Geotechnical Engineering Report · 2 Sandy Lean Clay Soft to hard, predominantly very ... recompacted. After stripping and grubbing, the subgrade should be proof-rolled where possible

REPORT COVER PAGE

Geotechnical Engineering Report__________________________________________________________________________

The Reserves at Saddleback Ranch Wolfforth, Texas

December 20, 2019Terracon Project No. AR195076

Prepared for:Jones Gillam Renz Architects

Salina, Kansas

Prepared by:Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Lubbock, Texas

Geotechnical Engineering ReportThe Reserves at Saddleback Ranch ■ Wolfforth, TexasDecember 20, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. AR195076

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable

REPORT TOPICS

REPORT SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... iINTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 2GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 3EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 3SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ........................................................................................... 6SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................ 8FLOOR SLABS............................................................................................................... 8PAVEMENTS .................................................................................................................. 9GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 12FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 14

Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format. Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referencedsection heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on theGeoReport logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online atclient.terracon.com.

ATTACHMENTS

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURESSITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANSEXPLORATION RESULTSSUPPORTING INFORMATION

Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents.

http://client.terracon.com/


Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable i

REPORT SUMMARY

Topic 1 Overview Statement 2

Information Provided Email request for proposal from Ms. Maggie Gillam dated October 1, 2019.

Project Description The proposed project is a 40-unit multifamily apartment complex.

Earthwork Approved on-site soils and imported fill material meeting Earthwork sectionrequirements can be used as structural fill.

Shallow Foundations Shallow foundations can be utilized for the construction of the proposedstructures.

Pavements Recommendations for both asphaltic concrete and portland cement concretepavements are provided in this section.

General Comments This section contains important information about the limitations of thisgeotechnical engineering report.

1. If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics above can be used to access the appropriate sectionof the report by simply clicking on the topic itself.

2. This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for designpurposes.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

INTRODUC TION

Geotechnical Engineering ReportThe Reserves at Saddleback Ranch

Flint AvenueWolfforth, Texas

Terracon Project No. AR195076December 20, 2019

INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineeringservices performed for the proposed Reserves at Saddleback Ranch located near the currentsouthern terminus of Flint Avenue in Wolfforth, Texas. The purpose of these services is to provideinformation and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

■ Subsurface soil conditions ■ Seismic site classification per IBC

■ Groundwater conditions ■ Floor slab design and construction

■ Site preparation and earthwork ■ Pavement design and construction

■ Foundation design and construction

The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement ofeleven test borings to approximate depths ranging from 5 to 25 feet below existing site grades.

Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and ExplorationPlan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samplesobtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs and in theExploration Results section.

SITE CONDITIONS

The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with thefield exploration.

Item DescriptionParcel Information The project is located at Flint Avenue in Wolfforth, Texas.ExistingImprovements The project site is developed for agricultural use.

Current Ground Cover Current stubble field and exposed soil.

Existing Topography Relatively level.



PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Item Description

Information Provided Email request for proposal from Ms. Maggie Gillam dated October 1, 2019.

Project Description The proposed project is a 40-unit multifamily apartment complex.

Proposed Structures The proposed project consists of three 2-story apartment units, clubhouseand associated driveways and parking lots.

Finished FloorElevation ±2 feet of existing grade.

Maximum LoadsColumn Loads: 25 kipWalls Loads: 5-8 klf

Below Grade Structures None Anticipated.

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION

We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon ourreview of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding ofthe project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis of our geotechnicalcalculations and evaluation of site preparation and foundation options. Conditions encountered ateach exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. The individual logs can be found in theExploration Results section and the GeoModel can be found in the Figures section of this report.

As part of our analyses, we identified the following model layers within the subsurface profile. Fora more detailed view of the model layer depths at each boring location, refer to the GeoModel.

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 Clayey Sand Loose to dense, predominantlymedium dense

2 Sandy Lean Clay Soft to hard, predominantly verystiff

The borings were advanced in the dry using continuous flight auger drilling techniques that allowshort term groundwater observations to be made while drilling. Groundwater seepage was notobserved within the maximum drilling depth at the time of our field exploration.

Groundwater conditions may be different at the time of construction. Groundwater conditions maychange because of seasonal variations in rainfall, runoff and other conditions not apparent at thetime of drilling.



GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW

The subsurface soils encountered in our borings consist of clayey sands and sandy lean clays tothe maximum depth explored of 25 feet below ground surface (bgs). The uppermost portion ofthe soil profile is not particularly expansive, and the calculated potential vertical rise (PVR) of theon-site subsurface materials is about 1 inch.

