Loading...
21-104309-Wetland Delineation-10-14-2021-V1 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone 425.415.0551 ♦ Fax 425.415.0311 www.riley-group.com GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PREPARED BY: THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NORTHEAST BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 PREPARED FOR: MAGELLAN ARCHITECTS 8383 158TH AVENUE, SUITE 280 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 RGI PROJECT NO. 2020-507-1 MIDWAY SAMOAN AG CHURCH 29276 MILITARY ROAD SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 13, 2020 Geotechnical Engineering Report i November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 1 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................... 1 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................................................... 1 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................................ 2 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 2 4.1 SURFACE .................................................................................................................................................. 2 4.2 GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................. 2 4.3 SOILS ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.4 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................................ 3 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 3 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS .......................................................................................................................... 4 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 4 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................. 4 5.2 EARTHWORK ............................................................................................................................................. 5 5.2.1 Erosion and Sediment Control ..................................................................................................... 5 5.2.2 Stripping and Subgrade Preparation ............................................................................................ 6 5.2.3 Excavations................................................................................................................................... 6 5.2.4 Structural Fill ................................................................................................................................ 7 5.2.5 Wet Weather Construction Considerations ................................................................................. 8 5.3 FOUNDATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 9 5.4 RETAINING WALLS ................................................................................................................................... 10 5.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................................... 10 5.6 DRAINAGE .............................................................................................................................................. 11 5.6.1 Surface ....................................................................................................................................... 11 5.6.2 Subsurface .................................................................................................................................. 11 5.6.3 Infiltration .................................................................................................................................. 11 5.7 UTILITIES ................................................................................................................................................ 11 5.8 PAVEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................ 11 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES .............................................................................................................. 12 7.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 12 LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES Figure 1 ..................................................................................................................... Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 ............................................................................................... Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 3 ............................................................................................... Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 4 ....................................................................................................Typical Footing Drain Detail Appendix A .......................................................................... Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Geotechnical Engineering Report November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 Executive Summary This Executive Summary should be used in conjunction with the entire Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) for design and/or construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the GER must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. Section 7.0 should be read for an understanding of limitations. RGI’s geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of eight test pit explorations to approximate depths of 6 to 10 feet below existing site grades. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site is challenging for development. The peat should be removed from the site and backfilled with structural fill. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: Soil Conditions: The soils encountered during field exploration include two to seven feet of medium dense to dense fill comprised of sandy gravel, silty gravel with some sand, silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, and 5/8” minus crushed rock over native deposits of soft peat, stiff to very stiff silt with varying amounts of sand, and medium dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and sand with some silt and gravel. Groundwater: Groundwater seepage was encountered at four location at depths of 4.5 to 8 feet during our subsurface exploration. Foundations: Foundations for the proposed building may be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on structural fill after peat is removed. Slab-on-grade: Slab-on-grade floors and slabs for the proposed building can be supported on structural fill after peat is removed. Pavements: The peat below the proposed parking area should be completely removed to avoid future settlement. However, if some settlement is allowed, the following pavement sections are recommended:  3 inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) over structural fill after recompaction. Geotechnical Engineering Report 1 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 1.0 Introduction This Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) presents the results of the geotechnical engineering services provided for the Midway Samoan AG Church in Federal Way, Washington. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the construction of a church building. Our scope of services included field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparation of this GER. The recommendations in the following sections of this GER are based upon our current understanding of the proposed site development as outlined below. If actual features vary or changes are made, RGI should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. In addition, RGI requests to review the site grading plan, final design drawings and specifications when available to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and construction. 2.0 Project description The project site is located at 29276 Military Road South in Federal Way, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by a church building, a single-family residence, an outbuilding, and a concrete slab. RGI understands that the existing structures will be removed and a new church with a paved parking lot will be constructed on the site. At the time of preparing this GER, building plans were not available for our review. Based on our experience with similar construction, RGI anticipates that the proposed building will be supported on perimeter walls with bearing loads of one to three kips per linear foot, and a series of columns with a maximum load up to 50 kips. Slab-on-grade floor loading of 250 pounds per square foot (psf) are expected. 3.0 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION On October 28, 2020, RGI observed the excavation of eight test pit explorations. The approximate exploration locations are shown on Figure 2. Field logs of each exploration were prepared by the geologist that continuously observed the excavation. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during excavating as well as our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. The test pit logs included in Appendix A represent an interpretation of the field Geotechnical Engineering Report 2 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and analysis of the samples. 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING During the field exploration, a representative portion of each recovered sample was sealed in containers and transported to our laboratory for further visual and laboratory examination. Selected samples retrieved from the test pit explorations were tested for moisture content and grain size analysis to aid in soil classification and provide input for the recommendations provided in this GER. The results and descriptions of the laboratory tests are enclosed in Appendix A. 4.0 Site Conditions 4.1 SURFACE The subject site is an irregular-shaped site comprised of two parcels totaling approximately 2.48 acres in size. The site is bound to the north by a single family residence and wetland, to the east by a residential development, to the south by a single family residence, and to the west by Military Road South. The existing site is occupied by a church building, a single family residence, an outbuilding, and a concrete slab. The site slopes east with about 10 feet of elevation change across the site. The eastern portion of the site is occupied by a wetland area with a stream extending along the eastern property line. The site is vegetated with grass, wetland plants and shrubs and several scattered medium- to large-diameter trees. 4.2 GEOLOGY Review of the Lidar-Revised Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5’ Quadrangle, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, by R.W. Tabor, etc. (2014) indicates that the soil in the western edge of the site is mapped as Till (Map Unit Qvt), which is light to dark gray, nonsorted, nonstratified mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. Most of the site is mapped as Recessional outwash deposits (Qvr), which is stratified sand and gravel, silty sand, and silt deposited in outwash channels draining meltwater from the receding glacier. The descriptions for recessional outwash deposits are generally similar to the findings in our field explorations with exception that peat was encountered at shallow depth. 4.3 SOILS The soils encountered during field exploration include two to seven feet of medium dense to dense fill comprised of sandy gravel, silty gravel with some sand, silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, and 5/8” minus crushed rock over native deposits of soft peat, stiff to Geotechnical Engineering Report 3 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 very stiff silt with varying amounts of sand, and medium dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and sand with some silt and gravel. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented in the test pit logs included in Appendix A. Sieve analysis was performed on four selected soil samples. Grain size distribution curves are included in Appendix A. 4.4 GROUNDWATER Groundwater seepage was encountered at four location at depths of 4.5 to 8 feet during our subsurface exploration. It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. In addition, perched water can develop within seams and layers contained in fill soils or higher permeability soils overlying less permeable soils following periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the future may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the logs. Groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Based on the International Building Code (IBC), RGI recommends the follow seismic parameters for design. Table 1 IBC Parameter 2015 Value 2018 Value Site Soil Class1 D2 Site Latitude 47.3380 Site Longitude -122.2995 Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SS (g) 1.304 1.33 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, S1 (g) 0.498 0.456 Adjusted Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SMS (g) 1.304 1.596 Adjusted 1-Sec Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SM1 (g) 0.748 0.841 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second; SDS(g) 0.869 1.064 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second; SM1(g) 0.499 0.561 1. Note: In general accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-10. The Site Class is based on the average characteristics of the upper 100 feet of the subsurface profile. 