Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout025 Geotechnical Report811 W Mendenhall SPR SUBMITTAL 811 W Mendenhall Apartments| BOZEMAN, MT, 59715 | GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 025 FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Land Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com 811 W. MENDENHALL BOREHOLE LOCATION MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 3 BH- # BH-1 N BH-2 MW-1 BH-3 BH-4MW-2 BH-5 MW-3 811 W Mendenhall SPR SUBMITTAL 811 W Mendenhall Apartments| BOZEMAN, MT, 59715 | GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 025 Civil Engineering ● Geotechnical Engineering ● Land Surveying ● Construction Services ALLIED ENGINEERING 32 Discovery Dr. Bozeman, MT 59718 Ph: (406) 582-0221 www.alliedengineering.com October 23, 2020 Alex Weidner KW Commercial 162 Tancho Sante Fe Road E70 Encinitas, CA 92024 Email: aweidner06@gmail.com RE: Due Diligence Geotechnical Report for 811 W. Mendenhall Bozeman, Montana Dear Mr. Weidner: This report summarizes our geotechnical evaluation at 811 West Mendenhall located in Bozeman, Montana. The primary purpose of this preliminary geotechnical report is to inform KW Commercial (the prospective buyer) about the geotechnical characteristics, constraints, and limitations with respect to development of the project area. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The proposed development area consists of Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, Block 7, of Springbrook Addition located at the northwest corner of West Mendenhall Street and 8th Avenue in Bozeman, Montana. The legal description of the property is the SW¼ of the NE¼ of Section 12, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian Montana, Gallatin County Montana. See Figures 1 and 2 for site location maps. Presently, a total of three structures extending from 8th Avenue to the gravel alley to the west are currently found on the property. A fourth structure (that shows up on aerial imagery) has since been removed and the disturbed area reclaimed. Based on a review of aerial imagery, it appears the structure (which fronted West Mendenhall Street) was removed sometime between 2011 and 2014. Lots 7, 8, and 9 located north of the existing primary structures appear undisturbed as far back at the google aerial imagery extends (1995). Looking further back through the aerials provided in the EA by Morrison-Maierle, we found no evidence of disturbance on Lots 7, 8, and 9 in a 1976 image, but the imagery from 1947 is simply too grainy to establish if these lots were developed prior to the 1976 photograph. In any case, given the location of the property and the prior development history, we suggest remaining aware of the possibility of undocumented fills during the design and construction of future improvements. Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 2 The geologic environment of the Bozeman area in general and this area specifically, consists of fine-grain flood deposits (primarily lean clay and silt) overlying Quaternary-aged alluvial fan deposits comprised of sand and gravel with rounded cobbles. These younger deposits overlie older Tertiary-aged lacustrine and fluvial deposits consisting of lightly cemented silt, clay, sand, and gravel. In this case, our explorations extended into the Quaternary-aged sand and gravel deposits, but did not reach the older Tertiary deposits. Groundwater levels in this area range from about 10 to 20 feet below the ground surface (consistent with what we observed in our boreholes). It is our understanding the proposed development on the subject property will consist of a 3,400 square foot single-story commercial space situated on the southern portion of the property with 3-story residential units located to the north. No details regarding the proposed construction were provided. Based on our work, we feel the site is suitable for the proposed development. Preliminary design recommendations (for planning purposes) are provided later in this document. A more detailed final geotechnical report can be provided at a later date that is specifically tailored to the design assuming the property is purchased. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions were investigated on October 20, 2020 under the direction of Erik Schnaderbeck, a staff geotechnical engineer with AESI. Three borehole explorations, which were identified as BH-1 through BH-3, were completed at the site using a truck-mounted drill rig. Each of the boreholes were completed to a depth of 15.5 feet. Please see Figure 4 for the approximate borehole locations. During the explorations, soil conditions were visually characterized, measured, and logged using split-spoon samples taken at regular intervals. Blow counts noted on the boring logs attached consist of the blows required to drive the split spoon sampler in three, 6-inch increments using a 140-pound hammer dropped 30 inches. The final 12 inches of driving are added together and recorded as the blow counts (N). The blow counts are used to develop an idea of the consistency and shear strength of the soil. Blow counts of more than 50 in any 6-inch increment are deemed as sampler refusal. All blow counts provided on the log are uncorrected for overburden pressures. Each of the boring logs provide assorted field information, such as soil depths and descriptions, groundwater conditions, relative density data, and a sketch of the soil stratigraphy. The borehole locations were marked with wooden lathe. Please be aware that the detail provided on the logs cannot be accurately summarized in a paragraph; therefore, it is important to review the logs in conjunction with this report. Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Provided below is a general description of the soil conditions encountered. For a more detailed description of the on-site soil conditions and summary of laboratory testing completed on select soil samples, please refer to the attached borehole logs and laboratory testing results (Appendix A and B). Soil conditions were similar in all three boreholes, and consisted of a layer of organic topsoil overlying native fine-grained flood deposits of medium stiff to stiff, light brown silt/clay. Below these fine-grain deposits, the explorations encountered dense to very dense, native alluvial sandy gravel with abundant rounded cobbles. Alluvial gravels were encountered at 7.0, 6.5, and 9.5 feet in BH-1, 2, and 3 respectively. Due to the potential of excessive settlement in the fine- grained flood deposits, the dense alluvial gravels are considered the target bearing layer for foundation elements. Groundwater was observed in all three boreholes completed. Specifically, water levels were measured at 13.2, 11.8, and 15.2 feet in BH-1, 2, and 3 respectively. A 10-ft long, 4-inch PVC monitoring well was installed at BH-2 in the center of the project site to enable future monitoring. Groundwater levels are expected to rise during the spring and summer months due to snowmelt and runoff. While we do not expect groundwater levels to rise significantly in this area in the spring, we would still caution against deep basements in the event of a particularly wet year where groundwater rises more than expected. In our opinion, crawlspace and slab-on-grade foundation would be acceptable alternatives. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Foundation Support As discussed earlier, subsurface conditions consist of fine-grain silt and lean clay deposits overlying dense to very dense gravels at depths ranging from of 6.5 to 9.5 feet. Under significant foundation loads, the fine-grain soils are susceptible to excessive settlement (particularly if they become wet). Therefore, we recommend foundation subgrade improvements as outlined in the three options discussed below. Option 1 The first option is to over-excavate the entire foundation footprint of each building down to the native gravels and bring back up with granular structural fill to footing elevations. This option would be applicable to either a crawlspace foundation or a slab-on-grade configuration. We expect that footing grades will be 3.0 to 6.0 feet above the target gravels and as a result several feet of structural fill will be required to build back up to footing grade. Structural fill may consist of 1.5-inch minus crushed roadmix gravel or 3-inch minus uncrushed pitrun gravel compacted to Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 4 98 percent of its Standard Proctor density. Design bearing pressures under this scenario would range from 3,000 to 3,500 pounds per square foot (psf). To save on foundation preparation costs, it is acceptable to remove fine-grain soils under foundations only, leaving non-organic silts and clays under interior slabs. In that case, the width of the excavation (in order to assure load transfer occurs in the structural fill) is the width of the footing plus the depth from the bottom of footing to target bearing gravels (essentially 0.5H:1V slope). For