Vista Point II L5-SY050512GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES REPORT
For the proposed
BANK OF TEXAS BUILDING
AT
LOT 5 OF VISTA POINT II
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SH 121 BYPASS & MACARTHUR BLVD.
COPPELL, TEXAS
Prepared for
BANK OF TEXAS
2650 ROYAL LANE
DALLAS, TX 75229
GTC PROJECT NO. 05Gl 17
MAY 12, 2005
Prepared by
GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND CONSULTING, LLC
1209 AVENUE N, SUITE 4
PLANO, TEXAS 75074
Telephone (972) 422-0050
GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND CONSULTING, LLC.
Geotechnical Engineering · Construction Materials Testing
Sarva Aron, P, E.
Bank of Texas
2650 Royal Lane
Dallas, TX 75229
Atto: Mr. Neil Brennan, V.P.
MAY 12, 2005
Re~
Geotechnical Engineering Services
Proposed Bank of Texas Building
Lot 5 of Vista Point II at
Southwest comer of SH 121 Bypass and MacArthur Blvd.
Coppell, Texas
GTC Project No.: 05G 117
Dear Mr. Brennan,
Geotechnical Testing and Consulting, LLC is pleased to transmit our Geotechnical Engineering
Services Report for the referenced project. This report includes the results of field and
laboratory testing, and recommendations for foundation design.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform this Geotechnical Study and look forward to continued
participation during the design and construction phases of this project. If you have any questions
pertaining to this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND CONSULTING, LLC.
Sarva Axon, P.E.
Principal
Report distribution:
3 copies to Schnitz & Sewell Architects
1209 Avenue N, Suite 4. Piano, TX 75074. Phone: 972-422-0050. Fax: 972-422-0047 · e-mail: sarva@gtc-eng.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1.0 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 1
2.1~ Project Description ...................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Site Location and Description ............................ . .. 1
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1, Field and Laboratory Tes¥i~ .................................................................................... :. 2
3.2, Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................... i. 2
3.3, Groundwater ........................................................... .. 2
4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1, Vertical Movements ................................................................. .3
4.2, Site Preparation .................................................................................................. ~. 3
4.3, Foundation Recommendations ........................ ' ....................... ...~ 5
4.3.1, Drilled Pier Foundation .............................................................................. 5
4.3.2- Floor Slab
4.4, Fill Materials .............................................................................................................. 6
4.5, Additional Considerations and Recommendations ................. ; 6
4.6, Pavement Recommendations ~ 8
4.6.1 · Pavement Subgrade Preparation ................................................................. 8
4.6.2, Pavement Design ........................................................................................ 8
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................ 9
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ......................................................................... 9
APPENDIX
Boring Location Plan
Boring Logs
Key to Log of Boring
Swell Test Results
1.0 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
The services of Geotechnical Testing and Consulting, LLC (GTC) were authorized on April 27,
2005. by Mr. Pies E. Schnitz, Jr. on behalf of the Bank of Texas, by approving our propos~al No.
55138 dated April 26, 2005.
Our scope of services included drilling 6 soil test borings at the site to epths o£approximatel~ I0 to
d
30 feet below the existing ground surface, limited laboratory testing of select soil samples to
evaluate pertinent physical properties, and to perform engineering analysis to develop foun~lation
design criteria.
The scope of services did not include an environmental assessment for determining the presence
or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, surface water,
groundwater, or air on or below, or around this site.
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Description
It is understood that the proposed project will consist of a single story buildine having, a fac/tn, i,,*
area of approximately 5,585 sfi. with an attached canopy area ~overin~ four dd~ve thro~gh'g~i~
lanes. Structural loading information is not currently available, however for the purpose o~f-~i~
report it is assumed that maximum wall loads on perimeter grade beams will be less than 3 kips per
linear foot and maximum concentrated loads will be less than 50 kips. Detailed site grhding
information is not currently available, therefore we have assumed that the building will be
constructed at or slightly above existing grades.
