G eotechnical Engineering Report - WestRock eotechnical Engin N eer North P Han ... Exhibit A-6 Hand Auger Boring Logs ... This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering

GGeoteechniical EEnginneerring RRepoort North PPointe Buuilding Paad B

Hannahan, Soouth Caroolina October 22, 22012

Terraccon Projectt No. EN1255059

Preparedd for:

MMWV-Northh Pointe, LLC Summmerville, South Caroolina

Preparedd by:

Terrracon Connsultants, Inc. North Charrleston, S outh Caroolina

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ......................................................................................................1

2.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................1 2.2 Site Location and Description ......................................................................................2

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................2 3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile............................................................................................2 3.2 Groundwater .................................................................................................................3

4.0 GEOTECHNICAL SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................4 4.1 Seismic Evaluation .......................................................................................................4 4.2 Liquefaction Potential ...................................................................................................5

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ...........................................6 5.1 Geotechnical Considerations .......................................................................................6 5.2 Earthwork ...................................................................................................................... 6

5.2.1 Material Types ...........................................................................................7 5.2.2 Compaction Requirements ........................................................................7 5.2.3 Use of Excavated Soils as Controlled Fill ..................................................7

5.3 Shallow Foundations ....................................................................................................8 5.4.1 Design Recommendations .........................................................................9

5.5 Pavements ..................................................................................................................10 5.5.1 Subgrade Preparation..............................................................................10 5.5.2 Design Considerations.............................................................................10 5.5.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness ...........................................11 5.5.4 Pavement Drainage .................................................................................12 5.5.5 Pavement Maintenance ...........................................................................12

6.0 GENERAL COMMENTS ........................................................................................................12

Appendix A Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Exploration Location Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Exhibit A-4 Cone Penetration Records Exhibit A-5 Flat Blade Dilatometer Records Exhibit A-6 Hand Auger Boring Logs Exhibit A-7 Shear Wave Velocity Profile Exhibit A-8 General Notes Exhibit A-9 Unified Soil Classification System

f

Geotechnnical Engineeering Reportt North Poi nte Building PPad B ■ Hanaahan, SC October 222, 2012 ■ Teerracon Projecct No. EN1255059 (Revisionn 1)

EXECUUTIVE SUUMMARY

This repoort presents the resultss of our geootechnical innvestigation performed ffor the propposed warehousse to be connstructed at NNorth Pointe Industrial CComplex, Bui ilding Pad B in Hanahann, SC. Our geotechnical scoope of work for this projeect included exploring thhe proposed building foootprint with a seeries of Con e Penetratioon Test (CPTT) and Flat BBlade Dilatoometer Test (DMT) soun ndings along withh Hand Augeer Borings (HHAB’s).

This repport providess recommendations fo r foundationn options, seismic connsiderations, site preparatioon, pavemennt designs, aand the other geotechniccal related coonditions thaat might affecct the proposedd constructioon. The foollowing geootechnical coonsiderationss were idenntified duringg our investigattion:

BBased on proccedures outliined in IBC 22006/ASCE7-05, and the results of ouur field testingg (i.e. an average w eighted sheaar wave veloccity of 955 feeet/sec, the pproject site wwill be classifi ed asSSeismic Site CClass D whicch is based oon exemptions granted bby IBC 2006//ASCE 7-05. The sttructural enggineer shouldd verify that tthe buildingss proposed ffor this deve lopment meeet the exxemption reqquirements.

SShallow founddation suppoort is available for the prooposed structture with an allowable coontact pressure of 2,000 psf, will be availablee for the propposed warehoouse structurres.

This summary should be used in cconjunction wwith the entirre report for ddesign purpooses. It shouuld be recognizeed that details were not iincluded or ffully develop ed in this seection, and thhe report muust be read in itts entirety for a comprehensive undeerstanding of the items c contained herrein. The seection titled GENNERAL COMMMENTS shoould be read for an underrstanding of tthe report limmitations.