2. Note: The 2015 IBC and ASCE 7-10 require a site soil profile determination extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope of our services does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination. Test pit explorations Geotechnical Engineering Report 4 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 extended to a maximum depth of 10 feet, and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil continues below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. 3. Note: In accordance with ASCE 11.4.8, a ground motion hazard analysis is not required for the following cases: • Structures on Site Class E sites with SS greater than or equal to 1.0, provided the site coefficient Fa is taken as equal to that of Site Class C. • Structures on Site Class D sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2, provided that the value of the seismic response coefficient Cs is determined by Eq. 12.8-2 for values of T ≤ 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Eq. 12.8-3 for TL ≥ T > 1.5Ts or Eq. 12.8-4 for T > TL. • Structures on Site Class E sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2, provided that T is less than or equal to Ts and the equivalent static force procedure is used for design. The above exceptions do not apply to seismically isolated structures, structures with damping systems or structures designed using the response history procedures of Chapter 16. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil’s strength. RGI reviewed the results of the field and laboratory testing and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site’s soil during an earthquake. Since the site is underlain by generally medium dense recessional deposits, RGI considers that the possibility of liquefaction during an earthquake is low to moderate. Review of the Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of King County, Washington by Stephen P. Palmer, etc. (2004) indicates the western edge of the site is mapped as having Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility and the rest of the site is mapped as having Low to Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility. 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS Regulated geologically hazardous areas include erosion, landslide, earthquake, or other geological hazards. Based on review of the City of Federal Way Critical Areas Map, the site does not contain geologically hazardous areas. 5.0 Discussion and Recommendations 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS Based on our study, the site is challenging for the proposed development. If the building foundation is supported on shallow footings bearing on native soil, it will experience a significant amount of post-construction settlement due to consolidation settlement of peat. To avoid potential damages to building structures, the peat should be completely removed in the building pad area and backfilled with structural fill. Foundations for the proposed building can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent structural fill. Slab-on-grade floors can be similarly supported on structural fill after overexcavation of peat. Geotechnical Engineering Report 5 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 5.2 EARTHWORK The earthwork is expected to include excavating and backfilling the building foundations and preparing slab subgrades. 5.2.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Potential sources or causes of erosion and sedimentation depend on construction methods, slope length and gradient, amount of soil exposed and/or disturbed, soil type, construction sequencing and weather. The impacts on erosion-prone areas can be reduced by implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan. The plan should be designed in accordance with applicable city and/or county standards. RGI recommends the following erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs):  Scheduling site preparation and grading for the drier summer and early fall months and undertaking activities that expose soil during periods of little or no rainfall  Retaining existing vegetation whenever feasible  Establishing a quarry spall construction entrance  Installing siltation control fencing or anchored straw or coir wattles on the downhill side of work areas  Covering soil stockpiles with anchored plastic sheeting  Revegetating or mulching exposed soils with a minimum 3-inch thickness of straw if surfaces will be left undisturbed for more than one day during wet weather or one week in dry weather  Directing runoff away from exposed soils and slopes  Minimizing the length and steepness of slopes with exposed soils and cover excavation surfaces with anchored plastic sheeting  Decreasing runoff velocities with check dams, straw bales or coir wattles  Confining sediment to the project site  Inspecting and maintaining erosion and sediment control measures frequently (The contractor should be aware that inspection and maintenance of erosion control BMPs is critical toward their satisfactory performance. Repair and/or replacement of dysfunctional erosion control elements should be anticipated.) Permanent erosion protection should be provided by reestablishing vegetation using hydroseeding and/or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established, site monitoring should be performed by qualified personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of the erosion control measures. Provisions for modifications to the erosion Geotechnical Engineering Report 6 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the erosion and sedimentation control plan. 5.2.2 STRIPPING AND SUBGRADE PREPARATION Stripping efforts should include removal of pavements, vegetation, organic materials, and deleterious debris from areas slated for building, pavement, and utility construction. The test pit explorations encountered 4 to 10 inches of topsoil and rootmass. Deeper areas of stripping may be required in forested or heavily vegetated areas of the site. Subgrade soils that become disturbed due to elevated moisture conditions should be overexcavated to reveal firm, non-yielding, non-organic soils and backfilled with compacted structural fill. In order to maximize utilization of site soils as structural fill, RGI recommends that the earthwork portion of this project be completed during extended periods of warm and dry weather if possible. If earthwork is completed during the wet season (typically November through May) it will be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork will require additional mitigative measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier summer and fall months. 