Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout016 - Appendix L.2 - Geotech Report Addendum #1 MONTANA | WASHINGTON | IDAHO | NORTH DAKOTA | PENNSYLVANIA 406.586.0277 tdhengineering.com 234 E Babcock St, Suite 3 Bozeman, MT 59715 June 25, 2024 Mr. Kerry Nickerson S2K Miller Holding, LLC 4643 S Ulster St, Ste. 1500 Denver, CO 80237 RE: CANOPY HOTEL BOZEMAN, MONTANA GEOTECHNICAL ADDENDUM #1 TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. B23-017-003 Dear Mr. Nickerson, Based on discussions with your design team, we understand that Allied Engineering Services, Inc. performed a geophysical investigation of the property in April of 2024 to assess the seismic site class for the property based on alternative methods. It is our understanding that you desire TD&H to provide an opinion regarding the suitability of the results provided by Allied Engineering. The seismic Site Class provided in our geotechnical report utilized standard penetration test (SPT) data within the depth of our investigation along with supporting well log information to the requisite 100-ft depth to assess the seismic site class in accordance with IBC methods. While our classification approach is an acceptable methodology, a geophysical study is a more accurate method as it provides direct measurements of shear wave velocity (Vs) within the 100-ft depth. Geophysical methods, such as the Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) utilized by Allied, is a specialized testing method that yields a continuous profile of shear wave velocity with depth, offering a detailed and precise subsurface characterization. In our opinion, the seismic Site Class designations as identified in the geophysical report prepared by Allied is appropriate for use in lieu of the site class provided in our original report, as the MASW method supersedes our SPT correlation method. However, TD&H did not oversee the geophysical study completed by Allied and provides no guarantee or assurance regarding the accuracy of their results. The intent of this addendum is to summarize additional information provided from work performed by others. It shall serve as an addendum to the original geotechnical report, dated March 2024, and is not to replace the overall engineering assessment or recommendations outside the changes specifically noted above. We trust that the additional information above is adequate to allow the design team to continue their work on this project. Please let us know if there are any additional questions or concerns. Sincerely, June 25, 2024 PAGE NO. 2 tdhengineering.com Nic Couch EI Craig Nadeau PE & Principal Geotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Manager TD&H ENGINEERING TD&H ENGINEERING APPENDIX: MASW SEISMIC SURVEY (ALLIED ENGINEERING, INC) J:\2023\B23-017 32 South Rouse\05_DESIGN (Tech & REPORTS)\GEOTECH\FINAL\SITE CLASS ADDENDUM\B23-017 32 SOUTH ROUSE ADDENDUM #1.DOC Civil Engineering ● Geotechnical Engineering ● Land Surveying ● Construction Services Corporate Office 32 Discovery Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 Ph: (406) 582-0221 Fax: (406) 582-5770 www.alliedengineering.com April 30, 2024 Miller Properties Group, LLC 4643 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500 Denver, CO 80237 Email: kerry.nickerson@millerglobal.com RE: MASW Seismic Survey, 32 South Rouse Dear Mr. Nickerson: This report presents our seismic evaluation of the 32 South Rouse site in Bozeman, Montana. The information provided herein is based on a review of geologic maps and geotechnical data for the project area, an on-site geophysical investigation of the property, and previous experience gained during our involvement with similar developments in and around Bozeman. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY The 32 South Rouse site is a series of 3 adjacent developed properties totaling 0.882 acres located immediately northeast of the intersection of East Babcock Street and South Rouse Avenue in Bozeman, MT. The legal description of the properties are Lots 18 - 21 of Rouse 1st Add, Block A, located in Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 6 East, Principal Meridian Montana, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is bound to the west, north, and south by public Right of Way (ROW), and to the east by an unimproved property (see Figures 1 and 2 for site location maps). Presently, the Salvation Army building is found on the westernmost subject property with adjacent parking to the south and east. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The geologic map for the area prepared by Lonn and English (2002) indicates the site is underlain by alluvium of modern channels and flood plains (Qal). An excerpt from the geology map is provided as part of Figure 4. This interpretation is consistent with the borings logged by TD&H in 2023 and 2024, which encountered topsoil, fill, or improved surfaces overlying about 5 to 10 feet of soft to medium stiff lean clay. These fine-grain soils were underlain by course- grained sands and gravels which were interbedded with seams/layers of very stiff lean clay and clayey sand. These conditions extended to the depth of the borings (up to 50 feet). Geologic mapping indicates the alluvium is underlain by the Upper Tertiary Sixmile Creek Formation (Tsc & Tscg). In the Bozeman area, this formation is primarily a course-grained brown-to-gray conglomerate. The depth of this older formation is unknown at the site, S2K Miller Babcock, LLC April 30, 2024 32 South Rouse MASW