HomeMy WebLinkAbout010 Appendix I - Geotechnical Reports
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR:
Stockyard Properties
Bozeman, Montana
July 2021
Project 21-108
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1
SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................. 1
GEOLOGY OF THE SITE .................................................................................................................... 2
EXPLORATIONS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 2
Subsurface Explorations .............................................................................................................. 2
Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................................. 3
Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................................................. 3
Random Fill .................................................................................................................................. 4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... 5
PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 7
UNDERGROUND UTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 9
COLD/WINTER WEATHER CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................... 9
AESI FUTURE INVOLVEMENT .......................................................................................................... 9
LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 10
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 11
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
List of Tables
• Table 1. Depth to Gravel
• Table 2. Depth to Groundwater
• Table 3. Depth of Random Fill at Test Pit Locations
• Table 4. Pavement Section 1 – Local Streets – 150,000 ESALs
• Table 5. Pavement Section 2 – Collector Streets – 550,000 ESALs
• Table 6. Pavement Section Under Unstable Subgrade Conditions
List of Figures
• Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
• Figure 2 – Quadrangle Map
• Figure 3 – Test Pit Location Map
• Figure 4 – Geology Map
• Figure 5 – Groundwater Map
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page ii
List of Appendices
• Appendix A – Test Pit Logs
• Appendix B – Laboratory Testing Results
• Appendix C – Pavement Section Design
• Appendix D – Limitations of Your Geotechnical Report
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
This report and attachments provide our preliminary geotechnical recommendations and
pavement design for the proposed improvements at the Stockyard Properties located near the
intersection of Story Mill Road and East Griffin Drive in Bozeman, Montana. The information
contained herein is based on an investigation of the property’s topographical and subsurface
conditions, a review of geologic maps and literature for the project area, and our previous
experience in the area. The purpose of this report is to provide a description of the site’s soil and
groundwater conditions as well as preliminary recommendations pertaining to site development,
earthwork, foundations, and pavement sections for new local and collector roads.
The Stockyard Properties is roughly 15.33-acres and consists of six (6) lots. These properties are
legally described as Tract K and Tract 23A of Certificate of Survey 2547 and Tracts 1, 2, 3, 4
Remainder of Certificate of Survey 1147A, located within a Portion of Sections 5 and 6, Township
2 South, Range 6 East and a Portion of Section 31, Township 1 South, Range 6 East, Principal
Meridian Montana, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. See Figures 1 through 3 for site
location maps.
The subject properties are located directly northwest and southwest of the intersection of East
Griffin Drive and Story Mill Road in northeast Bozeman, Montana. The site is relatively flat with
gentle sloping to the southwest towards the East Gallatin River and some isolated benching
around existing structures and access roads. The East Gallatin River borders the southwest
portion of the Stockyard Properties before flowing west around the adjacent Story Mill Park.
We anticipate development across the property will consist of a combination of slab-on-grade,
crawlspace, and basement foundations based on the proposed zoning of Community Business
District (Mixed) and Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use District. Development will also include local
and collector roads for access and connectivity to the existing nearby infrastructure.
This area of Bozeman was formerly used as the cattle stockyards and includes various existing
buildings some of which are still used. Based on the historic land use, random undocumented fill
is found at various locations across the property. The random fill includes construction debris,
former pipe networks, and other deleterious materials. Given the presence of undocumented
fill and varying soil conditions, each proposed development (or portion thereof) will need to be
assessed on an individual basis as the plans progress.
SCOPE OF WORK
The Scope of Services for the Geotechnical Investigation and Preliminary Report included the
following elements:
• Excavation of nine (9) test pits within the Stockyard Properties development area. The
location of each test pit is shown in Figure 3.
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 2
• Installation of groundwater monitoring wells in four (4) of the test pits spatially situated
across the property.
• Laboratory testing of select samples from the test pits.
• Discussion of geotechnical issues identified.
• Preliminary development recommendations.
• Asphalt pavement section materials and design thickness for local and collector roads.
GEOLOGY OF THE SITE
The geologic map for the area prepared by Lonn and English in 2002 (Figure 4) indicates the site
is underlain by Quaternary-aged Alluvial Deposits of Active Channels and Present Flood Plains
(Qal) and Alluvium of Younger Terraces (Qaty), which consist of “well-rounded, well-sorted, and
bouldery gravel and sand with some beds of clayey silt.” Our test pit findings were consistent
with the geologic mapping. However, in at least one instance, the depth of random fill found
prevented us from reaching the native alluvial gravels (i.e., we were at the extents of our reach
with the equipment used).
EXPLORATIONS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface Explorations
Subsurface conditions were investigated on June 15, 2021, under the direction of Erik
Schnaderbeck, a geotechnical engineer with Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Nine (9) test pit
explorations, identified as TP-1 through TP-9 were excavated across the Stockyard Properties
using a Hitachi 160 excavator provided and operated by RLS Construction. Test pits were located
in areas requested by Stahly Engineers for exploration. The test pit locations are shown on the
attached Figure 3.