5.2.3 EXCAVATIONS All temporary cut slopes associated with the site and utility excavations should be adequately inclined to prevent sloughing and collapse. The site soils consist of medium dense silty sand with trace gravel and sand with some silt and gravel, and soft peat and stiff to very stiff silt with varying amounts of sand. Accordingly, for excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the temporary side slopes should be laid back with a minimum slope inclination of 1.5H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations should be considered. For open cuts at the site, RGI recommends:  No traffic, construction equipment, stockpiles or building supplies are allowed at the top of cut slopes within a distance of at least five feet from the top of the cut  Exposed soil along the slope is protected from surface erosion using waterproof tarps and/or plastic sheeting  Construction activities are scheduled so that the length of time the temporary cut is left open is minimized  Surface water is diverted away from the excavation  The general condition of slopes should be observed periodically by a geotechnical engineer to confirm adequate stability and erosion control measures Geotechnical Engineering Report 7 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 In all cases, however, appropriate inclinations will depend on the actual soil and groundwater conditions encountered during earthwork. Ultimately, the site contractor must be responsible for maintaining safe excavation slopes that comply with applicable OSHA or WISHA guidelines. 5.2.4 STRUCTURAL FILL RGI recommends fill below the foundation and floor slab, behind retaining walls, and below pavement and hardscape surfaces be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural fill. The structural fill should be placed after completion of site preparation procedures as described above. The suitability of excavated site soils and import soils for compacted structural fill use will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot be consistently compacted to a dense, non-yielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percent above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is that moisture that results in the greatest compacted dry density with a specified compactive effort. Non-organic site soils are only considered suitable for structural fill provided that their moisture content is within about two percent of the optimum moisture level as determined by American Society of Testing and Materials D1557-09 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (ASTM D1557). Excavated site soils may not be suitable for re-use as structural fill depending on the moisture content and weather conditions at the time of construction. If soils are stockpiled for future reuse and wet weather is anticipated, the stockpile should be protected with plastic sheeting that is securely anchored. Even during dry weather, moisture conditioning (such as, windrowing and drying) of site soils to be reused as structural fill may be required. The onsite soils contain organics and are not suitable for use as structural fill. It is necessary to import clean, granular soils to complete site work that meets the gradation requirements listed in Table 2 to be used as structural fill. Geotechnical Engineering Report 8 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 Table 2 Structural Fill Gradation U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 4 inches 100 No. 4 sieve 22 to 100 No. 200 sieve 0 to 5* *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. Prior to use, an RGI representative should observe and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted as specified in Table 3. The soil’s maximum density and optimum moisture should be determined by ASTM D1557. Table 3 Structural Fill Compaction ASTM D1557 Location Material Type Minimum Compaction Percentage Moisture Content Range Foundations On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 95 +2 -2 Retaining Wall Backfill On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 92 +2 -2 Slab-on-grade On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 95 +2 -2 General Fill (non- structural areas) On-site soils or approved imported fill soils: 90 +3 -2 Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed by RGI. A representative number of in-place density tests should be performed as the fill is being placed to confirm that the recommended level of compaction is achieved. 5.2.5 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS RGI recommends that preparation for site grading and construction include procedures intended to drain ponded water, control surface water runoff, and to collect shallow subsurface seepage zones in excavations where encountered. It will not be possible to successfully compact the subgrade or utilize on-site soils as structural fill if accumulated water is not drained prior to grading or if drainage is not controlled during construction. Attempting to grade the site without adequate drainage control measures will reduce the amount of on-site soil effectively available for use, increase the amount of select import fill materials required, and ultimately increase the cost of the earthwork phases of the project. Geotechnical Engineering Report 9 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 Free water should not be allowed to pond on the subgrade soils. RGI anticipates that the use of berms and shallow drainage ditches, with sumps and pumps in utility trenches, will be required for surface water control during wet weather and/or wet site conditions. 