HomeMy WebLinkAbout008_Geotechnical ReportMONTANA | WASHINGTON | IDAHO | NORTH DAKOTA | PENNSYLVANIA
JOB NO. B18-091-001 APRIL 2020
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
CLIENT ENGINEER
Think Tank Design Group, Inc.
33 North Black
Bozeman, MT 59715
Craig Nadeau, PE
craig.nadeau@tdhengineering.com
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROJECT NAME
PROJECT LOCATION 406.586.0277
tdhe ngineering.com
234 East Babcock, Suite 3
Bozeman, MT 59715
TIMWORKS BREWERY SITE
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
Tinworks Brewery Site Table of Contents Bozeman, Montana i
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 3
3.0 SITECONDITIONS .................................................................................................................. 4
3.1 Geology and Physiography .............................................................................................. 4
3.2 Surface Conditions ........................................................................................................... 5
3.3 Subsurface Conditions ..................................................................................................... 5
3.3.1 Soils ........................................................................................................................... 5
3.3.2 Ground Water ........................................................................................................... 6
4.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 7
4.2 Site Grading and Excavations.......................................................................................... 7
4.3 Conventional Shallow Foundations on Structural Fill ...................................................... 7
4.4 Conventional Shallow Foundations on EAP Improved Soils ........................................... 8
4.5 Foundation Walls.............................................................................................................. 9
4.6 Parking Structure Slab ..................................................................................................... 9
4.7 Apartment Slab-on-Grade and Exterior Flatwork .......................................................... 10
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................... 11
5.1 Site Grading and Excavations........................................................................................ 11
5.2 Conventional Shallow Foundations on Structural Fill .................................................... 12
5.3 Conventional Shallow Foundations Over EAP Improved Soils ..................................... 13
5.4 Foundation Walls............................................................................................................ 14
5.5 Parking Structure Main Floor Slab ................................................................................. 15
5.6 Retail Floor Slab and Exterior Flatwork ......................................................................... 16
5.7 Continuing Services ....................................................................................................... 17
6.0 SUMMARY OF FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES ....................................................... 19
6.1 Preliminary Field Explorations ....................................................................................... 19
6.2 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................................... 19
7.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 21
Tinworks Brewery Site Appendix Bozeman, Montana ii
APPENDIX
Boring and Test Pit Location Map (Figure 1)
Logs of Exploratory Borings and Test Pits (Figures 2 through 9)
Laboratory Test Data (Figures 10 through 15)
USGS Design Maps Summary Report
Construction Standard 02801-06C
Soil Classification and Sampling Terminology for Engineering Purposes
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
Tinworks Brewery Site Executive Summary Bozeman, Montana Page 1
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT TINWORKS BREWERY SITE
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A geotechnical investigation was performed for the Tinworks Brewery project located on the west
side of North Wallace Avenue between East Tamarack and East Aspen Streets in Bozeman,
Montana, on March 5th and 17th, 2020. Subsurface soil conditions consisted of primarily fill
materials overlying native poorly-graded gravel with sand extending to depths of at least 20.9 feet,
the maximum depth investigated. Ground water was observed in all four borings and one test pit
performed for this project at depths of 11.5 to 14.0 feet below existing site grades. Based on the
findings of our field investigation, the seismic site class for this property is C. The risk of seismically
induced liquefaction is considered low and does not warrant additional consideration.
The primary geotechnical concerns regarding this project are the presence of uncontrolled fill
materials extending to depths of 2.0 to 11.5 feet. In most cases, the fill appears to extend down to
native gravels; however, two of the test pits encountered zones of native clay beneath the fill
ranging in thickness from three to five feet. The fill is generally classified as a clayey sand with
gravel and contains abundant construction debris such as concrete, wood, brick, and other
materials. Based on the site conditions encountered, it is our opinion that the fill is not suitable for
the support of structures in its current condition due to potential settlement concerns associated
with the unknown placement of this material and decomposition of wood and other organics.
Ideally, the fill would be completely removed down to the underlying native gravels and replaced
with a clean structural fill material which is placed and compacted in a controlled manner to ensure
consistency in the supporting materials. This approach would facilitate the use of conventional
shallow foundations and slab-on-grade construction; however, it would require over-excavation and
replacement depths of up to 11.5 feet across the site which may be cost prohibitive for the project
given the intended use of shallow foundations and slab-on-grade construction.
Alternative subgrade improvement methods such as the use of an engineered aggregate pier (EAP)
system, also called a rammed aggregate pier (RAP), should provide sufficient improvement to the
existing fill to also use shallow foundation systems. EAPs are densly compacted stone columns
extending through the fill zone on a relatively tight spacing. During construction, the materials
surrounding the EAP are densified and improved. Such a system would accommodate the use of
shallow foundations and slab-on-grade construction without the need for extensive over-excavation
and removal of the existing fill. Similar foundation improvements have been utilized beneath the
MSU parking structure on Grant Street and most recently beneath the new Bozeman Marriott
currently under construction on East Main Street in Bozeman.
Based on our experience in the Bozeman area, the use of deep foundation systems is not common.
However, alternative deep foundation systems such as driven pile or cast-in-place concrete piers
would also be viable for the support of these structures while leaving the fill material in place. While
Tinworks Brewery Site Executive Summary Bozeman, Montana Page 2
viable, deep foundation options generally are much slower and expensive to construction than EAP
options; thus, they have not been considered in detail for this project. We are available to provide
additional engineering analysis and recommendations for a deep foundation alternative should they
be considered for this project.
Due to the settlement concerns associated with the fill materials, we would advise that any removal
and replacement or EAP improvements extend beneath both footings and interior slab-on-grade
construction. Differential settlements associated with variations in fill thickness, fill placement, or fill
composition can result in undesirable differential movements in slab-on-grade construction and the
final structure.
Tinworks Brewery Site Introduction Bozeman, Montana Page 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Purpose and Scope
This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigations for the proposed Tinworks
Brewery Project located on the west side of North Wallace Avenue between East Tamarack and
East Aspen Streets in Bozeman, Montana. The purpose of this study was to determine the general
surface and subsurface conditions across the existing site for use by the design team in preparing
design documents for the building and associated site infrastructure. This report describes the field
work and laboratory analyses conducted for the site investigation, the surface and subsurface
conditions encountered, and presents our engineering assessment and design recommendations.
Two investigations were performed on March 5th and 17th, 2020. Four test pits were excavated on
March 5th to depths ranging from 10.2 to 15.1 feet. Subsequently, four additional borings were
drilled on March 17th to depths ranging from 16.0 to 20.9 feet. Samples were obtained from the
borings and test pits and returned to our Great Falls laboratory for testing. Laboratory testing was
performed on selected soil samples to obtain engineering properties of the subsurface materials.
