The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutJefferson Healthcare Hospital - Geotech Report 2023rlrtrI RILEYGR(]UP UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Pnrpeneo Bv: Txe RruY Gnoue, lruc. L7522 Bornru- Wav NonrHEAsr Bornrrr, WRsttrneroru 98011 PnepRnro ron: Jerrensoru HrRrrxcRne 834 SnrmoRru Stneer Ponr Towruseru o, WRsxttucroru 98358 RGf Pnorecr No. 2022-387-t JerreRsoru HERlrncRRe Sourn Clrupus RepncrueNT AND Aoortoru 834 SxentoRru Srneer Ponr Townsrruo, WRsttIuetoru hruunnv t2,2O23 Coryorote Olfice 77522 Bothell Way Northedst Bothell, Woshington 98017 Phone 425.475.0551 a Fax 425.475.0311 www.riley-group.com TIIlr! RILEVGR()UP January L2,2023 Aaron Vallat Jefferson Healthcare 834 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Addition 834 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, Washington Project No.2022-387-t Dear Aaron Vallat: As requested, The Riley Group, lnc. {RGl) has performed a Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) for the Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Addition project located at 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington. Our services for updating the previous report were completed in accordance with our proposal dated November 2,2022 and authorized by Mike Glenn on November L3, 2022. The information in this GER is based on our understanding of the proposed construction, and the soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the borings completed by RGI at the site on August 30 and 31-, 2022 and the test pits and infiltration tests completed on January 4,2A23. RGI recommends that you submit the project plans and specifications for a general review so that we may confirm that the recommendations in this GER are interpreted and implemented properly in the construction documents. RGI also recommend that a representative from ourfirm be present on site during portions of the project construction to confirm that the soil and groundwater conditions are consistent with those that form the basis for the engineering recommendations in this GER. lf you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfu lly su bm itted, Tnr RneY GRoue, lruc. lof zotz lrclzoz) Eric L. Woods, LG Project Geologist Kristina M, Weller, PE Principal Geotechnical Engineer Corporate Ollice 77522 Bothell Woy Northeast Bothell, Woshington 98077 Phone 425.475.0557 | Fox 425.475,0377 www,riley-group,com ERIC L. WOODS M Rta a Geotech nical Eng i nee ring Re port JeJferson Heolthcdre South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Jonuory 72,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-7 Taele oF CoNTENTS 1.0 2.0 3.0 INTRODUCTION.......... PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING................. 3,1 Frelo ExPLoRAToN ..... 3,2 LABoRAToRY TESTING ,. 1 I 1 L 2 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS...... 4.1 SURFACE, 4.2 GEoLoGY 4.3 Sot1s........... 4.4 GRouNDWATER ............. 4.5 SEtsMrc coNstDERAT|oNs ...........,..,......... 4.6 GEoLoGIc HAZARD AREAS 5.2.1 SoilConditions. 5.2.2 Groundwater Conditions.... 5.2.3 Soil NailWalls.. 5.2.4 Soldier Pile and Tieback Shoring .......... 5.2,5 1agginC.,.,,,.,,......... 5.2.5 Tiebacks................. 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 5.0 DISCUSSIONANDRECOMMENDATIONS 4 5.1 GEoTEcHNICAL CoNSIDERATIONS 4 5.1,1 Erosion and Sediment Control .....5 5.2 SHoRING RECoMMENDATIONS, .,............'..'.,........ 4 .........................,.. 5 '..,.'....'..'..6 6 6 ''.'''''.'.',,.'.'.'''''7 o ........10 8 11 L2 L2 L2 13 L4 L4 15 15 16 15 16 L7 L7 17 17 18 19 19 20 5.2,7 Construction Monitoring.................,.... 5.3 EARTHWoRK.. 5.3.1 Site Preparation 5.3.2 Structural Fi11........... 5.3.3 Wet Weather Construction Considerations.... 5.4 FouruonroNs,.,..,........ 5.4.1 Shallow foundations......... 5,5 RETAINING WALLS 5.5.1 Permanent Basement Wa1|s.................. 5.5.2 Retaining Wall Design 5,6 SLAB-oN-GRlor CorusmucloN ......,... 5,7 DRAINAGE 5.7.1 Surface...........,., 5.7.2 Subsurface 5.7.3 lnfiltration 5.8 UTILITIES. 5.9 PAVEMENTS..... ADDITIONAL SERVICES.........,...... 5.2.8 Survey Monitoring... '.'."".'L2 tlIlrI RILEYGR(lUP 6.0 7.0 Geotechnical Engineering Repon Jefferson Healthcare South Compus, Port Townsend, Wdshington Jonuary 72,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-7 Lsr or FteuRes AND APPENDtcEs Figure 1 ......... Figure 2......... Figure 3 ......... Figure 4......... Figure 5 ......... Figure 6......... Figure 7 ......... Figure 8 ......... Figure 9 ......... Appendix A.... .............. Vicinity Map .... Geotechnical Exploration Plan Soldier Pile Pressure Diagram ................ Earth Pressure - Single Tieback ............ Earth Pressure - M ultiple Tieback ... Surcharge Load ................ Basement Wall Drainage Detail ................. Retaining Wall Drainage Detail ...Typical Footing Drain Detail .Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing ItIlrI RILEYGR(}UP Geotechnico I Eng i nee ring Re port lefferson Hedlthcore South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Janudry 72,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-7 Executive Summary This Executive Summary should be used in conjunction with the entire Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER)for design and/or construction purposes. lt should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the GER must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. Section 7.0 should be read for an understanding of limitations. RGI's geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of ten borings to approximate depths of 10.5 to 21.5 feet below existing site grades. An additional 2 infiltration test pits were conducted January 4,2023 to the depths of 4.5 to 6 feet below existing grade. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site is suitable for development of the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: Soil Conditions: The soils encountered during field exploration include up to 8 feet of fill comprised of loose to dense silty sand with trace gravel over loose to dense surficial deposits comprised of silty sand with trace gravel over medium dense to very dense silty sand with trace gravel glacialtill. Groundwater: Groundwater seepage was encountered at Boring B-1 at a depth of 21 feet during our subsurface exploration. Foundations: Foundations for the proposed building may be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Micropiles will be used for some foundations adjacent to a retaining wall. Slab-on-grade: Slab-on-grade floors and slabs for the proposed building can be supported on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Pavements: The following pavement sections are recommended: crushed rock base (CRB) ItItrI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 1 lefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January L2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 1.0 lntroduction This Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) presents the results of the geotechnical engineering services provided for the Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Addition project in Port Townsend, Washington. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the expansion of the existing building and addition of parking and drive areas. Our scope of services included field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparation of this GER. The recommendations in the following sections of this GER are based upon our current understanding of the proposed site development as outlined below. lf actual features vary or changes are made, RGI should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. ln addition, RGI requests to review the site grading plan, final design drawings and specifications when available to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and construction. 2.O Projectdescription The project site is located at 834 Sheridan Street in Port Townsend, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by the Jefferson Healthcare South Campus building and associated parking and drive areas, and a storm drainage pond. RGI understands that a one- story portion of the existing building will be replaced and expanded, and will include a daylight basement level on a portion of the building. The expansion will include additional parking in the eastern and southern portions of the property. Future development plans include a 3-story addition to the south of the existing structures. 3.0 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing 3.1 Ftrt-o Expr-oRATtoN RGI observed the drilling of 10 borings on August 30th and 31't. Additionally RGI observed the excavation of 2 infiltration test pits on January 4,2023. The'approximate exploration locations are shown on Figure 2. Field logs of each exploration were prepared by the geologist that continuously observed the drilling. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. The boring logs included in Appendix A represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and analysis of the samples. ItIlrI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Reporr Page2 lefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Januarv t2,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 3.2 LeeoRRroRY TESnNG During the field exploration, a representative portion of each recovered sample was sealed in containers and transported to our laboratory for further visual and laboratory examination. Selected samples retrieved from the borings were tested for moisture content and grain size analysis to aid in soil classification and provide input for the recommendations provided in this GER. The results and descriptions of the laboratorytests are enclosed in Appendix A. '4.0 Site Conditions 4.L Sunrnce The subject site is bound to the west by Sheridan Street, to the north by 9th Street, Hospital Road, and a single-family residence, to the east by Gise Street, and to the south by 7th Street. One proposed parking area to the south is bound to the north by 7th Street, to the east by single family-residences, to the south by 6th Street, and to the west by Cleveland Street, and the other parking area to the south is bound to the west by Sheridan Street, to the north by a commercial development, to the east by Cleveland Street, and to the south by an undeveloped alignment of 5th Street. The site is occupied by the Jefferson Healthcare South Campus and associated paved and gravel parking areas. The site slopes generally east with an elevation change of approximately 60 feet. The site is vegetated primarily with grass and decorative plants and shrubs. 4.2 Geoloev Review of the Geologic Map of the Port Townsend South ond Part of the Port Townsend North 7.S-minute Quadrangles, Jefferson County, Woshington, by Henry W. Schasse, etc. (2005) indicates that much of the site is mapped as Modified land (Map Unit Qml), which is soils reworked by developments. The southern portion of the site is mapped as Lodgement till (Qgt), which is a compact mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel, deposited by glacial ice. These descriptions are generally similar to the findings in our field explorations. 4.3 Sorls The soils encountered during field exploration include up to 8 feet of fill comprised of loose to dense silty sand with trace gravel over loose to dense surficial deposits comprised of silty sand with trace gravel over medium dense to very dense silty sand with trace gravel (glacial till). ItIlrI RILEYGR(}UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 3 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January !2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented in the boring logs included in Appendix A. Sieve analysis was performed on two selected soil samples. Grain size distribution curves are included in Appendix A. 4.4 GRourrrowRrrn Groundwater seepage was encountered at Boring B-1 at a depth of 21 feet during our subsurface exploration. A groundwater monitoring well was installed in Boring B-1 and B- 4 to allow winter groundwater level readings. No water was observed in the well locations on January 4,2023. It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. ln addition, perched water can develop within seams and layers contained in fill soils or higher permeability soils overlying less permeable soils following periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the future may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the logs. 4.5 Sersvuc CorusroeRRrrorus Based on the 2018 lnternational Building Code (lBC), RGI recommends the follow seismic parameters for design. Table 12018 IBC Parameter Value Site Soil Classl gz Site Latitude 48.1061 Site Longitude -r22.789r Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss (g)1.335 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Sr (g)o.487 Adjusted Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Srvs (g)1.335 Adjusted l-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Srvr (g)0.8843 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second; Sos(g)0.89 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second; Sor(g)0.5893 1. Note: I n general accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-16. The Site Class is based on the average characteristics of the upper 100 feet of the subsurface profile. 2. Note: ASCE 7-16 require a site soil profile determination extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope of our services does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination. Borings extended to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet, and this seismic site class definition considers that very dense soil continues below the maximum depth of the subsurface ttIlrI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page4 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12, 2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil's strength. RGI reviewed the results of the field and laboratory testing and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site's soil during an earthquake. Since the site is underlain by glacial till and glacially consolidated deposits, RGI considers that the possibility of liquefaction during an earthquake as minimal. 4.6 Groloe rc Hazeno Aneas Regulated geologically hazardous areas include erosion, landslide, earthquake, or other geological hazards. Based on the definitions in the Port Townsend Municipal Code, the site does not contain geologically hazardous areas. 5.0 DiscussionandRecommendations 5.1 GeorrcnucAtCoNstDERATIoNs Based on our study, the site is suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical standpoint. Foundations for the proposed building can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on medium dense to very dense native soil or structural fill. Slab- on-grade and pavements can be similarly supported. Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechhical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 5.1.1 Enosrorrr nruo SeotrurNT CoNTRoL Potential sources or causes of erosion and sedimentation depend on construction methods, slope length and gradient, amount of soil exposed and/or disturbed, soil type, construction sequencing and weather. The impacts on erosion-prone areas can be reduced by implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan. The plan should be designed in accordance with applicable city and/or county standards. RGI recommends the following erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs): and undertaking activities that expose soil during periods of little or no rainfall llIlrI RILEYGR(}UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 5 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Januarv t2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 side of work areas if surfaces will be left undisturbed for more than one day during wet weather or one week in dry weather excavation surfaces with anchored plastic sheeting (Graded and disturbed slopes should be tracked in place with the equipment running perpendicular to the slope contours so that the track marks provide a texture to help resist erosion and channeling. Some sloughing and raveling of slopes with exposed or disturbed soil should be expected.) contractor should be aware that inspection and maintenance of erosion control BMPs is critical toward their satisfactory performance. Repair and/or replacement of dysfunctional erosion control elements should be anticipated.) Permanent erosion protection should be provided by reestablishing vegetation using hydroseeding and/or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established, site monitoring should be performed by qualified personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of the erosion control measures. Provisions for modifications to the erosion control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the erosion and sedimentation control plan. 5.I.2 SrRtpplrrrc Stripping efforts should include removal of pavements, vegetation, organic materials, and deleterious debris from areas slated for building, pavement, and utility construction. Deeper areas of stripping may be required in forested or heavily vegetated areas of the site. 5.1.3 Excevarrons All temporary cut slopes associated with the site and utility excavations should be adequately inclined to prevent sloughing and collapse. The site soils consist of medium dense to very dense silty sand with trace gravel. Accordingly, for excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the temporary side slopes should be laid back with a minimum slope inclination of 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). lf there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring !lIIrr RILEYGR(1UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 6 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 to support the excavations should be considered. Shoring recommendations are provided in the following section of this GER. For open cuts at the site, RGI recommends: the top of cut slopes within a distance of at least 5 feet from the top of the cut tarps and/or plastic sheeting is left open is minimized engineer to confirm adequate stability and erosion control measures ln all cases, however, appropriate inclinations will depend on the actual soil and groundwater conditions encountered during earthwork. Ultimately, the site contractor must be responsible for maintaining safe excavation slopes that comply with applicable OSHA or WISHA guidelines. 5.2 SxontrucRrcorunneruDATtoNs RGI anticipates that an excavation ranging up to about 20 feet deep will be needed at the site to accommodate the proposed building and substructure. Our geotechnical comments and recommendations concerning site excavations are presented below. 5.2.1 Son Coruomorus Based on our explorations, RGI anticipates that the on-site excavation will encounter primarily silty sand with trace gravel. These soils can be readily excavated with conventional earthworking equipment, in our estimation, but extra effort will be needed in the glacial till soils. Although our explorations did not reveal rubble within the fill soils or boulders within the native soils, such obstacles could be present at random locations within these deposits. 