The near surface medium dense clayey sands could become unstable with typical earthwork andconstruction traffic, especially after precipitation events. Effective drainage should be completedearly in the construction sequence and maintained after construction to avoid potential issues. Ifpossible, the grading should be performed during the warmer and drier times of the year. If gradingis performed during the winter months, an increased risk for possible undercutting andreplacement of unstable subgrade will persist. Site preparation recommendations are provided inthe Earthwork section.

The Shallow Foundations section addresses support of proposed structures bearing onapproved on-site soils or structural fill material.

The Floor Slabs section includes recommendations for subgrade preparation associated withperformance expectations of our assumed slab loads.

Both asphaltic concrete (AC) and portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement options can be usedfor parking area. Pavements section provides recommendations for the design of new pavementsystems.

The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations.

EARTHWORK

Earthwork is anticipated to include clearing, excavations, and fill placement. The followingsections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for the work.Recommendations include critical quality criteria, as necessary, to render the site in the stateconsidered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for foundations and floor slabs.

General Site Preparation

Remove existing vegetation and deleterious materials from the proposed project area. Exposedsurfaces should be free of mounds and depressions which could prevent uniform compaction.The stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from thesite or used to revegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of gradingoperations. Excessively wet or dry material should either be removed or moisture conditioned andrecompacted. After stripping and grubbing, the subgrade should be proof-rolled where possible



to aid in locating loose or soft areas. The proof-rolling should consist of several overlappingpasses in mutually perpendicular directions over a given area. Any soft or pumping areas shouldbe excavated to firm ground. Excavated areas should be backfilled with properly placed andcompacted fill as discussed in Compaction Requirements.

Structural Fill Material Types

Structural fill is material used below, or within 3 feet of structures, pavements, or constructedslopes. Earthen materials used for structural fill should meet the material property requirementsshown below. Of the samples tested during our investigation, the sandy lean clays from the lowerportion of the soil profile did not meet the recommended soil property requirements, and wouldnot be recommended for re-use as structural fill. Sorting and selective wasting of higher plasticityclays should be expected if mass grading requirements become significant at the site.

Soil Type 1 USCS Classification Required Parameters (for Structural Fill)

On-Site Soils CL, SC

Free of vegetation, organic material, debris, androcks greater than 4 inches in maximum dimension.

liquid limits (LL) less than 35, plasticity index (PI) lessthan 15

Imported Fill SC, CL

Clean soil (free of deleterious material and debris)with liquid limits (LL) less than 35, plasticity index (PI)

less than 15 and no rock greater than 4 inches inmaximum dimension

1. Structural fill should consist of approved materials free of organic matter and debris. Frozen material shouldnot be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A sample of each material type should besubmitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for evaluation prior to use on this site.

Compaction Requirements

Structural fill should meet the following compaction requirements.

Item Compaction Criteria

Maximum Lift Thickness 8 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-propelledcompaction equipment is used.

Proposed structures A minimum of 95 percent of the maximum standard Proctor dry density(ASTM D 698) and within 2 percent of optimum moisture content.

Utility Trench Backfill

Utility trenches penetrating beneath the structures should be effectively sealed to restrict waterintrusion and flow through the trenches, which could migrate below the building. The trench shouldprovide an effective trench plug that extends at least 5 feet from the face of the building exterior.The plug material should consist of cementitious flowable fill or low permeability clay. The trench



plug material should be placed to surround the utility line. If used, the clay trench plug materialshould be placed and compacted to comply with the water content and compactionrecommendations for structural fill stated previously in this report.

Grading and Drainage

All grades must provide effective drainage away from the buildings during and after constructionand should be maintained throughout the life of the structures. Water retained next to the buildingscan result in soil movements greater than those discussed in this report. Greater movements canresult in unacceptable differential floor slab and/or foundation movements, cracked slabs andwalls, and roof leaks. The roof should have gutters/drains with downspouts that discharge ontosplash blocks at a distance of at least 10 feet from the buildings.

Exposed ground should be sloped and maintained at a minimum 5% away from the building forat least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the building. Locally, flatter grades may be necessary totransition ADA access requirements for flatwork. After building construction and landscaping havebeen completed, final grades should be verified to document effective drainage has beenachieved. Grades around the structure should also be periodically inspected and adjusted, asnecessary, as part of the structure’s maintenance program. Where paving or flatwork abuts thestructure, a maintenance program should be established to effectively seal and maintain jointsand prevent surface water infiltration.