2.2 Project Description
The proposed project includes the construction of an 80-unit apartment building and a 240-stall
parking garage being constructed in two phases. The parking structure will be built in Phase I of the
project and the apartment building being Phase II. Each structure is anticipated to be three or four
stories tall incorporating either slab-on-grade construction or a crawlspace. The overall footprint of
the two structures combined is also expected to encompass the majority of the project area. The
parking structure is anticipated to be primarily concrete construction while the apartment building is
presumably a wood-framed structure. Structural loads had not been provided for either at the time
of this report. However, for the purposes of our analysis we have assumed that wall loads will be
less than 3,500 pounds per lineal foot and column loads will not exceed 75 kips for the apartment
structure. The parking structure is anticipated to have column loads of up to 700 kips. If final
foundation design loads vary considerably from those assumed, we must be allowed to review the
contents of this report and modify our recommendations as appropriate for the actual foundation
loads.
Tinworks Brewery Site Site Conditions Bozeman, Montana Page 4
3.0 SITECONDITIONS
3.1 Geology and Physiography
The site is geologically characterized as gravel (Qgr) and alluvium (Qal). The gravel areas shown
on the geologic map below are generally comprised of variable deposits ranging from pebble to
boulder size including sand, silt, and clay. They are dominantly associated with alluvial terrace,
abandoned channel and floodplain, remnant alluvial fan, and local glacial outwash. The area to the
west, shown as white, as delineated as alluvium which is typically comprised of gravel, sand, silt,
and clay deposits of stream and river channels and floodplains. The sections denoted Tsu are
Upper Tertiary Sediments or sedimentary rock comprised of conglomerate, tuffaceous sandstone
and siltstone, marlstone, and equivalent sediment and ash beds. Based on nearby water well logs,
the native gravels are anticipated to extend to depths exceeding 50 feet in the area of the Bozeman
Hot Springs.
Geologic Map of Montana, Edition 1.0 (2007)
Montana Bureau of Mines & Geology
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and our experience in the area, the site falls under
seismic Site Class E. The appropriate International Building Code (IBC) seismic design parameters
for the site include site coefficients of 1.116 and 1.592 for Fa and Fv, respectively. The
recommended design spectral response accelerations at short periods (SDs) and at 1-second
period (SD1) are 0.528g and 0.221g, respectively. These values represent two-thirds of the
mapped response accelerations following correction for the appropriate site classification and
assume the proposed construction to fall into risk category II. The likelihood of seismically-induced
soil liquefaction is low and does not warrant additional evaluation.
Tinworks Brewery Site Site Conditions Bozeman, Montana Page 5
3.2 Surface Conditions
The proposed project site is located one the west side of North Wallace Avenue between East
Tamarack and East Aspen Streets in Bozeman, Montana. The site currently consists of
undeveloped land vegetated with native grasses. However, several structures have previously been
constructed on this property as evident by the older aerial photograph shown on Figure 1. Based
on background information and site observations, the site appears to be relatively level with a slight
downward slope toward the north.
3.3 Subsurface Conditions
3.3.1 Soils
The subsurface soil conditions appear to be relatively consistent based on our drilling,
excavating, and soil sampling. In general, the subsurface soil conditions encountered within
the borings and test pits 3.5 to 11.5 feet of surficial fill and lean clay soils overlying dense
poorly-graded gravel with sand. Similar gravels extend to depths of at least 20.9 feet, the
maximum depth investigated.
The subsurface soils are described in detail on the enclosed boring and test pit logs and are
summarized below. The stratification lines shown on the logs represent approximate
boundaries between soil types, and the actual in situ transition may be gradual vertically or
discontinuous laterally.
FILL
Fill material, generally classified as clayey sand with gravel, was encountered in all test pits
and borings performed for this project. The fill ranges in depth from 2.0 to 11.5 feet below
existing ground surface. The fill contains construction debris such as concrete, brick, wood,
and other materials observed during excavation of the test pits on this project. Several of
the test pits encountered old railroad ties and exhibited a moderate to strong hydrocarbon
odor which may indicate potential environmental concern. The fill exhibits highly variable
relative densities as indicated by penetration resistance values which ranged from 9 to more
than 100 blows per foot (bpf) and averaged 43 bpf. This fill is considered uncontrolled and
contains abundant construction debris. The majority of the debris observed where non-
organic; however, other portions of the fill could contain deleterious materials not seen
during our investigation. Two samples contained 7.2 and 14.4 percent gravel, 59.6 and 53.6
percent sand, and 33.2 and 32.0 percent fines (clay and silt), respectively. A single sample
exhibited a liquid limit of 28 percent and a plasticity index of 8 percent. The natural moisture
contents were also highly variable and ranged from 5 to 39 percent and averaged 16
percent. This variability is likely associated with variations in the composition of the fill
material across the site.
Tinworks Brewery Site Site Conditions Bozeman, Montana Page 6
SANDY LEAN CLAY
Sandy lean clay which appears to be native material was observed in two test pits (TP-1
and TP-3). This material was between the surficial fill and the underlying native gravel and
ranges in thickness from 3.2 to 4.8 feet. It appears to be firm to stiff based on the relative
ease of excavation. This material is likely to be moisture sensitive and compressible. The
natural moisture contents varied from 24 to 33 percent and averaged 29 percent.
POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND
Native poorly-graded gravel with sand was encountered in all borings and test pits at depths
of 3.5 to 11.5 below ground surface and extends to depths of at least 20.9 feet, the
maximum depth investigated. The native gravels are very dense as indicated by
penetration resistance values which ranged from 57 to greater than 100 bpf and averaged
greater than 100 bpf. Two samples of the material contained 48.0 and 53.8 percent gravel,
49.1 and 41.3 percent sand, and 2.9 and 4.9 percent fines (silt and clay), respectively. The
natural moisture contents varied from 3 to 13 percent and averaged 8 percent.
This material exhibited a maximum dry density of 135.4 pounds per cubic foot when
compacted at its optimum moisture content of 8.2 percent in accordance with the relative
density method outlined in ASTM D4253 and D4254.
3.3.2 Ground Water
Ground water was encountered in all four borings and one test pits at depths ranging from
11.2 to 14.0 feet below ground surface. Some seasonal fluctuation of this water elevation is
anticipated and ground water monitoring is continuing using wells installed as at the time of
our investigation. This data is not yet compiled and will be reportedly separately.
