Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13 - Design Report - Langohr's - Water, Sewer, Drainage, Driveway, Geotech DESIGN REPORT WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE AND DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION LANGOHR'S SITE PLAN BOZEMAN, MONTANA July 12, 201.3 Prepared Gy: THOMAS, DEAN AND HOSKINS, INC. TD& '''��234 E. BABCOCK, SUITE 3 BOLEMAN, MT 59715 M rAVID J. Projcct No. B 12-021 � CR.�1!F0„D 8709� ;s�llkSti��.�`*� Purpose and Introduction The purpose of this report is to explain how water, sanitary sewer, drainage and access drive improvements will be designed to meet City of Bozeman Design Standards and provide service to the proposed Langohr's condominium development. This report will provide information on the detailed design of the above mentioned infrastructure. The proposed Langohr's condominium development is a redevelopment of approximately 2.6 acres within the existing City of Bozeman. This site, located at the northeast corner of Garfield Street and South Tracy Avenue, was a retail flower shop and greenhouse facility prior to this redevelopment. The site has mostly been cleared of'structures at this time, and is being designed as a 10 unit condominium development. The surrounding infrastructure was constructed as pant of older developments within the City and provides water, sewer, street and drainage service around the project. This design report describes how new connections to the existing infrastructure will accommodate this infill development. Design Report Water A new 8 inch water main loop will be constructed to provide fire flow and domestic water to the 10 proposed units. The new loop will connect to the existing 12 inch water main in Garfield Street and the 6 inch main in South Tracy Avenue. The proposed water services will tie into this new water mainloop. The area's overall water system is looped into the City of Bozeman water system in several locations. The following summarizes the estimated demands created by the Langohr's condominium project, along with other design input: • 10 single family residential units on 1 lot • 2.11 people per residential unit • 170 gallons per day per person average • 2.3:1 maximum day to average day ratio Based upon the data above, the maximum day domestic water demand would be 5.7 gpm. The required fire flow is 1,000 gpm, for units less than 3,600 square feet, according to the International Fire Code. There are existing hire hydrants near the property, but to provide ready access to fire flows, a new hydrant is proposed in the middle of the development. 3/4 inch copper water services will be extended to each unit. No fire service lines are proposed for these units. Sanitary Sewer The new units would be served by an 8 inch sewer main in the central driveway. There is an existing 8 inch main running from south to north through the property. In order to make the layout of the project fit better, this 8 inch main will be relocated and replaced with a new 8 inch main. The main will be SDR 35 PVC. The new sewer main and 4 inch services have been sized for the development based upon the following values from the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specification Policy, Revised 3/31/2011: Residential • 10 single family residential units on 1 lot • 2.11 people/unit • 89 gallons/capita/day • 150 gallons/acre/day infiltration Based on the above information, the average flow for the whole development was calculated at 1.6 gpm. A peak flow rate of 8.2 gpm was calculated for the whole development, using a peaking factor of 4.2 and an infiltration rate of 150 gpd/acre over 2.6 acres. Individual 4 inch sewer services will be provided for each unit within the development. That is the standard size required for residential units. Storm DrainajZe The runoff from the west row of units in this development will be captured by grading the condominium units toward the central driveway, where water will run