Earthwork Construction Considerations

Shallow excavations are anticipated to be accomplished with conventional constructionequipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgradewater content prior to construction of floor slabs. Construction traffic over the completedsubgrades should be avoided. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface wateron the prepared subgrades or in excavations. Water collecting over or adjacent to constructionareas should be removed. If the subgrade freezes, desiccates, saturates, or is disturbed, theaffected material should be removed, or the materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned,and recompacted prior to floor slab construction.

As a minimum, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926,Subpart P, “Excavations” and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, and/orstate regulations.

Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means,methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall theinformation provided herein be interpreted to mean Terracon is assuming responsibility forconstruction site safety, or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be impliednor inferred.



Construction Observation and Testing

The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer.Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of vegetation and topsoil, proof-rolling, and mitigation of areas delineated by the proof-roll to require mitigation.

Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked, as necessary, until approvedby the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. Each lift of fill should be testedfor density and water content at a frequency of at least one test for every 2,500 square feet ofcompacted fill in the building areas and 5,000 square feet in pavement areas. One density andwater content test should be performed for every 50 linear feet of compacted utility trench backfill.

In areas of foundation excavations, the bearing subgrade should be evaluated under the directionof the Geotechnical Engineer. If unanticipated conditions are encountered, the GeotechnicalEngineer should prescribe mitigation options.

In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessary for construction, thecontinuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides thecontinuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, includingassessing variations and associated design changes.

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

Proposed structures can be supported using shallow foundations. If the site has been preparedin accordance with the requirements noted in Earthwork, the following design parameters areapplicable for the proposed project.

Design Parameters – Compressive Loads

Item Description

Maximum Net Allowable Bearing pressure 1, 2 3,000 psf

Minimum Foundation Dimensions Columns: 30 inchesContinuous: 18 inches

Ultimate Coefficient of Sliding Friction 0.35Minimum Embedment Below Finished Grade 24 inches

Estimated Total Movements from Structural Loads 2,3 About 1 inch

Ultimate Passive Pressure 4 275 psf/ft (triangular distribution)



Item Description1. The maximum net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding

overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. An appropriate factor of safety has been applied. Valuesassume that exterior grades are no steeper than 20% within 10 feet of structure.

2. Values provided are for an assumed maximum 25 kip column load and 8 kip per linear foot continuousfoundation load. Our Geotechnical Engineer must review recommendations if projects loads exceed thesevalues.

3. Unsuitable or soft soils should be over-excavated and replaced per the recommendations presented in theEarthwork.

4. The sides of the excavation for the spread footings must be nearly vertical and the concrete should beplaced neat against these vertical faces for the passive earth pressure values to be valid. If the loaded sideis sloped or benched, and then backfilled, the allowable passive pressure will be reduced. Passiveresistance in the upper 2 feet of the soil profile should be neglected.

Foundation Construction Considerations

As noted in Earthwork, the footing excavations should be evaluated under the direction of theGeotechnical Engineer. The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loosesoil prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearingsoil disturbance. Care should be taken to prevent wetting or drying of the bearing materials duringconstruction. Excessively wet or dry material or any loose/disturbed material in the bottom of thefooting excavations represent unsuitable conditions and should be corrected before foundationconcrete is placed.

If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered at the base of the planned footing excavation, theexcavation should be extended deeper to suitable soils, and the footings could bear directly onthese soils at the lower level or on lean concrete backfill placed in the excavations. This isillustrated on the sketch below.

Over-excavation for structural fill placement below footings should be conducted as shown below.The over-excavation should be backfilled up to the footing base elevation, with approved on-sitesoils or imported fill, as recommended in the Earthwork section.



SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS

The seismic design requirements for structures are based on Seismic Design Category. SiteClassification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure. The SiteClassification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted averagevalue of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strengthin accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC). Based onthe soil properties encountered at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, itis our professional opinion that the Seismic Site Classification is D. Subsurface explorations atthis site were extended to a maximum depth of 25 feet. The site properties below the boring depthto 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of thegeneral area. If significant project cost savings could be realized from an improved siteclassification, additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm theconditions below the current boring depth.

FLOOR SLABS

For the light slab loads assumed, the slab performance will largely be a function of the onsite soilsor fill materials quality. The modulus of subgrade reaction is provided in the table below for materialsselected and compacted as noted in the Earthwork section. Slab deflection can be estimated basedon the load. If anticipated loads result in excess settlement that are not tolerable, our Engineer canprovide recommendations for improvement to the uppermost portion of the site subgrade or morestrict control of site grading fill materials and compaction requirements.



Floor Slab Design Parameters

Item Description

Floor Slab Support 1 Pad prepared with approved on-site or imported soils placed and compactedin accordance with Earthwork section of this report.