Responsivee ■ Resourcefuul ■ Reliable i

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT NORTH POINTE BUILDING PAD B

HANAHAN, SOUTH CAROLINA Terracon Project No. EN125059 (Revision 1)

October 22, 2012

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for North Point Building Pad B in Hanahan, South Carolina. The project site was explored with a series of six (6) insitu soundings consisting of Cone Penetration Test (CPT) and Flat Blade Dilatometer Test (DMT). Within one of the CPT soundings, simultaneous shear wave velocities were collected for the purposes of seismic site classification and earthquake modeling. Adjacent to each sounding a hand auger boring was conducted to a depth of 4 feet. In addition, six (6) hand auger borings were performed for surficial soil evaluation in pavement areas.

The soundings were advanced to termination depths ranging from 36 to 45 feet below the existing ground surface. Hand Auger Borings (HAB’s) were terminated at a depth of 4 feet.

Previous testing conducted during our preliminary investigation at the site was also used in our evaluation.

The purpose of the study is to provide subsurface information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

subsurface soil conditions groundwater conditions foundation solutions site preparation other geotechnical related conditions that pavement design

could affect the proposed construction

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

ITEM DESCRIPTION

Refer to the Exploration Location Plan Site layout

(Exhibits A-1 in Appendix A)

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

Geotechnnical Engineeering Reportt North Poi nte Building PPad B ■ Hanaahan, South CCarolina October 222, 2012 ■ Terracon Projecct No. EN1250054 (Revisionn 1)

ITEM DESCRIPTTION

Proposeed Structure

The project future ware

■ Spec w approx

Associated

t is expected t ehouse constr

warehouse bu ximately 285,0

asphalt park

to consist of p ruction.

uilding with a 000 square fe

ing and drive

preparing a b

plan footprint eet

areas.

building pad fo

t of

or

Buildingg constructioon Metal frameed building (aassumed)

Gradingg

Based on p of 2 feet grades. W rough grade

previous discu will be nece e also unders ed many mon

ussions, we e essary to es stand that the nths prior to b

expect fill hei stablish nom e pads will be building const

ghts on the o minal construc e constructed ruction.

order ction and

Maximum loads

■ Ma

■ Ma

■ Flo

Note: Build

ximum colum

ximum wall lo

or slabs = Un

ing type unkn

mn loads = 20

oads = 6 kips

niform load of

nown. Assum

0 kips (assum

/ linear foot (

f up to 600 ps

med loads pro

med)

(assumed)

sf

vided by cliennt.

Maximum allowable settlement Maximum to

Maximum d

otal: 1½ inche

differential: ¾

es (assumed)

inch over 40

)

feet (assumeed)

2.2 SSite Locatioon and Desscription

ITEM DESCRIPTTION

Locationn The projec Complex n Pointe Indu

ct site is loc ear the inter ustrial Road in

cated within rsection of No n Hanahan, S

the North orth Rhett Av SC

Pointe Indus venue and N

strial North

Existingg Improvemeents The buildin heavily woo

g pad B area oded.

a has not beeen developeed and the si te is

Current ground coveer Wooded

Existingg topographyy Relatively fllat

3.0 SSUBSURFFACE COONDITIONNS

3.1 TTypical Subbsurface Prrofile

Based o n the resultss of the fiel d exploration, the subs urface condditions at thee project sitee are relatively consistent aand can be generalized aas follows:

Responsivee ■ Resourcefuul ■ Reliable 2

r

to


Desscription Approxi Bottom

mate Depth t m of Stratum2 Materrial Encounteered

Suurface 66 inches Topsoil

Strratum 1 15 feet Mediumm Dense Clayyey Sands an

Clays d Very Stiff Saandy

Strratum 2 330 feet1 Soft to Firmm Sandy Clayss and Silts

Straatum 42 ++45 feet Clayyey to Sandy Silt (Cooper MMarl Formation)

1. Depth to bottom of stratum varies from 25 feeet at CPT4 andd 40 feet in CPTT5 and CPT6. Depth to bottoom of Sttratum 2 also correlates to top of Cooper Marro l Formation.

2. Thhe Cooper Maarl Formation iis a well studi ed and uniformm soil stratumm typically conssisting of clayeey to saandy silt appro ximately 100 too 200 feet thic k in the greateer Charleston aarea. This soil stratum is a tyypical beearing layer forr deep foundatiions as well ass the basis for eearthquake moodeling in the CCharleston areaa.

Details oof the subsuurface condittions encountered at eaach soundinng location aare presenteed on the indiviidual soundi ng records ppresented inn Appendix AA of this rep ort. Stratificcation bounddaries on the reecords represent the appproximate deepth of channges in soil ttypes; the transition betwween materialss may be graadual.