During the explorations, soil and groundwater conditions were characterized, measured, and
logged. The relative densities of the exposed soils were estimated based on the ease or difficulty
of digging, probing of the test pit walls, pocket penetrometer readings, and overall stability of
the completed excavations. Copies of our test pit logs are provided in Appendix A. The logs
provide assorted field information, such as soil depths and descriptions, groundwater conditions,
relative density data, and a sketch of the soil stratigraphy. Please be aware that the detail
provided in the logs cannot be summarized in a paragraph; therefore, it is important to review
the logs in conjunction with this report. Following completion of the fieldwork, the test pit
locations were backfilled and cleaned up to the extent possible. Each was staked with a wooden
lath that identified it accordingly. If any test pits will underlie future site improvements, they
should be completely re-excavated and backfilled in properly compacted lifts to avoid
undesirable settlements.
Select soil samples were brought back to the laboratory for further testing and classification.
Laboratory testing results are provided in Appendix B.
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 3
Subsurface Conditions
The native soil strata was relatively similar across all nine test pits, although did include varying
depths of random undocumented fill overlying these native soils. Generally, the native soil
conditions (below any random fill encountered) consisted of 0.75 to 1.5 feet of organic topsoil
overlying medium stiff to very stiff, moist to very moist, fine-grain flood deposits of sandy silt and
lean clay. The fine-grain flood deposits ranged from 2.0 to as much as 10.5 feet thick. Where
encountered, the underlying alluvial gravels were medium dense to dense and consisted of
clayey/sandy/silty gravel with 6 to 12-inch minus cobbles. The alluvium was moist to wet
depending on the presence of groundwater. See Table 1 below for the depth to the alluvial
gravels at various locations across the property.
Table 1. Depth to Gravel
TEST PIT DEPTH TO ALLUVIAL GRAVELS (FEET)
1 11.0
2 13.0
3 N/A – Fill in this area
4 N/A – Drainfield in this area
5 7.0
6 3.5
7 11.0
8 10.5
9 7.0
One option to provide foundation support for various proposed structures is to bear foundation
within the medium dense to dense alluvial deposits found at varying depths or granular structural
fill founded on these materials. Other alternative foundation support options are also provided
later in this report. Some development of these options can be provided in separate individual
geotechnical reports as the development planning progresses.
Groundwater Conditions
At the time of our excavation during late-spring, soil conditions were slightly moist to very moist,
becoming wet with depth. Groundwater was encountered in five of the nine test pits. See Table
2 for the depth to groundwater across the site. Recognize that groundwater levels will likely rise
even further during the course of the summer and are largely dependent on the degree of run-
off during a given year and irrigation practices in the area.
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 4
Table 2. Depth to Groundwater
TEST PIT DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (FEET)
1 N/A
2 N/A
3 11.0
4 N/A
5 13.0
6 4.5
7 13.0
8 13.5
9 N/A
Groundwater monitoring wells were installed in TP-1, TP-3, TP-6, and TP-8 for monitoring this
season and in the future as needed. A groundwater monitoring program was instituted following
the completion of test pits which includes weekly monitoring across the property through late
August. Static water levels will be measured each week and compiled into a spreadsheet that will
be sent to the Client following completion.
Given the potential for elevated groundwater levels across the property, we suggest the
incorporation of subsurface drainage measures as outlined in this report.
Random Fill
At various locations across the property, we encountered random undocumented fill material
including construction debris, former pipe networks, and other deleterious materials. We also
noted the presence of obvious stockpiles of concrete debris, raised benches (possible fill), and
depressions (old borrow pits) at various locations across the property. The presence of random
fill is noted in our test pit logs. Please recognize that other areas of undocumented random fill
outside our test pit locations are very likely.
The random fill can best be described as soft to medium stiff, silt and clay with varying amounts
of gravel. The random fill also included organics and debris which can make it more easily
identifiable when encountered.
Random fill can be subject to undesirable and excessive settlements under typical foundation
and slab loads. Since there appears to be no rhyme or reason to the fill placement on the site, we
suggest a bid item for each development to include the removal of fill and replacement with
structural fill material. This will provide the most accurate way of quantifying fill within
development areas. Table 3 provides a summary of depth of fill at the test pit locations only.
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 5
Table 3. Depth of Random Fill at Test Pit Locations
TEST PIT DEPTH OF FILL (FEET)
1 N/A
2 1.5
3 14.5
4 1.75 (Drainfield in area, difficult to distinguish)
5 N/A
6 1.5
7 Up to 9.0 (depending on location within test pit)
8 5.0
9 0.5
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Provided below are the geotechnical-related recommendations that we believe should be
considered when developing the Stockyard Properties. These recommendations are based on
previous geotechnical engineering experience in the area and specific observations made during
our on-site investigation. Seismic design factors, lateral earth pressures, exterior concrete slabs,
interior concrete slabs, surface drainage, and sub-surface drainage will be assessed on an
individual basis. In the event any existing structures are to be renovated we can provide
recommendations individual to that structure.
Given the proposed mixed-use, we anticipate a combination of crawlspace, basement, and slab-
on-grade foundations depending on location, proposed use, and depth to groundwater. With
that, we have proposed three preliminary options for foundation support including excavation
to native gravels, over-excavation with use of geogrid (for bearing in fine-grained native flood
deposits), or the use of helical piles. Options 1 and 2 include the removal of all random fill under
slabs and foundation elements. Details of each option are provided below.