The foundation recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project
information, project location, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If any Of the
noted information is incorrect, please inform GTC in writing so that we may amend the
recommendations presented in this report if appropriate and if desired by the client. GTC will not
be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes in
the project.
2.2 Site Location and Description
The proposed project site is an approximately 1.25 acre undeveloped vacant lot platted as lot 5,
Block A of Vista Point II which is located on the southwest comer of SH 121 bypass and
MacArthur Blvd. in Coppell, Texas. The project site is bound by vacant land on the north, west and
south sides and by MacArthur Blvd. on the east side.
The site surface was covered with grass and weeds. A few mature trees were located near the
eastern boundary. Surface topography slopes down from southwest to northeast, with a vertical
relief of approximately 4 to 5 feet, based on visual observations.
GTC Project No: 04G l l 7
Page 1 of lO
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Field and Laboratory Testin~
The site subsurface conditions were explored with a total of 6 soil test borings, 3 borings in the
building and canopy areas were advanced to a depth of about 30 feet and 3 borings in the paVement
areas were advanced to a depth of about 10 feet. The boring locations and depths were selected by
the project architect. The approximate boring locations are indicated on the Boring Locatioh Plan
enclosed in the Appendix. Copies of the Logs of Borings are also enclosed in the Appendix.
The borings were advanced utilizing continuous flight auger drilling methods and soil samples were
routinely obtained during the drilling process. Drilling and sampling techniques were accomplished
generally in accordance with ASTM procedures. Select soil samples were tested in the laboratory to
determine material properties for our evaluation. Laboratory testing was accomplished generally in
accordance with ASTM procedures.
3.2 Subsurface Conditions
Fill consisting of brown and dark brown clay was encountered in 3 of the 6 test borings. The fill
extended to depths of about one to two feet below existing ground surface. Dark brown clay was
encountered below the fill and at the surface and extended to depths of approximately 7 to ~ feet
below the surface. Laboratory plasticity tests indicated that these clays have liquid limits in the
range of 56 to 65 and plasticity indices in the range of 36 to 42. Brown clay with ferrous and
calcareous nodules was encountered below the dark brown clay and extended to depths of about
13 to 18 feet. Tannish brown and light gray sandy clay with ferrous and calcareous nodule~ was
encountered below the brown clay and extended to boring termination depths of about 30 feet.
The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major substirface
stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs included in the appendix should
be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. These records include soil/rOck
descriptions, stratifications, penetration resistances, and locations of the samples and laboratory test
data. The stratifications shown on the boring logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring
locations. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring locations. The
stratifications represent the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and the actual
transition may be gradual and indistinct. Water level information obtained during field operations is
also shown on these boring logs. The samples, which were not altered by laboratory testing will be
retained for 30 days from the date of this report and then will be discarded.
3.3 Groundwater
Ground water was encountered in all the building borings during drilling at depths of 14 to 18
feet and was recorded at depths of 14 to 15 feet at completion of drilling. Please notei that
groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally as a function of rainfall, proximity to creeks, rivers~ and
lakes, the infiltration rate of the soil, seasonal and climatic variations and land usage. Therefore,
GTCProjectNo: 04Gl17
Page 2 oliO
at a time of the year different from the time of drilling, there is the possibility of a considerable
change in the recorded levels or the occurrence of water where not previously encountered.
The groundwater levels presented in this report are the levels that were measured at the time of our
field activities. Fluctuation should be anticipated. We recommend the Contractor determine the
actual groundwater levels at the time of the construction to determine groundwater impact on the
construction procedures.