down the new curb and gutter. That runoff, along with precipitation on the driveway will drain to the low point toward the north end of the drive, and will then pass through a sidewalk chase on the east side of the drive and flow through an open grass-lined "v-ditch" to a new detention pond. At that point, sediment will deposit in the pond bottom and peak flows will be attenuated before discharging through a standard City outlet structure and pvc pipe connected to the City's existing storm drain that runs on the north edge of the property. We have attached calculations showing the peak 10 year runoff from the site, which hits a peak rate of 2.09 efs. The predevelopment peak 10 year runoff rate is 1.01 efs, so that is what we used as our release rate for sizing the detention pond. Iterating through various times of concentration showed the critical time of concentration, resulting in the maximum detention pond size occurs at 8.27 minutes. The required pond volume is 927 cubic feet. The actual pond we designed will hold more than double that volume with a water depth of two feet from the pond bottom to the top of outlet structure grate, Then there is an additional 6 inches of freeboard, before excess flows would overtop the pond and drain directly to the existing stream to the cast. We sized the detention pond outlet structure control slot to allow the predevelopment discharge rate of 1.01 efs to be released. This resulted in a vertical slot 1.25 inches wide, and 2 feet tall. Again, flows greater than the 10 year peak will overflow into the grate on a top of the structure. Runoff would then pass through the discharge pipe, which is an 8 inch SDR 35 pvc pipe at 6% slope. That pipe has the capacity to carry the 25 year storm peak of 2.51 cfs. The grass lined channel has a slope of 2%, and with side slopes of 4:1, will carry the 25 year runoff at a depth of 7.2 inches. The sidewalk chase will carry the 25 year runoff through its 12 inch wide opening at a depth of 4" and a slope of 4%. Geotechnical/Soils Information A geotechnical investigation was conducted for the South Tracy Apartments on March 26, 2013. During our investigation six soil test pits were excavated to observe and log the subsurface soils. In general, the subsurface soil conditions appear to be relatively consistent based on our exploratory excavating and soil sampling. The subsurface soil conditions encountered within the test pits consist of approximately 0.5 to 1.0 of lean clay topsoil overlying lean clay to clayey sand with well-graded gravel with sand and clay at depth. The well-graded gravel with clay and sand extended to a depth of at least 9.1 feet, which was the maximum depth investigated. Clayey Soils-The lean clay appears very soft to firm based on observations of test pit walls and the relative ease of excavation. The apparent consistency of the clay was dependent on the moisture content of the soil. Lower soil strength was observed as the moisture content increased with depth. The lean clay has varying amounts of sand and is of high plasticity based on our soils testing. Soil testing on a sample of the clay from TP- 5 indicates the clay is on the dividing line between high-plasticity lean clay and fat clay and actually just classifies as fat clay. This material is compressible as indicated by the consolidation test result. Samples of the material obtained fi•om TP-1 and TP-5 contained between 0 and 1 percent gravel, between 19 and 33 percent sand, and between 67 and 80 percent fines (silt and clay). The clay exhibited the following Atterberg Limits. Table 1 Atterberg Limits. Sample Classzfzeatzon Liquid Plastic 1?iastzcz#y TP-1, 7.6 ft Sandy Lean Clay 35.4 21.4 14.0 TP-4, 3.0 ft _Lean Clay with Sand 39.8 19.9 _ 19.9 TP-5, 2.8-3.7 ftf Fat Clay 50.8 �28.3 22.5 Clayey Sand-The clayey sand appears very loose to medium dense based on observations of test pit walls and the relative ease of excavation. This material can be slightly compressible due to the loose state of the clayey sand. Well Graded Gravel with Sand and -The well-graded gravel with sand and clay appears medium dense based oil observations of test pit walls and the relative case of excavation. Sampling was not performed on this material due to the large particle size and saturation. Test fits-Test pit locations along with the soil logs and testing results are attached. 