Numerous factors contribute to seasonal ground water occurrences and fluctuations, and
the evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. Evidence of ground water
during our investigation was ubiquitous, and ground water will be an important consideration
in the design and construction process.
Tinworks Brewery Site Preliminary Engineering Analysis Bozeman, Montana Page 7
4.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
The primary geotechnical concerns regarding this project are the presence of uncontrolled fill
materials extending to depths of 2.0 to 11.5 feet below the ground surface. In most cases, the fill
appears to extend down to native gravels; however, two of the test pits encountered zones of native
clay beneath the fill ranging in thickness from three to five feet. The fill is generally classified as a
clayey sand with gravel and contains abundant construction debris such as concrete, wood, brick,
and other materials. Several test pits encountered old railroad ties and exhibited a moderate to
strong hydrocarbon odor which may be indicative of environmental concerns on the property.
Based on the site conditions encountered, it is our opinion that the fill is not suitable for the support
of structures in its current condition due to potential settlement concerns associated with the
unknown placement of this material.
4.2 Site Grading and Excavations
The ground surface at the proposed site is considered relatively flat with a slight downward slope
toward the north. Based on our field work, clayey sand with gravel fill, limited thicknesses of sandy
lean clay, and native poorly-graded gravel with sand are anticipated within the site limits to the
excavation depths anticipated for this project. Ground water may not be encountered in
excavations associated with foundation construction; however, ground water should be anticipated
in any excavations deeper than 10 feet and depending on the magnitude of seasonal fluctuations
could be seen at shallower depths. The contractor should be prepared to provide dewatering
systems if needed during construction.
4.3 Conventional Shallow Foundations on Structural Fill
The existing fill materials encountered across the site are not suitable to support foundation loads in
their current condition due to the settlement risks associated with inconsistencies in the fill quality,
placement, and consistency. One option is to completely remove and replace the fill down to the
surface of the native gravels with properly compacted structural fill. This will alleviate potential
settlement concerns posed by the fill and facilitate standard foundation and slab system for both
structures. Complete removal and replacement of the fill materials and weak lean clay will warrant
excavations extending up to 11.5 feet below existing site grade.
Foundation bearing on properly compacted structural fill extending to native gravels may be
designed using a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 6,000 pounds per square foot with a
one-third increase in this value for consideration of transient load cases. Similar foundations are
not anticipated to realize settlements exceeding ¾-inch and differential settlements should be on
the order of one-half this amount.
Tinworks Brewery Site Preliminary Engineering Analysis Bozeman, Montana Page 8
4.4 Conventional Shallow Foundations on EAP Improved Soils
As an alternative to the complete removal and replacement of the existing fill, which may be cost-
prohibitive to the project, the use of an engineered aggregate pier system (EAP), also known as a
rammed aggregate pier (RAP) system may be considered. This system is specialized and
proprietary; thus, design would be performed by specialized firms such as GTFC – West (Hillsboro,
Oregon), First Mark Construction (Billings, Montana), or Montana Helical Pier (Whitefish, Montana).
This system has been recently used on the MSU parking structure on Grant Street and most
recently beneath the new Bozeman Marriott currently under construction on East Main Street in
Bozeman.
EAPs are installed by drilling a hole of a specified depth and diameter and constructing rock
columns comprised of very dense, highly compacted aggregate. Ramming of thin lifts takes place
with a high-energy beveled tamper that densifies the aggregate and forces it laterally into the
sidewalls of the hole. This action increases the lateral stress in the surrounding soil, thereby
providing a stabilized composite soil mass. The result of the EAP installation is a significant
strengthening and stiffening of the subsurface soils that would then support conventional footings.
This allows for improved performance of the fill materials without requiring it to be completely
removed thus reducing the overall cost of the project.
Based on our experience with the EAP system in similar conditions, we anticipate EAP elements to
utilize a 24-inch to 30-inch diameter piers and lengths sufficient to tie the columns into the
underlying native gravel to provide adequate subgrade improvement for support of typical
foundation loads associated with the planned construction. EAPs constructed in this manner
generally allow for a design bearing pressure on the order of 4,000 to 6,000 psf. Footings
supported on EAP improved soils are generally designed to limit potential settlements to less than
one inch with differential settlements being less than ½-inch; however, stricter design criteria could
be utilized and would likely result in more EAP elements extending to greater depth.
On EAP projects, the EAP designer typically works closely with the design team, and they create
their own EAP installation plans to be included as part of the overall package. They then provide
the specialized construction and quality control during the installation of this system. Their design is
prepared utilizing the data provided in this report and structural loads provided by the project
structural engineer. We anticipate this approach to be more economical and provide for a shorter
construction schedule than the complete removal and replacement of the fill or alternative deep
foundation options.
Once a preliminary foundation plan is available, we highly recommend that you contact an EAP
designer / contractor to provide preliminary pricing for the EAP system. We are able to provide
recommendations for high quality EAP contractors upon request.
Tinworks Brewery Site Preliminary Engineering Analysis Bozeman, Montana Page 9
4.5 Foundation Walls
If crawlspace systems are utilized for the apartment structure, foundation walls would be subjected
to horizontal loading due to lateral earth pressures. The lateral earth pressures are a function of the
natural and backfill soil types and acceptable wall movements, which affect soil strain to mobilize
the shear strength of the soil. More soil movement is required to develop greater internal shear
strength and lower the lateral pressure on the wall. To fully mobilize strength and reduce lateral
pressures, soil strain and allowable wall rotation must be greater for clay soils than for
cohesionless, granular soils.
The lowest lateral earth pressure against walls for a given soil type is the active condition and
develops when wall movements occur. Passive earth pressures are developed when the wall is
forced into the soil, such as at the base of a wall on the side opposite the retained earth side. When
no soil strain is allowed by the wall, this is the "at-rest" condition, which creates pressures having
magnitudes between the passive and active conditions.
The distribution of the lateral earth pressures on the structure depends on soil type and wall
movements or deflections. In most cases, a triangular pressure distribution is satisfactory for
design and is usually represented as an equivalent fluid unit weight. Design parameters are given
in the recommendations section of this report.
4.6 Parking Structure Slab
The main floor level of the parking structure will function as a rigid concrete pavement. Similar
pavement sections are designed to distribute concentrated traffic loads to the subgrade.
Performance of the pavement structure is directly related to the physical properties of the subgrade
soils and the magnitude and frequency of traffic loadings. Pavement design procedures are based
on strength properties of the subgrade and pavement materials, along with the design traffic
conditions. Traffic information was not available at the time of this report; however, for the purposes
of our analysis we have assumed that traffic for the interior parking will be limited to passenger-type
vehicles only.