4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Vertical Movements
Field and laboratory test results indicate that the near surface soils encountered in the borings
performed at this site have a high potential for vertical movement (PVM) due to shrinkage and
swelling properties of subgrade soils. Field and laboratory test results indicate that the near
surface soils encountered in the borings performed at this site exhibit high shrinkage and
expansion potential. Based on TxDOT method TEX-124-E, swell test results and our experience
with the shrink/swell characteristics of similar soils, the Potential for Vertical Movement (PVM)
is estimated to be on the order of 4 inches for slab on grade construction at existing grades. It is
not uncommon to assume differential movement, as half of the PVM. However, it should be noted
that for exlxeme conditions (i.e. soils dry and shrink in one area with soils in another area being
exposed to water and swelling) differential movement can be equal to or even double the PVM:
Remedial measures associated with swelling soils typically consist of either using a structurally
suspended floor slab system utilized in conjunction with drilled pier foundation system or reducing
the swell potential by removing some of the high plasticity soils and replacing them with low Swell
potential select fill materials. The thickness of removal and replacement with select fill depends on
the mount of desired reduction in design PVM. Providing 5 feet of select fill below the floor slab
is estimated to reduce the PVM to the order of 1 inch. The most positive means of limiting
movements due to swelling soils is to support the building structure on drilled pier foundation
system with a structurally suspended floor slab, isolated from the subgrade soils by providing a void
space between the subgrade and the suspended structural elements.
The following design recommendations have been developed on the basis of the previously
described project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered. If there are any changes in
these project criteria, including project location on the site, a review must be made by GTC to
determine if any modifications in the recommendations will be required. The findings of such a
review should be presented in a supplemental report.
Once final design plans and specifications are available a general review by GTC is strongly
recommended as a means to check that the evaluations made in preparation of this report are correct
and that the earthwork and foundation recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented.
GTC Project No: 04Gl 17
Page 3 of lO
4.2 Site Preparation
To reduce the potential for moisture induced movement of the site soils, it is important that
consideration is given to reducing the potential for moisture changes of the site soils. As a
minimum, positive drainage away from the building should be provided. If positive drainage is not
provided, water will pond around or below the building and excessive total and differential
movements may occur.
Initially, all topsoil and deleterious materials must be removed from the areas proposed for
construction. After stripping and excavating to the proposed subgrade level, as required and prior
to placing fill, the exposed building and pavement subgrades should be proof-rolled with a
tandem axle dump truck or similar rubber tired vehicle. Soils, which are observed to rut or
deflect excessively under the moving load, should be undercut and replaced with properly
compacted fill. The proof-roiling and undercutting activities should be witnessed by a
representative of the geotechnical engineer and should be performed during a period of dry
weather. The subgrade soils should then be scarified and re-compacted to at least 95 percent of
the standard Proctor maximum dry density ASTM D698, in the moisture range of optimum to
4% above optimum, for a depth of at least 6 inches below the surface.
After subgrade preparation and observation have been completed, fill placement may begin. The
first layer of fill material should be placed in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be
adequately keyed into the stripped and scarified subgrade soils.
Select fill materials should be free of organic or other deleterious materials, have a maximum
particle size less than 2 inches, and have a liquid limit less than 35 and plasticity index between 5
and 15. Fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM test method D 698.
Fill should be placed in maximum lifts of 8 inches of loose material and should be compacted
within the moisture range of optimum to 4 percentage points above the optimum moisture content
value. If water must be added, it should be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into the soil by
disking or scarifying. Each lift of compacted-engineered fill should be tested by a representative of
the Geotechnical engineer prior to placement of subsequent lifts. If the fill is not retained then the
edges of compacted fill should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the edges of the building.
If the recommended option of a structurally suspended floor slab is utilized in conjunction with a
drilled pier foundation system, undercutting of the existing subgrade soils and replacement with
select fill will not be required. Any fill required to achieve final grade may consist of on-site or
similar materials and should be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition capable of supporting
construction loads.
GTC Project No: 04G117
Page 4 of lO
4.3 Foundation Recommendations
Due to the high shrink/swell potential of the subgrade soils it is recommended that the building
structure be supported on drilled pier foundation system. The floor slab, utilized with the drilled pier
foundation system, should consist of a structurally suspended floor system.
