampler over three successive 6 inch increments. The first 6 inches is the "seating drive," while the number of blows required to drive the sampler the last two 6 inch increments is the "penetration" in blows per foot. Where resistance was high, the number of inches of penetration for 50 blows of the hammer is recorded. When less than 6 inches of penetration is obtained, the test is terminated regardless of the drive increment. The results of the penetration test are reported on the boring logs at the corresponding depth. Materials recovered from the split -spoon sampler are then placed in a plastic bag to reduce moisture loss and protect the sample. 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on samples selected as being generally representative of that stratum and /or boring(s). Testing was performed to allow for general material classification according to the Unified Soil Classification System (based upon ASTM D 2487), and to determine the engineering properties of the materials. These tests included: • Moisture content • Atterberg limits (liquid and plastic limits) • Percent passing No. 200 sieve • Unconfined compressive strength • Unit dry weight • Absorption pressure swell The results of these tests are presented at the corresponding depth on each boring log, individual report plates (as appropriate), and the Laboratory Tests Results Summary in the Appendix. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 3 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 GEOLOGY The Dallas Sheet of the Geologic Atlas of Texas locates the project within a mapped outcropping of the Eagle Ford geologic formation. The Eagle Ford formation typically includes residual clay and shaly clay overlying the primary shale that contains significant quantities of soluble sulfates. The clays and shaly clays of the Eagle Ford vary in color from dark brown to yellow brown, are highly expansive. The clays are often jointed; contain silt and sand seams /partings, and bentonite seams /layers. The primary shale is commonly gray to dark gray in color, and is not as hard as most regional rock materials. The shale is often calcareous and can contain very hard limestone and sandstone seams. Soft bentonite seams and layers can also be present. However, the subsurface soils suggest that the site is located within terrace deposits that overly the Eagle Ford geologic formation. Terrace deposits can consist of a variety of materials, including gravel, sand, silt, and clay, and are associated with deposition from low velocity floodwaters. The grain size of these deposits typically increases with increasing depth, but is dependent upon channel geometry and flow rates. Water is often intermittent within terrace deposits. These deposits can often be soft or loose, especially in the presence of groundwater. 3.2 SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during the field exploration and the results of the laboratory testing program the subsurface stratigraphy at the site is variable. The subsurface materials encountered at the site consisted of the following: • Fill: Sandy Clay (CL) and Clayey Sand with gravel (SC); • Clay with sand (CL); • Sandy Clay (CL); • Shaly Clay with sand (CL); and • Clayey Sand (SC). 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 4 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder Not all soil strata were encountered at each boring location. For detailed subsurface descriptions, refer to the Logs of Borings in the Appendix. Note that demarcation lines between the strata are interpretive of the field conditions, and that actual strata transitions in the field may be gradual. Fill was encountered in Borings 2 and 3, and extended from the ground surface to depths ranging from about 2 to 4 feet. The fill materials vary in strength, but appear to be relatively competent. Hand penetrometer tests conducted on the fill materials ranged from 2.5 to greater than 4.5 tsf. Documentation concerning the compaction efforts of the fill placement was not available at the time of this report. Soft and loose zones may be present during construction and should be addressed accordingly. The clayey sand and clayey sand with gravel fill are predominately granular and have a relatively low potential to undergo volumetric changes with moisture fluctuations. A liquid limit of 33 with a corresponding plasticity index of 20 was determined for the clayey sand with gravel fill material. The sandy clay fill, sandy clay and lean clay with sand soils are expected to have a low to high potential to undergo volumetric changes with moisture fluctuations. Liquid limits ranged from 22 to 49 with corresponding plasticity indices from 9 to 37. 