5.2.2 GRounownreR Coruomorus Our explorations encountered groundwater at depths of about 21feet below grade at the time of drilling, but we expect that groundwater levels will rise several feet during the late winter and spring months. A groundwater monitoring well was installed and winter monitoring should be completed to determine if the groundwater will impact the proposed basement level or shoring installation. ttIlrI RILEYGR{)UP Geotechnical Engineering Report PageT Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Unit Weight tpcfl Januarv L2,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 5.2.3 Son NnllWalls Based on our experience with similar soils, we expect soil nails and shotcrete will be feasible for shoring during excavation. The first row of soil nails need to be carefully installed if utilities are present in the area. Vertical nail elements may be needed for additional lateral support. Soil nailing stabilizes vertical excavations by reinforcing the soil mass with passive inclusions (soil nails). Soil nails typically consist of 3/a- to 1-3/8-inch-diameter steel bars that are centrally grouted in 6- to 8-inch-diameter augered holes. The nails are normally spaced at 4 to 6-foot centers. Following the installation of a row of nails, the excavation face is covered with a shotcrete facing that is reinforced with either welded wire mesh or rebar. The nails are then secured to the shotcrete wall with a steel plate and bolt assembly. Once grout strengths are achieved, the excavation continues below the wall and the construction sequence is repeated untilthe bottom of the excavation is reached. Soil Nail Design Based on the soils encountered at the site, RGI recommends using the following soil parameters for soil nailing design: Table 2 Soil Nail Design Parameters SoilParameter Cohesion Shaft Resistance (psf) Dense to very dense 1,500stsand Excavation and wall construction sequencing should not exceed a height of 6 feet. Care must be taken to prevent caving during initial excavation in loose fill. Temporary protection such as soil berms and flash coating should be considered. The shaft resistance assumes open hole tremie grouting. Soil nail verification tests should be performed to verify the soil resistance before construction. Conflicts and Easements Because soil nails typically extend about 30 to 40 feet behind the excavation face, conflicts with underground utilities and adjacent structures often arise. The project structural engineer or shoring designer should carefully consider the locations of such obstructions when laying out all tiebacks. Furthermore, temporary easements will be required for any nails that extend beyond the site's property boundaries, and it should be realized that the City does not typically allow permanent tiebacks under their roadways and alleyways. Friction Angle (psfl rlIlrI RILEYGR(1UP L25 38 100 Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 8 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington )anuary L2,2Q23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 5.2.4 Soloren Ptt aruo Ttrencr Snontruc ln our opinion, soldier piles can be used in either a cantilevered or a tied-back configuration for shoring the proposed excavation sidewalls at the site. The following geotechnical comments and recommendations are provided concerning soldier piles' Soldier Pile Embedment All soldier piles must have sufficient embedment below the final excavation levelto provide adequate kick-out resistance to horizontal loads, as calculated by the design engineer. RGI recommends providing a minimum embedment of 10 feet below the excavation base directly in front of each pile. For cantilevered soldier piles, RGI further recommends that the embedment depth not be less than the exposed wall height. Drilling Conditions Our subsurface explorations revealed that the site is underlain by layers of loose to very dense sands and stiff to hard silts. These soils can likely be drilled with a conventional auger, but the very dense and hard layers will undoubtedly yield slow drilling rates. Although none of our explorations encountered cobbles or boulders, it should be realized that such obstructions could exist at random locations within these deposits. Groundwater seepage should be expected at various depths throughout each borehole. Applied Loads All soldier piles at the subject site should be designed to resist the various lateral loads applied to them. For a temporary shoring wall, RGI expects that these lateral loads will consist of active or at-rest pressures and possibly traffic surcharge or structural surcharge pressures, depending on the specific wall location. For a shoring wall that has adequate drainage, RGI does not expect that hydrostatic pressures will need to be considered. Our recommended design pressures are presented graphically on Figures 3 through 5 and are discussed in the following paragraphs. row of tiebacks can be designed using active earth pressures modeled as the equivalent fluid densities shown on Figures 3 and 4. Tied-back walls that have two or more rows of tiebacks should be designed using the trapezoidal pressure distribution shown on Figure 5. From the backslope level to the foreslope level, these active pressures should be applied over the soldier pile spacing; below the foreslope level, the pressures need be applied over just one pile diameter. should be increased to account for any structural loads located within a horizontal . distance equal to half the wall height. lf existing footings or other structural loads are found to exist within this distance, RGI should be contacted to calculate the appropriate surcharge pressures. ttrlrI RILEYGR(}UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 9 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12,2023 RGI Proiect No. 2022-387-1 should be increased to account for traffic, construction equipment, material stockpiles, or other temporary loads located within a horizontal distance equal to half the wall height. For light to moderately heavy vehicles, this traffic surcharge can be modeled as a uniform lateral pressure of 75 psf acting overthe upper 8 feet of wall; or heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks, a value of 150 psf would be more appropriate. a net hydrostatic pressure of 45 pcf would act against the portion of wall above the foreslope level and below the saturation level. However, if adequate drainage is provided behind the shoring wall, we expect that hydrostatic pressures will not develop. passive earth pressure acting over the embedded portion of each soldier pile, neglecting the upper 2 feet. This passive pressure should be applied over a lateral distance equal to the pile spacing or twice the pile diameter, whichever is less. For a level foreslope (measured perpendicular to the wall face), RGI recommends using a maximum allowable passive pressure modeled as an equivalent fluid density of 400 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). tieback and underpinning may be calculated using an allowable end bearing of 15 kips per square foot (ksf) and an allowable friction of 1.5 ksf in the very denbe till soils expected at the base of the piles. horizontal modulus of subgrade reaction, which generally increases with depth. As a reasonable approximation, however, a uniform modulus of 250 kips per cubic foot (kcf) or 145 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used. 5.2.5 Lnecrruc RGI recommends that lagging be installed between all adjacent soldier piles to reduce the potential for soil caving, backslope subsidence, and hazardous working conditions. Our geotechnical comments and recommendations about lagging are presented below. Lagging Materiols ln our opinion, either conventional wooden timbers or reinforced shotcrete panels could be utilized as lagging at the site, but the former would likely be much less expensive. For permanent shoring wall applications, RGI typically recommends that all wooden timber lagging be pressure-treated. However, because the on-site shoring wall serves only a temporary function, pressure-treated wooden lagging is not necessary. llrlrI RILEYGR(lUP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 10 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 Laterdl Pressures Due to soil arching effects, temporary lagging that spans 8 feet or less need be designed for only 50 percent of the lateral earth pressure previously recommended for soldier pile design. Permanent lagging, on the other hand, should be designed for 75 percent of this same lateral earth pressure. ln both cases, these values assume that adequate drainage is provided behind the lagging, as discussed below. Lagging Bockfill RGI recommends that any voids behind the lagging be backfilled with a material sufficiently pervious to allow groundwater flow and prevent a build-up of hydrostatic pressure. For this reason, permeable materials such as granular excavation spoils, clean sand, or pea gravel are suitable as backfill material, whereas silty soils, cement grout, controlled-density fill, or other less-permeable materials are not suitable. Drainage System RGI recommends that all lagging backfill material connect to a continuous horizontal drain located in front of the wall. This can be accomplished either by extending gravel under the lagging or by providing gaps between the lagging boards. lf concrete or shotcrete walls are to be placed against wooden lagging, prefabricated vertical drainage strips (such as MiraDRAlN 5000') should be attached to each lagging bay. 