4.3.1 Drilled Pier Foundations
It is recommended that the piers be under-reamed. Under-reamed piers should be founded at a
depth of 14 feet below final grade into undisturbed brown clay or tannish brown and Light gray
sandy clay.
Piers founded in the referenced materials may be proportioned assuming a maximum allowable
end bearing capacity of 4,500 pounds per square foot based on dead load plus design live load
considerations.
The under-reamed piers should have a minimum bell diameter to shaft diameter ratio of 2.0 to
resist uplift forces, associated with shrinking and swelling of the site soils, that may be created
by soil-to-pier adhesion in the zone of expansive clays. A maximum bell diameter to shaft
diameter ratio of 3.0 is also recommended.
Settlements on the order of one inch with differential settlements (between adjacent piers) on the
order of 0.5 inches should be considered. The piers should be reinfomed for their full depth to
resist potential, tensile forces, which may develop due to swelling of the site soils, and due to
structural loads. Uplift fomes due to swelling soils can be approximated by assuming an uplift
adhesion value of 1,600 pounds per square foot over the perimeter of the shaft for a depth of 10
feet.
It is recommended that the design and construction of drilled piers should generally follow
methods outlined in the manual titled Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design
Methods (Publication No: FHWA-IF-99-025, August 1999).
Detailed inspection of pier construction should be made to verify that the piers are vertical and
founded in the proper bearing stratum, and to verify that all loose materials have been removed prior
to concrete placement. Temporary casing must be used where necessary to stabilize pier holes and
may be required at this site to reduce water inflow and caving.
Any accumulated water must be removed prior to the placement of concrete. A hopper and tremie
should be utilized during concrete placement to control the maximum flee fall of the wet concrete to
less than five feet unless the mix is designed so that it does not segregate during free fall and
provided the pier excavation is dry. If the pier hole has been cased, sufficient concrete should
remain in the casing as the casing is withdrawn to prevent any discontinuities from forming within
the concrete section. Furthermore, concrete placed in drilled piers should not be placed at slumps
less than five inches unless it is consolidated with a vibrator or by other means. Concrete which are
placed in piers at a slump less than five inches increases the potential for honeycombing. Concrete
used in piers should be designed to achieve the required strength at a specified slump of 6 + 1 inch.
GTC Project No: 04 G 117
Page 5 of lO
For any given pier, excavation, placement of steel and concreting should be completed within the
same workday. Where water inflow or caving soils are encountered, excavation of piers and
placement of concrete within a very short time frame will frequently aid in proper pier
construction.
Structurally supported grade beams, and pier caps if required, should be isolated from the subgrade
soils by providing a minimum 8-inch positive void beneath the grade beams and pier caps. Voids
can be produced by using compressible cardboard carton forms specially manufactured for this
purpose. Care should be exercised so that the forms are not crushed, damaged or saturated prior to
placement of the concrete. In addition, barriers that will not rapidly decay should be placed or
constructed along the sides of the cardboard carton forms to prevent soil intrusion into the void after
the carton forms decay.
4.3.2 Floor Slab
Floor slabs utilized in conjunction with the drilled pier foundation system should be structurally
supported and isolated from the subgrade soils. The structurally suspended floor should be isolated
from the subgrade by providing a minimum of 8-inch void beneath the suspended element. These
voids can be produced using commercial cardboard carton forms, or a crawl space can be provided
beneath the floor slab.
4.4 Fill Materials
Fill should be free of organic or other deleterious materials and should have a maximum particle
size of 3 inches. Low swell potential "select" fill should have a maximum liquid limit of 35 and
plasticity index between 5 and 15.
Fill should be placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture
content at the time of compaction should be in the range of optimum to 4 percent above the
optimum value as defined by ASTM D 698. The referenced moisture content and density should
be maintained until construction is complete.