3.3 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS The borings were advanced with continuous flight augers to their termination depths in an attempt to observe for the presence of subsurface water seepage. Table 3.1 presents the depths and elevations at which subsurface water seepage was encountered at the time of drilling and the collected water depth at the end of the exploration duration. TABLE 3.1 — SEEPAGE DEPTH Boring Depth of Seepage During Drilling* Depth of Collected Water at End of Drilling* B -01 18 feet - -- B-02 21 feet 20 1 /2 feet B -03 25 feet 23 feet Subsurface water depths have been rounded to the nearest one -half foot. 110996/ DFW1OR108 Page 5 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder The subsurface water is present within the clayey sand stratum. However, the depth at which the subsurface water was encountered should not influence the construction of a shallow foundation system. The occurrence and variation of groundwater can vary due to many factors. These factors include seasonal changes, site topography, the depth to rock, surface runoff, the layering and permeability of subsurface strata; water levels in waterways, utilities, and other factors not evident at the time of this study. The possibility of groundwater and its fluctuation should be considered when developing this project. A groundwater study has not been performed. Long -term observations would be necessary to more accurately evaluate groundwater levels. 3.4 EXPANSIVE SOIL CHARACTERISTICS The subgrade at this site includes expansive soil that will exhibit shrink and swell behavior. The amount of shrink /swell behavior that can occur will depend upon moisture fluctuations that occur over the design life of the structure. The total magnitude of the shrink /swell behavior will also be dependent upon the thickness of the expansive soil and the depth of the active moisture zone. Moisture fluctuations occur due to seasonal cycles, but can also be influenced to varying degrees by drainage conditions; site grades /sloping ground, landscaping, irrigation practices, the presence of vegetation, groundwater, and the presence of flatwork or other impervious barriers. This large number of variables complicates the determination of the magnitude of shrink /swell movements that could occur. An estimate of the potential expansive soil movement was made using a variety of sources, including the Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) Method 124 -E published by TxDOT, the results of laboratory index and swell testing, engineering judgment, and experience. Based on this information, the calculated potential vertical rise (PVR) within the pavilion and restroom areas is about 2 inches for a full seasonal moisture cycle. Note that the subgrade soil is relatively lean, but that the swell test form Boring 2 indicates that potential swell is relatively high for the measured plasticity. Recognize that the PVR is not an exact value, and is only an indication of the potential movements due to expansive soil for seasonal moisture fluctuations. Actual movements may be significantly larger than estimated due to inadequate site grading, 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 6 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder poor drainage, ponding surface water, and /or leaks in utility lines. Significant changes to existing site graded can also alter actual PVR movements by changing the thickness of the expansive soil and /or altering the active moisture zone depth. 110996 / DFVV1OR108 Page 7 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder • After striping and over excavating the on -site materials, the exposed subgrade should be proof rolled with appropriate construction equipment (weighing at least 25 tons) to determine if soft or weak zones are present. • If soft or weak areas are encountered during the proof rolling operations, the effected areas should be excavated in both the horizontal and vertical directions exposing a competent subgrade. Grade can be restored with select fill or on -site material provided it is clean of deleterious materials. • Once proof rolling operations are completed and soft and weak zones have been addressed, the subgrade should be scarified a depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted. • Select