5.2.6 Treencxs RGI anticipates that tieback anchors might be needed to support any soldier pile walls having an exposed height greater than about 15 feet. Our tieback comments and recommendations are summarized below. Conflicts ond Easements Because tiebacks typically extend about 30 to 60 feet behind the excavation face, conflicts with underground utilities and adjacent structures often arise. The project structural engineer should carefully consider the locations of such obstructions when laying out all tiebacks. lnstallotion Methods All tiebacks should be installed in a manner that minimizes caving and associated ground subsidence. Typically, this involves drilling with a full-length casing or continuous flight auger, as well as pumping grout from the bottom of each tieback hole with a tremie. lf desired, the shoring contractor can use secondary pressure-grouting techniques to reduce auger diameters and develop greater adhesion values. ItrlrI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report page 11 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 72,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 No-Load Zone The anchor portion of all tiebacks must be located a sufficient distance behind the retained excavation face in order to develop resistance within a stable soil mass. We specifically recommend that the anchorage be obtained behind a "no-load zone" defined by a plane set back from the wall face a horizontal distance equal to 25 percent of the wall height and projected upward at a 60-degree angle from the excavation base level. This configuration is shown on Figures 4 and 5. Anchor Length ond Spocing The anchor portion of all tiebacks must have sufficient embedment below the backslope surface and behind the no-load zone to provide adequate pull-out resistance to lateral loads, as calculated by the design engineer. RGI recommends providing a minimum anchor depth of 10 feet and a minimum anchor length of 20 feet. To avoid interactions between adjacent tiebacks, RGI further recommends that a clear spacing of at least 5 feet be maintained along the anchor zones. Estimated Adhesion lf properly grouted, an allowable concrete/soil adhesion of 1,500 psf can be assumed for the anchor portion of a tieback located within the dense to very dense till soils. Secondary pressure-grouting techniques can often achieve adhesions two to three times greater than these values. ln all cases, however, the aitual design values will depend on the installation method and should be confirmed by load-testing all tiebacks in the field. Load Testing and Lock-Off Field testing of temporary tiebacks is necessary to confirm design assumptions, verify the integrity of individual tiebacks, and provide information regarding their short-term creep characteristics. Our recommended tests are described below. After testing, each tieback should be lockedoff at 100 percent of its design load. production tiebacks at the site. RGI specifically recommends testing at least one tieback on each side of the excavation. The test load should equal 200 percent of the design capacity and the 150 percent load should be held for at least 60 minutes. site. The test load should equal 130 percent of the design capacity and be held for at least 10 minutes. 5.2.7 CorusrnucnonMorumoRlrue Because shoring requires specialized installation and earthwork techniques to maintain stable conditions during and after construction, RGI strongly recommends that an RGI representative be retained to continuously monitor all construction activities. This would ttIlrI RILEYGR()UP I Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 12 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington )anuary L2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 include observation and documentation of installation procedures, construction materials, drilling conditions, and load testing. 5.2.8 SuRvev MoruroRtrue A monitoring program must be implemented to verify the performance of the shoring system and possible excavation effects on neighboring buildings and existing alley. The first step in this program should consist of surveying building feature elevations and documenting the condition of the existing properties, alley and adjacent buildings. This documentation should include a photographic record. Monitoring points should be set by a licensed surveyor on the adjacent streets and structures at a maximum of 25 foot intervals with a minimum of two on each side of the excavation. Monitoring of the shoring system should occur two times per week as the excavation proceeds and then once every two weeks once the excavation is completed. A registered land surveyor should be retained to establish the baseline data and obtain the bi-weekly readings. Monitoring data can be obtained by the project contractor. Monitoring should continue until the permanent new lower walls are adequately braced and should include surveying the vertical and horizontal alignment of the top of every other soldier pile or at 15 foot intervals on the soil nail wall. The project's structural and geotechnical engineers should review the monitoring data weekly. 5.3 ElnrHwonr After completion of the shoring and removal of the soils to subgrade elevation, the site earthwork is expected to consist of excavating foundations, installing under slab utilities and preparing the slab subgrade. Parking area earthwork is expected to consist of grading, underground utility installation and preparing parking subgrades. 5.3.1 Srr PRepnnlnoru Subgrade soils that become disturbed due to elevated moisture conditions should be overexcavated to reveal firm, non-yielding, non-organic soils and backfilled with compacted structural fill. lf earthwork is completed during the wet season (typically November through May) it will be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork will require additional mitigative measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier summer and fall months. 5.3.2 SrnucruRal Ftl RGI recommends fill below the foundation and floor slab, behind retaining walls, and below pavement and hardscape surfaces be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural fill. ltrTTI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report page 13 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January t2,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 The suitability of excavated site soils and import soils for compacted structural fill use will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot be consistently compacted to a dense, non-yielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percent above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is that moisture that results in the greatest compacted dry density with a specified compactive effort. Non-organic site soils are only considered suitable for structural fill provided that their moisture content is within about 2 percent of the optimum moisture level as determined by American Society of Testing and Materials D1557-09 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (ASTM D1557). Excavated site soils may not be suitable for re-use as structural fill depending on the moisture content and weather conditions at the time of construction. lf soils are stockpiled for future reuse and wet weather is anticipated, the stockpile should be protected with plastic sheeting that is securely anchored. Even during dry weather, moisture conditioning (such as, windrowing and drying) of site soils to be reused as structural fill may be required. Even during the summer, delays in grading can occur due to excessively high moisture conditions of the soils or due to precipitation. lf wet weather occurs, the upper wetted portion of the site soils may need to be scarified and allowed to dry prior to further earthwork, or may need to be wasted from the site. The site soils are moisture sensitive and may require moisture conditioning prior to use as structural fill depending on the time of year and weather conditions at the time of excavation. lf on-site soils are or become unusable, it may become necessary to import clean, granular soils to complete site work. Prior to rlse, an RGI representative should observe and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density. The soil's maximum density and optimum moisture should be determined by ASTM D1557. Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed by RGl. A representative number of in-place density tests should be performed as the fill is being placed to confirm that the recommended level of compaction is achieved. 5.3.3 Wrr Wunrnen CorusrRuciloN CoNslDERATloNs RGI recommends that preparation for site grading and construction include procedures intended to drain ponded water, control surface water runoff, and to collect shallow llrlrI RILEYGR{]UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 14 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington )anuary 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 subsurface seepage zones in excavations where encountered. lt will not be possible to successfully compact the subgrade or utilize on-site soils as structural fill if accumulated water is not drained prior to grading or if drainage is not controlled during construction. Attempting to grade the site without adequate drainage control measures will reduce the amount of on-site soil effectively available for use, increase the amount of select import fill materials required, and ultimately increase the cost of the earthwork phases of the project. Free water should not be allowed to pond on the subgrade soils. RGI anticipates that the use of berms and shallow drainage ditches, with sumps and pumps in utility trenches, will be required for surface water control during wet weather and/or wet site conditions. 