Estimated Modulus ofSubgrade Reaction 2 120 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) for point loads

1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building footings to reduce the possibility of floor slabcracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation.

2. Modulus of subgrade reaction is an estimated value based upon our experience with the subgradecondition, the requirements noted in Earthwork, and the floor slab support as noted in this table. It isprovided for point loads. For large area loads the modulus of subgrade reaction would be lower.

The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade covered withwood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab willsupport equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder,the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regardingthe use and placement of a vapor retarder.

Floor Slab Construction Considerations

Finished subgrade, within and for at least 3 feet beyond the floor slab, should be protected fromtraffic, rutting, or other disturbance and maintained in a relatively moist condition until floor slabs areconstructed. If the subgrade should become damaged or desiccated prior to construction of floorslabs, the affected material should be removed and structural fill should be added to replace theresulting excavation. Final conditioning of the finished subgrade should be performed immediatelyprior to placement of the floor slab support course.

The Geotechnical Engineer should approve the condition of the floor slab subgrades immediatelyprior to placement of the floor slab support course, reinforcing steel, and concrete. Attention shouldbe paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier, and to areas where backfilledtrenches are located.

PAVEMENTS

Pavement Design Parameters

Design of Asphaltic Concrete (AC) pavements are based on the procedures outlined in theNational Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) Information Series 109 (IS-109) and adjustedbased on local experience. Design of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavements are basedupon American Concrete Institute (ACI) 330; Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete



Parking Lots and again adjusted based on local experience. A design life of 20 years is commonlyexpected of asphalt pavements while portland cement concrete pavement is normally muchlonger.

Design Traffic

The “Light-Duty” pavement sections shown in the tables below are intended for passenger carparking area. The “Pavements Subjected to Occasional Truck Traffic” should be used in fire lanesand loading-unloading areas where the delivery trucks are traveling frequently. Portland cementconcrete pavements often perform better than asphalt in heavily trafficked areas and locations oftrucks turning. Adjustments could be necessary for pavements subjected to more traffic load;additional information should be provided to our engineer regarding required pavement loading.

Pavement Section Thicknesses

The following tables provide options for AC and PCC Sections:

Asphaltic Concrete Design

LayerThickness (inches)

Light Duty Pavements Subjected toOccasional Truck Traffic

Asphaltic Concrete 1 3 4

Aggregate Base 1,2 8 8

Compacted Subgrade orStructural Fill 2 6 6

1. All materials should meet the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.2. Subgrade soil, structural fill aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95% of its Standard Proctor (ASTM

698) maximum dry density with moisture contents controlled within 2% of optimum moisture content.

Portland Cement Concrete Design

LayerThickness (inches)

Light DutyPavements Subjected to

Occasional Truck Traffic 1Dumpster

Pad

Portland Cement Concrete 2 5 6 7

Compacted Subgrade orStructural Fill 3 6 6 6

1. In areas of anticipated moderate traffic, fire trucks, delivery trucks, and areas with repeated turning ormaneuvering of heavy vehicles.

2. All materials should meet the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.3. Subgrade soil or structural fill should be compacted to at least 95% of its Standard Proctor (ASTM 698)

maximum dry density with moisture contents controlled within 2% of optimum moisture content.



Areas for parking of heavy vehicles, concentrated turn areas, and start/stop maneuvers couldrequire thicker pavement sections. Edge restraints (i.e. concrete curbs or aggregate shoulders)should be planned along curves and areas of maneuvering vehicles. A maintenance programincluding surface sealing, joint cleaning and sealing, and timely repair of cracks and deterioratedareas will increase the pavement’s service life. As an option, thicker sections could be constructedto decrease future maintenance.

Openings in pavements, such as decorative landscaped areas, are sources for water infiltrationinto surrounding pavement systems. Water can collect in the islands and migrate into thesurrounding subgrade soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especiallyapplicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near-surface soils. The civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features torestrict or collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edgedrains connected to the storm water collection system, longitudinal subdrains, or other suitableoutlets and impermeable barriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wallinstalled to a depth below the pavement structure.

Dishing in parking lots surfaced with ACC is usually observed in frequently-used parking stalls(such as near the front of buildings) and occurs under the wheel footprint in these stalls. The useof higher-grade asphaltic cement, or surfacing these areas with PCC, should be considered. Thedishing is exacerbated by factors such as irrigated islands or planter areas, sheet surfacedrainage to the front of structures, and placing the ACC directly on a compacted clay subgrade.