fill should then be placed in compacted lifts within the building pad area to restore grade. Select fill should be placed and compacted as recommended in the Earthwork Section of this report. The final two feet of fill placed outside of the building footprints should consist of moisture conditioned clay. This clay "cap" will help to reduce the chances for moisture to enter into the select fill body. The on -site clay soils can be used to create this clay "cap" provided that the soil has a Plasticity Index (PI) between 15 and 30, and should be placed and compacted as recommend in the Earthwork Section for on -site materials. These subgrade preparation recommendations assume that there will be an absence of ponded surface water near the foundations, that there will be no leaking utility lines, and that positive surface drainage away from the structures will be provided after construction. Failure to control these items could result in movements greater than those calculated. Due to the density of the site soils, significant subsidence is not expected. Once the building pads are prepared as recommended above a shallow slab -on -grade foundation system may be used for support of the planned structures. 4.2 SLAB -ON -GRADE FOUNDATION Once the building pad has been prepared as described, a monolithically placed, reinforced and stiffened slab -on -grade foundation system may be used to support the structures. The slab must be stiffened and reinforced to tolerate 1 inch or more of potential subgrade movement. The foundation must be designed by a structural engineer familiar with the design of stiffened slabs -on -grade subject to differential movement. Reinforcement may be achieved using either conventional rebar or post - tensioning strands. Grade beams may be designed based on an allowable soil bearing 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 9 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot or less. This bearing value will provide a factor of safety of at least three. The beams should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade into compacted and tested select fill. This beam depth is given in regards to bearing capacity and is not intended to be a structural recommendation regarding stiffness. Foundation excavations should be observed by Kleinfelder to confirm that excessively loose, soft or otherwise undesirable materials are removed and that foundations will bear on satisfactory material. Soils exposed in the bases of satisfactory foundation excavations should be protected against detrimental change in condition such as from disturbance, rain or excessive drying. Surface runoff should be drained away from the excavations and not allowed to pond. 4.3 SURFACE DRAINAGE Proper drainage is critical to the performance and condition of the building foundation and flatwork. Positive surface drainage must be provided that directs surface water away from the building and flatwork. If water is collect next to or below the building and flatwork, then undesirable soil movements can occur, and these movement can exceed values used in design. It is recommended that a slope of at least 1 percent be provided, with steeper slopes up to 5 percent recommended in those areas without restrictions. The slopes should direct water away from the structure, and must be maintained throughout construction and the life of the structure. The location of gutter downspouts, and other features, should be designed such that these items will not create moisture concentrations at or beneath the structure or flatwork. Downspouts should discharge well away from the structure, and should not be allowed to erode surface soil. Moisture related issues can be positively addressed by constructing continuous exterior flatwork that extends to the building line. The joints created at the interface of the flatwork and building line must be sealed with a flexible joint sealer to prevent the infiltration of water. Open cracks that may develop in the flatwork should also be sealed. The joint and any cracks that develop must be maintained and resealed as needed, and should be part of a periodic inspection and maintenance program. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 10 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder 4.4 LANDSCAPING We do not recommend the use of landscaping against and around the exterior of the structure. These landscaped areas can adversely affect subgrade moisture. Landscaped areas can create both saturated and desiccated conditions that cause localized /differential movements and the formation of cracks. If used, landscaping should be kept as far away from the foundation as possible and positive drainage must be maintained. Landscaping elements (such as edging) must not prohibit or slow the drainage of water. When feasible, irrigation lines and heads should not be placed in close proximity to the foundation to prevent the collection of water near the foundation or flatwork, particularly in the event of leaking lines or sprinkler heads. Trees (if used) should not be placed in proximity to the structure or movement sensitive flatwork, as trees are known to cause in localized soil shrinkage due to desiccation of the soil by the root system. The desiccation zone varies by tree, but trees should generally set back 1 to 2 times the mature tree height, and in no case should the drip - line of the mature tree extend over or near rooflines. 4.5 IBC SEISMIC SITE CLASS For structural designs based upon the 2006 IBC, the recommended Site Class is C. This site class has been selected based upon the results of the borings and our experience with the local geologic conditions. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 11 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder 5 EARTHWORK 5.1 SITE PREPARATION The project site should be stripped of vegetation, roots, organic material, existing construction materials (if present) and other undesirable debris. Obstructions that could hinder preparation of the site should also be removed, with special attention given to tree stumps and associated root systems. A typical stripping depth is 4 to 6 inches, but the actual depth will vary and should be based on field observations. After stripping, the area should suitable for the support of construction equipment. Unsuitable areas (such as those with wet, soft, yielding, and /or pumping subgrade) should be corrected before construction proceeds. Proof rolling should be used to detect areas of soft and /or pumping soil. Proof rolling should be based upon TxDOT Standard Specification Item 216, and performed using a heavy tired vehicle weighing at least 25 tons, with the tires inflated to the manufacturer's specified operating pressure. The entire area should be proof rolled, with each succeeding pass offset by not greater than one tire width. Proof rolling should be performed within the building /foundation area, and also within flatwork areas, such as pavement, sidewalks, pads, etc. Kleinfelder should be present during proof rolling activities to assist with the identification of unsuitable soil. Unsuitable soil should be undercut and reworked, or otherwise improved in a manner that is suitable to the engineer. When fill is planned, proof rolling should occur before the fill is placed. After proof rolling, and before fill placement, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, and recompacted to the specified density and moisture content provided below. 5.2 MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS AND VERIFICATION TESTING Table 5.1 provides material, moisture, and density requirements for a variety of materials and applications. Compaction of each lift should be continuous over its entire area. Fill should be placed in loose horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 to 9 inches, with the intent of providing a compacted lift thickness of 6 inches. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 12 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder TABLE 5.1 - MATERIAL AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS Material Material Proctor Test Density Moisture Use Requirements Method Requirement* Requirement On -Site Soil: No organics Standard 95% or -1 to +4 % General Use (ASTM D 698) Greater "Non- expansive" PI: 8 to 15, LL: <_35 Select Fill: 4200 Sieve: <_70% Standard 95% or -1 to +4 % Below Structures No organics (ASTM D 698) Greater Based upon Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content The material should be a consistent with regard to type and moisture content. Clods should be processed and mixed, and water should be evenly applied, so that each lift has a uniform moisture and density. Each lift should be tested to confirm it has the specified moisture and compaction. One moisture /density verification test should be performed for every 5,000- square -feet of compacted area, or for every 150 - linear foot of utility backfill. For smaller areas, a