instance, if the width of the footing is 2 feet and the depth to the native gravels below the bottom of footing is 3 feet, the necessary width of the excavation is 5 feet. The footing is assumed to be centered on the trench. Option 2 The second option is to place the structure on rammed aggregate piers (RAPs) that extend from the footing elevation down to native gravels and use the footings as grade beams to span between piers. The RAP’s consist of 24 to 30-inch augured holes that extend down to target bearing and are filled with structural fill compacted in lifts with a vibratory hammer attached to an excavator. Spacing of the RAP’s is often about 8 to 10 feet. We expect the footings could be designed for bearing pressures of 3,000 to 3,500 psf in this scenario. Another similar foundation option is to support the buildings on helical piers that likewise extend to the gravel and are spaced at about 8-foot intervals. Our experience with the helical piers is that they tend to be a bit more expensive then the rammed aggregate piers. We expect the helical piers could be designed for working loads of 30 to perhaps as high as 35 kips. Some thought was given to providing a third option consisting of the over-excavation and placement of a geogrid reinforced structural fill section approximately 24 inches deep under the footings. However, the over-excavation may actually reach the native gravels (or be close), and therefore, we do not view this as a particularly attractive option. Interior Slab Support Assuming the building(s) will be placed on an interior concrete slab, the slab should be supported (at a minimum) on 6-inches of crushed rock and 12 inches of granular structural fill overlying compacted non-organic soil. Foundation Wall Backfill The on-site soils are suitable for foundation wall backfill provided the moisture content is near optimum, rocks larger than six inches in diameter are removed, and organics and other deleterious materials (e.g., wood debris) are removed. Foundation backfill should be compacted to 95 percent of its Standard Proctor Density. Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 5 Foundation Drainage and Moisture Protection While we do not expect problems with groundwater, we believe it would still be prudent to install footing drains around the perimeter of crawlspace foundations (at the base of the footing). The drain should consist of a 4-inch perforated pipe encased in 12 inches of clean crushed rock and completely wrapped in a non-woven geotextile drainage fabric. Daylighting the footing drain on property is likely not possible, therefore, the drains should be taken to a sump with a pump. Footing drains are not necessary for slab-on-grade applications assuming the interior slab elevation is higher than the exterior grade at all locations. Under interior slabs and in crawlspaces, we recommend installing a heavy-duty vapor barrier (15- mil minimum) that is properly attached to footings/walls as per manufacturer recommendations. All foundation walls should be damp-proofed. Driveway Access/Parking Preliminarily (subject to the actual intended traffic), we recommend a minimum section of 12 inches of uncrushed sub-base gravel and 6 inches of crushed road mix. Surfacing should consist of 3 inches of asphalt or 4 inches of concrete. The sub-base and base course gravel should meet the specifications provided in the latest edition of the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. The subgrade should be compacted to an unyielding condition prior to gravel placement. A woven geotextile separator may be necessary if the subgrade cannot be compacted to an unyielding condition. Other Considerations As discussed earlier, care should be taken to completely remove all random fill material that may be present. One structure was removed between 2011 and 2014, and subsequently filled in with material. Presumably, the material used to fill the old foundation was not placed as an engineered filled and should be removed in its entirety and replaced with compacted structural fill if any future site improvements will be placed on the old footprint. Care should also be taken when razing the existing buildings to remove/replace any associated random fill under or around these structures. Other areas of undocumented fill may exist on the property and should be watched for during the future construction. Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 6 LIMITATIONS This report provides our preliminary geotechnical-related recommendations for 811 West Mendenhall located in Bozeman, Montana. These recommendations are based on our observation and evaluation of the site’s surface and subsurface conditions, our review and interpretation of available geologic information, and our previous experience in the Bozeman area. All individuals associated with this project should consult this report during the planning and preliminary design of the site improvements. It should be made available to other parties for information on factual data only and not as a warranty of actual subsurface conditions such as those interpreted herein. These recommendations are preliminary only and should not be used for final design purposes. We recommend that we be retained during design and construction to provide input and recommendations as necessary and to complete a Final Geotechnical Report for the property. We appreciate the opportunity to perform our geotechnical services. Sincerely, Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Craig R. Madson, PE Principal Geotechnical Engineer enc: List of Figures Figure 1 – Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Quadrangle Map Figure 3 – Geology Map Figure 4 – Borehole Location Map List of Appendices Appendix A - Test Pit Logs Appendix B - Laboratory Testing Results Appendix C - Limitations of Your Geotechnical Report Alex Weidner – KW Commercial October 23, 2020 Due Diligence Geotechnical Report 811 W. Mendenhall, Bozeman, MT Bozeman Office: 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718. ● Ph: (406) 582-0221 ● Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 7 REFERENCES 1. Steven E. Slagle (1995). “Geohydrologic Conditions and Land Use in the Gallatin Valley, Southwestern Montana”, USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 95-4034. 2. Morrison-Maierle (September 2020). “Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Media Station Property, Springbrook Addition: Lots 7 through 12”. LIST OF FIGURES FFiigguurree 11 –– VViicciinniittyy MMaapp FFiigguurree 22 –– QQuuaaddrraannggllee MMaapp FFiigguurree 33 –– GGeeoollooggyy MMaapp FFiigguurree 44 –– BBoorreehhoollee LLooccaattiioonnss © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com 811 W. MENDENHALL VICINITY MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 1 N © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com 811 W. MENDENHALL QUADRANGLE MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 2 N © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com 811 W. MENDENHALL GEOLOGY MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 3 N © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com 811 W. MENDENHALL BOREHOLE LOCATION MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 4 N BH# BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 LIST OF APPENDICES AAppppeennddiixx AA –– BBoorreehhoollee LLooggss AAppppeennddiixx BB –– LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss AAppppeennddiixx CC –– LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff YYoouurr GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall RReeppoorrtt APPENDIX A BBoorreehhoollee LLooggss DEPTH (FT)GEOLOGYLOGDESCRIPTIONOF MATERIALS SAMPLESN(UNCOR)BLOWS/FTMOISTURECONTENTOTHER FIELD ORSAMPLEINFORMATION 2.0 Geotechnical Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718 FAX (406) 582-5770 PHONE (406) 582-0221Land SurveyingCivil Engineering Structural Engineering LOG OF BORING PROJECT: 811 W. Mendenhall JOB #: 20-166 DATE: 10/20/2020 PAGE:1 of 1 LOCATION: Bozeman, MT ELEVATION: N/A DEPTH: 15.5' GW: 13.2' DRILL TYPE: Mobile B-61 FIELD ENGINEER: EGS BORING: BH-1 DRILLER: Steve w/O'Keefe CASING/HAMMER/SAMPLER: 6"/4"/140 lb. SSS General Notes:1. Borehole conducted on northernportion of project site onundeveloped lot.2. Ground surface covered with tallgrass.3. Coordinates for borehole locationare 45.68080, -111.04789. ·The beginning and endingdepths of the individual soillayers are approximate. End of Boring {0.0' - 1.0'}: TopsoilStiff; dark brown; organic sandy SILT withsmall roots; moist.S1-A @0.0'-1.5' 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 {1.0' - 7.0'}: Flood DepositStiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; slightly moist to moist. ·Fast/smooth drilling down to 7.0'. {7.0' - 15.5'}: AlluviumVery dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL withrounded cobbles; slightly moist to wet. ·Target bearing layer. ·Becoming denser and moister withdepth. ·2"-minus rounded cobbles observedin drill cuttings. ·Drilling