The parking structure slab if unaddressed would be supported over the existing fill material which
are susceptible to differential settlements. Such settlement can lead to issues with slab support and
significant distress to the concrete surface. To address the concerns posed by the fill and improve
performance of the structure, we recommend that the improvements discussed in Sections 4.3 or
4.4 above be continued beneath the slab portion of the parking structure as well as beneath
foundation elements.
The concrete pavement section outlined in our recommendations has assumed that materials
beneath the concrete will be either compacted structural fill or EAP improved existing fill.
Tinworks Brewery Site Preliminary Engineering Analysis Bozeman, Montana Page 10
4.7 Apartment Slab-on-Grade and Exterior Flatwork
For the reasons discussed in Section 4.6 above, any slab-on-grade options utilized within the
apartment building will be susceptible to settlements associated with the uncontrolled fill
encountered on site and warrant improvements of these materials. Either the full replacement of
the fill or EAP improvements to the fill zone beneath interior slab-on-grade applications are
warranted.
Exterior slab-on-grade is generally less of a concern as these features can be relatively easily
removed and replaced should excessive settlements occur. Thus, conventional slab-on-grade
construction over the existing fill is viable provided the Owner understands that a higher level of
maintenance and potential replacement of exterior flatwork may be warranted when constructed
over the fill material. If standard construction methods are planned, a four to six-inch leveling
course of granular fill is placed directly beneath the concrete to provide a structural cushion, a
capillary-break from the subgrade, and a drainage medium. Prior to placement of the cushion
course, the surface of the fill materials should be compacted per our recommendations. This
compaction will not alleviate the settlement risk and is intended to provide a stable surface on which
the construction can be performed.
If the Owner is unwilling or unable to accept the risk of settlement beneath exterior flatwork or if
especially movement sensitive exterior flatwork applications are planned, mitigation of the fill by
replacement or EAP improvement should be considered in these areas.
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 11
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Site Grading and Excavations
1. All topsoil and organic material should be removed from the proposed building and
pavement areas and any areas to receive site grading fill. For planning purposes, a
stripping thickness of six inches should be adequate to remove most organic
material; however, deeper excavations may be required at some locations where
deep-rooted plants are present.
2. All fill and backfill should be non-expansive, free of organics and debris, and should
be approved by the project geotechnical engineer. The on-site soils, exclusive of
topsoil, are suitable for use as general site grading fill and exterior foundation
backfill but may require processing prior to use. The existing fill is generally an
acceptable material; however, all construction debris larger than 4-inch diameter
and any organic materials would need to be removed from the fill prior to reuse.
Hydrocarbon odors were evident in several test pits indicating that contaminated
zones may be present within the fill. If reused, the fill would warrant additional
environmental evaluation to assess potential contaminants and the materials
suitability to use as backfill on site. Some specialized handling and disposal of
potentially contaminated zones may be required.
All fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness for fine-
grained soils and not exceeding 12 inches for granular soils. All materials
compacted using hand compaction methods or small walk-behind units should
utilize a maximum lift thickness of 6 inches to ensure adequate compaction
throughout the lift. All fill and backfill shall be moisture conditioned to the
approximate optimum moisture content and compacted to the following percentages
of the maximum dry density determined by a standard proctor test which is outlined
by ASTM D698 or equivalent (e.g. ASTM D4253-D4254).
a) Structural Fill Replacement ......................................................... 98%
b) Subgrade Soils Below Concrete Flatwork ................................... 95%
c) Gravel Base Course Below Concrete Flatwork ........................... 98%
d) Foundation Wall Backfill .............................................................. 95%
e) General Landscaping or Nonstructural Areas ............................. 92%
f) Utility Trench Backfill, To Within 2 Feet of Surface ...................... 95%
For your consideration, verification of compaction requires laboratory proctor tests to
be performed on a representative sample of the soil prior to construction. Due to the
variability in the existing fill materials, several proctor tests may be required to
adequately verify the compaction of these materials. These tests can require up to
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 12
one week to complete (depending on laboratory backlog) and this should be
considered when coordinating the construction schedule to ensure that delays in
construction or additional testing expense is not required due to laboratory
processing times or rush processing fees.
3. Develop and maintain site grades which will rapidly drain surface and roof runoff
away from foundation and subgrade soils; both during and after construction. The
final site grading shall conform to the grading plan and satisfy the minimum
requirements of the applicable building codes.
4. Downspouts from roof drains should convey directly into the on-site storm water
system, when possible.
5. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to provide safe working conditions in
connection with underground excavations. Temporary construction excavations
greater than four feet in depth, which workers will enter, will be governed by OSHA
guidelines given in 29 CFR, Part 1926. For planning purposes, subsoils
encountered in the borings and test pits are considered Type C. The soil conditions
on site can change due to changes in soil moisture or disturbances to the site prior
to construction. Thus, the contractor is responsible to provide an OSHA
knowledgeable individual during all excavation activities to regularly assess the soil
conditions and ensure that all necessary safety precautions are implemented and
followed.
5.2 Conventional Shallow Foundations on Structural Fill
The design and construction criteria below should be observed for a shallow foundation system
bearing on properly compacted structural fill extending to native gravels. With this option, the
complete remove of the existing fill and native clays to the gravels surface shall be performed and
compacted structural fill installed back to the design footing and slab elevations. The construction
details should be considered when preparing the project documents.
6. Both interior and exterior footings should bear on properly compacted structural fill
extending to approved native gravels. All structural fill shall be placed and
compacted in accordance with item 2 above and conform to the material
requirements of Item 7. The limits of removal and replacement with compacted
structural fill shall extend beneath the entire building footprint and at least two feet
beyond the outer face of the exterior footings in all directions. Footings supported
as described should be designed with a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of
6,000 psf and a one-third increase in the bearing pressure is acceptable for
consideration of transient load cases. Such construction is expected to realize total
settlements of less than ¾-inch with differential settlements of approximately one-
half this amount.
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 13
7. Structural fill utilized with this alternative shall comply with the material requirements
outlined in Section 02234 of the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications
(MPWSS). All gradations outlined in this specification are acceptable for this
application based on contractor preference and local availability. Materials
containing more than 30 percent of the sample being larger than ¾-inch are not
suitable for use of conventional proctor methods outlined in ASTM D698 and shall
utilize relative density methods (ASTM D4253 and D4254) to establish the maximum
dry density used for field verification of compaction. Alternative fill materials not
conforming to the material requirements of MPWSS Section 02234 should be
approved by TD&H prior to use.