4 Pavement Analysis-A pavement section is a layered system designed to distribute concentrated traffic loads to the subgrade. Performance of the pavement structure is directly related to the physical properties of the subgrade soils and the magnitude and frequency of traffic loadings. Pavement design procedures are based on strength properties of the subgrade and pavement materials, along with the design traffic conditions. Traffic information was not available at the time of this report. We have assumed that traffic for the access way will be limited to passenger-type vehicles and occasional delivery trucks. The potential worst case subgrade material is high-plasticity lean clay to fat clay which is classified as an A-7-5 in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) classification. AASHTO considers this soil type to be a poor subgrade. Typical California Bearing Ratio (CBR) values for this type of soil range from to two to five percent. It will be necessary to scarify and recompact the subgrade soils prior to placing fill material associated with the pavement section. The fill should be selected,placed, and compacted in accordance with our recommendations. A geotextile acting as a separator is recommended between the pavement section gravels and the silt subgrade. The geotextile will prevent the upward migration of fines and the loss of aggregate into the subgrade, thereby prolonging the structural integrity and performance of the pavement section. The pavement section presented in this report is based on an assumed CBR value of two percent, assumed traffic loadings, recommended pavement section design information presented in the Asphalt Institute and AASHTO Design Manuals, and our past pavement design experience in the Bozeman, Montana, area. Pavement Recommendations I. The following pavement section or an approved equivalent section should be selected in accordance with the discussions in the Pavement Analysis, Section Conti orient Section Asphaltic Concrete Pavement 3" 1.5-inch minus Crushed Base Course 6" 3-inch minus Subbase Course 12" Total (inches) 2 F 5 2. Gradations for the crushed base and subbase course shall conform to section 02235 and 02234, respectively, of the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS). 3. Where the existing grades will be raised more than the thickness of the pavement section, all fill should be placed, compacted to 95%of the maximum dry density determined by a standard proctor test which is outlined by ASTM D698 or equivalent (e.g. ASTM D4253-4254) and meet the gradation for 3-inch minus subbase course. Alternative granular material may be used if approved by the geotechnical engineer. On site clayey soils should not be used to raise existing grades. 4. A geotextile is recommended between the pavement section and the prepared subgrade to prevent the migration of fines upward into the gravel and the loss of aggregate into the subgrade. A Mirafi 60OX or equivalent geotextile is appropriate. 5. The asphaltic cement should be a Performance Graded (PG)binder having a 58-28 grade in accordance with AASHTO MP 1. 6 Appendix 7 Storm Drainage Calculations \/ E a { ( E J{ { ° R \ / \ , a � } � ® § 0 Z U \ � \ E / { ƒ/ � / ( G 7 . \ , 3 - 2 ¥ \ = . /\ \ m ) »/ / o I \ / / 6 § \ � / z « J o u = \ 0 F- \ } \ \ \# § ) \ / , ' } \ \ o/ ~ \ 0 > k ° ) - _ % _Co , « « k \ o o / \ \ _ w \ / \ C \ \ \ / � � } \ kk � � \ \ \ 2 ± ® A ~ E E ! ) f � " \;\cl� ( { � Ee 7 6 f a A $ /E < E E \ 7 � } / ) - � / ; \; 2 ® ; ( & E{ > ;q � e 4 ° ƒ LL - ° \d a \ a \ / > 2 : \ 6 ) ° CIL CV \ \ * \ � ` \ J \ j / \ m ( \ \ so eo ± m = o 0) y ® / ¢ x � / ba / / Oo 0- 0 \ 0 .