1. Option 1 is to excavate to the native gravels found at depths of 3.0 to 13.0 feet (refer to
Table 1) and bear foundation elements on the native gravels or on granular structural fill
that is founded on this material. Depending on location, structural fill may be required to
extend from the target bearing gravels up to the bottom of footings. For frost protection,
exterior footings should bear at a depth of four feet below the lowest adjacent finish
grade. Within the option to excavate down to native gravels, the option may exist to
choose between excavating along individual footing lines or the entire building footprint.
If fine-grain soils are allowed to remain under interior slabs, all random fill and underlying
organic topsoil should be removed at a minimum.
Excavating along footing lines will reduce the amount of excavated material. However,
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 6
excavating the entire building footprint can be more efficient due to the ability to use
larger compaction equipment. In the past, we have found there is a balance between the
two excavation methods and recommend evaluating on a case-by-case basis.
2. Option 2 is to utilize structural fill and geogrid to bear within the native floodplain deposit.
This option would include a prescribed over-excavation depth within the fine-grained
material and replacement with compacted lifts of structural fill (1.5-inch minus crushed
road mix gravel) with geogrid reinforcement. This option may be favorable in areas with
significant depth to alluvial gravels. Note that all random fill should be removed under
the entire footprint of the building.
3. Option 3 is the use of helical piles that extend through the random fill and upper soils to
suitable bearing in the gravels. In this case, it might be the most economical to utilize the
helical piles to support the foundations and span these foundation elements with a
structural floor. If a slab-on-grade is proposed, the interior slab would likewise need to
be supported on the helical piles assuming no support from the random fill or all random
fill removed down to native, non-organic soils. For preliminary planning purposes, we
suggest a design capacity for each pile of 25 kips with an ultimate capacity of 2.5 times
that or 62.5 kips.
We recommend drainage provisions be implemented during the development of each site to
reduce moisture or water-related problems. At a minimum, the drainage measures should
include damp proofing/waterproofing the foundation walls and installing a sub-drain system
depending on the foundation type. Subsurface drainage should be evaluated on an individual
basis depending on the location of the development and the foundation type. Basement
foundation should be evaluated carefully for the potential for flooding. If a basement is
proposed, we suggest installing sub-drains under the slab that outlet to a sump with a pump to
address the potential for groundwater.
No water should be allowed to accumulate against or flow along any exposed foundation walls.
Concrete and asphalt surfacing that abuts any foundations should be designed with a minimum
grade of 2 percent away from buildings, and adjacent landscaped areas should have a slope of at
least 5 percent within 10 feet of the wall. To further reduce the potential for moisture infiltration
along foundation walls, backfill materials should be well-compacted. The upper 4 to 6 inches of
backfill should consist of low permeability topsoil. Except for locations that will be surfaced by
concrete or asphalt, finished grades next to foundation walls should be set no less than 6 inches
below the top of the sill plate.
All topsoil should be stripped and stockpiled for re-use during site reclamation. On-site soils
suitable for re-use as site fill or backfill should be separated from wet, rocky, random fill, debris-
contaminated, or otherwise unsuitable soils during excavation. The suitability of the non-organic
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 7
excavated soils will depend on their rockiness, plasticity, natural moisture content, and ability to
be re-compacted. The driest soils containing an even mixture of soil matrix and smaller rock
fragments should be selected for use as compacted fill, while the wettest and rockiest soils should
either be hauled off-site or used for general site grading in non-critical locations. Depending on
the time of year, some of the native soil that is excavated may be wet of optimum and will require
drying prior to re-use. This may necessitate the import of easily compacted fill material if work is
conducted during the wet or winter season when drying is not an option.
Import granular structural fill for the project should consist of organic-free, well-graded 4-inch-
minus sandy (pit-run) gravel or 1.5-inch-minus crushed road mix gravel. The gravels shall meet
the material and gradation specifications as presented in the Montana Public Works Standard
Specifications (MPWSS) for sub-base course and base course gravel.
PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the varying subsurface conditions across the site and intended uses for roads, we have
recommended a separate pavement sections for local streets and collector streets as well as an
option in the event soft subgrade conditions are encountered. See Appendix D for design
calculations.
For local roads including side streets, accesses, and driveways, we assumed a design ESAL of
150,000 and a 20 year design life. Table 4 presents the minimum pavement section for local
streets.
Table 4. Pavement Section 1 – Local Streets – 150,000 ESALs
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 15
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 24
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 8
For collector streets, we assumed a design ESAL count of 550,000 and a 20 year design life. Table
5 presents the minimum pavement section for collector streets.
Table 5. Pavement Section 2 – Collector Streets – 550,000 ESALs
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 4 (2 – 2” lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 18
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 28
For soft to highly unstable subgrade conditions, including but not limited to areas with random
fill, high groundwater, or proximity to the East Gallatin River, several options are presented to
mitigate the unstable conditions (Table 6). We should be retained during construction of
roadways to determine the severity of any unstable conditions and consideration of higher
strength fabrics or increasing the sub-base section.