8. Footings shall be sized to satisfy the minimum requirements of the applicable
building codes while not exceeding the maximum allowable bearing pressure
provided in Item 6 above.
9. Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be placed at least 48
inches below finished exterior grade for frost protection.
10. Lateral loads are resisted by sliding friction between the footing base and the
supporting soil and by lateral pressure against the footings opposing movement.
For design purposes, a friction coefficient of 0.45 and a lateral resistance pressure
of 200 psf per foot of depth are appropriate for foundations bearing on properly
compacted structural fill (Item 7) and backfilled with processed and compacted on-
site fill.
11. A representative of TD&H Engineering should be retained to observe construction
excavations, verify that all excavations have reached suitable native gravels, and
verify the placement and compaction of the structural fill in accordance with these
recommendations.
5.3 Conventional Shallow Foundations Over EAP Improved Soils
When EAP systems are preferred, the EAP design must be performed by a licensed design/build
contractor. The recommendations below are intended to be preliminary guidelines based on our
experience with this system. These recommendations shall not be utilized for final design of the
foundation system without being verified by a licensed EAP designer.
12. Both interior and exterior footings should bear on EAP improved soils and be
designed using the maximum allowable bearing pressure to be issued by the EAP
designer. For preliminary planning purposes, we understand that an allowable soil
bearing pressure of approximately 4,000 to 6,000 psf is typical for these systems.
EAP elements are anticipated to be 24 to 30 inches in diameter with lengths
extending down into the native gravels stratum. However, alternative EAP sizes
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 14
may be specified by the designer of record based on their analysis. Any compacted
gravel specified by the EAP designer as a capping substrate shall be compacted
and installed per the EAP designer requirements.
13. Footings shall be sized to satisfy the minimum requirements of the applicable
building codes while not exceeding the maximum allowable bearing pressures
provided by the EAP designer.
14. Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be placed at least 48
inches below finished exterior grade for frost protection unless otherwise specified
by the EAP designer.
15. Lateral loads are resisted by sliding friction between the footing base and the
supporting soil and by lateral pressure against the footings opposing movement.
For design purposes, a preliminary friction coefficient of 0.5 is typical of EAP
improved soils; however, this value shall be verified by the EAP designer during the
final design process. A lateral resistance pressure of 200 psf per foot of depth is
appropriate for exterior consisting of processed and compacted existing fill.
16. The EAP designer / installer typically provides their own internal quality control
system; however, the International Building Code (IBC) considers EAPs to be a form
of deep foundation which require full-time inspection. We recommend that a
representative of TD&H Engineering be retained to provide third-party construction
observation on a full-time basis during the installation of EAP elements to verify the
compliance with the design documents.
5.4 Foundation Walls
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for foundation walls
associated with potential crawlspace construction. The construction details should be considered
when preparing the project documents.
17. Foundation stem walls which are laterally supported and can be expected to
undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 60 pcf for
exterior backfill consisting of processed and compacted existing fill.
18. When a crawlspace configuration is utilized, fill should be placed and compacted on
the interior of the crawlspace to an elevation equal to the top of the exterior footings.
This fill is intended to provide lateral support to the wall during exterior backfill and
help reduce the potential for water accumulation in the crawlspace by exterior
sources. The use of structural fill or processed and compacted existing fill are
suitable for this application.
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 15
19. Backfill should be selected, placed, and compacted per Item 2 above. Care should
be taken not to over-compact the backfill since this could cause excessive lateral
pressure on the walls. Only hand-operated compaction equipment should be used
within 5 feet of foundation walls.
20. Exterior footing drains are recommended to remove ground water seepage and
infiltrated surface runoff away from foundation soils when a crawlspace configuration
is utilized. Drains should consist of a minimum 3-inch diameter, geotextile-wrapped,
flexible, slotted pipe (ADS) or perforated, SDR 35, 4-inch diameter, PVC drain tile in
poorly-graded gravel with geotextile placed at or below exterior footing grade. Drains
shall be covered by at least 12 inches of free-draining, open-graded, granular
material. The open-graded granular material should be enveloped in a geotextile to
prevent the migration of fines. Use of a single piece of geotextile with a full-width
lap at the top is preferred; however, two separate pieces of fabric may be used
provided a minimum overlap distance of 12 inches is maintained at all joints. Drains
should be sloped to an interior sump or a storm water system. A typical perimeter
foundation drain is shown on Construction Standard No. 02801-06C.
21. Based on the subsurface soil and ground water conditions, foundation stem walls
associated with crawlspace construction should de damp-proofed in accordance
with the applicable sections of the International Building Code (IBC).
5.5 Parking Structure Main Floor Slab
22. The following rigid pavement section should be selected for use in the interior
parking structure main slab-on-grade assumed to be utilized by passenger car and
truck traffic only.
Pavement Component Component Thickness
Portland Cement Concrete Pavement 6”
Crushed Base Leveling Course 6”
Total 12”
The section provided assumes that the interior slab will be underlain by properly
compacted structural fill extending to native gravel or EAP improved fill as discussed
in sections 5.2 and 5.3 above. Conventional slab-on-grade construction over
unimproved fill material is not advised due to the settlement risk.
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 16
23. The minimum thickness of crushed base leveling course of six inches provided
above is recommended unless a greater thickness is specified by the EAP designer.
Gradations for the crushed base leveling course shall conform to Section 02235 of
the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS). All gradations
outlined in this specification are acceptable for this application based on the local
availability and contractor preference.
24. Where the existing grades will be raised more than the thickness of the pavement
system, all fill should be placed, compacted and meet the general requirements
given in Item 2 above.
25. The concrete pavement section provided assumes that the concrete will provide a
minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi and a minimum modulus of rupture of
570 psi. If the desired concrete mix cannot satisfy these two strength requirements,
we should be consulted to revise the section for the proposed concrete properties.
A modulus of vertical subgrade reaction no greater than 400 pci is appropriate for
the design of the concrete reinforcing by others based on support by compacted
structural fill or EAP improved soils.
5.6 Interior Floor Slab and Exterior Flatwork
26. If interior slab-on-grade construction is utilized for the apartment building, subgrade
improvements outlined in either Section 5.2 or 5.3 should be extended beneath the
entire interior slab area to address settlement concerns posed by the existing fill.
Interior slab-on-grade construction over unimproved fill is not recommended due to
the elevated risk of performance issues and the cost and impacts associated with
these settlements.