\/ o c .c = 2 k \ ° e ° ttZ o -0 0 § 2 a � � M / ./ \ ƒ \ \ \ 2 \ » a) \ / y / y / k / \ // \ a y�E E � \ 75 / > > CDC m n0) \\E / c) ) : S s © 4 \ \ 0 0 § \ \ Cl 2 U) co \ < / < \ r � m � / 7 { m m $ ƒ s � t u / = c , � � \ / a ( k 5 ( Langohr's I'lowerland Detention Pond Release/Slot Sizing Reference:COB Design Standards Cr-L 10-Year Qpre C Width Head Qweir cfs in ft cfs Pond 1 1.01 3.33 1.25 2 0.98 c c ,. U cr 'D 1�I LO 11 U C N p o = CO -1 11 O N M to Q if c0 0 O O w lL U CV U >. U CN C N CO C N O ro m '- _ ? v 1 M o. U t°- E �2 3 N o o N ° w' �� itliu � 11 IL I � _ c N N m ' 1 >- 00 O � m `O N N � 11 O n. I? Y m O LO OU O Cl- d O M U it II �' ti N c O O 0 _p. Lit � y, — rn O c 'c c R c Soil Boring Logs and Location Map t, SURFACE: Sod x z W � x ?,MOISTURE CONTENT a O APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 48&"•.3 Q wLL 04 g w • -MGf5TURE CONTEN' ED SOIL DESCRIPTION (D U) p., 0 10 Q 30 40 50 TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears soft,slightly moist,dark brown, 0 - abundant organics •0 1 Lean CLAY, appears firm, slightly moist, light to dark brown 2 G 3 4 14.41 Sandy lean CLAY, appears soft to very soft,moist, brown to brownish gray, occasional pockets of poorly-graded sand G a g _ 7 _ 8.0♦ c 8 Well-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay,appears medium 8.5 dense to dense,saturated, brown,3"-4"gravel with occasional 8"boulders 9 Bottom of Test Pit:8.5 ft 10 m L 3 .0 W � V LX 12 M 0 0 13 Q) 14 15 16 LEGEND 0 10 ZO 30 40 50 X--x-- Log of Test Pit TP-1 {�I South Tracy Apartments :.,. . ...., t'„' Bozeman, Montana .. }.,..:�:)".}1C i? t.,,. :: t S-:]:;C:I'[ '1:,1� ;e,.¢ .v'I'.;l�CC:;:t: li::l'. fCi:•C:e nl oGGroel^ole ,:r m:es leh:err Logged Sys K3�leL.scnit.r�.e Excavated By. Tmvnscr:aexeava:o" 2-11 c l i�. 5p4; $pp Gr Hlnhi ZMI1 35U zV t)1r.:s AC WO!�O! � 'Idat:es rrtp;i March 26, 2013 812-021 Figure Tri& ;-::at?'aulatulrro>srcr, t, h No Set 1 of 1 _" SURFACE: Bore and grove: storage area �� zW FF r,±OiS%IRE COI:" ;ENT Q O APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 1865.0 (i LU p d ¢ w T M -5 O!STURE CO.VTENS SO1l0ESCRIPTION y C7 v0 1 2 Fill: Pea gravel overlying lenses of lean with sand and fat clay, 0 appears firm to very stiff,light brown to brown, slightly moist 1.7 Lean CLAY with sand, appears firm,slightly moist, brown,slightly 2 - -- ---- - moist qu=2.5 tsf 3.5 Clayey SAND,appears very loose, slightly moist, brown 4 (� qu=0.75 tsf • �. 6 _ 7 Well-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay,appears medium =� dense to dense, saturated, brown,3'r-4'r gravel with occasional 8"boulders 8 o _ � a Bottom of Test Pit:8.5 ft g b a� 0 w to ' w 12 m 3 � co 13 14 15 16 LEGEND 0 10 0 5 •----- ® Log of Test Pit TP- �-- South Tracy Apartments Bozeman, Montana Logged By.KyS:!.Sc,­.FE Excavated By: T.11SO110 8xca al— Si• , GC!-� i`(!r; rr,�!,• L`C, c C!'h .r HdeGht ZaX,$'5U ` March 26, 2013 B12-021 F IHOM\S DEAN&lu>SKINS IN<. Figure No. 3 Sheet 1 of 1 i SURFACE: Grovel access drive and gorden area �F °zef M� �'.O'.STURE CONTc�W O APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 4866.:+ ft pQ W LL • =MOISf'I;RE C0i1TU.NT SOIL DESCRIPTION _ U COn v0 10 20 30 4 Fill: Bark and potting soil 0 1.8 Fill: Poorly-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay, appears Z•t 2 �.' dense,slightly moist, brown,road aggregate Clayey SAND,appears loose to medium dense, slightly moist to 3 _ moist with depth,dark brown /. 5 6.0 Well-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay, appears medium dense to dense,saturated, brown,Y-4"gravel with occasional 8"boulders 7 Bottom of Test Pit:6.0 ft 9 10 2s v u, a; w 12 M a, 3S oa 13 14 15 16 LEGEND 0 0 0 30 0 5 _s . . .... Log of Test Pit TP-3 South Tracy Apartments Bozeman, Montana r: .. . _ s ea•cse.; Logged By:Kyle sw::,Pe Excavated By: 7n.vn5endE>cw,tiun Hilatin Zeais 35U March 26, 2013 B12-021 + Iiun1�5 0l ��c Ilosnl�5 Inc• Figure No. 4 TD& L ; .:.., t,t:.n011;(0, Sheet 1 of 1 y SURFACE: Grove! walkway in garden creo yP zW FF /OISTURE CCN7c`!T O APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 48v ."L It ~aw Z) a aw • =V,OISTURE CONTE,NI Q WLL �C ¢ Ww cC� SOIL DESCRIPTION 0to V r, o Fill: Pea gravel trail on fabric 0.3--- 0 Lean CLAY with sand, appears soft to very soft, slightly moist to moist,dark brown _. qu= 1.5 tsf 2 C 3 r •__..