PCC pavement details for joint spacing, joint reinforcement, and joint sealing should be preparedin accordance with ACI 330 and ACI 325. PCC pavements should be provided with mechanicallyreinforced joints in accordance with ACI 330.

Pavement Drainage

Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pondon or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to prematurepavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positivedrainage within the granular base section. Appropriate sub-drainage or connection to a suitabledaylight outlet should be provided to remove water from the granular subbase.

Based on the possibility of shallow and/or perched groundwater, we recommend installing apavement subdrain system to control groundwater, improve stability, and improve long-termpavement performance.

Pavement Maintenance

The pavement sections represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodicmaintenance should be anticipated. Therefore, preventive maintenance should be planned and



provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Maintenance activities areintended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment.Maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching)and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the prioritywhen implementing a pavement maintenance program. Additional engineering observation isrecommended to determine the type and extent of a cost-effective program. Even with periodicmaintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required.

Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventivemaintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design andlayout of pavements:

■ Final grade adjacent to paved areas should slope down from the edges at a minimum 2%.■ Subgrade and pavement surfaces should have a minimum 2% slope to promote proper

surface drainage.■ Install below pavement drainage systems surrounding areas anticipated for frequent

wetting.■ Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately.■ Seal all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to

subgrade soils.■ Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.■ Place curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on clay subgrade soils rather than on unbound

granular base course materials.

GENERAL COMMENTS

Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnicalconditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will occurbetween exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather.The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction.Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, where noted in this report, to provideobservation and testing services during pertinent construction phases. If variations appear, wecan provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in theabsence of our observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified sothat we can provide evaluation and supplemental recommendations.

Our Scope of Services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental orbiological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention ofpollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential forsuch contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.



Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for thesole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed andare accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices withno third-party beneficiaries intended. Any third-party access to services or correspondence issolely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client.Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended forthird parties. Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at theirown risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made.

Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Anyuse of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as theremay be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impactexcavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own sitecharacterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing.Site safety, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewateringrequirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or locationof the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered validunless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing.


FIGURES

Contents:

GeoModel (2 pages)

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

DE

PT

H B

EL

OW

GR

AD

E (

Fee

t)The Reserves at Saddleback Ranch Wolfforth, TX Terracon Project No. AR195076

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnicalengineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions asrequired for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6

GEOMODEL

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name

Loose to dense1

Soft to hard2

LEGEND

Clayey Sand

Sandy Lean Clay

Clayey Sand

Sandy Lean Clay

1

2

6

25

1

2

6

25

1

2

6

25

1

2

6

25

1

2

6

25

1

2

6

25

-1.0

-0.5

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

DE

PT

H B

EL

OW

GR

AD

E (

Fee

t)The Reserves at Saddleback Ranch Wolfforth, TX Terracon Project No. AR195076

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnicalengineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions asrequired for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5

GEOMODEL

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name

Loose to dense1

Soft to hard2

LEGEND

Clayey Sand

Clayey Sand

Sandy Lean Clay

1

5

1

5

1

5

1

5

1

5


ATTACHMENTS


Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

Field Exploration

Number of Borings Boring Depth (feet) 1 Location

6 25 Proposed Building Locations

5 5 Proposed Pavements Locations

1. Below ground surface.

Boring Layout and Elevations: Terracon personnel provided the boring layout. Coordinateswere obtained with a handheld GPS unit (estimated horizontal accuracy of about ±10 feet).

Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We drilled soil borings with a truck-mounted drill rig usinghollow stem augers. We obtained representative samples primarily by the split-barrel samplingprocedure. Five soil samples were taken to a depth of 10 feet and at about 5 feet intervalsthereafter to the completion depth of the borings as indicated on the boring logs.

Our granular soil sampling was conducted in general accordance with the Standard Method forPenetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils (ASTM D1586). In the split-barrel samplingprocedure, a standard, 2-inch O.D., split-barrel sampling spoon is driven into the boring with a140-pound automatic SPT (Standard Penetration Test) hammer falling 30 inches. Field personnelrecorded the number of hammer blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inchesof an 18-inch sampling interval as the SPT N-value. The N-values are recorded on the field boringlogs. The soil samples obtained from the split-barrel sampler were visually classified andpackaged for transportation to our laboratory.

The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information was recorded on thefield boring logs. The samples were placed in appropriate containers and taken to our soil laboratoryfor testing and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer. The exploration team prepared fieldboring logs as part of the drilling operations. These field logs included visual classifications of thematerials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions betweensamples. Final boring logs were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent theGeotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based onobservations and tests of the samples in our laboratory.