Table 6. Pavement Section Under Unstable Subgrade Conditions
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt Based on Classification of Roadway
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24 (additional 6” if needed in Highly
Unstable Subgrade Conditions)
Mirafi 580i for Soft to Moderately Unstable
Subgrade or Tensar TX-5 Triaxial Geogrid
underlain by an 8-ounce nonwoven separator
fabric for Highly Unstable Subgrade
Yes
Soft, Moderately Unstable, and/or Highly
Unstable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 30 and up to 36 inches of gravel
With respect to roads situated over the top of random fill, there is still some risk of fill settlement
over time even with the thicker gravel section. This settlement may be variable and
unpredictable. The safest option is to remove the random fill under roadway sections, but
recognize there is an economic cost associated with the complete removal of the random fill.
The sub-base and base course materials that comprise the granular parts of the pavement section
shall consist of 6-inch minus uncrushed sandy (pitrun) gravel and 1-1/2-inchminus crushed (road
mix) gravel, respectively. Both gravel courses shall meet the material and gradation specifications
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 9
presented in MPWSS, Sections 02234 and 02235. Under normal circumstances, the gravel
products should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness (depending on the size of
the compactor) and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as defined in
ASTM D-698. However, if the subgrade soils are found to be overly moist, soft, or unstable, the
initial lift thickness of the sub-base gravel should be thickened to prevent damaging and tearing
the geotextile fabric with construction equipment.
UNDERGROUND UTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
Utilities situated within the random fill may likewise be subject to unpredictable settlements. We
suggest over-excavating under water, sewer, and perhaps dry utility services down to the native
gravels and replacing with bedding gravel as per the Montana Public Works Standard
Specifications. We suggest compacting trench backfill to 95 percent under hardscaped areas and
92 percent under landscaped areas.
COLD/WINTER WEATHER CONSTRUCTION
If foundation construction for any portions of the future improvements will occur during the
cold/winter weather season, the Contractor shall take all necessary precautions to prevent the
earthwork from freezing and/or from being contaminated with snow. Exposed subgrade and fill
materials (under footings, slabs, and walls) should be adequately covered with concrete
insulation blankets to prevent frost penetration and to protect them from snow. All soils that are
used for fill under or around foundation components should be relatively dry, free of intermixed
snow and frozen clods, and must not be placed when it is snowing. Fill materials or foundations
should not be placed over frozen soils, which may be in a “frost-heaved condition,” or over layers
of snow. When earthwork will proceed during the non-optimal times of the year, we recommend
that it be performed expeditiously to minimize the time that the foundation excavation is open
and exposed to the elements.
AESI FUTURE INVOLVEMENT
We suggest that we be retained during the planning and design stages of this development to
provide site specific recommendations. As discussed previously in this report, geotechnical
recommendations contained herein are strictly preliminary and require assessment on an
individual basis. Once construction begins, we recommend retaining our services to verify
appropriate target bearing materials have been reached for each development. We further
recommend retaining our services during the construction of roadways and streets to assess the
stability of subgrade conditions.
Wake Up Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for Stockyard Properties
July 29, 2021 Bozeman, Montana
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 11
REFERENCES
1. International Code Council, 2018. “2018 International Building Code”.
2. Montana Contractors’ Association, April 2010. “Montana Public Works Standard
Specifications”, Sixth Edition.
3. Lonn, J. and English, A (2002). “Preliminary Geologic Map of the Eastern Part of the Gallatin
Valley Montana”, MBMG Open-File Report 457.
P:\2021\21-108 Stockyard Properties\05 Design\Geotech\Report\21-108 Geotech Report.docx
LIST OF FIGURES
FFiigguurree 11 –– VViicciinniittyy MMaapp
FFiigguurree 22 –– QQuuaaddrraannggllee MMaapp
FFiigguurree 33 –– TTeesstt PPiitt LLooccaattiioonn MMaapp
FFiigguurree 44 –– GGeeoollooggyy MMaapp
FFiigguurree 55 –– GGrroouunnddwwaatteerr MMaapp
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering
Land Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718
PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770
www.alliedengineering.com
STOCKYARD PROPERTIES
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
STOCKYARD PROPERTIES
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
STOCKYARD PROPERTIES
TEST PIT LOCATION MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
3
TP#
TP-1
MW#N
MW-1
TP-2
TP-7
TP-8
MW-4
TP-6
MW-3
TP-4
TP-9
TP-3
MW-2
TP-5
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering
Land Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718
PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770
www.alliedengineering.com
STOCKYARD PROPERTIES
GEOLOGY MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
4
N
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering
Land Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718
PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770
www.alliedengineering.com
STOCKYARD PROPERTIES
GROUNDWATER MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
5
N
LIST OF APPENDICES
AAppppeennddiixx AA –– TTeesstt PPiitt LLooggss
AAppppeennddiixx BB –– LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss
AAppppeennddiixx CC –– PPaavveemmeenntt SSeeccttiioonn DDeessiiggnn
AAppppeennddiixx DD –– LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff YYoouurr GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall RReeppoorrtt
APPENDIX A
TTeesstt PPiitt LLooggss
{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Soft; dark brown; organic silty SAND with roots;moist.{1.5' - 11.0'}: Flood Deposit:Stiff to medium stiff; light brown; sandy leanCLAY; slightly moist to moist.·Becoming softer and moister with depth.·Moisture increase below 4.0'.·Becoming sandier with depth.·Pocket Penetrometer = 2.0 tsf. at 2.0'·Pocket Penetrometer = 1.0 tsf. at 4.0'.Atterberg Limits: S1-C at 6.0'PL = 12.8LL = 25.7PI = 12.9USCS Soil Classification: Lean Clay (CL){11.0' - 12.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; silty sandy GRAVEL with6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist.·Pitrun depth across bottom appears tovary.Notes:1.Test pit located on north side of property.2.No groundwater observed in TP.3.4" PVC piezometer installed for futuremonitoring purposes.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10812.5'NONETest Pit Designation: TP-1 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021 North Portion45.70118, -111.02219369121515129631233S1-A@2.0'14.3%S1-B@4.0'17.1%S1-C@6.0'13.1%S1-D@8.0'11.5%
{0.0' - 1.5'}: Fill:Soft; dark brown; organic SILT/CLAY withrounded cobbles; moist.{1.5' - 2.5'}: Buried Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown; organic SILT/CLAY with roots;moist.·Pocket Penetrometer = 2.0 tsf. at 2.0'.{2.5' - 13.0'}: Flood Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy lean CLAY;moist to very moist.·Becoming softer and moister with depth.·Moisture increase below 10.0'.·Not as sandy as TP-1.·Pocket Penetrometer = 1.0 tsf. at 4.0'.Atterberg Limits: S2-D at 8.0'PL = 17.9LL = 32.4PI = 14.5USCS Soil Classification: Lean Clay (CL){13.0' - 14.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; silty sandy GRAVEL with6"-minus rounded cobbles; very moist.Notes:1.Test pit located on northwest side ofproperty.2.No groundwater observed in TP.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10814.0'NONETest Pit Designation: TP-2 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021S2-A@3.0' Northwest Portion45.70091, -111.0232718.8%36912151512963124334S2-B@4.0'19.3%S2-C@6.0'20.3%S2-D@8.0'17.1%S2-E@12.0'30.3%
{0.0' - 14.5'}: Fill:Soft/medium dense; dark brown with brownstreaking; varying organic CLAY/SILT pocketswith seams of rounded cobbles andconstruction debris; very moist to wet.·Wire and metal observed from 6.0' to 13.0'.·Wood debris encountered at 11.0' to 14.0'.·Caving of test pit walls below 11.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 11.0'.·Lower 3.0' consists of brown silty sandygravel with rounded cobbles and wooddebris.·Unable to determine depth of fill extent.Notes:1.Test pit located on northwest side ofproperty. North of Griffin Drive (east ofthe park).2.Possible old borrow pit??3.4" PVC piezometer installed for futuremonitoring purposes.1DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10814.511.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-3 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021S3-A@6.0' Northwest Portion45.70036, -111.0232925.5%3691215GWT at 11.0'15129631
{0.0' - 0.75'}: Native Topsoil:Soft; dark brown; organic silty CLAY with roots;moist.{0.75' - 1.5'}: Flood Deposit/Fill?:Stiff; light brown; silty fine SAND; slightly moist.·Pocket Penetrometer = 2.0 tsf. at 1.25'.·Encountered 4" PVC clean out and lateralin test pit. Only top of cleanout cap wasdamaged. Due to concerns of underlyingactive drainfield did not continue test pitdeeper.Notes:1.Area appears to sit on raised bench.(Possible fill area with drainfield inlocation?).2.Utility locate and topographic surveyconducted by Stahly Engineering did notshow drainfield in area.3.Test pit was not continued deeper toavoid damaging drainfield that may be inuse from houses in area.4.PVC cleanout was repaired and backfilledto condition prior to test pit.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-1081.5'NONETest Pit Designation: TP-4 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021Central Portion (N. Side ofGriffin Drive).45.70041, -111.02225369121515129631S4-A@1.5'7.7%2
{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown; organic sandy SILT with rootsand some gravels; slightly moist.{1.0' - 7.0'}: Flood Deposit:Very stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/silty fineSAND; slightly moist.·Pocket Penetrometer = 2.5 tsf. at 2.0'.·Pocket Penetrometer = 4.0 tsf. at 4.0'.·Too sandy to perform plastic limit test.Atterberg Limits: S5-C at 6.0'PL = Non-PlasticLL = Non-PlasticPI = Non-Plastic{7.0' - 13.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with 6"-minusrounded cobbles; moist to wet:·Material is wet below 12.0'.Notes:1.Test pit located SW of Sheep Shed.2.Groundwater observed at 13.0'.3.Concrete debris located on groundsurface near test pit. (Possible fillnearby).12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10813.5'13.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-5 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021 Sheep Shed45.69982, -111.022283691215GWT at 13.0'15129631233S5-A@2.0'14.5%S5-B@4.0'14.5%S5-C@6.0'16.6%S5-D@8.0'8.2%