grinding beginning at 7.0 to15.5'. ·Groundwater encountered at 13.2'. S1-B @2.0'-3.5' S1-C @4.0'-5.5' S1-D @7.0'-8.5' S1-E @9.0'-10.5' S1-F @12.0'-13.5' S1-G @14.0'-15.5' 5/6/612 6/6/410 3/4/48 16/34/3670 21/41/2162 10/19/2443 50-5" 10.0% NA 10.5% 3.7% 4.2% 12.9% 10.8% DEPTH (FT)GEOLOGYLOGDESCRIPTIONOF MATERIALS SAMPLESN(UNCOR)BLOWS/FTMOISTURECONTENTOTHER FIELD ORSAMPLEINFORMATION 2.0 Geotechnical Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718 FAX (406) 582-5770 PHONE (406) 582-0221Land SurveyingCivil Engineering Structural Engineering LOG OF BORING PROJECT: 811 W. Mendenhall JOB #: 20-166 DATE: 10/20/2020 PAGE:1 of 1 LOCATION: Bozeman, MT ELEVATION: N/A DEPTH: 15.5' GW: 11.8' DRILL TYPE: Mobile B-61 FIELD ENGINEER: EGS BORING: BH-2 DRILLER: Steve w/O'Keefe CASING/HAMMER/SAMPLER: 6"/4"/140 lb. SSS General Notes:1. Borehole conducted on centerportion of project site. (North ofexisting building).2. Ground surface covered withshort grass.3. Coordinates for borehole locationare 45.68067, -111.04788.4. 4"PVC piezometer placed inborehole for future monitoring.Piezometer is 10' long. ·The beginning and endingdepths of the individual soillayers are approximate. End of Boring {0.0' - 1.0'}: TopsoilStiff; dark brown; organic sandy SILT withsmall roots; moist.S2-A @0.0'-1.5' 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 {1.0' - 6.5'}: Flood DepositMedium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; slightly moist to moist. ·Fast/smooth drilling down to 6.5'. Atterberg Limits: S2-C at 4.0 to 5.5'PL = 21.8LL = 31.3PI = 9.5USGS Classification: CL (Lean CLAY) {6.5' - 15.5'}: AlluviumVery dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL withrounded cobbles; slightly moist to wet. ·Target bearing layer. ·Becoming denser and moister withdepth. ·1"-minus rounded cobbles observedin drill cuttings. ·Drilling grinding beginning at 6.5 to15.5'. ·Groundwater encountered at 11.8'. S2-B @2.0'-3.5' S2-C @4.0'-5.5' S2-D @7.0'-8.5' S2-E @9.0'-10.5' S2-F @12.0'-13.5' S2-G @14.0'-15.5' 5/4/48 3/2/35 2/3/36 19/22/2951 12/24/2347 28/38/5088 29/48/4391 15.1% 15.4% 18.4% 3.8% 4.1% 11.1% 11.5% DEPTH (FT)GEOLOGYLOGDESCRIPTIONOF MATERIALS SAMPLESN(UNCOR)BLOWS/FTMOISTURECONTENTOTHER FIELD ORSAMPLEINFORMATION 2.0 Geotechnical Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718 FAX (406) 582-5770 PHONE (406) 582-0221Land SurveyingCivil Engineering Structural Engineering LOG OF BORING PROJECT: 811 W. Mendenhall JOB #: 20-166 DATE: 10/20/2020 PAGE:1 of 1 LOCATION: Bozeman, MT ELEVATION: N/A DEPTH: 15.5' GW: 15.2' DRILL TYPE: Mobile B-61 FIELD ENGINEER: EGS BORING: BH-3 DRILLER: Steve w/O'Keefe CASING/HAMMER/SAMPLER: 6"/4"/140 lb. SSS General Notes:1. Borehole conducted on southportion of project site. (South ofexisting building).2. Ground surface covered with sod.3. Coordinates for borehole locationare 45.68051, -111.04783. ·The beginning and endingdepths of the individual soillayers are approximate. End of Boring {0.0' - 1.0'}: TopsoilStiff; dark brown; organic sandy SILT withsmall roots; moist.S3-A @0.0'-1.5' 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 {1.0' - 9.5'}: Flood DepositMedium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; slightly moist to moist. ·Fast/smooth drilling down to 9.5'. {9.5' - 15.5'}: Alluvium Very dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL withrounded cobbles; slightly moist to wet. ·Target bearing layer. ·Becoming denser and moister withdepth. ·3"-minus rounded cobbles observed in drill cuttings. ·Drilling grinding beginning at 9.5 to15.5'. ·Groundwater encountered at 15.2'. S3-B @2.0'-3.5' S3-C @4.0'-5.5' S3-D @7.0'-8.5' S3-E @9.0'-10.5' S3-F @12.0'-13.5' S3-G @14.0'-15.5' 3/4/59 4/4/37 3/3/36 3/3/47 9/34/3468 6/24/3559 50-4" 21.0% 14.2% 13.6% 21.2% 12.6% 8.5% NA APPENDIX B LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216) Project: 811 W. MendenhallProject Number: 20-166 Sample Identification: Varies Soil Classification: Varies Date Sampled: 10/20/2020 Date Tested: 10/20/2020 Tested By: JGE Sample Identification:S1-A S1-C S1-D S1-E S1-F S1-G S2-A S2-B S2-C Exploration Location:BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-2 BH-2 BH-2 Sample Depth (ft):0.0-1.5 4.0-5.5 7.0-8.5 9.0-10.5 12.0-13.5 14.0-15.5 0.0-1.5 2.0-3.5 4.0-5.5 Container Number:J D OO KK A TT NN JJ QQ Weight of Container:31.70 31.77 31.11 31.20 32.01 30.95 30.91 30.94 31.23 Container + Wet Soil:140.93 145.91 191.79 179.83 235.58 79.05 131.19 152.74 123.16 Container + Dry Soil:130.99 135.04 186.13 173.80 212.38 74.35 118.00 