27. Exterior concrete flatwork may be constructed using a typical cushion course
consisting of free-draining, crushed gravel placed beneath the concrete and
compacted to the requirements of Item 2c above. However, such construction will
be susceptible to differential settlements associated with the uncontrolled fill present
on site and this risk must be acceptable to the Owner if standard construction
methods are used. Settlements may result in a higher level of maintenance and the
potential for necessary replacement of the exterior flatwork. When conventional
construction is preferred, a four to six-inch cushion course should be placed beneath
concrete over compacted fill materials conforming to the requirements of item 2b.
If the Owner is unwilling or unable to accept the risk of settlements or if especially
movement sensitive flatwork is known to exist, we recommend that improvements to
the fill as discussed in Item 26 and Sections 5.2 or 5.3 be performed beneath these
areas.
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 17
28. Cushion course materials utilized beneath concrete flatwork should conform to Item
23 above.
29. Geotechnically, an underslab vapor barrier is not required for this project. A vapor
barrier is normally used to limit the migration of soil gas and moisture into occupied
spaces through floor slabs. The need for a vapor barrier should be determined by
the architect and/or structural engineer based on interior improvements and/or
moisture and gas control requirements.
5.7 Continuing Services
Three additional elements of geotechnical engineering service are important to the successful
completion of this project.
30. Consultation between the geotechnical engineer and the design professionals
during the design phases is highly recommended. This is important to ensure that
the intentions of our recommendations are incorporated into the design, and that
any changes in the design concept consider the geotechnical limitations dictated by
the on-site subsurface soil and ground water conditions.
31. Observation, monitoring, and testing during construction is required to document the
successful completion of all earthwork and foundation phases. A geotechnical
engineer from our firm should be retained to observe the excavation, earthwork, and
foundation phases of the work to determine that subsurface conditions are
compatible with those used in the analysis and design.
EAP systems, if utilized, are a specialized deep foundation system which should be
observed on a full-time basis by a third-party inspector to evaluate if subsurface
conditions are compatible with those observed during our investigation and to
document the conformance with the subgrade improvement plans to be prepared by
the EAP contractor of your choosing.
32. During site grading, placement of all fill and backfill should be observed and tested
to confirm that the specified density has been achieved. We recommend that the
Owner maintain control of the construction quality control by retaining the services of
our experienced construction materials testing laboratory. Our local engineering
staff is available to provide construction inspection services as well as materials
testing of compacted soils and the placement of Portland cement concrete. In the
absence of project specific testing frequencies, TD&H recommends the following
minimum testing frequencies be used:
Tinworks Brewery Site Recommendations Bozeman, Montana Page 18
Compaction Testing
Mass Structural Fill Operations (if used) 1 Test per 2,500 SF per Lift
Beneath Concrete Flatwork 1 Test per 1,500 SF per Lift
Exterior Foundation Backfill 1 Test per 50 LF of Wall per Lift
LF = Lineal Feet SF = Square Feet
Tinworks Brewery Site Summary of Field & Laboratory Studies Bozeman, Montana Page 19
6.0 SUMMARY OF FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES
6.1 Preliminary Field Explorations
The field exploration programs were conducted on March 5th and March 17th, 2020. The initial
investigation performed on March 5th included four test pits excavated to depths ranging from 10.2
to 15.1 feet. The subsequent investigation on March 17th included four borings drilled to depths of
16.0 to 20.9 feet. The approximate location of each boring and test pit is shown on Figure 1. All
borings were advanced through the subsurface soils using a track-mounted ODEX rig owned and
operated by Excel Drilling. The test pits were excavated by Earth Surgeons using a Komatsu 88
min-excavator. The subsurface exploration and sampling methods used are indicated on the
attached boring and test pit logs. All borings and test pits were logged by Mr. Ahren Hastings, PE of
TD&H Engineering. The location of the borings and test pits were refenced to existing surface
features and are approximate as shown.
During drilling, samples of the subsurface materials were taken using 1⅜-inch I.D. split spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven 18 inches, when possible, into the various strata using a 140-
pound drop hammer falling 30 inches onto the drill rods. For each sample, the number of blows
required to advance the sampler each successive six-inch increment was recorded, and the total
number of blows required to advance the sampler the final 12 inches is termed the penetration
resistance (“N-value”). This test is known as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) described by
ASTM D1586. Penetration resistance values indicate the relative density of granular soils and the
relative consistency of fine-grained soils. Composite samples were also collected from excavation
spoils as the test pits were excavated. The samples were taken at changes in the subsurface
stratigraphy. Logs of all soil borings and test pits, which include soil descriptions, sample depths,
and penetration resistance values, are presented on the Figures 2 through 9.
Measurements to determine the presence and depth of ground water were made after the
completion of drilling using a steel tape measure. The depth or elevation of the water level
measured, and the date of measurement are shown on the boring and test pit logs, when
encountered.
6.2 Laboratory Testing
Samples obtained during the field exploration were returned to our materials laboratory where they
were observed and visually classified in general accordance with ASTM D2487, which is based on
the Unified Soil Classification System. Representative samples were selected for testing to
determine the engineering and physical properties of the soils in general accordance with ASTM or
other approved procedures.
Tinworks Brewery Site Summary of Field & Laboratory Studies Bozeman, Montana Page 20
Tests Conducted: To determine:
Natural Moisture Content Representative moisture content of soil at the time of sampling.
Grain-Size Distribution Particle size distribution of soil constituents describing the percentages of clay/silt, sand and gravel.
Atterberg Limits A method of describing the effect of varying water content on the consistency and behavior of fine-grained soils.
Moisture-Density Relationship A relationship describing the effect of varying moisture content and the resulting dry unit weight at a given compactive effort. Provides the optimum moisture content
and the maximum dry unit weight. Also called a Proctor Curve or Relative Density Test.
The laboratory testing program for this project consisted of 30 moisture-visual analyses, 4 sieve
(grain-size distribution) analyses, and 1 Atterberg Limits analyses. The results of the water content
analyses are presented on the boring and test pit logs, Figures 2 through 9. The grain-size
distribution curves and Atterberg limits are presented on Figures 10 through 14. In addition, one
relative density test was performed, and the result is shown on Figure 15.
Tinworks Brewery Site Limitations Bozeman, Montana Page 21
7.0 LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The findings, analyses, and
recommendations contained in this report reflect our professional opinion regarding potential
impacts the subsurface conditions may have on the proposed project and are based on site
conditions encountered. Our analysis assumes that the results of the exploratory borings and test
pits are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site, that is, that the subsurface
conditions everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the subsurface study.
Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by a
limited number of soil borings and test pits and laboratory analyses. Such unexpected conditions
frequently require that some additional expenditures be made to obtain a properly constructed
project. Therefore, some contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such potential extra
costs.
The recommendations contained within this report are based on the subsurface conditions
observed in the borings and test pits and are subject to change pending observation of the actual
subsurface conditions encountered during construction. TD&H cannot assume responsibility or
liability for the recommendations provided if we are not provided the opportunity to perform limited
construction inspection and confirm the engineering assumptions made during our analysis. A
representative of TD&H should be retained to observe all construction activities associated with
subgrade preparation, foundations, and other geotechnical aspects of the project to ensure the
conditions encountered are consistent with our assumptions. Unforeseen conditions or undisclosed
changes to the project parameters or site conditions may warrant modification to the project
recommendations.
Long delays between the geotechnical investigation and the start of construction increase the
potential for changes to the site and subsurface conditions which could impact the applicability of
the recommendations provided. If site conditions have changed because of natural causes or
construction operations at or adjacent to the site, TD&H should be retained to review the contents of
this report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations provide
considering the time lapse or changed conditions.
Misinterpretation of the geotechnical information by other design team members is possible and can
result in costly issues during construction and with the final product. Our geotechnical engineers
are available upon request to review those portions of the plans and specifications which pertain to
earthwork and foundations to determine if they are consistent with our recommendations and to
suggest necessary modifications as warranted. This service was not included in the original scope
of the project and will require additional fees for the time required for specification and plan
document review and comment. In addition, TD&H should be involved throughout the construction
process to observe construction, particularly the placement and compaction of all fill, preparation of
all foundations, and all other geotechnical aspects. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who
Tinworks Brewery Site Limitations Bozeman, Montana Page 22
prepared your geotechnical report to provide construction observation is the most effective method
of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions.
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the owner and architect and/or engineer in the
design of the subject facility. It should be made available to prospective contractors and/or the
contractor for information on factual data only and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions such
as those interpreted from the boring and test pit logs and presented in discussions of subsurface
conditions included in this report.
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Craig Nadeau PE Ahren Hastings, PE Geotechnical Manager Geotechnical Engineer
TD&H ENGINEERI NG TD&H ENGINEERI NG
J:\2018\B18-091 Aspen & Wallace Parking\GEOTECH\REPORTS\Tinworks Brewery Site.doc
TINWORKS BREWERY SITE BOZEMAN, MONTANA BORING AND TEST PIT LOCATION MAP FIGURE 1
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, brown, moist,
abundant organics
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, very dense, grayish
brown, slightly moist, contains construction debris
and organics
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, dense to very
dense, reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to wet
Bottom of Boring
0.5
11.5
20.9
50/3"
23-32-
48
50/5"
29-29-
35
16-50/
5"
50/3"
80
50/5"
64
50/5"
LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-1SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Ahren Hasings, PE
2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Excel Drilling
Track-mounted ODEX Rig2-1/2-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.
March 17, 2020 B18-091-001
No sample recovery Figure No.2
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Native Grasses
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
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, brown, moist,
abundant organics
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, loose to medium
dense, brown, slightly moist
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, dense to very
dense, reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to wet
Bottom of Boring
0.5
7.0
20.2
3-4-5
9-16-23
25-25-
37
26-50/
4"
50/2"
62
50/2"
LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-2SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Ahren Hasings, PE
2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Excel Drilling
Track-mounted ODEX Rig2-1/2-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.
March 17, 2020 B18-091-001
No sample recovery Figure No.3
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Native Grasses
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
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, brown, moist,
abundant organics
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, medium dense,
grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organics
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, very dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to wet
Bottom of Boring
0.5
8.0
16.0
7-7-6
7-4-12
50/3"
38-50/
5"
50/3"
50/5"
LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-3SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Ahren Hasings, PE
2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Excel Drilling
Track-mounted ODEX Rig2-1/2-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.
March 17, 2020 B18-091-001
No sample recovery Figure No.4
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Native Grasses
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
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, brown, moist,
abundant organics
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, medium dense,
grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organics
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, very dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to wet
Bottom of Boring
0.5
8.5
20.5
2-3-10
6-6-12
21-31-
26
32-36-
29
50/3"
57
65
50/3"
LEGEND LOG OF SOIL BORING B-4SPT blows per foot Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
1-3/8-inch I.D. split spoon Logged by:Ahren Hasings, PE
2-1/2-inch I.D. split spoon Drilled by:Excel Drilling
Track-mounted ODEX Rig2-1/2-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.
March 17, 2020 B18-091-001
No sample recovery Figure No.5
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Native Grasses
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
2.25
4.5
6.75
9
11.25
13.5
15.75
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, dark brown, slightly
moist, abundant organics
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, appears loose to medium
dense, grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organic material
Lean CLAY with Sand, appears soft, brown, slightly moist
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, relatively dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to wet
Bottom of Test Pit
0.6
6.0
9.2
15.1
G
G
G
G
LEGEND LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
Logged by:Ahren Hastings, PE
Excavated by:Earth Surgeons
Komatsu 88 Mini-ExcavatorGNP = Granular and Nonplastic
Note: The stratification lines represent approximate
boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries
may be gradual or transitional.
March 5, 2020 B18-091-001
Figure No.6
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Snow Covered Native Grasses
SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured
DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)MOISTURE CONTENT
0 10 20 30 40 50
= MOISTURE CONTENT
1 of 1
0
2.25
4.5
6.75
9
11.25
13.5
15.75
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, appears loose to medium
dense, grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organic material
Poorly-Graded SAND with Gravel, appears loose, brown,
slightly moist
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, relatively dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to moist
Bottom of Test Pit
3.5
9.1
10.9
Ground
water
not
encoun-
tered
G
G
G
LEGEND LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
Logged by:Ahren Hastings, PE
Excavated by:Earth Surgeons
Komatsu 88 Mini-ExcavatorGNP = Granular and Nonplastic
Note: The stratification lines represent approximate
boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries
may be gradual or transitional.
March 5, 2020 B18-091-001
Figure No.7
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Snow Covered Native Grasses
SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured
DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)MOISTURE CONTENT
0 10 20 30 40 50
= MOISTURE CONTENT
1 of 1
0
2.25
4.5
6.75
9
11.25
13.5
15.75
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, appears loose to medium
dense, grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organic material
Sandy Lean CLAY, appears firm to stiff, brown, slightly
moist
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, relatively dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to moist
Bottom of Test Pit
2.0
6.8
11.1
Ground
water
not
encoun-
tered
G
G
G
LEGEND LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
Logged by:Ahren Hastings, PE
Excavated by:Earth Surgeons
Komatsu 88 Mini-ExcavatorGNP = Granular and Nonplastic
Note: The stratification lines represent approximate
boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries
may be gradual or transitional.