Laboratory Testing

The project engineer reviewed the field data and assigned laboratory tests to understand theengineering properties of the various soil strata, as necessary, for this project. Proceduralstandards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to


Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 2 of 2

methods were applied because of local practice or professional judgment. Standards noted belowinclude reference to other, related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable todescribe the specific test performed.

■ Moisture Content Measurements (ASTM D-2216)■ Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D-422)■ Atterberg Limits (ASTM D-4318)

The laboratory testing program often included examination of soil samples by an engineer. Basedon the material’s texture and plasticity, we described and classified the soil samples in accordancewith the Unified Soil Classification System.


SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS

Contents:

Site Location PlanExploration Plan

Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.

SITE LOCATIONThe Reserves at Saddleback Ranch ■ Wolfforth, TexasDecember 20, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. AR195076

Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the tableabove this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.

When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above andoutside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.

The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can editit as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.

SITE LOCA TION POR TRAI T

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS

EXPLORATION PLANThe Reserves at Saddleback Ranch ■ Wolfforth, TexasDecember 20, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. AR195076

Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the tableabove this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.

When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above andoutside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.

The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can editit as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.

EXPLORATION P LAN PORTRAI T

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS

EXPLORATION RESULTS

Contents:

Boring Logs (B1 thru P5)Atterberg LimitsGrain Size Distribution (2 pages)


4-5-5N=10

6-7-9N=16

11-12-15N=27

7-9-10N=19

8-11-19N=30

12-15-20N=35

6-4-5N=9

20-50/5"

407 23-12-11CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown, medium dense

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to reddishbrown, stiff to hard

Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

6.0

25.0

Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

Latitude: 33.4939° Longitude: -102.0187°

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Continuous flight auger

Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: AR195076

Drill Rig: B-80

BORING LOG NO. B1Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc.CLIENT:Salina, KS

Driller: CK

Boring Completed: 11-21-2019

PROJECT: The Reserves at Saddleback Ranch

See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory proceduresused and additional data (If any).

See Supporting Information for explanation ofsymbols and abbreviations.

Flint Ave Wolfforth, TXSITE:

Boring Started: 11-21-2019

5827 50th St, Ste 1Lubbock, TX

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

4-6-8N=14

9-10-12N=22

14-13-16N=29

6-4-6N=10

4-4-8N=12

6-12-15N=27

5-5-7N=12

7-11-16N=27

367 23-14-9

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown, medium dense

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), reddish brown, stiff to verystiff


6.0

25.0


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

7-10-11N=21

11-12-18N=30

21-19-22N=41

5-9-13N=22

10-17-18N=35

6-11-17N=28

10-14-10N=24

7-9-11N=20

6012 33-16-17

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown, medium denseto dense

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to reddishbrown, very stiff to hard


6.0

25.0


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

4-9-11N=20

12-14-15N=29

13-18-21N=39

8-6-11N=17

14-12-11N=23

2-2-2N=4

17-22-19N=41

6-11-19N=30

439 29-16-13


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to reddishbrown, soft to hard

- light brown from 18' to 23' bgs


6.0

25.0

bgs- below grade surface


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

8-11-14N=25

7-10-12N=22

4-8-16N=24

6-10-19N=29

10-15-20N=35

11-16-21N=37

11-17-23N=40

10-15-18N=33


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to reddishbrown, very stiff to hard


6.0

25.0


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

5-5-7N=12

10-11-13N=24

12-11-14N=25

4-6-7N=13

7-12-14N=26

9-16-22N=38

9-21-19N=40

7-15-26N=41

5927 31-13-18


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to reddishbrown, stiff to hard

- light brown from 18' to 23' bgs


6.0

25.0

bgs- below grade surface


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

10

15

20

25

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

2

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

6-7-7N=14

4-8-9N=17

10-9-13N=22


Boring Terminated at 5 Feet5.0


TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80

BORING LOG NO. P1Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc.CLIENT:Salina, KS

Driller: CK










1

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

3-4-5N=9

4-9-10N=19

9-13-12N=25

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown, loose tomedium dense



TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

5-6-8N=14

6-10-12N=22

7-11-15N=26




TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

3-5-9N=14

10-12-14N=26

11-11-13N=24




TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

3-5-10N=15

11-14-16N=30

14-10-11N=21




TH

IS B

OR

ING

LO

G IS

NO

T V

ALI

D IF

SE

PA

RA

TE

D F

RO

M O

RIG

INA

L R

EP

OR

T.