minimum of three verification tests should be provided for every lift. Subsequent lifts should not be placed until the exposed lift has the specified moisture and density. Lifts failing to meet the moisture and density requirements should be reworked to meet the required specifications. The specified moisture content must be maintained until compaction of the overlying lift, or construction of overlying flatwork. Failure to maintain the moisture content could result in excessive soil movement, and can also have a detrimental effect on overlying plastic concrete. The contractor must provide some means of controlling the moisture content (such as water hoses, water trucks, etc.). Maintaining subgrade moisture is always critical, but will require the most effort during warm, windy and /or sunny conditions. Density and moisture verification testing is recommended to provide some indication that adequate earthwork is being provided. However, the quality of the fill is the sole responsibility of the contractor. Satisfactory verification testing is not a guarantee of the quality of the contractor's earthwork operations. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 13 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder 6 LIMITATIONS This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder's profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services are provided. Our conclusions, opinions and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided. This report may be used only by the Client and the registered design professional in responsible charge and only for the purposes stated for this specific engagement within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than two (2) years from the date of the report. The work performed was based on project information provided by Client. If Client does not retain Kleinfelder to review any plans and specifications, including any revisions or modifications to the plans and specifications, Kleinfelder assumes no responsibility for the suitability of our recommendations. In addition, if there are any changes in the field to the plans and specifications, Client must obtain written approval from Kleinfelder's engineer that such changes do not affect our recommendations. Failure to do so will vitiate Kleinfelder's recommendations. Kleinfelder offers various levels of investigative and engineering services to suit the varying needs of different clients. Although risk can never be eliminated, more detailed and extensive studies yield more information, which may help understand and manage the level of risk. Since detailed study and analysis involves greater expense, our clients participate in determining levels of service, which provide information for their purposes at acceptable levels of risk. The client and key members of the design team should discuss the issues covered in this report with Kleinfelder, so that the issues are understood and applied in a manner consistent with the owner's budget, tolerance of risk and expectations for future performance and maintenance. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 14 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder Recommendations contained in this report are based on our field observations and subsurface explorations, limited laboratory tests, and our present knowledge of the proposed construction. If soil, rock or groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those described herein, the client is responsible for ensuring that Kleinfelder is notified immediately so that we may reevaluate the recommendations of this report. If the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are not considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and the conclusions of this report are modified or approved in writing, by Kleinfelder. The scope of services for this subsurface exploration and geotechnical report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. This report, and any future addenda or reports regarding this site, may be made available to bidders to supply them with only the data contained in the report regarding subsurface conditions and laboratory test results at the point and time noted. Bidders may not rely on interpretations, opinion, recommendations, or conclusions contained in the report. Because of the limited nature of any subsurface study, the contractor may encounter conditions during construction which differ from those presented in this report. Contingency funds should be reserved for potential problems during earthwork. 