March 5, 2020 B18-091-001
Figure No.8
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Snow Covered Native Grasses
SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured
DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)MOISTURE CONTENT
0 10 20 30 40 50
= MOISTURE CONTENT
1 of 1
0
2.25
4.5
6.75
9
11.25
13.5
15.75
TOPSOIL: Lean CLAY, appears firm, dark brown, slightly
moist, abundant organics
FILL: Clayey GRAVEL with Sand (Pit Run), appears dense
to very dense, grayish brown, slightly moist
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, appears loose to medium
dense, grayish brown, slightly moist, contains construction
debris and organic material
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand, relatively dense,
reddish grayish brown, slightly moist to moist
Bottom of Test Pit
0.4
7.1
8.5
10.2
Ground
water
not
encoun-
tered
G
G
LEGEND LOG OF TEST PIT TP-4Atterberg Limits
Field Moisture content Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, MontanaGroundwater Level
Grab/composite sample
Logged by:Ahren Hastings, PE
Excavated by:Earth Surgeons
Komatsu 88 Mini-ExcavatorGNP = Granular and Nonplastic
Note: The stratification lines represent approximate
boundaries between soil types. Actual boundaries
may be gradual or transitional.
March 5, 2020 B18-091-001
Figure No.9
SheetGRAPHICLOGSOIL DESCRIPTION
SURFACE:Snow Covered Native Grasses
SURFACE ELEVATION:Not Measured
DEPTH (FT)GROUNDWATERSAMPLEDEPTH (FT)MOISTURE CONTENT
0 10 20 30 40 50
= MOISTURE CONTENT
1 of 1
Tested By: WJC Checked By:
3-16-2020
10
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=
D50=D30=D15=
D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
Poorly-Graded SAND with Gravel
3"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#80
#100
#200
100.0
89.6
79.5
75.0
66.9
61.9
52.0
42.7
33.0
18.0
8.5
5.3
4.2
2.9
38.7895 31.9440 8.4070
4.0499 0.7278 0.3691
0.2788 30.16 0.23
SP
Report No. A-20927-206
Think Tank Design Group
Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, Montana
B18-091-001
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Location: TP-2
Sample Number: A-20927 Depth: 4.0 ft Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.
*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 25.0 23.0 9.3 24.7 15.1 2.96 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: WJC Checked By:
3-13-2020
11
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=
D50=D30=D15=
D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#80
#100
#200
100.0
97.5
95.3
88.8
82.1
73.8
68.1
60.3
56.0
46.2
35.0
20.5
11.1
8.3
7.1
6.5
4.9
52.7506 43.7206 12.4556
6.2502 1.4649 0.5971
0.3661 34.02 0.47
GP
Report No. A-20931-206X
Think Tank Design Group
Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, Montana
B18-091-001
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Location: TP-3
Sample Number: A-20931 Depth: 7.0 ft Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.
*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
2.5 29.4 21.9 11.2 23.9 6.2 4.96 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: WJC Checked By:
4-3-2020
12
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=
D50=D30=D15=
D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#80
#100
#200
100.0
93.3
90.5
89.1
85.6
81.3
78.4
72.8
61.0
50.2
44.7
32.0
11.3320 4.2368 0.2423
0.1787
SC
Report No. A-21078-206
Think Tank Design Group
Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, Montana
B18-091-001
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Location: B-2
Sample Number: A-21078 Depth: 5.0 - 6.5 ft Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.
*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 6.7 7.7 4.3 8.5 40.8 32.06 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MS Checked By:
3-31-2020
13
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=
D50=D30=D15=
D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
FILL: Clayey SAND
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
#10
#20
#40
#60
#80
#100
#200
100.0
95.7
95.2
94.7
92.8
90.8
85.5
75.8
65.1
56.6
50.8
33.2
1.6345 0.8138 0.2028
0.1461
SC
Report No. A-21083-206
Think Tank Design Group
Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, Montana
B18-091-001
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Location: B-3
Sample Number: A-21083 Depth: 5.0 - 6.5 ft Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.
*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 4.3 2.9 2.0 15.0 42.6 33.26 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: BC Checked By:
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
PLASTICITY INDEX0
10
20
30
40
50
60
LIQUID LIMIT
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
CL-ML
C L o r O L
C H o r O H
ML or OL MH or OH
Dashed line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural soils
47
WATER CONTENT25.8
26.2
26.6
27
27.4
27.8
28.2
28.6
29
29.4
29.8
NUMBER OF BLOWS
5 6 7 8 9 10 20 25 30 40
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS
Project No.Client:Remarks:
Project:
Location: B-2
Sample Number: A-21077 Depth: 2.5 - 4.0 ft
Figure
FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel 28 20 8 SC
B18-091-Think Tank Design Group
14
Report No. A-21077-207
Date: 4-3-2020Tinworks Brewery Site
Bozeman, Montana
Technician:
Test Procedure
2.70
2.5
4.9
FIGURE 15
WJC
Pessimum Moisture =2.1 % Passing No. 200
Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Sand
8.2
Specific Gravity
Unified Classification
Optimum Moisture =
Minimum Dry Density =
135.4
111.8
Maximum Dry Density =
Client:Think Tank Design Report Number:A-20931-209
Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, Inc.
Sample Source:TP-3 ( 6.0 feet)
REPORT OF RELATIVE DENSITY
1800 River Drive North
Great Falls, Montana 59401
Mr. Erik Nelson
Report Date:3/13/2020
Telephone: (406) 761-3010 Fax: (406) 727-2872
Bozeman, MT 59715 Sample Number:A-20931
33 North Black Project Number:B18-091
Project:Aspen & Wallace Parking Lot
Group, Inc.
Date Sample Received:3/9/2020
Attn:
Address:
Relative Density, (ASTM D-4253, ASTM D-4254)
% Retained on 3"
Peter Klevberg, P.E.
Laboratory Manager
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0
135.0
140.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0Dry Density (pcf)Water Content (%)
110
120
130
140
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100lbs. / cu.ft.Percent Relative Density
ZAV Curve
QUALITY CHECK:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CAD NO.
JOB NO.
DATE:
02801-06C
Engineering
tdhengineering.com
CONSTRUCTION STANDARD NO. 02801-06C
PERIMETER FOUNDATION DRAIN
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
RLT
CRN
MMJ
5/21/15
FIGURE