AESI Project: 24-057 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 2 although there is a possibility the borings may have just been touching into it at the bottom of the deeper explorations. METHODOLOGY A geophysical survey was conducted on 20 April 2024, by Jesse Moyles, EI, and Erik Schnaderbeck, PE, both of whom are geotechnical engineers with AESI. The survey was conducted via Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) wherein 24 vertically polarized and calibrated 4.5-Hz geophones manufactured by Seismic Source were used to analyze Raleigh Wave propagation across the site. For this study, the geophones were connected via a 24-channel spread cable to a DAQlink 4 MASW Seismograph, also manufactured by Seismic Source. The geophones were deployed linearly, east to west (see Figure 3), on a 7-foot interval, for a total geophone array length of 161 feet. The array was located near the southern property boundary, with the first receiver located at approximately 45.67846, -111.03134, and the last receiver located at approximately 45.67844, -111.03084. Each geophone was firmly seated into the soil utilizing a spike connection or attached to a steel sled for improved surfaces (i.e., asphalt or concrete). Surface waves were generated with a 20-lb sledgehammer impacting a rigid plastic or hard rubber strike plate. The sledgehammer was instrumented and connected to the seismograph via a hammer switch and cable. The acquisition time was set to 4 seconds with a 0.5 millisecond sample interval. Shots were taken at 1, 6, 12, and 24 receiver spacings on each side of the array, and stacks of 5 shots were recorded and stored in SEG-2 format for further processing. DATA PROCESSING Data were processed utilizing the ParkSEIS 3.0 Auto automated MASW processing software from Park Seismic, LLC. The SEG-2 files were pre-loaded with acquisition parameters (shot and receiver spacings) which were verified upon processing. Dispersion images were generated for each SEG-2 file and subsequently stacked to produce a single-best image (Figure R1). Some automated data smoothing, gain adjustment, and normalization were also conducted within the ParkSEIS software to enhance the overall quality of the dispersion image. S2K Miller Babcock, LLC April 30, 2024 32 South Rouse MASW AESI Project: 24-057 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 3 Figure R1 – 32 South Rouse dispersion image. The acquired dispersion image demonstrates well-defined amplitudes for frequencies between approximately 8 and 32 Hz. Although amplitudes are much smaller beyond 32 Hz, a fundamental mode is still discernable at frequencies as high as about 43 Hz. Figure R2 – 32 South Rouse dispersion curve extraction. Once boundary conditions were established, a dispersion curve was extracted based on the highest amplitudes within the pre-defined boundaries. The extracted dispersion curve is shown in Figure R2. S2K Miller Babcock, LLC April 30, 2024 32 South Rouse MASW AESI Project: 24-057 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 4 INVERSION A one-dimensional shear wave velocity profile was produced by inversion analysis utilizing the ParkSEIS 3.0 Auto software. For this analysis, layer properties were defined based on the boring information provided by TD&H and our interpretation of the geologic information. Multiple iterations were conducted until a best-fit model was produced. In this case, the shear wave velocity profile produces a modeled dispersion curve that is a 96.5 percent fit to the measured curve. Red-dot measured vs blue-dot modeled dispersion curves are shown in Figure R3. Figure R3 – 32 South Rouse Shear Wave Velocity Profile. As shown in Figure R3, the modeled shear wave velocity profile (solid blue line) increases from about 500 ft/s at the surface to approximately 1,300 ft/s at a depth of 10 feet. Measured shear wave velocities then decrease slightly before increasing to about 1,700 ft/s at a depth of approximately 50 feet. Beyond 70 feet, shear wave velocities jumped to 2,250 ft/s, which extended to a depth of over 100 feet. The estimated velocity profile provided above is generally consistent with both the geotechnical information provided by TD&H and our interpretation of the available geologic information. SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION Per ASCE 7-16 and ASCE 7-22, and barring any special circumstances, seismic site classification is determined based on the average shear wave velocity as measured from the ground surface to a depth of 100 feet. Moreover, ASCE 7-22 only allows the assignment of Site Classes A and B S2K Miller Babcock, LLC April 30, 2024 32 South Rouse MASW AESI Project: 24-057 32 Discovery Drive . Bozeman, Montana 59718 . Ph: (406) 582-0221 . Fax: (406) 582-5770 Page 5 based on measured shear wave velocities and not velocities correlated from other data (CPT, SPT, etc.). The MASW survey of 20 April 2024 fulfills these requirements by directly measuring in-situ shear wave velocities on site. As demonstrated in Figure R4, the average estimated shear wave velocity at this site measured from the ground surface to a depth of 100 feet (Vs100) is approximately 1,274 ft/s, as calculated according to the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program and ASCE standards. The subject property is therefore assigned a Seismic Site Classification “C” per ASCE-7-16 and a Seismic Site Classification “CD” per ASCE 7-22. Per ASCE 7-16, the transition from Site Class D to Site Class C is 1,200 ft/s. Figure R4 – 32 South Rouse Seismic Site Classification (ASCE 7-16). Site-specific seismic loading and response spectra can be obtained from the web-based Hazard Tool provided by the ASCE (https://ascehazardtool.org/). The user is required to input parameters that are used to obtain site-specific seismic information. The user will need to specify the applicable standard (ASCE 7-16 or ASCE 7-22), the occupancy risk category, the seismic site classification, and the site location. LIST OF FIGURES FFiigguurree 11 –– VViicciinniittyy MMaapp FFiigguurree 22 –– QQuuaaddrraannggllee MMaapp FFiigguurree 33 –– MMAASSWW AArrrraayy FFiigguurree 44 –– GGeeoollooggyy MMaapp FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Land Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718 PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770 www.alliedengineering.com 32 SOUTH ROUSE MASW VICINITY MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 1 N FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Land Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718 PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770 www.alliedengineering.com 32 SOUTH ROUSE MASW QUADRANGLE MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 2 N FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Land Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718 PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770 www.alliedengineering.com 32 SOUTH ROUSE MASW MASW ARRAY BOZEMAN, MONTANA 3 N FIGURECivil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Land Surveying 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718 PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770 www.alliedengineering.com 32 SOUTH ROUSE MASW GEOLOGY MAP BOZEMAN, MONTANA 4 N LIST OF APPENDICES AAppppeennddiixx AA –– GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall BBoorriinnggss AAppppeennddiixx BB –– LLiimmiittaattiioonnss APPENDIX A GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall BBoorriinnggss ? ? ?B-4 B-3 B-5 B-1 B-2 ³ 0 30 6015 Feet ? PROJECT LOCATION BORING LOCATION 406.761.3010 • tdhengineering.comService Layer Credits: NatGeo_World_Map: National Geographic, Esri, Garmin, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI,NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp.BORE HOLE LOCATION MAP1800 RIVER DR. NO. • GREAT FALLS, MONTANA 59401K:\2023\B23-017 32 South Rouse\05_DESIGN (Tech & Reports)\GEOTECH\BOREHOLE MAP\B23-017 BOREHOLE MAP.2024.03.05.aprxB23-017 BOREHOLE MAP.2024.03.05.APRX DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: DATE DRAWN: JOB NO.: FIELDBOOK:REVDATEREVISIONCRN 1BOZEMAN, MONTANA32 SOUTH ROUSE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES DRW 03/05/2024 B23-017-003 FIGURE 0 4.5 9 13.5 18 22.5 27 31.5 TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY with Sand - very soft to soft, dark brown to black, moist, organics, trace gravel Sandy Lean CLAY - soft, brown, moist, organics to 4 feet - See Figure 9 for consolidation test result Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Clay and Sand - medium dense, brown, moist, some red and rusty brown throughout Clayey GRAVEL with Sand - medium dense to very dense, brown, moist to wet, some red / light brown / white throughout No Recovery Bottom of Boring (Groundwater Monitoring Well Installed Following Completion) Screen from 24.0 to 14.0 feet Sand from 24.0 to 10.0 feet Bentonite from 10.0 to 1.5 feet Sand, Concrete, and Well Cover from 1.5 to 0.0 feet 3.8 6.8 9.0 24.0 2-1-2 N=3 2-2-2 N=4 PUSH 5-5-6 N=11 5-4-9 N=13 19-32- 50/0.4 25-50/ 0.4 50/0.0 T 82/0.9 50/0.4 50/0.0 LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-01SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Nic Couch, EI 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Haztech Drilling Truck-Mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch I.D. HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. June 7, 2023 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.2 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Sodded Lawn SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 1 of 1 0 4.5 9 13.5 18 22.5 27 31.5 TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY with Sand - appears soft to firm, dark brown to black, moist, organics FILL: Clayey GRAVEL with Sand - relatively dense, dark brown, moist, cobbles, chunk of concrete Sandy Lean CLAY - soft, brown, moist Clayey SAND - medium dense, brown, moist Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Clay and Sand - medium dense to very dense, brown, moist Clayey GRAVEL with Sand - very dense, brown, moist to wet - Large cobbles / boulders, and some creme brown below 15 feet No Recovery - Brown to dark gray and some maroon below 25 feet Bottom of Boring (Groundwater Monitoring Well Installed Following Completion) Screen from 25.0 to 15.0 feet Sand from 25.0 to 10.0 feet Bentonite from 10.0 to 1.5 feet Sand, Concrete, and Well Cover from 1.5 to 0.0 feet 1.0 1.5 4.5 6.0 9.5 26.4 3-3-3 N=6 6-7-7 N=14 16-27- 50/0.4 17-42- 23 N= 65 24-42- 50/0.4 50/0.33 35-47- 50/0.4 77/0.9 65 92/0.9 50/0.33 97/0.9 LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-02SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Nic Couch, EI 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Haztech Drilling Truck-Mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch I.D. HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. June 8, 2023 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.3 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Sodded