5.4 Fouruolnorus Following installation of the shoring and excavation to design grades, the proposed building foundation can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on dense native soil or structural fill. On the east side of the proposed building, micropiles will be used for foundation support to avoid loading of an existing retaining wall for the adjacent structure. 5.4.1 SnauowFouNDATtoNs We expect most foundations will be excavated into the dense native soils. lf unsuitable soils are encountered at foundation subgrade, they should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill or lean mix concrete if the native soil bearing pressure is used. Perimeter foundations exposed to weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. lnterior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Finished grade is defined as the lowest adjacent grade within 5 feet of the foundation for perimeter (or exterior) footings and finished floor level for interior footings. Table 3 Foundation Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity - Structural Fill Dense native soils Friction Coefficient Passive pressure (equivalent fluid pressure) Minimum foundation dimensions 2,500 psfl 4,000 psf 0.30 25O pcf2 Columns: 24 inches Walls: 16 inches 1. psf = pounds per square foot 2. pcf = pounds per cubic foot ttI!rI RILEYGR{]UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 15 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Januarv 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity may be used. At perimeter locations, RGI recommends not including the upper 12 inches of soil in the computation of passive pressures because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. The passive pressure value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 5.3.2. The recommended base friction and passive resistance value includes a safety factor of about 1.5. With spread footing foundations designed in accordance with the recommendations in this section, maximum total and differential post-construction settlements of 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively, should be expected. 5.4.2 Mrcnoprtes For Micropiles designed in accordance with FHWA-SA-97-O7O,the following capacities may be used for the dense to very dense soils encountered on the site in the vicinity of the proposed piles. Based on the proximity of the piles to the existing wall, the capacity of the piles should be limited to the portion below the wall footing and should be installed to prevent additional soil loads above the foundation level. Based on our experience with similar glacial soils, the soils should not be corrosive. Table 4 Micropile Design Parameters Grout-to-Ground Bond Nominal Strengths (ksfl Soils Type B to D Dense to very dense silty sand glacial till Type A - Gravity grout only Type B - Pressure grouted through the casing during casing withdrawal Type C - Primary grout placed under gravity head, then one phase of secondary "global" pressure grouting Type D - Primary grout placed under gravity head, then one or more phases of secondary "global" pressure grouting Micropiles should be tested to confirm capacities of the installed piles. At least one performance test should be completed to 2.5 times the design load and 5 percent of the total number of production piles should be proof tested to 1'67 times the design load. 5.5 RerRrrurne WRU-s RGI expects the below grade level basement walls will be formed directly against shoring in some areas. lf retaining walls are needed as part of the building, RGI recommends cast- in-place concrete walls be used. lf walls are needed for grade changes outside of the building, modular block walls may be used. Based on the recent site plan, modular block walls will be used for grade changes for the parking areas. The design and construction 5 rlIlrI RILEYGR()UP Type A 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 16 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12,2O23 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 recommendations for these walls will be provided as a separate document for permit submittal for the walls. 5.5.1 Penrunrurrur Beseruerut Weu-s The basement walls formed against cantilever soldier pile and tieback shoring should be designed for the earth pressures provided on Figures 3 through 5 and any surcharges. Permanent basement walls formed against soil nail shoring should be designed for the values in Table 5 below and any surcharges. An additional earthquake load of 7H should be added to the full wall height. Permanent basement walls formed against shoring should be provided with drainage. A typical drainage system for walls formed against shoring is attached as Figure 7. 5.5.2 Rrrntrutne Wnu Desteru The magnitude of earth pressure development on retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. RGI recommends placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. Wall drainage will be needed behind the wall face. Typical drainage for slope cut wall is shown on Figure 8. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended, and drainage properly installed, RGI recommends using the values in the following table for design. Table 4 Retaining Wall Design Design Parameter Value Active Earth Pressure (unrestrained walls)35 pcf At-rest Earth Pressure (restrained walls)50 pcf For seismic design, an additional uniform load of 7 times the wall height (H) for unrestrained walls and 14H for restrained walls should be applied to the wall surface. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters and allowable bearing are provided in the Foundations section of this GER. 5.6 SLne-oN-GRADECoNsrRUcnoN Once site preparation has been completed as described in Section 5.3, suitable support for slab-on-grade construction should be provided. RGI recommends that the concrete slab be placed on top of medium dense native soil or structural fill. lmmediately below the floor slab, RGI recommends placing a 4-inch-thick capillary break layer of clean, free-draining sand or gravel that has less than five percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying rlrtr! RILEYGR(1UP Geotechnical Engineering Report page 17 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, an 8- to L0-millimeter-thick plastic membrane should be placed on a 4-inch- thick layer of clean gravel. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post-construction floor settlements of L/4- to L/2-inch. For thickness design of the slab subjected to point loading, RGI recommends using a subgrade modulus (Ks) of 150 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection. 5.7 Dnatruner 5.7.L SuRrncr Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building area. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. For non-pavement locations, RGI recommends providing a minimum drainage gradient of 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter. ln paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.7.2 SuesuRrece RGI recommends installing perimeter drainage as shown on Figures 7 ,8, and 9. At the time this GER was prepared, the configuration of the below grade levels was not known. RGI should be contacted to provide additional recommendations for below grade drainage once the below grade plans are completed. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. 5.7.3 lrunlrRnnoru Two small-scale Pilot lnfiltration Test (PlT) was performed at the site. lnfiltration test INF-1 was completed on the southern portion of the property and INF-2 was completed on the eastern portion of the property, east of the existing paved parking area. lnfiltration test INF-1 was completed at a depth of approximately 3.5 feet below grade with the infiltration test pit measuring 2 feet by 6 feet. lnfiltration test INF-2 was completed at a depth of approximately 3 feet below grade with the infiltration test pit measuring 2 feet by 6 feet. The small scale Pilot lnfiltration Tests (PlT) was completed in accordance with the 2014 Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SMMWW). !lrtrI RITEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Page 18 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Table 5 Measured lnfiltration Rates Field Measured Rate (inches/hour) January 12,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 Ksat Design Rate (inches/hourlTest Location Test Depth (feetl INF-1 3.2 INF-2 0.9 Correction factors in the SMMWW were applied to the field measured infiltration rate (K'"t initial) to determine long-term design infiltration rates. Correction factors include factors for uncertainties in site variability, test method, and degree of influent control. Calculotion oI Krot design CF1=fPuxCFtxCFm 6Pt = (0.7)x (0.50) x (0.9) =O.32 Where: CFr = Total Correction Factor CFv = Site variability and number of locations tested (0.7) CFt = 0.5 for small-scale PIT test CFn. = 0.9 for influent control and bio-buildup RGI understand permeable pavement is planned in the area where the infiltration testing was completed. The above design rates exceed the minimum rate of 0.30 inches/hour to support permeable pavement. 