4.5 Additional Considerations and Recommendations
The following information has been developed ~er review of numerous problems concerning
foundations throughout the area. It is presented here for your convenience. If these features are
incorporated in the overall design and specifications for the project, performance of the project will
be improved.
Prior to construction, the area to be covered by buildings should be prepared so that
water will not pond beneath or around the buildings after periods of rainfall. In addition,
water should not be allowed to pond on or around pavements.
GTC Project No: 04Gl 17
Page 6 oflO
Roof drainage should be collected and transmitted by pipe to a storm drainage system or to
an area where the water can drain away from buildings and pavements without entering the
soils supporting buildings and pavements.
Sidewalks should not be structurally connected to buildings. They should be sloped away
from buildings so that water will be drained away from structures.
Paved areas and the general ground surface should be sloped away from buildings on all
sides so that water will always drain away from the structures. Water should not be
allowed to pond near buildings after the floor slabs and foundations have been constructed.
Backfill for utility lines that are located in pavement, sidewalk and building areas should
consist of low swell potential fill The backfill should be compacted as described in the
"Fill Material" section of this report. Lesser lifl thickness may be required to obtain
adequate compaction.
Care should be exercised to make sure that ditches for utility lines do not serve as conduits
that transmit water beneath structures or pavements. The top of the ditch should be sealed
to inhibit the inflow of surface water during periods of rainfall.
Flower beds and planting areas should not be constructed along building perimeters.
Constructing sidewalks or pavements adjacent to buildings would be preferable. If
required, flower beds and planting areas could be constructed beyond the sidewalks away
from the buildings. If it is desired to have flower beds and planting areas adjacent to a
building, the use of above grade concrete box planters, or other methods which reduce the
likelihood of large changes in moisture content of soils adjacent to or below structures
should be considered.
Water sprinkling systems should not be located where water will be sprayed onto building
walls and subsequently drain downward and flow into the soils beneath foundations.
Trees in general, should not be planted closer to a structure than the mature height of the
tree. A tree planted closer to a structure than the reconunended distance may extend its
roots beneath the structure, allowing removal of subgrade moisture and/or causing
structural distress.
10.
Utilities which project through slab-on-grade floors, particularly where expansive soils or
soils subject to settlement are present, should be designed with some degree of flexibility
and/or with a sleeve to reduce the potential for damage to the utilities should movement
OCCur.
GTC Project No: 04Gl 17
Page 7 of lO
4.6 Pavement Recommendations
4.6.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation
The near surface soils at this site consist of dark brown clay which is of a highly plastic nature
that exhibits strength dependent upon the moisture content. Changes in the moisture content
may produce volume changes in these soils. The subgrade performance of the onsite soils can be
improved by stabilization with lime. We therefore recommend that at least the upper six inches
of these clays be lime stabilized with a minimum of 6 percem (of dry weight) of the hydrated
lime.
It should be realized that increasing the depth of lime stabilization of subgrade soils significantly
improves the life of the pavement. The results of the field and laboratory investigation, together
with our experience with similar types of soils, indicate that the dark brown fat clay soils
modified with approximately 6 percent (of dry weight) of the hydrated lime should produce a
material having a plasticity index below 15. Lime stabilization should be accomplished in
accordance with the applicable provision of Item 260 of the TXDOT Specifications.
The lime stabilized subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. The moisture content at the time of compaction
should be in the range of one percent below to four percent above the optimum value as defined
by ASTM D 698.
4.6.2 Pavement Design
The design thickness of a pavement will depend on the magnitude of axle loads and the number
of load repetitions. Parking and drive areas will be constructed at locations around the building.
Based on information provided, we understand that the parking areas will be subjected to normal
daily traffic consisting of passenger automobiles only with occasional delivery and trash pick-up
trucks limited heavy duty drive areas. Based on 20 year design life and computation based on
AASHTO design methods the following pavement sections are recommended. Light Duty
pavement sections are recommended for passenger vehicle parking areas and the Heavy Duty
pavemem sections are recommended for truck parking and drive areas.
RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN THICKNESS
Light Duty Heavy Duty
Portland Cement Concrete
(3600 psi) 5.0 inches 6.0 inches
Subgmde or Subbase Lime Stabilized As Discussed Previously
The concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3,600 psi at 28 days. The
concrete should also be designed with 5 + 1 percent entrained air to improve workability and
durability. Proper finishing of concrete pavements requires the use of appropriate construction
joints to reduce the potential for cracking. Construction joints should be designed in accordance
GTC Project No: 04Gl 17
Page 8 of l O
with current Portland Cement Association guidelines. Joints should be sealed to reduce the
potential for water infiltration into pavement joints and subsequent infiltration into the
supporting soils. The design of steel reinforcement should be in accordance with accepted codes,
Minimum reinforcement consisting of#3 bars placed at 18" centers is recommended.
Large front loading trash dump trucks frequently impose concentrated front-wheel loads on
pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of the pavement and
ultimately, pavement failures. Therefore, we recommend that the pavement in trash pickup areas
and loading dock areas should consist ora minimum 7-inch thick, reinfomed concrete slab.
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
It is recommended that GTC be retained to provide observation and testing of construction activities
involved in the foundations and pavements, earthwork, and related activities of this project. GTC
cannot accept any responsibility for any conditions, which deviated from those, described in this
report, nor for the performance of the foundations and pavements if not engaged to also provide
construction observation and testing for this project.
The upper fine-grained soils encountered at this site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by
construction traffic and changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the
moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support
capabilities. In addition, soils, which become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard
the progress of grading and compaction activities. It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform
earthwork and foundation construction activities during dry weather.
Due to the plastic nature of on-site soils, some of which may be left in place, consideration should
be given to these soils to reduce their shrink/swell potential. Simply stated, clays expand or shrink
by absorbing or losing moisture. Controlling the moisture content variation of a soil will therefore
reduce its variation in volume. During construction, a positive surface drainage scheme should be
implemented to prevent ponding of water on the subgrade. The pavement subgrades should not be
allowed to dry out during construction. Drainage from the buildings roof/gutter system should not
be allowed to drain and/or pond behind the pavement curbs.
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
The recommendations submitted, in this report, are based on the available subsurface information
obtained by GTC and design details furnished by the client. If there are any revisions to the plans
for this project, or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered
during construction, GTC should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation
recommendations are required. If GTC is not notified of such changes, GTC will not be responsible
for the impact of those changes on the project.
The geotechnical engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or
professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted
GTC Project No: 04Gl 17
Page 9 of lO
professional geotechnical engineering practices in the local area. No other warranties are implied or
expressed.
After the plans and specifications are more complete, the geotechnical engineer should be retained
and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to check that our
engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents. At this
time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. If GTC is not retained to
perform these functions, GTC will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the
project. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client CEI Engineering
Associates, Inc. for the specific application to this project. GTC is not responsible for conclusions,
opinions or recommendations made by others based on data contained in this report.
Project No: 04Gl 17
GTC
Page I0 oflO
APPENDIX
l
TESTING AND
CONSULTING
J
BORING LOCATION PLAN
BANK OF TEXAS
VISTA POINT ~1
COPPELL, TEXAS
G~TTC pPrOject: Bank of Texas
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX Log of Boring BI
roject Number: 05Gt17 Sheet 1 of 1
Date(s) -- - ~
D~rilred may z, 2005
Drilling .