{0.0' - 1.5'}: Fill:Loose; light brown; clayey GRAVEL with4"-minus rounded cobbles; slightly moist.{1.5' - 3.5'}: Flood Deposit:Medium stiff; dark brown; silty SAND; very moistto wet.·Pocket Penetrometer = 0.5 tsf at 2.0'.·Material becoming wet below 2.75'.{3.5' - 6.5'}: Alluvium:Medium dense; brown; gravelly SAND withoccasional rounded cobbles; wet.·Groundwater at 4.5'.{6.5' - 10'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with 6"-minusrounded cobbles; wet.Notes:1.Test pit located in SW portion of the site.2.Groundwater observed at 4.5'.3.4" PVC piezometer installed in test pit.4.Piles of rounded cobbles anddepressions near test pit (Possible fill!)12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10810.0'4.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-6 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021 SW Portion of Site45.69928, -111.023153691215GWT at 4.5'15129631233S6-A@2.0'40.1%S6-B@4.0'12.2%S6-C@6.0'10.2%S6-D@8.0'9.9%44
{0.0' - 1.0'}: Fill:Loose; light brown; silty sandy GRAVEL; slightlymoist.{1.0' - 2.0'}: Buried Topsoil/Fill?:Very stiff; dark brown; organic sandy CLAY;slightly moist.·Pocket Penetrometer = 3.5 tsf. at 1.5'.{2.0' - 8.0'}: Flood Deposit/Fill:Stiff; brown to dark brown; silty fine SAND;moist.·Parts of test pit contains pockets of wires,organic soils, pipes, stocktank water lines,bones, and logs (Obvious fill).·Fill appears to be centralized in trenchesthat extend to depths of 9.0'.·Difficult to determine fill/trench extents.{8.0' - 9.0'}: Alluvium/Fill?:Dense; brown; clayey GRAVEL with 3"-minusrounded cobbles; moist.·Layer not observed in any other test pit.{9.0' - 11.0'}: Flood DepositMedium dense; brownish-gray; clayey SAND;very moist to wet.·Too sandy to perform plastic limit test.Atterberg Limits: S7-D at 10.0'PL = Non-PlasticLL = Non-PlasticPI = Non-Plastic1.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10814.0'13.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-7 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021 South Central45.69918, -111.021713691215GWT at 13.0'1512963123S7-A@2.0'18.8%S7-B@4.0'57.3%S7-C@6.0'40.0%S7-D@10.0'24.9%{11.0' - 14.0'}: AlluviumDense; gray to brown; sandy GRAVEL with6"-minus rounded cobbles; wet.Notes:1.Groundwater observed at 13.0'.2.Fill/Old trenches observed in test pit.Fill in Area!3.Extended test pit to east to avoid oldlines.45Trench Fill(Contains Wires,Old Pipes,Bones, WoodDebris)TrenchFill(ContainsOldPipes)34566
{0.0' - 5.0'}: Fill:Dense; brown to gray; clayey GRAVEL with4"-minus rounded cobbles; slightly moist tomoist.·Wires and twine observed in layer.{5.0' - 6.0'}: Buried Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown; organic silty SAND with roots;moist.{6.0' - 10.5'}: Flood Deposit:Medium stiff; gray; sandy CLAY; very moist towet.·Wet below 9.0'.·Becoming softer with depth.·Pocket Penetrometer = 1.0 tsf. at 6.0'.·Pocket Penetrometer = 0.5 tsf. at 8.0'.{10.5' - 14.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; dark brown; sandy GRAVEL with6"-minus rounded cobbles; wet.·Groundwater encountered at 13.5'.Notes:1.Test pit located on south side of property.2.Groundwater encountered at 13.5'.3.4" PVC piezometer installed in test pit.4.Benches located around test pit (Fill?).12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10814.0'13.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-8 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021S8-A@2.0' South Portion45.69894, -111.021479.7%3691215GWT at 13.5'1512963124334S8-B@4.0'12.9%S8-C@7.0'30.0%S8-D@9.0'33.6%S8-E@12.0'12.8%
{0.0' - 0.5'}: Fill:Loose; light brown; SILT/CLAY with 1"-minusrounded gravels; slightly moist.{0.5' - 2.0'}: Buried Topsoil:Dense; dark brown; organic silty SAND withroots; moist.·Pocket Penetrometer = 3.5 tsf. at 2.0'.{2.0' - 7.0'}: Flood Deposit:Very stiff; brown to dark brown; silty fine SANDwith some clay; slightly most.·Encountered 1" old copper line at 5.0'.·Becoming softer with depth.·Pocket Penetrometer = 3.5 tsf. at 4.0'.{7.0' - 13.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; dark brown; silty sandy GRAVEL with12"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to very moist.·Material becoming very moist below 13.0'.·No groundwater encountered.Notes:1.Test pit located on southeast side ofproperty.2.Groundwater not encountered.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.comNA21-10813.5'NONETest Pit Designation: TP-9 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 160 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Neil w/RLS Const. Project: Stockyards Groundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: June 15, 2021S9-A@2.0' Southeast Portion45.69920, -111.0209319.2%36912151512963124334S9-B@4.0'16.1%S9-C@6.0'19.3%S9-D@13.0'7.6%
APPENDIX B
LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108Sample Identification: See Below
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/16/2021
Tested By: Zach Liley
Sample Identification:S1-A S1-B S1-C S1-D S2-A S2-B S2-C S2-D S2-E
Exploration Location:TP-1 TP-1 TP-1 TP-1 TP-2 TP-2 TP-2 TP-2 TP-2
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 3.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 12.0
Container Number:I UU G SS B A RR JJ D
Weight of Container:31.81 31.00 31.59 31.01 31.57 31.99 31.28 30.92 31.76
Container + Wet Soil:141.63 130.86 111.90 142.45 129.23 146.15 144.39 142.77 147.02