GE

O S

MA

RT

LO

G-N

O W

ELL

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12/

20/

19

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

OB

SE

RV

AT

ION

S

DE

PT

H (

Ft.)

5

STRENGTH TEST

FIE

LD T

ES

TR

ES

ULT

S

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(tsf

)

TE

ST

TY

PE

ST

RA

IN (

%)

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

S

WA

TE

RC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T (

pcf)

ATTERBERGLIMITS

LL-PL-PI



GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

MO

DE

L LA

YE

R

DEPTH

Page 1 of 1



Notes:


Drill Rig: B-80


Driller: CK










1

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 20 40 60 80 100

CH o

r

OH

CL o

r

OL

ML or OL

MH or OH

"U" L

ine

"A" L

ine

ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTSASTM D4318

PLASTICITY

INDEX

LIQUID LIMIT

PROJECT NUMBER: AR195076

SITE: Flint Ave Wolfforth, TX

PROJECT: The Reserves at SaddlebackRanch

CLIENT: Jones Gillam Renz Architects, Inc. Salina, KS


LAB

OR

AT

OR

Y T

ES

TS

AR

E N

OT

VA

LID

IF S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

OR

IGIN

AL

RE

PO

RT

.

AT

TE

RB

ER

G L

IMIT

S A

R19

5076

TH

E R

ES

ER

VE

S A

T S

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N_D

AT

AT

EM

PLA

TE

.GD

T 1

2/2

0/19

23

23

33

29

31

12

14

16

16

13

11

9

17

13

18

PIPLLLBoring ID Depth

B1

B2

B3

B4

B6

39.5

36.5

60.1

43.1

58.6

Fines

0 - 1.5

3.5 - 5

6 - 7.5

1.5 - 3

13.5 - 15

SC

SC

CL

SC

CL

CLAYEY SAND

CLAYEY SAND

SANDY LEAN CLAY

CLAYEY SAND

SANDY LEAN CLAY

DescriptionUSCS

CL-ML

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60

HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

16 20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

44 10063 2 10 14 506 2001.5 81 140

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONASTM D422 / ASTM C136






LAB

OR

AT

OR

Y T

ES

TS

AR

E N

OT

VA

LID

IF S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

OR

IGIN

AL

RE

PO

RT

.

GR

AIN

SIZ

E: U

SC

S 1

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12

/20

/19

0.1

5.5

4.4

60.4

58.0

35.4

39.5

36.5

60.1

B1

B2

B3

fine coarse

0.137 0.158

finemediumCOBBLES

GRAVEL SANDSILT OR CLAY

0.0

0.0

0.0

D30

D60

BORING ID

3/8"#4#40#200

100.099.9498.6939.54

3/4"1/2"3/8"#4#40#200

100.098.3996.5294.5191.4436.49

100.098.6897.895.5588.3260.13

3/4"1/2"3/8"#4#40#200

CC

CU

coarse

D10

0 - 1.5

3.5 - 5

6 - 7.5

CLAYEY SAND (SC)

CLAYEY SAND (SC)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

SC

SC

CL

Sieve

REMARKS

SOIL DESCRIPTION% Finer% Finer SieveSieve% Finer

USCS% CLAY% FINES% SILT% SAND% GRAVEL% COBBLESDEPTH

COEFFICIENTS

GRAIN SIZE

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60

HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

16 20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

44 10063 2 10 14 506 2001.5 81 140

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONASTM D422 / ASTM C136






LAB

OR

AT

OR

Y T

ES

TS

AR

E N

OT

VA

LID

IF S

EP

AR

AT

ED

FR

OM

OR

IGIN

AL

RE

PO

RT

.

GR

AIN

SIZ

E: U

SC

S 1

AR

1950

76 T

HE

RE

SE

RV

ES

AT

S.G

PJ

TE

RR

AC

ON

_DA

TA

TE

MP

LAT

E.G

DT

12

/20

/19

0.0

0.2

56.9

41.2

43.1

58.6

B4

B6

fine coarse

0.127 0.08

finemediumCOBBLES

GRAVEL SANDSILT OR CLAY

0.0

0.0

D30

D60

BORING ID

#4#40#200

100.098.8543.07

3/8"#4#40#200

100.099.8198.1658.62

CC

CU

coarse

D10

1.5 - 3

13.5 - 15

CLAYEY SAND (SC)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

SC

CL

Sieve

REMARKS

SOIL DESCRIPTION% Finer% Finer SieveSieve% Finer

USCS% CLAY% FINES% SILT% SAND% GRAVEL% COBBLESDEPTH

COEFFICIENTS

GRAIN SIZE

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Contents:

Unified Soil Classification SystemGeneral Notes to Log Terms


UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

UNIFIED SOI L CLASSI FICATI ON SYSTEM

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests ASoil Classification

GroupSymbol Group Name B

Coarse-Grained Soils:More than 50% retainedon No. 200 sieve

Gravels:More than 50% ofcoarse fractionretained on No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels:Less than 5% fines C

Cu ³ 4 and 1 £ Cc £ 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F

Cu < 4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E GP Poorly graded gravel F

Gravels with Fines:More than 12% fines C

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H

Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H

Sands:50% or more of coarsefraction passes No. 4sieve

Clean Sands:Less than 5% fines D

Cu ³ 6 and 1 £ Cc £ 3 E SW Well-graded sand I

Cu < 6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E SP Poorly graded sand I

Sands with Fines:More than 12% fines D

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I

Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I

Fine-Grained Soils:50% or more passes theNo. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays:Liquid limit less than 50

Inorganic:PI > 7 and plots on or above “A”line J

CL Lean clay K, L, M

PI < 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K, L, M

Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried

< 0.75 OL Organic clay K, L, M, N

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O

Silts and Clays:Liquid limit 50 or more

Inorganic:PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K, L, M

PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K, L, M

Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried

< 0.75 OH Organic clay K, L, M, P

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q

Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT PeatA Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve.B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles

or boulders, or both” to group name.C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded

gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorlygraded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.

D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-gradedsand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly gradedsand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay.

E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =6010

230

DxD

)(D

F If soil contains ³ 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.I If soil contains ³ 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with

gravel,” whichever is predominant.L If soil contains ³ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add

“sandy” to group name.MIf soil contains ³ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add

“gravelly” to group name.NPI ³ 4 and plots on or above “A” line.OPI < 4 or plots below “A” line.P PI plots on or above “A” line.QPI plots below “A” line.

December 20, 2019 Terracon Project No. AR195076The Reserves at Saddleback Ranch Wolfforth, TX

0.25 to 0.50

> 4.00

2.00 to 4.00

1.00 to 2.00

0.50 to 1.00

less than 0.25

Unconfined Compressive StrengthQu, (tsf)

StandardPenetrationTest

N

(HP)

(T)

(DCP)

UC

(PID)

(OVA)

Standard Penetration TestResistance (Blows/Ft.)

Hand Penetrometer

Torvane

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Unconfined CompressiveStrength

Photo-Ionization Detector

Organic Vapor Analyzer

SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS

Soil classification as noted on the soil boring logs is based Unified Soil Classification System. Where sufficient laboratorydata exist to classify the soils consistent with ASTM D2487 "Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes" thisprocedure is used. ASTM D2488 "Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)" is also used toclassify the soils, particularly where insufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils in accordance with ASTM D2487.In addition to USCS classification, coarse grained soils are classified on the basis of their in-place relative density, andfine-grained soils are classified on the basis of their consistency. See "Strength Terms" table below for details. The ASTMstandards noted above are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as aresult of local practice or professional judgment.

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION

Exploration point locations as shown on the Exploration Plan and as noted on the soil boring logs in the form of Latitudeand Longitude are approximate. See Exploration and Testing Procedures in the report for the methods used to locate theexploration points for this project. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical surveywas conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined fromtopographic maps of the area.

LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES

The soil boring logs contained within this document are intended for application to the project as described in thisdocument. Use of these soil boring logs for any other purpose may not be appropriate.

GENERAL NOTESDESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

RELEVANCE OF SOIL BORING LOG

Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs arethe levels measured in the borehole at the timesindicated. Groundwater level variations will occurover time. In low permeability soils, accuratedetermination of groundwater levels is notpossible with short term water levelobservations.

Water InitiallyEncountered

Water Level After aSpecified Period of Time

Water Level Aftera Specified Period of Time

Cave InEncountered

STRENGTH TERMS

Standard Penetration orN-Value

Blows/Ft.

Descriptive Term(Density)

Hard

15 - 30Very Stiff> 50Very Dense

8 - 15Stiff30 - 50Dense

4 - 8Medium Stiff10 - 29Medium Dense

2 - 4Soft4 - 9Loose

0 - 1Very Soft0 - 3Very Loose

(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field visual-manual

procedures or standard penetration resistance

> 30

Descriptive Term(Consistency)

Standard Penetration orN-Value

Blows/Ft.

(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILSRELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

Documents

Geotechnical Engineering Report · 2 Sandy Lean Clay Soft to hard, predominantly very ... recompacted. After stripping and grubbing, the subgrade should be proof-rolled where possible