Lawn SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 1 of 1 0 4.5 9 13.5 18 22.5 27 31.5 Asphalt Pavement - 4" thick Base Coarse - Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - brown, moist, coarse, subrounded LEAN CLAY with Sand - medium stiff to stiff, dark brown, moist, medium plasticity, lenses of sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - dense to very dense, brown, moist, coarse, subrounded and subangular Clayey SAND with Gravel - very dense, brown, wet, coarse Silty SAND - medium dense, light brown, wet, fine, homogeneous, moderate oxidation Poorly-graded SAND with Clay and Gravel - dense, brown, wet, medium grained, moderate oxidation 0.3 0.8 8.7 24.0 28.0 32.0 3-3-4 N=7 4-4-4 N=8 5-7-8 N=15 11-11- 14 N= 25 23-32- 29 N= 61 45-50/ 1" 44-50/ 5.5" 8-12-17 N=29 61 95/7" 94/11.5" LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-03SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Travis D. Gilskey, PE 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Paul Brey with Haztech Drilling Truck-mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. 2/21/2024 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.4 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Asphalt Pavement SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 1 of 2 36 40.5 45 49.5 54 58.5 63 Clayey SAND - dense, light brown, wet, fine, homogeneous, moderate oxidation Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - very dense, brown, wet, coarse, subrounded and subangular Poorly-graded SAND with Clay - dense, light brown, wet, medium grained, moderate oxidation, trace of gravel Bottom of Boring 37.0 44.5 47.0 51.2 13-21- 14 N= 35 6-11-19 N=30 13-50/ 3" 13-17- 20 N= 37 63/9" LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-03SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Travis D. Gilskey, PE 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Paul Brey with Haztech Drilling Truck-mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. 2/21/2024 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.4 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Asphalt Pavement SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 2 of 2 0 4.5 9 13.5 18 22.5 27 31.5 Asphalt Pavement - 4" thick Base Coarse - Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - brown, moist, coarse, subrounded Poorly-graded SAND with Clay - loose, dark brown, moist, fine Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - medium dense to very dense, brown, moist, coarse, subrounded - light brown - tan - wet Bottom of Boring 0.3 1.1 6.0 26.0 3-2-3 N=5 3-5-6 N=11 6-6-9 N=15 5-10-11 N=21 21-29- 33 N= 62 30-40- 50/4" 23-33- 38 N= 71 62 90/10" 71 LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-04SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Travis D. Gilskey, PE 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Paul Brey with Haztech Drilling Truck-mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. 2/19/2024 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.5 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Asphalt Pavement SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 1 of 1 0 4.5 9 13.5 18 22.5 27 31.5 Concrete Pavement - 3 1/2" thick Base Coarse - Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - brown, moist, coarse, subrounded LEAN CLAY with Sand - stiff, dark brown, moist, medium plasticity, lense of sand Poorly-graded GRAVEL with Sand - medium dense to very dense, brown, moist, coarse, subrounded and subangular, scattered cobbles - wet 0.3 1.0 3.8 18-7-4 N=11 2-3-7 N=10 9-7-6 N=13 4-7-6 N=13 10-14- 15 N= 29 50/4" 33-41- 50/5" 33-48- 43 N= 91 42-38- 50/5" 50/4" 91/11" 91 88/11" LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-05SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Travis D. Gilskey, PE 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Paul Brey with Haztech Drilling Truck-mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. 2/20/2024 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.6 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Concrete Pavement SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 1 of 2 36 40.5 45 49.5 54 58.5 63 Poorly-graded SAND with Clay and Gravel - dense, brown, wet, fine and medium grained Sandy LEAN CLAY - very stiff, tan, moist, medium plasticity, homogeneous Bottom of Boring 34.0 38.0 51.2 8-16-33 N=49 4-5-12 N=17 6-6-8 N=14 26-11- 15 N= 26 LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-05SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits Field Moisture content 32 South Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level Grab/composite sample 1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Travis D. Gilskey, PE 2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Paul Brey with Haztech Drilling Truck-mounted Longyear BK-81 with 4.25-inch HSA2-1/2-inch I.D. ring sampler GNP = Granular and Nonplastic 3-inch I.D. thin-walled sampler Note: The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries may be gradual or transitional. 2/20/2024 B23-017-001 No sample recovery Figure No.6 SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION SURFACE:Concrete Pavement SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSPT BLOWCOUNTSSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)PENETRATION RESISTANCE/MOISTURE CONTENT 0 10 20 30 40 50 = BLOWS PER FOOT = MOISTURE CONTENT 2 of 2 APPENDIX B LLiimmiittaattiioonnss 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.