5.8 Urtunes Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. For site utilities located within the right-of-ways, bedding and backfill should be completed in accordance with City of Port Townsend specifications. At a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.3.2. Where utilities occur below unimproved areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to a minimum of 90 percent of the soil's maximum density as determined by ASTM D1557. As noted, soils excavated on site should be suitable for use as backfill material provided earthwork takes place in the summer and fall months in dry weather. lf site soils become unusable, clean (less than 5 percent fines) imported structural fill should be used for trench backfill. ltrlrI RILEYGR(]UP 10.03.5 3.0 2.75 Geotechnical Engineering Report page 19 Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington 'lanuaryL2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 5.9 PRvrnnerurs Pavement subgrades should be prepared as. described in Section 5.3 and as discussed below. Regardleis of the relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. The subgrade should be proof-rolled with heavy construction equipment to verify this condition. 5.9.1 FlexreLePnveurrurs With the pavement subgrade prepared as described above, RGI recommends the following pavement sections for parking and drive areas paved with flexible asphalt concrete surfacing. 5.9.2 CotcRrrePnvemrnrs With the pavement subgrade prepared as described above, RGI recommends the following pavement sections for parking and drive areas paved with concrete surfacing. The paving materials used should conform to the WSDOT specifications for HMA, concrete paving, and CRB surfacing (9-03.9(3) Crushed Surfacing). Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, surface drainage gradients of no less than 2 percent are recommended. Also, some degree of longitudinal a.nd transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 6.0 Additionalservices RGI is available to provide further geotechnical consultation throughout the design phase of the project. RGI should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. RGI is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and construction monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. ln addition, engineering decisions may arise in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. ItrlrI RILEYGR()UP Geotechnical Engineering Report Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington Page 20 lanuarv t2,2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 7.O Limitations This GER is the property of RGl, Jefferson Healthcare, and its designated agents. Within the limits of the scope and budget, this GER was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the area at the time this GER was issued' This GER is intended for specific application to the Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Addition project in Port Townsend, Washington, and for the exclusive use of Jefferson Healthcare and its authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (for example, mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. lf the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, we can provide a proposal for these services. The analyses and recommendations presented in this GER are based upon data obtained from the test exploration performed on site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident untilconstruction. lf variations appear evident, RGI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this GER prior to proceeding with construction. It is the client's responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designers, contractors, subcontractors, are made aware of this GER in its entirety. The use of information contained in this GER for bidding purposes should be done at the contractorls option and risk. trIlr! RILEYGR(]UP ICTO T STH/ l,I 4THsrl* F-t-? =<d LI E UJ:ttn 5TI 5rH ('tgE l"l I.JJftz.q -J e -ili- -t li- .-!l 1 1-*{$lr 0rH 5r 9rH 5r { 5 a(q l_U rjl sl .ld T-] IJJ r-J F*.n ]ta, > q')q LU TJ0lJ 4_q .I H.L4 l-trl (/){Es .t- t*- I L a,..J*t,,tfJ I ltc.1 j USGS, 2O2O, Port Townsend South, Washington 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Approximate Scale: 1"=1000'A N0 500 1000ITIlr! RILEYGR()UP Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Address: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Addition Figure 1 Site Vicinity MapRGI Project Number: 2022-387-7 Date Drawn: 09/2022 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way N .Fqr *f r!* i5-r)'a UINFl a P'*"$ -l *.l nt p ,t "rOl*i,F t I ,L iq Eet '{r '* f-. .. .. i ,-J,\ f---tF-''-*.f.. +* ---B :F !.1 ,:i { I I'l '-l I I fr, 1, lib il,:1 IN F2 B tri ,f- ,{t <*F.r ? 4 l:'-4 t '_J ) r; S-Su t L .'-*.t {:, .-l - t I " ilt /f ,'r{iF,t rfu*#- r i,j'I1 L '.t !F. *"T #{ ..1-Ltf ,' i L a +{-: *!-* i 1 i=!4r:!!fiiid[,1 ! .a*r? ,t':ltiilt-ol:' a*4 f* ['ffr,#" E = lnfiltration test by RGl, 07/04/2023 $ = Boring by RGl, o8l3o-31/2022 --- =SiteboUndary Approximate Scale: 1" l-80'A N0 90 180 360 :1 t .4 ? *r'I I'Ff { {. I Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Additio Figure 2 Date Drawn a912022 RGI Project Number: 2022-387-t Geotechnical Exploration Plan Address: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington 98368 I I I:IHT::fllllfayNortheas, I f ! Rnrnerr nrasnrnsrnn Yir-ri r iln ffe nIIF illX"; li? ;1 ll,T " Hs R 35 pcf Hw 75 psf (Traffic Surcharge where applicable) Base of Excavation 2', a00(D) psf DesignHeight: H=Hw+Yz Notes: L. Apparent earth pressure and surcharge act overthe pile spacing above the base ofthe excavation. 2. Passive earth pressure acts over 2 times the concreted diameter of the soldier pile, or the pile spacing whichever is less. 3. Passive pressure includes a reduction factor. 4. Additional surcharge from footings of adjacent buildings should be included. 5. This pressure diagram is appropriate for temporary soldier pile walls. lf additional surcharge loading (such as from soil stockpiles, excavators, dumptrucks, cranes, or concrete trucks) is anticipated, RGI should be consulted to provide revised surcharge pressures. Not to Scale g' D Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Replacement and Additio Figure 3 RGI Project Number: 2022-387-L Soldier Pile Pressure Diagram Date Drawn: a9/2022! I : ;;,=-.; ;;;^,*="u *o..n""., ru Fv e nbIF il-l l;,1ii ;1 ll i,"'Add 834 shend Street,Port Townsend,Wash ington 983 68ress:na Geotechnical Engineering Report Jefferson Healthcare South Campus, Port Townsend, Washington January 12, 2023 RGI Project No. 2022-387-1 APPENDIX A FIETD EXPTORATION AND TABORATORY TESTING On August 30 and 3L,2022, RGI performed field explorations using a track rig. RGI explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by observing the drilling of 10 borings to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet below existing grade. Additionally, RGI performed 2 infiltration test pits using a mini excavator on January 4,2023. All the boring and test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. Exploration locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing property lines and paved roads. A geologist from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test exploration, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative soil samples obtained from the explorations were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. As a part of the laboratory testing program, the soil samples were classified in our in-house laboratory based on visual observation, texture, plasticity, and the limited laboratory testing described below. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture content determinations were performed in accordance with ASTM D22L6-IO Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass (ASTM D2216) on representative samples obtained from the exploration in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The moisture content of typical sample was measured and is reported on the boring Logs. Grain Size Analysis Agrain size analysis indicatesthe range in diameter of soil particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses was determined using D6913-04(2009) Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis (ASTM D6913) on two of the samples. !!! Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare 165 llrlt! RILEYGRt}UP Test Pit No.: INF-1 0)d) -co.o)o c)(t) c.9o o lu 't70 The Riley croup, lnc.'17522 Borhell Way NE, Bothel, wA 9801 1 Date(s) Excavated: 1 l4l2023 Logged By ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Excavation Method: Test Pit Bucket Size: N/A Total Depth ofExcavation: 3.5 feet bgs Excavator Type: Mini Excavator Excavating Contractor: Kelly's Excavating !nx'd11i;",,"" rzo Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s)Compaction Method Bucket Test Pit Backfill: Cuttings Location 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington o)o F _9o Eo(t) ct-oE z _9CL EIEa) E-oE u)aoU)l o)oJ .9 CL(g o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 6 2" SM Fiil Brown silty SAND with some gravel, loose to medium dense, moist (Fiil) Tan silty SAN with some gravel, dense, moist Test Pit terminated at 3.5' lnfiltration test performed at 3.5' ,l Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare Irt Test Pit No.: INF-2IIII RILEY6Rl)I'P Date(s) Excavated: 1 l4l2|23 Logged By ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Excavation Method: Test Pit Bucket Size: N/A Total Depth of Excavation: Excavator Type: Mini Excavator Excavating Contractor: Kelly's Excavating Approximate Surface Elevation Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s)CompactionMethod Bucket Test Pit Backfill: Cuttings Location 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington od) E o-IDo o)o) c.9o o) lrJ REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS oo. F -gCI E(!a o-oE z 0) EoU) o-oE U)aou)l o)oJ .c)Eogo MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SW.SM 4" topsoil SM SM Reddish brown silty SAND with some gravel, loose to medium dense, moist Gray silty SAND with some gravel, dense, moist -Becomes tan (Glacial Tiil) lnfiltration test at 3' Test Pit terminated at 6' The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet). Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown. @ Sampte Number: Sample identification number FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material. Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered. @ Unfentm DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered. May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text. @ neHlnnfs AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. Pl: Plasticity lndex, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) Silty SAND (SM) Well graded SAND with Silt (SW-SM) rtIlrI RILEYGR()UP Key to Logs ffi AF Auger sampler Bulk Sample 3-inch-OD California w/ brass rings ffi "t. samprer TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Pitcher Sample - Water level (at time of drilling, ATD) 2-inch-oD unlined split j water level (after waiting' AW) spoon (SPT) - Minor change in material properties within aV stratum Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, - tnferred/gradational contact between stratafixed head) -?- Queried contact between strata t N X n ffi Mn Grab Sample 2.5-inch-OD Modified California w/ brass liners GENERAL NOTES 1: Soil classifications are baJed on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may begradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests. 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representativeof subsurface conditions at other locations or times. The Riley croup, Inc. 17522 Bolhell Way NE, Bothell, WA 9801 1 od) .9 (E {l) lrJ o)d) E CLo)o o)o F c) CIEou) o-oEz _g CL EGa 6-oEaaoU)f o)oJ .o o-(E(,MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS I Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project N u mber: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare I!Boring No.: B-1 Sheet 1 ol 2 lllr RILEYGR()UP Date(s) Drilled: 8l3Ol2O22 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 8" auger Total Depth ol Borehole: 21.5 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevation:179 Groundwater Level: 21'Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backtill: Well lnstalled Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington c)(l, o.oo n 0)o Eo (d -9IU 179 s o .9o o)oJ o3 ;9-o o(JoE. o_o E aaOal o,oJ .oco(d o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION oo FooE({a o o) o_ E(da o.)ocd .9U)0)Eo, E_bE}do@v TPSL aa/a/ /a/aaaa,aa,/ 11 IJ 1417 25 23 65 SM Topsoil -?rafmoilted "iliv Sruo wit|r traG sEvetFedTumGnG mo-ist @taffit - - Tilr) -Becomes very dense, contains 1" sand lens with iron oxide staining16910 The Rilsy Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 '15 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare trrlr! RILEYGROUP Boring No.: B-1 Sheet 2 ol 2 o)c) c(1oo 15 o)d) c.9(! o TJJ 164 159 20 154 25 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 9801i oo FoE Eda o -go_ E(Ua ooc.(d -tho(l) TE o) O" utE=do@.8 s bo oooE, ooE U) Qoaf (')oJ .9 o.(U(,MATERIAL DESCRIPTION s o 5 .9,o o)oJ 6 = S SM SM Gray Silty SAND with trace gravel, very dense, moist (clacial-ill)- -drafiirtlEnrrr6 uuTF tri6e dlaufrverv oe-nse, i wet -16% lines -Becomes water bearing 50/6' 88 Boring terminated at 21.5' 10 13 30 -)-) II Boring No.: B-2 Sheet 1 of 1 tI tI RILEYGROUP Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare Date(s) Drilled : 8l30l 2022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Asphalt Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Tolal Depth ol Borehole: 11.42 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevalion:180 Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb,30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backlill: Cuttings Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Porl Townsend, Washington oo oo)o oo c.9 (d o uJ 180 5 o)oJ o3 ;s o5 .oo f :.ct oooE. 6-oE a(/)o(t)f o)oJ .9Eago MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (Do F -go E(!a o -eo E(Ua 0)oc(d -9.IJ'oE. o) o-@E=(!oA.o S TrayTirtv-Snn-owitntriiegr"ufr urto"*e,ioist-(ciEiiaiJill)--- 4" asphalt over washed rock -22o/" lines \sphall SM a 9 7 I 50/6" 86/t 1" 54 ao Boring terminated at 1l'5" 't70 Ths Ril€y Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 15 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Nu mber: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare I t I Borinq No.: B-3 t "1t sneer r or r Date(s) Drilled: 813012022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Gtass Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Total Depth ol Borehole: 10.92 leet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig DrillingContractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevalion: l'o Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 1 40 lb, 30' drop, rope and Borehole Backfill: Cufiings Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington oo E o-oo oto c.9 (U o) uJ 't78 o -qo. E(!a ooE(d .q.thctE ct) cLdE}do@v * bo ooocc 6c E U) @() U) O)oJ .o-co_6o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION t')oJ o = s o 5 -ato TPSL SM SM sntto wittr trace graG, miaiuF o6'se-, rnoiii -crayf irtv-Sar'tTw-nntriiegravfr veryoinse,-moiil(o-uciaiTil)--- I Topsoil l-__ Brown silty I 50/5" 21 54 51 Boring terminated at 10'1 1" 4 5 7 7 The Riley Group, lnc.'17522 Bolhell Way NE, Both6ll, WA 9801 | ,J "a} Boring No.: B-4 Sheet 1 of 1 rlrtr! RILEYGR()UP Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare Date(s) Drilled: I l3Ol2O22 Logged By: ELW SurfaceConditions: Grass Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 8" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 10.92 feet bgs Drill Hig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevation:160 Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30'drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backlill: Well lnstalled Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington oo -co.oo oo co (d -9UJ I 155 '10 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 9801 1 ;e o5 th'6 o)o -J 0)3 o)oJ .(J-co-(U o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION cto FooEda o o o_ Eda (lt()Cd .9U)0)E o) o_6E}doaz -b< t'o o()otr o_o Ea U)Oa:) TPSL SM Fitl loose lo medium dense, trace brick debris very dense gravel, dense Eoiilcuaialr_ritt)withSAND tracesilty , moisttracewithlooseBrownSAND (Fiil)silty gravel, Topsoil 10 9 8 ., Boring terminated at 50/5' 10 7 35 145 15 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare Boring No.: B-5 Sheet 1 of 1 II RILEYGROUP ltlr Date(s) Drilled: 813012022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Gravel Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit SizeiType: 6" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 11.5 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig DrillingContractor: Bortec !P';i11i;,,,"", roo Groundwaler Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb,drop, rope and Borehole Backfill: Benlonite Chips Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington oo E o-oo o(1) c.9 (E o I.JJ '1 o)o FgoE(da o -qo.Eda 0)oc(d .o6oE O) EbE}do@6 s o ooo)E. E-oE u) ct)oat)f, o)oJ .o-co- Eo MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o)oJ ot3 be o5 .9o SM Fiil with trace gravel, medium dense, moist (Glacial Till) -Becomes medium dense -Becomes very dense Brown silty SAND with trace gravel, loose, moist (Fill) Gray silty SAND I 13 29 67 Boring terminated at 1 1' 6" 10 b '10 The Biley Group, lnc.'17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 'l Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare t I I Boring No.: B-6 ;',},ffi sheet 1 or 1 Date(s) Drilled: 8l3Ol2O22 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Gravel Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 11.5 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevalion:170 Groundwaler Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backfill: Bentonite Chips Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Pott Townsend, Washington o)(t o_c)C] 0 oo go (d -0) I.JJ 170 165 10 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bolhell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 s o .9o = o)oJ o3MATERIAL DESCRIPTION oo F -qoEda o o o_ Eda 0)()cd .9oo)E o) E_bE}do6E Ebo) oooE. o-oEa u)oaf, o)o -J.o.c,o-(!(t I PSL Gray silty SAND with trace gravel, very Topsoil medium dense, moist dense, moist (Glacial Till) Brown silty SAND with trace gravel, SM SM 't1 I I Boring terminated at 1 1' 6" 89/1 1. 17 77 82 155 15 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare 166 161 I!Boring No.: B-7 Sheet 1 of 1 Itlr RILEYGRt)UP oo o.q,o 0 oo co (g -9u-l 171 The Riley Group, lnc.'17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 9801 1 Date(s) Drilled: 8l3Ol2O22 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Gravel Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit SizeiType: 6" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 10.42 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig DrillingContractor: BofieC Approximate Sudace Elevalion:171 Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and Borehole Backlill: Bentonite Chips Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington o)o Foo ErdU) o _eo. E(ga c)oc(d .