5.3 FOUNDATIONS As described above, peat should be removed below the building pad area and backfilled with structural fill. Based on our test exploration, the depth of peat is about 4.5 feet in the building area. After the peat is removed, the building foundation can be supported on spread footing foundation bearing on structural fill. Perimeter foundations exposed to weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Finished grade is defined as the lowest adjacent grade within 5 feet of the foundation for perimeter (or exterior) footings and finished floor level for interior footings. Table 4 Foundation Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity – Structural Fill 2,500 psf1 Friction Coefficient 0.30 Passive pressure (equivalent fluid pressure) 250 pcf2 Minimum foundation dimensions Columns: 24 inches Walls: 16 inches 1. psf = pounds per square foot 2. pcf = pounds per cubic foot The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity may be used. At perimeter locations, RGI recommends not including the upper 12 inches of soil in the computation of passive pressures because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. The passive pressure value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 5.2.4. The recommended base friction and passive resistance value includes a safety factor of about 1.5. With spread footing foundations designed in accordance with the recommendations in this section, maximum total and differential post-construction settlements of 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively, should be expected. Geotechnical Engineering Report 10 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 5.4 RETAINING WALLS If retaining walls are needed in the building area, RGI recommends cast-in-place concrete walls be used. The retaining wall must be supported on structural fill after peat is completely removed. The magnitude of earth pressure development on retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. RGI recommends placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. Wall drainage will be needed behind the wall face. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is shown in Figure 3. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended, and drainage properly installed, RGI recommends using the values in the following table for design. Table 5 Retaining Wall Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity – Structural Fill 2,500 psf Active Earth Pressure (unrestrained walls) 35 pcf At-rest Earth Pressure (restrained walls) 50 pcf For seismic design, an additional uniform load of 7 times the wall height (H) for unrestrained walls and 14H in psf for restrained walls should be applied to the wall surface. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 5.3. 5.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION As described above, the peat should be completely removed in the building pad area and backfilled with structural fill. Once site preparation has been completed as described in Section 5.2, suitable support for slab-on-grade construction should be provided. RGI recommends that the concrete slab be placed on top of structural fill. Immediately below the floor slab, RGI recommends placing a four-inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free- draining sand or gravel that has less than five percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, an 8- to 10-millimeter thick plastic membrane should be placed on a 4-inch thick layer of clean gravel. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post-construction floor settlements of 1/4- to 1/2-inch. Geotechnical Engineering Report 11 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 5.6 DRAINAGE 5.6.1 SURFACE Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building area. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. For non-pavement locations, RGI recommends providing a minimum drainage gradient of 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6.2 SUBSURFACE RGI recommends installing perimeter foundation drains. A typical footing drain detail is shown on Figure 4. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. 5.6.3 INFILTRATION The native site soils are not suitable for infiltration due to low permeability and shallow ground water level. The stormwater should be routed to the storm drainage system in the right-of-way. 5.7 UTILITIES Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. For site utilities located within the right-of-ways, bedding and backfill should be completed in accordance with City of Federal Way specifications. At a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.2.4. Where utilities occur below unimproved areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to a minimum of 90 percent of the soil’s maximum density as determined by the referenced ASTM D1557. The onsite soil is not suitable for use as backfill material. Imported structural fill meeting the gradation provided in Table 2 may be necessary for trench backfill. Since the site contains peat that has a potential of settlements, all utilities pipes should use flexible joints for connections to structures. 5.8 PAVEMENTS As described above, peat below the site will cause long term settlement. To avoid settlement, all peat below the site should be removed and backfilled with structural fill. Based on test exploration in the proposed parking area, the excavation depth will be from Geotechnical Engineering Report 12 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 7 to 9 feet in order to remove all the peat. If the amount of overexcavation is too much, the pavement can be supported on existing fill. However, long-term settlement on an order of several inches will be expected. If it is acceptable to the client, the pavement can be supported on existing fill. Pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in Section 5.2 and as discussed below. Regardless of the relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. The subgrade should be proof-rolled with heavy construction equipment to verify this condition. RGI recommends the following pavement sections for parking and drive areas paved with flexible asphalt concrete surfacing.  3 inches of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) over existing fill after recompaction The paving materials used should conform to the WSDOT specifications for HMA, and CRB surfacing (9-03.9(3) Crushed Surfacing). Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, surface drainage gradients of no less than 2 percent are recommended. Also, some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 6.0 Additional Services RGI is available to provide further geotechnical consultation throughout the design phase of the project. RGI should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. RGI is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and construction monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may arise in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. 7.0 Limitations This GER is the property of RGI, Magellan Architects, and its designated agents. Within the limits of the scope and budget, this GER was prepared in accordance with generally Geotechnical Engineering Report 13 November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the area at the time this GER was issued. This GER is intended for specific application to the Midway Samoan AG Church project in Federal Way, Washington, and for the exclusive use of Magellan Architects and its authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (for example, mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, we can provide a proposal for these services. The analyses and recommendations presented in this GER are based upon data obtained from the explorations performed on site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, RGI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this GER prior to proceeding with construction. It is the client’s responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designers, contractors, subcontractors, are made aware of this GER in its entirety. The use of information contained in this GER for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor’s option and risk. USGS, 2014, Poverty Bay, Washington 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Approximate Scale: 1"=1000' 0 500 1000 2000 N Site Vicinity Map Figure 1 11/2020 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Midway Samoan AG Church (20-046) RGI Project Number: 2020-507-1 Date Drawn: Address: 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington 98003 SITE TP-1TP-2TP-3TP-4TP-5TP-6TP-7TP-811/2020Corporate Office17522 Bothell Way NortheastBothell, Washington 98011Phone: 425.415.0551Fax: 425.415.0311Midway Samoan AG Church (20-046)RGI Project Number:2020-507-1Date Drawn:Address: 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington 98003Figure 2Approximate Scale: 1"=80'04080160N= Test pit by RGI, 10/28/20= Site boundaryGeotechnical Exploration Plan Incliniations) 12" Over the Pipe 3" Below the Pipe Perforated Pipe 4" Diameter PVC Compacted Structural Backfill (Native or Import) 12" min. Filter Fabric Material 12" Minimum Wide Free-Draining Gravel Slope to Drain (See Report for Appropriate Excavated Slope 11/2020 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Midway Samoan AG Church (20-046) RGI Project Number: 2020-507-1 Date Drawn: Address: 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington 98003 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 3 Not to Scale 3/4" Washed Rock or Pea Gravel 4" Perforated Pipe Building Slab Structural Backfill Compacted Filter Fabric 11/2020 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Midway Samoan AG Church (20-046) RGI Project Number: 2020-507-1 Date Drawn: Address: 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington 98003 Typical Footing Drain Detail Figure 4 Not to Scale Geotechnical Engineering Report November 13, 2020 Midway Samoan AG Church, Federal Way, Washington RGI Project No. 2020-507-1 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING On October 28, 2020, RGI performed field explorations using a backhoe. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by observing the excavation of eight test pit explorations to a maximum depth of 10 feet below existing grade. The test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing property lines and paved roads. A geologist from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test exploration, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative soil samples obtained from the explorations were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. As a part of the laboratory testing program, the soil samples were classified in our in house laboratory based on visual observation, texture, plasticity, and the limited laboratory testing described below. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture content determinations were performed in accordance with ASTM D2216-10 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass (ASTM D2216) on representative samples obtained from the exploration in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The moisture content of typical sample was measured and is reported on the test pit logs. Grain Size Analysis A grain size analysis indicates the range in diameter of soil particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses was determined using D6913-04(2009) Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis (ASTM D6913) on four of the samples. Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-1 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:Not Encountered Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:10 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolTPSL Fill Fill ML ML SP-SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 29% moisture 19% moisture 19% moisture 6% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4" topsoil Brown sandy GRAVEL, dense, moist (Fill) Contains quarry spalls Brown silty SAND with some gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) Tan mottled SILT with some sand, stiff, moist Becomes gray, very stiff Becomes hard Gray sandy SILT, very stiff, moist to wet Contains sand interbeds Gray SAND with some silt and gravel, medium dense, moist Test Pit terminated at 10'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-2 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:Seepage at 8' Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:8.5 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolTPSL ML ML SM SP-SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 27% moisture 14% moisture, 22% fines 22% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 10" topsoil Gray SILT with trace sand and gravel, very stiff, moist Gray sandy SILT, very stiff, moist Gray silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist Heavy iron