110996 / DFW10R108 Page 15 of 15 May 20, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder C G ateway Blvd r a) S m Fritz Dr Airline Dr Dallas Fort o Dallas Worth International; r,. -�n Q > Airport aN — y a X tr ? ` ` w a) Regent Blvd 6 w 41 Wrangler Dr North -' Irving 9� p Make P;i re C o l a 7 VICINITY MAP ( KLE/NFELOER Main Street Park Improvements Bright People. Right Solutions. Coppell Texas Project 110996 May 2010 Plate 1 rgh Ln �.�_- t i j s v) o I w Forest Ridge Dr �F�. O -y alifax Ln Halifax Dr Wynnpage pr [] ey Dr o Not to Scale Wagon Wheel Park Ruby Rd _ a g \o�Ot U Plantat ,' - _ O v BUIlock o - L Cemetery w ..reekview Dr - -° Kaye St - —'t A "� po op Cooper Ln Cozby Ave a J Brooks Ln a ! Dillard Ln = c Co o 0 � St :3 s r W Bethel Rd -1 � Project Location Coppell AQ , a _0 Q E a E' i - X °a m Burns St -..; m o w a W . pro y a Southwestern Blvd o t CL w o LL a m a� w C G ateway Blvd r a) S m Fritz Dr Airline Dr Dallas Fort o Dallas Worth International; r,. -�n Q > Airport aN — y a X tr ? ` ` w a) Regent Blvd 6 w 41 Wrangler Dr North -' Irving 9� p Make P;i re C o l a 7 VICINITY MAP ( KLE/NFELOER Main Street Park Improvements Bright People. Right Solutions. Coppell Texas Project 110996 May 2010 Plate 1 OMMT U30IRWA rn o � o � N co E N Z o Q X o CO Y 11 L M ^_^, LL W O d Q� Q Z U o Q L U _C O (0 O d U - 0 N O O 72 = O0 U Q Z c _0 cp � a a) a� w a� H X O Q O_ (4 (0 Ln C O U O O m W 4 � t W� a O t Plate 2 ----------------- -.,r --- KLEINFELDER KEY TO LOGS OF BORINGS DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS AND TERMS: Thin - Walled Tube Sample E] TxDOT Cone Penetrometer Test F1 Auger Sample /Drilling © Bag Sample ® Split Spoon Sample & Standard Penetration Test �Z Water Level Initial Measurement M Continuous Core Sample _y Water Level Subsequent Measurement Hand Penetrometer An indicator of fine- grained soils consistency. Reported as tons per square foot (tsf). Core Recovered Length of rock core recovered as a percent of the total continuous core sample length. RQD Rock Quality Designation (RQD) is a measure of the integrity of recovered core samples. Reported in percentage as the sum of core pieces greater than 4 inches in length. Blow Count Indicator of soil or rock density /consistency, and correlates to the soil strength. Blow count columns used to report values for both the SPT and the TxDOT Cone Penetrometer. Each column refers to the number of hammer blows required to advance the split spoon sampler or cone 6 inches. Note that the seating blows (first 6 inch drive) are not reported. For the SPT the "N" value is the sum of the values for the second and third drive. In cases where resistance was high during the first, second or third drive, the number of inches of penetration for 50 blows of the hammer is reported. RELATIVE DENSITY I CONSISTENCY OF COARSE - GRAINED SOILS OF FINE - GRAINED SOILS Penetration Relative Hand Penetrometer Consistency Resistance Density Readings, tsf (see Note) Blows /foot Having wide range in grain sizes and substantial intermediate particle sizes Poorly graded Predominantly one grain size, or having some intermediate size missing 0 -4 Very Loose <1 Soft 4 -10 Loose 1 -2 Firm 10 -30 Medium Dense 2 -3 Stiff 30 -50 Dense 3 -4 Very Stiff over 50 Very Dense >4.0 Hard Note: Some clays may have lower unconfined compressive strengths because of planes of weakness or cracks within the soil. The consistency rating of such soils are based on penetrometer readings. TERMS CHARACTERIZING SOIL STRUCTURE: Fissured Containing cracks, usually more or less vertical Laminated Composed of thin layers of varying color and texture, typically horizontal Interbedded Composed of alternate layers of different soil types Calcareous Containing appreciable quantities of calcium carbonate Well graded Having wide range in grain sizes and substantial intermediate particle sizes Poorly graded Predominantly one grain size, or having some intermediate size missing Slickensided Having inclined planes of weakness that are slick and glossy in appearance GENERAL DEGREE OF WEATHERING: Unweathered Rock in its natural state before being exposed to weathering agents Slightly weathered Noted predominantly by color change with no disintegrated zones Weathered Complete color change with zones of slightly decomposed rock Severely weathered Complete color change with consistency, texture, and appearance approaching soil SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS: Soil and rock descriptions on the boring logs are a compilation from field data as well as from laboratory test results. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between materials and the actual transition can be gradual. Water level observations have been made in the borings at the times indicated. Note that fluctuations in groundwater level(s) may occur due to variations in rainfall, hydraulic conductivity of soil strata, construction activity, and other factors. Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder Plate 3 LOG OF BORING NO. B -01 f Project Description: Main Street Park Improvements KL E /NI DE)9 Coppell, Texas Bright People. Right Solutions. Location: See Plan of Borings. Approx. Surface Elevation: Not Provided W o 0 o a > o U) U 3 o d E E x a) rn c.2 y r rn w v L a u ? Q E ° a N o o 0 J o J w in to o O U N 3: d t,, E m (V u- m tY > u7 -° c a m tL Z y C din Z m MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4.5+ SANDY CLAY, light brown to brown, hard 4.5+ 2.0 — — —— — 3.0 _ _ 48 18 30 72 21 CLAY with sand, brown to light brown, firm to 1.75 very stiff 1.5 24 99 0.6 6.8 5 3.5 - becoming light brown with yellow -brown and with occasional calcareous nodules below 7 feet 4.0 44 12 32 75 21 — — — —— — 10 ... SANDY CLAY, dark yellow- brown, very stiff to stiff, with calcareous nodules 14.0' ,_. _. _. .— — —- 2.25 SANDY CLAY light yellow -brown to 15 24 red - yellow- brown, stiff to very stiff with sand seams 19.0' - 24 CLAYEY SAND, light yellow to orange- brown, 20 medium dense, with sand seams light yellow -brown gravel layer at 22 feet - with yellow -brown shaly clay seams below 23.5 23 feet 25 — --------- 2s.o _ _ . — ...... — — — — — — Completion Depth: 25 ft. Latitude: 32.95259 Date Boring Started: 5/2/10 Longitude: - 97.00626 Date Boring Completed: 5/2/10 Remarks: Groundwater seepage occurred at 18 feet during drilling. Logged by: H. Masood Project No.: 110996 J4 alq UvU //UP /lGJ a/c orN/vn„ /,�a.,., c.••v ,.• •+• transitions maybe gradual. This Log of Boring is not intended for bidding or estimating purposes. Boring log(s) should not be reproduced separately from the engineering report unless said report is specifically Plate 4 included by reference. LOG OF BORING NO. B -02 Project Description: Main Street Park Improvements Coppell, Texas KLE /NFELOER Bright People. Right Solutions. Location: See Plan of Borings \. Approx. Surface Elevation: Not Provided' U) y o v 3 x o U a N ? \° ° Jr U a� E o _ E _ E c > �.� .� rn N y w d ? D_ C > O 0 g J v J w N U cc° O U O O. Y Ern fQ u tj �° E U a) % N o N m Z` 02 c >, U a. a� c d ca d o Z 0 -- C U m _ O = a " MATERIAL DESCRIPTION .N _ 4.5+ SANDY CLAY with gravel, light brown to brown, 3.5 hard to very stiff, with sand seams (FILL) 2.0' _ 3.5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - SANDY CLAY, light brown to brown, very stiff to 4.5 hard 15 118 2.7 4.7 4.5+ 41 11 30 61 13 - 5 4.5+ 4.5+ _ 9.01 _ _ _ _ _ _ - - SANDY CLAY, yellow -brown with occasional - 10 light brown, hard to very stiff, with calcareous nodules and sandy seams 4.0 22 13 9 62 12 - 15 _ 16.0' - - - CLAYEY SAND, yellow- brown, medium dense to very dense 28 20 71 -with gravel from 23.5 to 25 feet 25 - - - -. _ 25.0 :ompletion Depth: 25 ft. Latitude: 32.95234 late Boring Started: 5/2/10 Longitude: - 97.00645 late Boring Completed: 5/2/10 Remarks: Groundwater seepage occurred at 21 feet during drilling. Water at ogged by: H. Masood 20.6 feet at the end of the day. roject No.: 110996 Strata boundaries are approximate, and in situ transitions maybe gradual. This Log of Boring is not intended for bidding or estimating purposes. Boring log(s) should not be reproduced separately from the engineering report unless said report is specifically included by reference. Plate 5 LOG OF BORING NO. B -03 Project Description: Main Street Park Improvements Coppell, Texas Location: See Plan of Borings Approx. Surface Elevation: Not Provided KLE/NFELOER \\ Bright People. Right Solutions. ouaia uuunuanas are appruximare, ano in siru transitions maybe gradual. This Log of Boring is not intended for bidding or estimating purposes. Boring log(s) should not be reproduced separately from the engineering report unless said report is specifically Plate 6 included by reference. N `m _ a 3 x o o CL o L v) N o E O o '° a) o E E 70 c 0) > c c' C C V) w ani w N a a D. 2 m c C o tj C7 J a J ... .