Container + Dry Soil:127.88 116.25 102.61 131.00 113.80 127.66 125.27 126.42 120.25
Weight of Water:13.75 14.61 9.29 11.45 15.43 18.49 19.12 16.35 26.77
Weight of Dry Soil:96.07 85.25 71.02 99.99 82.23 95.67 93.99 95.50 88.49
Moisture Content:14.3%17.1%13.1%11.5%18.8%19.3%20.3%17.1%30.3%
Sample Identification:S3-A S4-A S5-A S5-B S5-C S5-D
Exploration Location:TP-3 TP-4 TP-5 TP-5 TP-5 TP-5
Sample Depth (ft):6.0 1.5 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
Container Number:QQ K E KK H MM
Weight of Container:31.21 31.78 31.66 31.19 31.60 31.06
Container + Wet Soil:145.53 166.32 151.05 146.53 134.51 170.32
Container + Dry Soil:122.31 156.65 135.92 131.88 119.87 159.79
Weight of Water:23.22 9.67 15.13 14.65 14.64 10.53
Weight of Dry Soil:91.10 124.87 104.26 100.69 88.27 128.73
Moisture Content:25.5%7.7%14.5%14.5%16.6%8.2%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108Sample Identification: See Below
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/16/2021
Tested By: Zach Liley
Sample Identification:S6-A S6-B S6-C S6-D S7-A S7-B S7-C S7-D
Exploration Location:TP-6 TP-6 TP-6 TP-6 TP-7 TP-7 TP-7 TP-7
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 10.0
Container Number:L OO J TT LL F NN DD
Weight of Container:31.70 31.09 31.64 30.92 31.07 31.69 30.85 30.84
Container + Wet Soil:117.23 166.90 267.69 242.67 135.19 119.85 123.89 172.27
Container + Dry Soil:92.77 152.11 245.92 223.67 118.72 87.74 97.29 144.09
Weight of Water:24.46 14.79 21.77 19.00 16.47 32.11 26.60 28.18
Weight of Dry Soil:61.07 121.02 214.28 192.75 87.65 56.05 66.44 113.25
Moisture Content:40.1%12.2%10.2%9.9%18.8%57.3%40.0%24.9%
Sample Identification:S8-A S8-B S8-C S8-D S8-E S9-A S9-B S9-C S9-D
Exploration Location:TP-8 TP-8 TP-8 TP-8 TP-8 TP-9 TP-9 TP-9 TP-9
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 7.0 9.0 12.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 13.0
Container Number:C M U P V S T R Y
Weight of Container:31.76 50.63 51.21 49.28 51.04 50.50 51.62 50.60 50.94
Container + Wet Soil:166.84 216.55 246.81 217.78 349.34 173.66 220.46 219.18 223.47
Container + Dry Soil:154.84 197.56 201.67 175.38 315.40 153.79 196.99 191.90 211.32
Weight of Water:12.00 18.99 45.14 42.40 33.94 19.87 23.47 27.28 12.15
Weight of Dry Soil:123.08 146.93 150.46 126.10 264.36 103.29 145.37 141.30 160.38
Moisture Content:9.7%12.9%30.0%33.6%12.8%19.2%16.1%19.3%7.6%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Sample Identification: S1-C at 6.0'Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/17/2021Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:12.8
Liquid Limit:25.7
Plasticity Index:12.9
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
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Sample Identification: S2-D at 8.0'Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/17/2021Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:17.9
Liquid Limit:32.4
Plasticity Index:14.5
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
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Sample Identification: S5-D at 8.0'Soil Classification: Sandy SILT/Silty fine SAND (Non-Plastic)
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/17/2021Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:NP
Liquid Limit:NP
Plasticity Index:NP
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
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Sample Identification: S7-D at 10.0'Soil Classification: Clayey SAND (Non-Plastic)
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/17/2021Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:NP
Liquid Limit:NP
Plasticity Index:NP
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
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D-698)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Soil Classification: TP-1 - Composite A (1.5' to 2.5')
Soil Classification: Sandy Lean Clay
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/23/2021
Tested By: Zach Liley
Note: No Oversize Correction Applied
Natural Moisture Content: 13.8 %
Optimum Moisture Content:15.3 %
Maximum Dry Unit Weight:105.8 pcf
Reviewed By:
Summary of Lab Test Data
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
8%10%12%14%16%18%20%22%Dry Unit Weight (pcf)Moisture Content
PROCTOR COMPACTION CURVE
Compaction CurveZ.A.V. for S.G.=2.50Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.65Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.80Poly. (Compaction Curve)
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718Phone (406) 582-0221Fax (406) 582-5770
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D-698)
Project: Stockyard Properties
Project Number: 21-108
Sample Identification: TP-5 - Composite B (2.0' to 4.0')
Soil Classification: Sandy Silt/Silty Sand
Date Sampled: 6/15/2021
Date Tested: 6/23/2021
Tested By: Zach Liley
Note: No Oversize Correction Applied
Natural Moisture Content: 12.9 %
Optimum Moisture Content:17.2 % Maximum Dry Unit Weight:102.6 pcf
Reviewed By:
Summary of Lab Test Data
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
8%10%12%14%16%18%20%22%24%26%Dry Unit Weight (pcf)Moisture Content
PROCTOR COMPACTION CURVE
Compaction CurveZ.A.V. for S.G.=2.50Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.65Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.80Poly. (Compaction Curve)
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
APPENDIX C
PPaavveemmeenntt SSeeccttiioonn DDeessiiggnn
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 1 - Local Streets
(Note: The Option 1 design is applicable for stable subgrade conditions (ie. dry, hard, compacted).