136.49 108.89 Weight of Water:9.94 10.87 5.66 6.03 23.20 4.70 13.19 16.25 14.27 Weight of Dry Soil:99.29 103.27 155.02 142.60 180.37 43.40 87.09 105.55 77.66 Moisture Content:10.0%10.5%3.7%4.2%12.9%10.8%15.1%15.4%18.4% Sample Identification:S2-D S2-E S2-F S2-G S3-A S3-B S3-C S3-D S3-E Exploration Location:BH-2 BH-2 BH-2 BH-2 BH-3 BH-3 BH-3 BH-3 BH-3 Sample Depth (ft):7.0-8.5 9.0-10.5 12.0-13.5 14.0-15.5 0.0-1.5 2.0-3.5 4.0-5.5 7.0-8.5 9.0-10.5 Container Number:DD O GG BB EE CC AA T Q Weight of Container:30.87 48.97 48.27 48.37 49.14 49.83 48.99 51.58 50.92 Container + Wet Soil:156.18 307.27 339.86 269.27 192.63 231.97 219.02 258.95 232.07 Container + Dry Soil:151.56 297.10 310.77 246.51 167.70 209.33 198.63 222.64 211.77 Weight of Water:4.62 10.17 29.09 22.76 24.93 22.64 20.39 36.31 20.30 Weight of Dry Soil:120.69 248.13 262.50 198.14 118.56 159.50 149.64 171.06 160.85 Moisture Content:3.8%4.1%11.1%11.5%21.0%14.2%13.6%21.2%12.6% Reviewed By: 32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718Phone (406) 582-0221 Fax (406) 582-5770 Moisture Content Determinations MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216) Project: 811 W. MendenhallProject Number: 20-166 Sample Identification: Varies Soil Classification: Varies Date Sampled: 10/20/2020 Date Tested: 10/20/2020 Tested By: JGE Sample Identification:S3-F Exploration Location:BH-3 Sample Depth (ft):12.0-13.5 Container Number:P Weight of Container:49.43 Container + Wet Soil:237.27 Container + Dry Soil:222.48 Weight of Water:14.79 Weight of Dry Soil:173.05 Moisture Content:8.5% Sample Identification: Exploration Location: Sample Depth (ft): Container Number: Weight of Container: Container + Wet Soil: Container + Dry Soil: Weight of Water: Weight of Dry Soil: Moisture Content: Reviewed By: 32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718Phone (406) 582-0221 Fax (406) 582-5770 Moisture Content Determinations ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318) Project: 811 W. Mendenhall Project Number: 20-166 Sample Identification: S2-C @ 4.0 - 5.5'Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL) Date Sampled: 10/20/2020 Date Tested: 10/20/2020 Tested By: JGE Test Results Plastic Limit:21.8 Liquid Limit:31.3 Plasticity Index:9.5 Reviewed By:_________________ A-Line CL ML or OL CH MH or OH CL-ML ML0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Plasticity IndexLiquid Limit PLASTICITY CHART 32 Discovery Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone (406) 582-0221 Fax (406) 582-5770 APPENDIX C LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff YYoouurr GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall RReeppoorrtt    LIMITATIONS OF YOUR GEOTECHNICAL REPORT      GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS ARE PROJECT AND CLIENT SPECIFIC      Geotechnical investigations, analyses, and recommendations are project and client specific.  Each project  and each client have individual criterion for risk, purpose, and cost of evaluation that are considered in  the development of scope of geotechnical investigations, analyses and recommendations.  For example,  slight changes to building types or use may alter the applicability of a particular foundation type, as can a  particular client’s aversion or acceptance of risk.  Also, additional risk is often created by scope‐of service  limitations imposed by the client and a report prepared for a particular client (say a construction  contractor) may not be applicable or adequate for another client (say an architect, owner, or developer  for example), and vice‐versa.  No one should apply a geotechnical report for any purpose other than that  originally contemplated without first conferring with the consulting geotechnical engineer.  Geotechnical  reports should be made available to contractors and professionals for information on factual data only  and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions, such as those interpreted in the exploration logs and  discussed in the report.      GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE      Geotechnical conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity.  Geotechnical  reports are based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration.  Construction  operations such as cuts, fills, or drains in the vicinity of the site and natural events such as floods,  earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations may affect subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing  adequacy of a geotechnical report.       GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE       The site exploration and sampling process interprets subsurface conditions using drill action, soil sampling,  resistance to excavation, and other subjective observations at discrete points on the surface and in the  subsurface.  The data is then interpreted by the engineer, who applies professional judgment to render  an opinion about over‐all subsurface conditions.  Actual conditions in areas not sampled or observed may  differ from those predicted in your report.  Retaining your consultant to advise you during the design  process, review plans and specifications, and then to observe subsurface construction operations can  minimize the risks associated with the uncertainties associated with such interpretations.  The conclusions  described in your geotechnical report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that  conditions revealed through selective exploration and sampling are indicative of actual      Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive.  Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582‐0221 Page 2 conditions throughout a site.  A more complete view of subsurface conditions is often revealed during  earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to observe earthwork to confirm conditions  and/or to provide revised recommendations if necessary.  Allied Engineering cannot assume responsibility  or liability for the adequacy of the report’s recommendations if another party is retained to observe  construction.      EXPLORATIONS LOGS SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT      Final explorations logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs (assembled  by site personnel), field test results, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data.   Only final exploration logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical reports.  These final logs  should not be redrawn for inclusion in Architectural or other design drawings, because drafters may  commit errors or omissions in the transfer process.     To reduce the likelihood of exploration log misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to  the complete geotechnical report and should be advised of its limitations and purpose.  While a contractor  may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss  the report with Allied Engineering and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to  obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost estimating purposes.        OWNERSHIP OF RISK AND STANDARD OF CARE      Because geotechnical engineering is much less exact than other design disciplines, there is more risk  associated with geotechnical parameters than with most other design issues.  Given the hidden and  variable character of natural soils and geologic hazards, this risk is impossible to eliminate with any  amount of study and exploration.  Appropriate geotechnical exploration, analysis, and recommendations  can identify and reduce these risks.  However, assuming an appropriate geotechnical evaluation, the  remaining risk of unknown soil conditions and other geo‐hazards typically belongs to the owner of a  project unless specifically transferred to another party such as a contractor, insurance company, or  engineer.  The geotechnical engineer’s duty is to provide professional services in accordance with their  stated scope and consistent with the standard of practice at the present time and in the subject geographic  area.  It is not to provide insurance against geo‐hazards or unanticipated soil conditions.        The conclusions and recommendations expressed in this report are opinions based our professional  judgment and the project parameters as relayed by the client.  The conclusions and recommendations  assume that site conditions are not substantially different than those exposed by the explorations.  If  during construction, subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the explorations are  observed or appear to be present, Allied Engineering should be advised at once such that we may review  those conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary.      RETENTION OF SOIL SAMPLES      Allied Engineering will typically retain soil samples for one month after issuing the geotechnical report.  If  you would like to hold the samples for a longer period of time, you should make specific arrangements to  have the samples held longer or arrange to take charge of the samples yourself.