�� 4 _ c qu=0.5 tsf 5 5.8 Sandy lean CLAY,appears soft,wet to saturated, brown 6.2 6 Well-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay,appears medium dense to dense,saturated, brown,3"-4"gravel with occasional a ° 8" boulders 7 o\QC. � o 0 o C ° a «a o of 9 Bottom of Test Pit: 9.1 ft 10 c 11 s � m u r tu a a, 12 � a '0 13 t7 14 15 16 ,., 0 10 20 30 40 5 LEGEND • : :` Log of Test Pit TP-4 1--a ---+� South Tracy Apartments ;' Bozeman, Montana j.-3/8--:nch :.D. split sp:;...,. wac Ti.G st::ablG.:1Cr. i rrxc;cr:? Logged By:Kyle L scuff.a e Excavated By: rownser:u ex­a::o" .D. p6, sc;ec. e , cx.• ;c trnw,cw:¢_ ::etweNr: Heath:7.ax s 75U ty;; hc(ud �c•„ncoes March 26, 2013 B12-021 . TltoNt>,S In � Itc� t� c INti Inc. TU&I� Sheet 1 of 9 SURFACE: Sod r °z w � w !AOISTURE CONTENT 0 APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 4867.1 f` CL p¢ g CL Q. =!,40:STURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION O (�7 O 4 Topsoil: Lean clay, appears very soft, moist, black 0 Fat clay, appears soft to firm, dry to moist with depth,dark 1 - - < brown qu=3.75 tsf 2 c 3 qu= 1.75 tsf 51 4, 5.2 5 c`o c Well-graded gravel with sand and clay,appears medium dense =� to dense, saturated, brown,3"-4"gravel with occasional 8" boulders 6 J e r= . O 0 ^1 O Q Q c_G' 4 8•d 8 Bottom of Test Pit: 8.0 ft 1 9 10 w r 0 11 C > W U 12 tCCn C � cQ 13 c7 14 15 16 LEGEND 0 10 20 30 40 50 _:__. s . .. Log of Test Pit TP-5 �� ' South Tracy Apartments Bozeman, Montana Logged By:Kyict scur.Pr. Excavated By. Tcnnseelf Eccavalmn Hiiachr Zaris 35i1 March 26, 2013 B12-021 TD& I nDiu,. IIocLI„ I]c.• Figure No. 6 Sheet 1 of 1 SURFACE: Sod' s 0� w x MGSTURc CONTENT Q o APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION: 4868 f t w w o Q w w • -!�oiSTU,E CGNT'E'W SOIL DESCRIPTION _ 0 1 �— Topsoil: Lean CLAY with sand, appears very soft, moist, black, 0 • occasional gravel 0,3 c Lean CLAY,appears firm to soft,dry to moist, brown • 3 4•G 4 Sandy lean CLAY,appears very soft,moist brown qu=1.0 tsf • c 5.8 Well-graded GRAVEL with sand and clay,appears medium 8 rz a dense to dense, saturated, brown,3"-4"gravel with occasional 8"boulders o ` c O O O� a � 0 C $ ....,.....-. .. ... ........ _. 0 ro 0 o CJ ca 8. Bottom of Test Pit:8.7 ft 9 10 v 0 11 o M C W W 12 IC 3 c L cQ 13 14 15 16 LEGEND _J 0 10 20 30 40 s _ :< ' Log of Test Pit TP-6 -�—t< South Tracy Apartments ...> Bozeman, Montana 3/8 incn 1 DSplz, sr.,p!. Logged B Y, c L Sosu.P.E Excavated By. To—setw Excaot-oit .t) stn! sncor, roc Hrtxh,Zaxs 351) types ..uJ: onu•^.c`--� '.4 . March 26, 2013 B12-021 h Il,t>"„ I C.AN c uashi., INC Figure No. 7 .,. Sheet 1 of 1 Particle Size Distribution Report o 0 0 100 i f I 80 w 60 I i I i I 1 I I I I I70 ' _ .,_-,.�•P ! ! i i l l !�I i�f l _. _i_. - r- - z LL I j i I W f { U '� I- I , 30 ;-f-' 20 10 _ - I I I I I '!�I !;L_I .- -- I �_ - I' 11 f 1 1 i I h' ` ! I 1 I I I I I I 1 .t tl f 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 GRAIN SIZE mm. +3" %GRAVEL - %SAND %SILT - _ %CLAY USCS -� LL PL PI 32.6 67.3 CL 35.4 21.4 14.0 0 0.0 0.9 118.7 80-4 CL 39.8 19.9 19.9 SIEVE i.- PERCENT FINER SIEVE PERCENT_FINER numb M•�terial Descri�tjgn -_-_ inches F [7 er 0 J- O Sande Lean CLAY _ size I I sire 3/8" I 100.0 100.0 #4 I 99.9 _ �i� CTI ! #10 I 99.8 I 99.0 f!Lean('LAY with Sand #20 I 99.3 ! 98.3 I #40 j 98.6 96.8 #60 ! 97.0 94.3 I ! f #80 I 94.6 92.1 ! _ if 100 90.8 90.0 GRAIN SIZE #200 67.3 I 80.4 1 RE AR D60 I i 0 Report No.At-7183-206 D30 D10 I i i I l IDReport No.A-71 Y4-206 COEFFICIENTS --. .. Cc 1 CU 0 Location:11%1 Depth:7.6 11 Sample Number: A-7183 r" Location:'fP-4 Depth:3.0 t't Sany)le.Number A 7t84 --._....