@IJ'oE(') o-d,E}(60av be bo oooE Eo EaaO <t)f cto-).9 o-(U(,MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o)o -J ct3 s o =.u,o TPSL T SM SM -oafiirti5nrvD w-itn trii" gavet, vetoens",Toist-(ciliiaiTill)- - - Topsoil t-ro,ii'sitifsffi D,Eed-ium dense, moist 90i 1 1" 50i3' 50/5' 60 Boring terminated at l0' 5" 6 7 I I t) Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Project Nu mber: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare 163 5 10 t t I Boring No.: B'8 il,"\H sheet 1 or 1 c)o o"oo 0)o Eo (d c)t! 168 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 9801 1 Date(s) Drilled: 8131 12022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Gravel Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Total Depth ol Borehole: 10.83 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevation:168 Groundwaler Level: Not Encountered Sampling Melhod(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backtill: Bentohite Ghips Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington s o f .oo o)oJ (,3 o)o F -qoEdCh o o o_ E(d U) o.)oc(U .!to0)cr o) o_6EBdoav ;s o oooE o-oEaa() ct)f o)oJ Eo-(do MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N S SM SM Frll Brown silty SAND with trace gravel, dense, moist (Fill) Brown silly SAND with trace gravel,moist -oaFirtyTnnT gravel,very dense, moist (Glacial Till)with some 4 7 7 7 - Boring terminated at l0' 10" 99/10" 50/6" 50t4" 48 '153 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387-1 Client: Jefferson Healthcare I I I Boring No.: B-9 t "1t sneer r or r Date(s) Drilled: 8131 12022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: GraSS Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 10.83 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec !P;";ifl;*"", rar Groundwaler Level: Not EncoUntered Sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backfill: Bentonite Ghlps Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Pofi Townsend, Washington o)o o.oo oo tr.9 (E o IJJ 181 5 oo F -qo Eda o o o_ E(da a)oc(d .u)U'oE o) E_;E3(Bo@z ;< o o()oE. o-oEa @oal o)oJ .o-co-g(,MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o)oJ o = s o5 ..2o il,sL SM SM -srown sitiy sANo wi-tn -rrace g-raG, mGaiifr craysinyTnlFowi-tntriied-rau+a"i"r",rnoiiilca-ciaiTirry- -Becomes very dense moist Topsoil 50/3' 50/4" 27 48 - Boring terminated at 10' 10' 10 7 7 171 10 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Both€ll, WA 980i 1 166 t5 a Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Campus Project Nu mber: 2022-387 -1 Client:,fefferson Healthcare lrIlr! RII-EYGR()UP Boring No.: B-10 Sheet 1 of 1 Date(s) Drilled: 8lg'l 12022 Logged By: ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Drilling Method(s): Hollow Stem Auger Drill Bit Size/Type: 6" auger Total Depth of Borehole: 11.5 feet bgs Drill Rig Type: Track Rig Drilling Contractor: Bortec Approximate Surface Elevalion:175 Groundwater Level: Not Encountered 'sampling Method(s): SPT Hammer Data 140 lb, 30" drop, rope and cathead Borehole Backtill: Bentonite Chips Location: 834 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington oo) o-oo 0 c)o co (d -0)IJJ I t5 5 '165 10 o)oJ o = s o) .tho C',oJ .oEo_(!.(,MATERIAL DESCRIPTION oo F -go E(! CN o o o_E(ga 0)oc(d .9aho CE o) E_bE}(s06z be o oC)oE. o-oEaaOaf I PTiL SM SM SAND with trace gravel, loose to medium dense, moist -Oay silty SAND with trace gravel, dense, moist (Glacial Till) -Becomes very dense -Becomes dense Brown silly Topsoil 11 4 6 b Boring terminated at 1 l'6' 10 36 58 48 The Riley Group, lnc. 17522 Bothell way NE, Bothell, wA 98011 Project Name: Jefferson Healthcare South Gampus Project Number: 2022-387 -1 Client: Jelferson Healthcare H Key to Log of Boring Sheet 1 of 1 Itrlr! RITEYGROUP COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS I Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet).pl Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. ljll Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown. Sample lD: Sample identification number. Sampling Resistance, blows/ft: Number of blows to advance driven sampler one foot (or distance shown) beyond seating interval _ using the hammer identified on the boring log.lll Recovery (%): Core Recovery Percentage is determined based on a ratio of the length of core sample recovered compared to the cored interval length. FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Asphaltic Concrete (AC) Bentonite chips Portland Cement Concrete USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material. Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text. Well Log: Graphical representation of well installed upon completion of drilling and sampling. Moisture (%): Moisture, expressed as a water content. Pl: Plasticity lndex, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksl WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) E E tr E ffi ffi{ AF Silty SAND (SM) Poorly graded SAND (SP) Topsoil TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS PitcherSample i Waterlevel(attimeofdrilling,ATD) 2-inch-oD unlined split -j water level (after waiting) spoon (SPT) l Minor change in material properties within aI stratum Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, - tnferred/gradational contact between stratafixed head)? Queried contact between slrata rl N E(] n m IVn Auger sampler Bulk Sample 3-inch-OD California M brass rings iT "", samprer Grab Sample 2.5-inch-OD Modified California M brass liners GENERAL NOTES 1: Soil classilications are based on the UniJied Soil Classification System. Descriptions and slratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may begradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests.2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specilic boring localions and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representativeoI subsurface conditions at other locations or times. The Rll6y croup, lnc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothelt, WA 9g0i 1 oo c.9 (E o IJJ o)o, o-oo oo FoaEda o _9o.E(! U) atoc(U .aah(lttr o) o.dE}doav Eto ooc)E. o-oEaaoU)f o)3 .o o-(U o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION t')oJ c) ts s (1) l ..2o ITHE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 BothellWay NE Bothell, WA 98011 1 PHoNE: (425) 41s-0551 FAX: (425) 41s-0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421 DLL O,D2487, D6913 B-1efferson Healthcare South 20'2022-387-L EW sl6l2022 SAMPTE IDITYPE SAMPLE DEPTH DATE RECEIVEDDATE PROJECT TITTE PROJECT NO. 570.564r.2 15.9570.5 554.5 Weight Of Sample (gm) Tare Weight (gm) Total15.9 70.7 554.6 13 WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1) Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2) Weight of Tare (gm) (w3) Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) Moisture Content 100 Wt Ret SIEVE ANATYSIS Cumulative (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS % COBBLES % C GRAVEL % F GRAVEL % C SAND % M SAND % F SAND % FINES %TOTAL 0.0 0.0 6.4 5.5 4?.4 28.3 16.3 100.0 L2.0"cobbles coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel fine gravel fine gravel 2.5" 1.5" 1.0" o.75" 0.50" 0.375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 PAN ne gravel D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Cu Cc a.27 0.58 4.3 27.4 o.4 sand medium sand medium sand ne sand ne sand sand silt/clay 12"3' 2' '1" .75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 % P A s s I N G 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 7 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size in millimeters DESCRIPTION uscs Prepared For:Reviewed By: ELW 0.00 100.0015.9 0.00 100.000.00 0.0015.9 100.000.00 0.0015.9 100.000.00 0.0015.9 96.9716.80 3.0332.7 93.5835.60 6.4251.5 87.9966.60 72.0182.5 44.63307.10 55.37323.O 20.r2443.00 79.88458.9 16.34464.00 83.66479.9 0.00554.60 100.00570.5 SAND with trace gravel SM Healthcare trIlrI RILEYGR(}UP THE RITEY GROUP, INC. 17522 BothellWay NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHoNE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425) 41s-0311 D2487 D6913 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D42L, D422, Healthcare South B-2 2022-387-1,2.5' EW 91612022 813U2o22 SAMPTE |D/TYPE SAMPTE DEPTH DATE RECEIVEDDATE PROJECT TITTE PROJECT NO. 589.6 540.1 540.1"15.9 15.9 Weight Of Sample (gm) Tare Weight (gm) Total 524.2 49.5 524.2 WATER CONTENT lDelivered Moisturel Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1) Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2) Weight of Tare (gm) (w3) Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) Moisture Content 100 9 Wt Ret SIEVE ANATYSIS Cumulative (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS % COBBLES % C GRAVET % F GRAVEL % C SAND % M SAND % F SAND % FINES %TOTAL 0.0 3.9 8.8 4.2 24.2 32.8 22.1, 100.0 12.o" 3.0" 2.5u 2.O" 1.5" cobbles coarse gravel gravel 0.75" 0.50" 0.375" coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel fine gravel fine gravel fine gravel coarse sand medium sand medium sand D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Cu Cc o.21 0.58 4.5 27.4 o.4 #10 #20 #40 #50 sand ne sand PAN fine sand fines silt/clay 12"3' 2' '1..75' .375' #4 #1 o #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 % P A s s I N G 100 90 80 70 50 50 40 30 20 10 0 I G\ 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size in millimeters DESCRIPTION uscs Prepared For:Reviewed By: ELW 15.9 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.9 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.9 0.00 0.00 100.00 36.6 20.70 3.95 96.05 58.6 42.70 8.15 91.85 82.6 66.70 L2.72 87.28 r.04.5 88.60 15.90 83.10 252.4 236.50 45.t2 54.88 394.2 378.30 72.t7 27.83 424.2 408.30 77.89 22.17 540.1 524.20 100.00 0.00 Silty SAND with trace gravel SM Hedlthcore ltIlrr RILEYGRt}UP