� Cn cv oC, o U ,� dt E _ LL E U) d a ca N 4_ N d Z U m N ( n -p o J l]- a ° Z N U U) C = a " MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Z) 4.5+ CLAYEY SAND with gravel, light brown to 2.5 brown, medium dense, with light brown sand seams (FILL) 2.5 18 110 1.7 11.0 2.5 — a 0 , 33 13 20 41 14 SANDY CLAY, light brown to brown, very stiff to 4.0 — — 5 hard 4.5 49 12 37 62 18 - with sand seams and calcareous nodules from 4.5+ 9 to 10 feet 10.01 10 — — — —. _ ._ _. _. — - ----------- SANDY CLAY, yellow -brown to light yellow- brown, hard 4.5+ 15 - gravel layer from 17 to 19 feet 28 _ 1s.o' _ _ _ ______ — — — SHALY CLAY with sand, yellow -brown to light 20 brown, very stiff 26 23.5' — — — — — — — — — CLAYEY SAND, yellow -brown to brown, 25 — _ _ _ _ medium dense, with occasional gravel 25.0' _. .. , -- Completion Depth: 25 ft. Latitude: 33.21899 Date Boring Started: 5/2/10 Longitude: - 96.72292 Date Boring Completed: 5/2/10 Remarks: Groundwater seepage occurred at 25 feet. Water at 23 feet during Logged by: H. Masood drilling. Project No.: 110996 ouaia uuunuanas are appruximare, ano in siru transitions maybe gradual. This Log of Boring is not intended for bidding or estimating purposes. Boring log(s) should not be reproduced separately from the engineering report unless said report is specifically Plate 6 included by reference. Plate 7 Sheet 1 of 1 Boring No. Sample p Depth (ft.) Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Percent Passing No.200 Sieve Moisture Content %) Unit Dry Weight �Pcf ) Unconfined Compressive Strength tsf Strain at Failure B -01 2.0-3.0 48 18 30 72 21.0 B -01 4.0-5.0 24.0 99 0.6 6.8 B -01 9.0-10.0 44 12 32 75 20.7 B -02 3.0-4.0 15.0 118 2.7 4.7 B -02 4.0-5.0 41 11 30 61 12.7 B -02 14.0-15.0 22 13 9 62 12.0 B -03 2.0-3.0 18.0 110 1.7 11.0 B -03 3.0-4.0 33 13 20 41 14.0 B -03 7.0-8.0 49 12 37 62 17.5 •= KLE /NFELOER \ Bright People. Right Solutions. Summary of Laboratory Results Project: Main Street Park Improvements Coppell, Texas Project Number: 110996 Plate 7 KL E/NFEL LEER Bright People. Right Solutions. Absorption Pressure Swell Test Results 0 3 Project Name: Main Street Park Improvements Location: Coppell, Texas Material Description: CLAY with sand, brown to light brown Project No.: 110996 Tested By: H. Masood Boring No.: B -01 Date Tested: 5/10/10 Sample Depth (ft.): 9 to 10 Consolidometer ID: 2 Soil Classification Properties: Initial Final Liquid Limit = 44 Load Applied (psf): 597 112 Plastic Limit = 12 Moisture Content ( %) = 21.4 24.0 Plasticity Index = 32 Wet Unit Weight (pcf) = 126.3 129.1 % Passing #200 Sieve = 75 Dry Unit Weight (pcf) = 104.0 104.0 Maximum Measured Absorption Swell Pressure (psf) = 597 One - Dimensional Swell for Change in Moisture from Initial to Final ( %) = 1.1 --------------- I ------------------------------- I-.---------.-- _._. I 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 100 1000 Swelling Pressure, psf 10000 Plate 8 KL E/NFEL DER Bright People. Right Solutions. Absorption Pressure Swell Test Results 0 3 Project Name: Main Street Park Improvements Location: Coppell, Texas Material Description: SANDY CLAY, light brown to brown Project No.: 1109 Tested By: H. Masood Boring No.: B -02 Date Tested: 5/10/10 Sample Depth (ft.): 4 to 5 Consolidometer ID: 3 Soil Classification Properties: Initial Final Liquid Limit = 41 Load Applied (psf): 4662 112 Plastic Limit = 11 Moisture Content ( %) = 12.9 21.6 Plasticity Index = 30 Wet Unit Weight (pcf) = 133.0 142.2 % Passing #200 Sieve = 61 Dry Unit Weight (pcf) = 117.8 116.9 Maximum Measured Absorption Swell Pressure (psf) = 4,662 One - Dimensional Swell for Change in Moisture from Initial to Final ( %) = 9.8 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 100 1000 Swelling Pressure, psf 10000 Plate 9 KL E/NFEL DER Bright People. Right Solutions. Absorption Pressure Swell Test Results Project Name: Main Street Park Improvements Location: Coppell, Texas Material Description: SANDY CLAY, light brown to brown Project No.: 110996 Tested By: H. Masood Boring No.: B -03 Date Tested: 5/10/10 Sample Depth (ft.): 7 to 8 Consolidometer ID: 4 Soil Classification Properties: Initial Final Liquid Limit = 49 Load Applied (psf): 791 112 Plastic Limit = 12 Moisture Content ( %) = 18.6 21.2 Plasticity Index = 37 Wet Unit Weight (pcf) = 128.3 130.4 % Passing #200 Sieve = 62 Dry Unit Weight (pcf) = 108.1 107.6 Maximum Measured Absorption Swell Pressure (psf) = 791 One - Dimensional Swell for Change in Moisture from Initial to Final ( %) = 1.3 3 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 100 Swelling Pressure, psf 1000 10000 Plate 10