__.......-.._... _.... _ ._._...,._._-......._.---.----..._._.._ _,_.._. _._..---.----............ -._.................... --..__ __...._..- -- -..__._..... ----.._.._..._...__..._ ......- i 1"-,. THOMAS,DEAN&HOSKINS,UNC. !;Client: Prugtl& Lenon Architect~ TD&H ��,, ENGINKERIENG CONSULTANTS �I 1 Project: Langohr's Flowerland Survey: _. I 8 �ow:a�rr.uce.norxsax•zufv'ac aosrxs I3UY_elllan,IVIUtltalnal ! i ew`t"nom w�snmm�no I 7_ 7 Project No.: 131 0_1 -.-_-.-....................__-----_-___ Fiaure_ Tested By: SSS ....._....-_....-_..___...... Checked By: ^ .:� --.._-._._..._._.._.___.- ............... LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60 71i'li Dashed line indicates the approximateupper limit boundary for natural soils 0 50 dzl �I 40 - - - �._...._.....__......_._._.. x i 1 Q z - j i _J ; I J i a I I i I I .... I j L or OL MH or OH � 0 1 t 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION I LL l PL i PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS _- ... - ... Sand) L.can CLAY - --- -- I9.4 21.4 � 14.(l 98,C> 67.3 i CL j ------ - ._ ....... d; Lean CLAY with Sand 39.8 19.9 I 19.9 90.6 80.4 CL e Fat CLAY 50.8 28.3 22.5 CH _..... __._. i I - - i I � I 'Project No. 1312 021 Client: Iglu=h &7 Lenon Architects ,Remarks: Project: Lam,ohr's Fit)wedanil Sucre: y ®12eport No. i�-7183-207 Rcport No,A-7154-207 IL3ozeman. Vlontau:) A Report No. A-7195-207 o Location: TI'-1 Depth: 7.6 Ct Sample Number: A-7183 11 Location: TI'-4 Depth: 3.0 It Sample Number: A-7184 'e Location: 'T11-5 Depth: 2.8- 3.7 I't Sample Number: A-7185 is is li TDfcH ? THOMAS,DEAN&HOSKINS,INC. I, ENCTNEFRINC CONSULTANTS '. (� y CN%AY PAtLaUOYXHAK•YA1.i A'I1.t, NONiLa j� v A'AfH111C20N °�nr II Figure i cxA7non mmo Tested By: _5SS.._.. _-- Checked BY __. __T .I. ...... .. CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT -0,75 I � � 1 � ! Ii i � ! � i 0.75 ...... -------------- ----------- ............ 2.25 ----------------- ---------- ....... 65 ---------------- 3.00 ---------1------- ------ ----------- 3.75 ----------------- 4.50 --------- —----------- 5.25 1 ------- 7........... ........ -------- 6.00 ------ ----------- &75 100 200 Soo 1000 2000 Applied Pressure - psf -...N.a.tur.al . Dry Dens. Sp. Overburden PC cc Cr Swell Press. Heave Sat. Moist. (pCf) LL PI Gr, (psf) (psf) (psf) % eo 94.1 % 36.B r7 81.2 1 65 375 1884 0.14 0M2 1.037 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION uSCS AASHTO ............................. ------------- Lean CLAY(Visual) CL ............... .............. ......... ......- ........... �Project No. 1312-021 Client: P111-011 c", Letion Architects ;;Remarks: !Project: Langolir's Flowerland Survey Reporl No. A-7182-217 Bozeman.Monuina Location:TP-I THOMAS, DEAN & HOSIUNS, INC. TD& FNGINEERING CONSULTANTS 10 N.-MAN-KAUSFELL MONTANA 5POKAXE SmNOTON LE MN "UGFigure .............1-1--.1--1----------------- ............. .............-.................. ................. ............. THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND Engineering Consultants SAMPLING TERMINOLOGY D &H Great Falls,Kalispell,Bozeman,Montana FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES Spokane.Washington,Lewiston,Idaho STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (ASTIVI D1 586) RELATIVE DENSITY* RELATIVE CONSISTENCY* .......... ------------------------ Standard Standard Granular, Noncohesive Penetration Test est Fine-Grained, Cohesive Penetration Test (Gravels, Sands, &Silts) (blows/foot) (Clays) (blows/foot) Very Loose 0-4 V -----­----------------.......... ­ ery Soft 0-2 Loose 5-10 Soft 3-4 Medium Dense 11-30 Firm 5-8 Dense 31-50 Stiff 9.15 Very Dense +50 Very Stiff 15-30 Hard +30 Based on Sampler-Hammer Ratio of 8,929 E-06 ft/lbf and 4.185 E-05 ftA2/lbf for granular and cohesive soils, respectively (Terzaghi) PARTICLE SIZE RANGE Sieve Openings (inches) I Standard Sieve Sizes 12" 3" 3/4" No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200 <No.200 .......... ....... BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVELS SANDS SILTS & CLAYS ........................ ------ —---------- Coarse Fine Coarse' Medium Fine Atterberg Limits) PLASTICITY CHART 60 For classification of fine-grained soils and the fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soil 50 Equation of "A"-line Horizontal at PI =4 to LL= 25.5, then PI = 0.73 (LL-20) x 40 Equation of "U"dine --------- ----------- 0 IJJ Vertical at LL= 16 to P1 =7, then PI 0.9 (LL-8) Z >. 30 ................--­---- F— U) ............. -----------------------20 MH or OH 10 ......... 7 4 c// ML or OIL 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) GW-Well-graded GRAVEL SW- Well-graded SAND CL- Lean CLAY GP - Poorly-graded GRAVEL SP - Poorly-graded SAND ML - SILT GM - Silty GRAVEL SM - Silty SAND CIL- Organic SILT/CLAY GC - Clayey GRAVEL SC - Clayey SAND CH - Fat CLAY MH - Elastic SILT OH - Organic SILT/CLAY THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS ASTIM D2487 DEngineering Consultants CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS&H Great Falls,Kalispell,Bozeman,Montana Spokane,Washington,Lewiston,Idaho FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES -Y Ctia4 and I<Cc�53 ---------- GW- IS%sand--->Welt-graded GRAVEL "A'S%fines .1 at 5%Sand Well-graded GRAVEL with sand Cu<4 and/or I>Cc>3 --.__..__.._._-.._..-:...._..._.__..._.._......_> GP .15%sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL >15%sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL with sand -)p It es-MIL or NAIA_.__......_..__._->GW-GM <I 6%sand Well-graded GRAVEL wtill,sill Z;f Cu>�4 and I,Cc53--_ >_I 5%sand Well-graded GRAVEL with sill and sand _­)t,fines=CL or CIA GW-GC y<151/.sand Well-graded GRAVEL with clay(or silly clay) GRAVEL i (or CL-ML) >z15%sand------>Well-graded GRAVEL with clay and sand %gravel> 5-12%lines (or silly clay and sand) %sand GP-GM <15%sarld Poorlygraded GRAVEL with Silt Cu<4 and/or I>Cc>3<-_ >IS%sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL with silt and sand fines=CL or CIA GP-GC ---_-_-----.-> 15%Sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL wilh clay(or silly clay) (or CL-ML) >2:15%sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL with clay and sand (or silty clay and sand) it fines_ML or MIA _---------- --_>GM _ > 15%sand Silty GRAVEL _z ................ IS%sand Silty GRAVEL with sand fines -------------------- fines�;Cl_of CIA GC sand Clayey GRAVEL ---------�2!159e sand Clayey GRAVEL with sand fincs�CL-Ml_ �----------- GC-GM ><15%sand Silly,Clayey GRAVEL _)­15%sand Silty.clayey GRAVEL with sand Cu2�6 and I Cc�3 ­__1­_.__­._------------.._.-..._._..._.....__> SW <l 5%gravel Well-graded SAND .A 15%fines<- 15%gravel Well-graded SAND with gravel Cu,Garldfor I>Cc>3 Poorly-graded SAND Poorly-graded SAND with gravel fines=ML of MIA—-—------>SW-SM <15%gravel Well-graded SAND with silt Cu->6 and I.5CC,3,4z::- a15%gravel >Well-graded SAND with sill and gravel fines-CL of CH-_______> SW-SC .15%gravel Well-graded SAND with clay(or silty clay) SAND (or CL-ML) Z15%gravel Well-graded SAND with clay and gravel %sand -->5-12%fines (01 silly clay and gravel) /,gravel 40 �6 and/or I>CC>3, fines=ML or MH SP-SM 15%gravel Poorly-graded SAND with silt U1 2t 15%gravel Poorly-graded SAND with silt and gravel lines-CL or CH._.__..____> SP-SC .15%gravel Poorly-graded SAND with clay(or silly clay) (or CL-10L) 4.>15%gravel Poorly-graded SAND with clay and gravel (or silly clay and gravel) fines=I&or MIA.-____> SM <1 5%gravel Silly SAND 2!15%gravel y Silty SAND with gravel "">12%fines --------------- > lives=Cl_or CH___-___> SC <15%gravel Clayey SAND 2!15%gravel Clayey SAND with gravel SC-SM ><15%gravel Silty,clayey SAND 6%gravel Silty.Clayey SAND with gravel Flow Chart For Classifying Coarse-Grained Soils (More Than 50 % Retained On The No.200 Sieve) PI>7 and plots 4301.1.plus No.200 15%plus No.200 ......