Method Continuous Flight Auger
of Borehole 30 feet bgs
Drill Rig
Type Mobil B53 Approximate
Groundwater Level 18feetATD, 14.6 feetafter Sun'aceElevation Existing Ground Surface
and Date Measured 2 hrs
Borehole
Backfill Cuttings Location See Boring Location Plan
RIAL DESCRIPTION ~ ~'~ ~._~ - - RE~RKS AND
~m ~ ~ E ~ OTHER TESTS
4.5 Dark Brown Clay with gravel - FiLL 14.9
3.5 ~ Dark Br~n Clay 21 2
3~0 22,3
4.5 23~2 90 63 22 41
4.5 20.8
Brn Clay ~th fer~us n~ules
4.5 --218
25 (affer2hm)~- 24.7 101.6 90 3.91
~ Tannis~ ~rown and Light Gray ~:~
1.5 h ~l~r~us and feffous -- 22 108.1 2.82
2.0 20.5
375 19.9
IProject:Bank of Texas
Project Location: Vi.s. ta Point II, Coppell, TX
GTC Project Number. 05Glt7
Log of Boring B2
Sheet 1 of I
Data(s)
Drifted May 2, 2005
' Ddlfing
Method Continuous Flight Auger Total Depth
of Borehole 30 feet bgs
Drift Rig
Type Mobil B$3 Approximate
Surface Elevation Existing Ground Surface
Groundwater Level 18 feet ATD, 14 feet after 2
and Date Measured hr~
Borehole
Backfill Cuttings Location See Boring Location Plan
4.5 ~///~ Dark Brown Clay with gravel - FILL 17.6
4.5 ~/~ Dark Brown Clay 18.6
3.0~ 24.8 91 65 23 42
275 24.8
3.25 24.3
Brown Clay with ferrous nodules
(after 2 hfs) · -
2.75 = 22.4 105.8
! Tannish Brown and Light Gray ,~d"y~
~ nodulesClay with calcareous and ferrous --
Bottom of Boring at 30 feet bgs
Project: Bank of Texas I Log of Boring B3
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX
GTC Project Number: 05G117 I Sheet 1 of I
Date(s)
Drilleri May 2, 2005
Drilling Total Depth
Method Continuous Flight Auger
of Boreho~e 30 feet bgs
Ddll Rig Mobil B53 Approximate
Type Surface Elevation Existing Ground Surface
Groundwater Level '14 feet ATD, 1B feet after 2
and Date Measured hr~
Borehole
Backfill Cuttings Location See Boring Location Plan
o. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ ~. _/ . ,~ REMARKS AND
3.75 Dark Brown Clay 25.1
1 75 28.9
1.0 32.9
30 28.3
2.75 ~_ Brown Clay with ferrous nodules 27 95 69 26 43
Tannish Brown and Light Gray Sandy
i 2.75 _nodules (after 2 hfs) ?-- 20.4 108.5 82 4.29
2.25 17.7
225 196
3.25 21.8
Bottom of Boring at 30 feet bgs
Project: Bank of Texas '-=~0" of ,~ ,e=or;nm
PI
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX
GTC Project Number: 05Gl17 Sheet 1 of 1
Data(s) ..
Drilled May 2, 2005
Drilling Total Depth
Method Continuous Flight Auger of Borehole 10 feet bgs
Drill Rig Mobil B53 Approximate
Type Sun'ace Elevation Existing Ground Surface
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured Not Encountered ATD
Borehole
Backfill Cuttings LocaSon See Boring Location Plan
z ~,~ ~= [ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0 4.5 Dark Br~ and 8~n Clay - FILL 9.5
3.25 23.8
3.25 24.3
2~
35
Project: Bank of Texas
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX Log of Boring P2
GTC Project Number: 05Gl17 Sheet 1 of 1
r Date(s)
D~lled May 2, 2005
Dritling Total Depth
Method Continuous Flight Auger of Borehole t0 feet bgs
Drill Rig .
Type Mobil B53 Approximate
Surface Elevation Existing Ground Surface
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured Not Encountered ATD
8orehole .