oxide staining Occasional cobble Gray SAND with some silt and gravel, medium dense, moist Becomes wet, light groundwater seepage Test Pit terminated at 8.5'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-3 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:5' Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Gravel Total Depth of Excavation:7.5 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolFill Fill Peat SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 17% moisture 94% moisture 585% moisture 26% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 8" gray 5/8" minus crushed rock, dense, moist (Fill) Brown silty SAND with some gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) Black PEAT, soft, moist Becomes brown, wet Becomes saturated Gray silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, wet Test Pit terminated at 7.5'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-4 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:4.5' Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:9 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolTPSL Fill Peat ML REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 765% moisture 25% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 6" topsoil Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense, moist (Fill) Contains concrete debris Black PEAT, soft, wet Becomes brown Becomes saturated Gray SILT with some sand, stiff, moist to wet Trace organics Test Pit terminated at 9'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-5 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:6' Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:8 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolTPSL Fill Peat SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 20% moisture, 18% finesGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4" topsoil Gray silty gravelly SAND, medium dense, moist (Fill) Contains concrete and asphalt debris Black PEAT, soft, wet Heavy seepage Gray silty fine SAND, medium dense, water bearing Test Pit terminated at 8'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-6 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:Not Encountered Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:9.5 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolTPSL Fill Peat ML REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 5% moisture, 12% fines 49% moisture 14% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 5" topsoil Gray GRAVEL with some sand, medium dense, moist (Fill) Trace concrete debris Brown to gray Black PEAT with wood debris, soft, wet Becomes brown Gray sandy SILT with trace gravel, very stiff, moist Test Pit terminated at 9.5'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-7 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:Not Encountered Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Gravel Total Depth of Excavation:6.5 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolFill Fill Peat ML REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 30% moisture 23% moisture, 87% finesGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4" 5/8" minus crushed rock, dense, moist (Fill) Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense, moist (Fill) Trace metal debris Large boulder Black PEAT, soft, wet Gray SILT with trace sand, stiff, moist Test Pit terminated at 6.5'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Test Pit No.: TP-8 Date(s) Excavated:10/28/2020 Excavation Method:Test Pit Excavator Type:Rubber Tired Backhoe Groundwater Level:Not Encountered Test Pit Backfill:Cuttings Logged By ELW Bucket Size:N/A Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 29276 Military Road South, Federal Way, Washington Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:6 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation N/A Compaction Method Bucket USCS SymbolFill Fill Peat ML REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 362% moisture 21% moistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2" 5/8" minus crushed rock, dense, moist Brown silty SAND with some gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) Black PEAT, soft, moist to wet Becomes brown Gray SILT with some sand and gravel, very stiff, moist Test Pit terminated at 6'Depth (feet)0 5 10 Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Midway Samoan AG Church Project Number:2020-507-1 Client:Magellan Architects Key to Logs USCS SymbolREMARKS AND OTHER TESTSGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTIONDepth (feet)Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS 1 Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet). 2 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. 3 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown. 4 Sample Number: Sample identification number. 5 USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material. 6 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered. 7 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered. May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text. 8 REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent PI: Plasticity Index, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS AF SILT, SILT w/SAND, SANDY SILT (ML) Peat Silty SAND (SM) Poorly graded SAND with Silt (SP-SM) Topsoil TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Auger sampler Bulk Sample 3-inch-OD California w/ brass rings CME Sampler Grab Sample 2.5-inch-OD Modified California w/ brass liners Pitcher Sample 2-inch-OD unlined split spoon (SPT) Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, fixed head) OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Water level (at time of drilling, ATD) Water level (after waiting) Minor change in material properties within a stratum Inferred/gradational contact between strata ?Queried contact between strata GENERAL NOTES 1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests. 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425) 415-0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Midway Samoan AG Church SAMPLE ID/TYPE TP-2 PROJECT NO.2020-507-1 SAMPLE DEPTH 4' TECH/TEST DATE EW 10/29/2020 DATE RECEIVED 10/28/2020 WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1)285.6 Weight Of Sample (gm)252.0 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)252.0 Tare Weight (gm) 16.1 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)16.1 (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) 235.9 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 33.6 SIEVE ANALYSIS Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 235.9 Cumulative Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 14 Wt Ret (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100-%ret) % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles % C GRAVEL 0.0 3.