­>Lean CLAY oil of above CL 15-29%plus No.200 %sand 2!%gravef Lean CLAY with sand "A"-line %sand,%gravel Lean CLAY willi gravel —_),%sand.%gravel ----><15%(jt avel Sandy lean CLAY y. 30%plus No.200 ),>15%gravel Sandy lean CLAY with gravel %sand<%4faVel --><1 5%Sand Gravelly teat)CLAY ':)6>15%Sand Gravelly teat)CLAY with sand 30%plus No.2.00 plus No.200 >Silly CLAY LL,50 4::PI,7 and -,-A 15-29%plus No.200 sand_>-/gravel Silty CLAY with sandplots oil or above >C L-10 L �A 11,"sand,1,zgravei Silly CLAY with gravel line 7',,,.sand>�',jjiavvl <151,��gravel Sandy silly CLAY A 00.".plus No.200<1 I 5-ib gravel Sandy silty CLAY with 9tavef `ksarlcj c"Qravel 15%sand Gravelly silly CLAY sand >Gravelly silty CLAY with sand plus No.200', <I 5%p!us No.200 ........... ...........> SILT 15-29�,'�plus No.200'<'�>',�sand>%gravel SILT with sand PI,4 or pots >ML< ��X,sand�-.��(jravel SILT with gmvef below -line be "sand:.!,,gruel <1 5�,gravel >Sandy SILT 130°'plus No.200. >15,,gravcl---->Sandy SILT with gravel -sand<'gravel 5c.",sand >G,avQlly SILT -and >Gravelly SILT will)sand .r<30. Na'�phm 200'-Z >,15'.,,.piusNo.200 Fat CLAY 200 Fat CLAY v"ah satif CH y PI plots On or <',�qrave!-> Fat CLAY wttIi gt avel above'A"-fine nd,_ ><15" it'av(,'I ......> Sandy!at CLAY 30",.plus No.200<' >1 5�;gravel > Sandy 1,91 CLAY with gravel LL>50 ",�safld I',�glavel <15',�Sand Gravelly(at CLAY (Inorganic) _>15-,sand Gravelly fat CLAY with sand <30°;p!u-,No.200 >,15 plus No.200 Elastic SILT ",,sand<%gravel Elastic SILT with Q PI JAGIS below >MH 15-291!��plus No.200 ',"ano 2!%gravel Elastic SILT with sand "A"-line ravel %sand>%,,g'avej _> 15%gravel Sandy elastic SILT plus No.200 ]1,>155/.gravel Sandy elastic SILT with grant .X°,,sand,%gtavel Sand Gravelly elastic SILT sand...._> Gravelly elastic SILT with sand Flow Chart For Classifying Fine-Grained Soils( 50%Or More Passes The No. 200 Sieve) Q� ' 7 N N i /•)// ' / 1 � a o w o J � c..nriau sinew /--..._.•:•___-._ �o ao ao s.._..`..i_.._J SHEET,�910F 1 TREASURE STATE ROOFING, LLC JEFF BRIGHT: OWNER 1026 2ND Ave. N.W. GREAT FALLS, MT. 59404 PHONE (406)799-5002 FAX (406)453-4051 E-MAIL; jefftsroofi-,ig@yahoo.com PROPOSAL FOR WORK AND ACCEPTANCE TO: R&R TAYLOR CONSRUCTION,INC............................................................ (CUSTOMER) Treasure State Roofing proposes to perform the work described below for the price of. $64,220.00.............................................................................................................................. TO BE PAID AS FOLLOWS:AS PER PROGRESS BILLING......................................................... WORK TO BE PERFORMED: ls'Security Bank, Fort Benton, MT. -Furnish all labor and material to install all insulation,tapered cricket system, 1/4"primed dens deck and fully adhered (white) TPO roof system as per the plans and specifications and in STRICT accordance to the manufacturers recommendations. Price includes manufacturers 10 year warranty. Price excludes all metal flashings. Should you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact me at any time. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PATRONAGE OF OUR COMPANY. Treasure State Roofing,and its agents,employees and personnel,is an independent contractor and not an employee of the Customer.Treasure State Roofing assumes all liability for taxes, withholdings,injuries and other costs or penalties arising from performance of the work to be performed.Any changes,alterations or additions to the above described work to be performed which entails additional costs or work will be written in change(s) and will become an additional charge. Unpaid balances shall result in a finance charge of 10% per annum.Actions to enforce this agreement shall entitle the prevailing party to recover attorney fees and costs. THIS PROPOSAL EXPIRES IF NOT ACCEPTED IN WRITING IN 30 DAYS. TREASURE STATE ROOFING, LLC DATE ACCEPTED this day of . 20— CUSTOMER