Backffil Cu[ttngs Location See Boring Location Plan
c~ ~. z~-== ~- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ~
~. u) ~ ~ =. ~- REMARKS AND
'~ ~ OTHER TESTS
C 4.5 ~/~ Dark Brownto Brow~ Clay 14.9
4.5t 17~4
3~5 20.6
3.25 25.1
4.5 23.6
5--- --
~ 4.5 21 ~2
t0- ~ 45 21.4
Bottom of Boring at 10 feet bgs
t5--
2O--
25-- _
30-
35
Project: Bank of Texas
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX Log of Boring P3
GTC Project Number: 05Gl17 Sheet 1 of 1
Date(s)
Drilled May 2, 2005
Method Continuous Flight Auger Total Depth
of Borehole 10 feet bgs
Drill Rig
Type Mobil B53 Approximate
Su~ace Elevation Existing Ground Surface
Groundwater Level
and Date Measured Not Encountered ATD
Sorehole
Backfill Cuttings Location See Boring Location Plan
c~ z ~-- = ~ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~.~'-e~o ~ c~ ~_- =d REMARKS ANDoTHER TESTS
0 25 Dark Brown to Brown Clay 17.4
4.5 179
3.5 202
. 2.5 28.2
Bottom of Soring at 10 feet bgs
2O--
Project: Bank of Texas
Project Location: Vista Point II, Coppell, TX
Project Number: 05Gl17
Key to Log of Boring
Sheet 1 of 1
~ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
1 Depth, feet; Depth in feet below the ground surface,
i-2i Sample TvD~: Type of soil sample collected atthe depth
interval shown,
L3i N=blows/foot tSPT) T=lnches/100 Blows (THD}:
N: Number of blows to advance SPT sampler
12 inches or distance shown OR T:
penetration in inches of THD Cone for 100
blows.
14 PP: The Relative Consistancy of the soil, Measured by Pocket
Penetrometer (TSF)
i~i Graghic Lou: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material
encountered.
[6i ATERALDE CRIPTI N:Descriptionofmaterial
encountered.
;~' Water Contenl~, %: Water content of the soil sample,
expressed as percentage of dry weight of sample.
~'8: Dry Unit Weiuht. i~f: Dry weight per unit volume of soil
sample measured in laboratory, in pounds per cubic foot.
FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS
SPT: Standard Penetration Test
THD: Texas Dept. of Transportation Cone Penetrometer test
LL: Liquid Limit, percent
PL: Plastic Limit, percent
Ph Plasticity index, percent
TYPICAL MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
i~'~ Poor y or Well graded SAND
w/CLAY
(sP-sc, sw-sc)
~I f ~ SILTY SAND (SM
TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
Fixed Head) Grab Sample
! I 2-inch OD unlined Split ~-r~
iL '~ Spoon (SPT) THC Cone
GENERAL NOTES
i_9.i Passing # 200 Sieve. %: The percent fines (soil
passing the No. 200 Sieve) in the sample.
101 LL. %: Liquid Limit, expressed as a water content
~1-1J PL, %: Liquid Limit, expressed as a water content
i1_~ PI, o/,~: Plasticity Index, expressed as a water content
]~! UC, ksf: Unconfined Compressive Strength
;~i REMARKS AND OTHER TE~TS: Comments and
observations regarding drilring or sampling made
by driller or field personnel.
REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS
PP: Pocket Penetrometer
UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf
Fat CLAy, CLAY w/SAND, SANDY
CLAY (CH) ?~-~ Shale
OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
-~' Waterlevel(attirne0fdrilling, ATD)
~ · Water level (after waiting a given time)
; Minor change in material properties within a
stratum
Inferred or gradational contact between
strata
~ Queried contact between strata
1 Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may
be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests
2 DeSCriptions on these logs apply only at the specific bodng locations and at the time the borings were advanced They are not warranted to be
representative of subsun'ace COnditions at other locations or times.
~ o ,-
m -~
Ill