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F GRAVEL 11.2 2.5" coarse gravel % C SAND 4.8 2.0" coarse gravel % M SAND 16.6 1.5"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F SAND 45.0 1.0" coarse gravel % FINES 22.4 0.75"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel % TOTAL 100.0 0.50" fine gravel 0.375"34.9 18.80 7.97 92.03 fine gravel D10 (mm)#4 42.6 26.50 11.23 88.77 coarse sand D30 (mm)#10 54.0 37.90 16.07 83.93 medium sand D60 (mm)#20 medium sand Cu #40 93.1 77.00 32.64 67.36 fine sand Cc #60 fine sand #100 179.4 163.30 69.22 30.78 fine sand #200 199.2 183.10 77.62 22.38 fines PAN 252.0 235.90 100.00 0.00 silt/clay DESCRIPTION Silty SAND with trace gravel USCS SM Prepared For:Reviewed By: Magellon Architechts RW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1".75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425) 415-0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Midway Samoan AG Church SAMPLE ID/TYPE TP-5 PROJECT NO.2020-507-1 SAMPLE DEPTH 7' TECH/TEST DATE EW 10/29/2020 DATE RECEIVED 10/28/2020 WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1)449.1 Weight Of Sample (gm)375.7 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)375.7 Tare Weight (gm) 16.1 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)16.1 (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) 359.6 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 73.4 SIEVE ANALYSIS Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 359.6 Cumulative Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 20 Wt Ret (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100-%ret) % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles % C GRAVEL 0.0 3.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F GRAVEL 0.0 2.5" coarse gravel % C SAND 0.0 2.0" coarse gravel % M SAND 0.8 1.5"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F SAND 81.1 1.0" coarse gravel % FINES 18.1 0.75"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel % TOTAL 100.0 0.50" fine gravel 0.375"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel D10 (mm)#4 16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse sand D30 (mm)#10 16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 medium sand D60 (mm)#20 medium sand Cu #40 18.9 2.80 0.78 99.22 fine sand Cc #60 fine sand #100 238.5 222.40 61.85 38.15 fine sand #200 310.5 294.40 81.87 18.13 fines PAN 375.7 359.60 100.00 0.00 silt/clay DESCRIPTION Silty fine SAND USCS SM Prepared For:Reviewed By: Magellon Architechts RW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1".75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425) 415-0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Midway Samoan AG Church SAMPLE ID/TYPE TP-6 PROJECT NO.2020-507-1 SAMPLE DEPTH 1.5' TECH/TEST DATE EW 10/29/2020 DATE RECEIVED 10/28/2020 WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1)466.1 Weight Of Sample (gm)444.8 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)444.8 Tare Weight (gm) 16.1 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)16.1 (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) 428.7 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 21.3 SIEVE ANALYSIS Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 428.7 Cumulative Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 5 Wt Ret (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100-%ret) % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles % C GRAVEL 39.9 3.0"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F GRAVEL 23.7 2.5" coarse gravel % C SAND 5.2 2.0" coarse gravel % M SAND 8.2 1.5"16.1 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F SAND 10.6 1.0" coarse gravel % FINES 12.3 0.75"187.1 171.00 39.89 60.11 fine gravel % TOTAL 100.0 0.50" fine gravel 0.375"255.1 239.00 55.75 44.25 fine gravel D10 (mm)#4 288.9 272.80 63.63 36.37 coarse sand D30 (mm)#10 311.3 295.20 68.86 31.14 medium sand D60 (mm)#20 medium sand Cu #40 346.6 330.50 77.09 22.91 fine sand Cc #60 fine sand #100 380.4 364.30 84.98 15.02 fine sand #200 392.2 376.10 87.73 12.27 fines PAN 444.8 428.70 100.00 0.00 silt/clay DESCRIPTION Silty GRAVEL with some sand USCS GM Prepared For:Reviewed By: Magellon Architechts RW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1".75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425) 415-0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Midway Samoan AG Church SAMPLE ID/TYPE TP-7 PROJECT NO.2020-507-1 SAMPLE DEPTH 6' TECH/TEST DATE EW 10/29/2020 DATE RECEIVED 10/28/2020 WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1)234.3 Weight Of Sample (gm)193.7 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)193.7 Tare Weight (gm) 16.2 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)16.2 (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) 177.5 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 40.6 SIEVE ANALYSIS Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 177.5 Cumulative Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 23 Wt Ret (Wt-Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100-%ret) % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles % C GRAVEL 0.0 3.0"16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F GRAVEL 0.0 2.5" coarse gravel % C SAND 0.2 2.0" coarse gravel % M SAND 1.5 1.5"16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel % F SAND 11.5 1.0" coarse gravel % FINES 86.8 0.75"16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel % TOTAL 100.0 0.50" fine gravel 0.375"16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel D10 (mm)#4 16.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse sand D30 (mm)#10 16.6 0.40 0.23 99.77 medium sand D60 (mm)#20 medium sand Cu #40 19.2 3.00 1.69 98.31 fine sand Cc #60 fine sand #100 30.1 13.90 7.83 92.17 fine sand #200 39.6 23.40 13.18 86.82 fines PAN 193.7 177.50 100.00 0.00 silt/clay DESCRIPTION SILT with trace sand USCS ML Prepared For:Reviewed By: Magellon Architechts RW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1".75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200