Project: Stockyard Properties - Bozeman, MT
Project Number: 21-108
Date: July 15, 2021
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Sub-base course shall be comprised of import 6"-minus, sandy pitrun gravel.
3) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)150,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
5.17609 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.20 5.1927 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)15.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.20
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 2 - Collector Streets
(Note: The Option 2 design is applicable for stable subgrade conditions (ie. dry, hard, compacted).
Project: Stockyard Properties - Bozeman, MT
Project Number: 21-108
Date: July 15, 2021
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Sub-base course shall be comprised of import 6"-minus, sandy pitrun gravel.
3) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)550,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
5.74036 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.85 5.7367 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)4.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)18.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.85
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 1 of 3
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN
(EXPLANATION OF DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS)
Design Life (yr): 20
ESALs (total): 150,000 or 550,000
Subgrade CBR, (%): 2.5
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi): 3,750
Reliability, R (%): 90
Standard Normal Deviate, ZR: -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So: 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po: 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt: 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI) 2.2
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1: 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2: 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2: 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3: 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3: 0.90
Design Life: A design life of 20 years is typical for new asphalt projects.
ESALs (total): According to Table 18.12 in Reference 1, the estimated design Equivalent
18,000-lb Single Axle Load (ESAL) value for roadways subjected to light vehicle and
medium truck traffic ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000. We have used assumed an ESAL
value of 150,000 for local streets and 550,000 for collector streets.
Subgrade CBR: The soaked subgrade CBR was estimated to be 2.5, which is generally
applicable to sandy silts/clays.
Subgrade Resilient Modulus: For fine-grained soils with a CBR of 10.0 or less, an
accepted correlation between CBR and resilient modulus is MR = 1500 x CBR. Based on
this equation, the design resilient modulus value shall be 3,750 psi.
Reliability: According to Table 2.2 in Reference 2, the recommended reliability level for
local streets (low volume) in urban settings ranges from 50 to 80 percent; while
collector streets (high volume) should be designed with a level of reliability between 80
and 95 percent. We chose an elevated design reliability level of 90 percent.
Standard Normal Deviate: According to Table 4.1 in Reference 2, a 90 percent reliability
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 2 of 3
value corresponds to a standard normal deviate of –1.282.
Overall Standard Deviation: According to Sections 2.1.3 and 4.3 in Reference 2, a
design value of 0.45 is recommended for flexible pavements.
Initial Serviceability: According to Section 2.2.1 in Reference 2, a design value of 4.2 is
recommended for flexible pavements.
Terminal Serviceability: According to Section 2.2.1 in Reference 2, a design value of 2.0
is suggested for roads that will be subjected to small traffic volumes; while a value of 2.5
or higher should be used when designing major highways. We selected a terminal
serviceability of 2.0.
Design Serviceability Loss: This is the difference between the initial and terminal
serviceability. Therefore, the design value shall be 2.2.
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient: According to the table with the revised surfacing
structural coefficients in Reference 4, a design value of 0.41 is recommended for all
asphalt plant mix grades. This value replaces the 0.33 asphalt coefficient that was
provided in Table 3-2 of Reference 3.
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient: According to the table with the revised
surfacing structural coefficients in Reference 4, a design value of 0.14 is recommended
for new 1.5”-minus, crushed base course gravel. This value replaces the 0.12 crushed
gravel coefficient that was provided in Table 3-2 of Reference 3.
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient: According to Table 2.4 in Reference 2, a
coefficient of 0.80 to 1.00 should be used when fair to good drainage is anticipated
within the pavement structure. We assume good drainage for this project with a
corresponding drainage coefficient of 0.90 for design.
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient: For Pavement Section Design, we are
assuming that imported, uncrushed sandy (pitrun) gravel will be placed for the sub-base
section of the roadway. This is the standard product used in the Bozeman area for sub-
base. According to pavement design charts for gravelly soils, we estimated that pitrun
will have a CBR of between 15.0 and 20.0%, which correlates to a structural coefficient
of 0.09.
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient: The drainage coefficients for sub-base
and base course layers are typically the same; therefore, we selected a value of 0.90 for
the design. See the base course layer drainage coefficient section for an explanation.
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 3 of 3
Reference List
1) Traffic and Highway Engineering; Nicholas J. Garber and Lester A. Hoel; 1988.
2) Design of Pavement Structures; AASHTO; 1993.
3) Pavement Design Manual; Montana Department of Transportation; 1991.
4) Pavement Design Memo; Montana Department of Transportation; May 11, 2006.
5) Geotechnical Manual; Montana Department of Transportation; July 2008.
APPENDIX D
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.