3.2 GGroundwateer

At the timme of our expploration, thee water tablee was encouuntered at a ddepth of appproximately 88 feet below thee existing grround surfacce. The grouundwater deepth was dettermined fro m calculatinng the hydrostattic line (heig ht of water bbelow the groound surfacee) on the peenetration poorewater presssure (U) graphh in the Piezzocone Peneetration Logss. Groundw w t visually obb iin theater was no served withHAB’s coonducted accross the prooject site. Rainfall eveents, drainagge constrain ts, and sea sonal weather ppatterns cann vary with timme and influeence the levvel of the grooundwater ta ble. As suchh, the possibilit y of groundwater fluctuuations shouuld be consi dered whenn developingg the designn and constructtion plans foor the projecct, especiallyy in the wetteer periods oof the year. The groundwwater surface sshould be cchecked prioor to constr uction to asssess its effffect on site work and other constructtion activitiess.

Fine-grained soils loocated near the existingg ground surrface may ddrain poorly during and after periods oof heavy rai nfall. Basedd on this infformation, wwe anticipatee the possibility for “percched” groundwaater conditioons during wwet months. A “perchedd” groundwaater table occcurs when wwater collects aabove low peermeability ssoils, such ass the clayey sand and siilty clays locaated on this tract. During heeavy rainfall periods, waater will tendd to move laaterally acrosss the site aand collect inn low-lying areaas before it sslowly desceends into the groundwateer table.


f


4.0 GGEOTECHHNICAL SSEISMIC CCONSIDEERATIONNS

4.1 SSeismic Evaaluation

According to the Inteernational Building Codee, 2006 edittion (IBC 20006), which rreferences AASCE 7-05, struuctures are required to be designeed to a desiggn earthquaake from a 550 year expoosure period with a 2% Proobability of EExceedance (PE) (i.e. a 2475 year ddesign earthhquake). The 2% PE in 500 year desiggn earthquakke has a M oment Magnitude (Mw)) of 7.3 andd a Peak Grround Acceleration (PGA) of 0.55g, ass determineed from dataa provided in the IBC 22006 Code. The seismic eevaluation off the site ideentified potenntially liquefiiable soils (cclean to siltyy sand) locatted at isolated llocations an d at variablee depths withhin the studyy area. Acccording to thee IBC (20066) and ASCE 7--05, this poteential for liquuefaction claassifies the ssite as Site CClass F.

ASCE 7--05 (Sectionn 20.3.1) prrovides an eexception too the Site CClass recommmendation for a structurees with a fun damental peeriod equal tto or less thhan 0.5 secoonds, which states that aa site can be classified aas whateverr Site Classs it would be without consideringg liquefactioon to determine spectral aaccelerationss for structuural design. Based upoon the Site Class excepption, seismic ddesign parammeters for thhe site are ass follows:

Table 4. Seismic Parameters

Coode Used Site Classificatioon

2006 Internationnal Building Coode (IBC) 1 D 2,3

Seismic DDesign Parammeter Value

Fa 1.00

Fv 1.633

SDS 1.037g

SD1 0.418g

1. In genneral accordancee with the 2006 Innternational Buildding Code, Tablee 1613.5.2.

2. Basedd on average sheear wave velocityy (Vs) of 955 feett per second (fpss) collected from in-situ testing m ethods.

3. Basedd upon the fundaamental period eexception outlineed in ASCE 7-055 Section 21.3.1.. The structural engineer should verify that thhis assumption iss a valid for the sttructures proposeed for this parcel, else a site speciffic evaluation willl be necessary.

Figure 1 presents thee Design Reesponse Speectrum for thhe structuress proposed for this site bbased on a seissmic Site Claass D calculaated by the procedures outlined in I BC 2006/ASSCE 7-05.



1.60

1.40

1.20

1.00

0.80

0..55 g 0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00 0 0.5 11 1.5 2 2. 5 3 3.5 44 4.5 5

PPeriod, T (secconds)

4.2 LLiquefaction Potentiall Due to thhe high seissmicity of thee Charlestonn, South Ca rolina area, we performmed a liquefaaction potential analysis foor the site tto evaluate the stabilityy of the soiils. Groundd shaking aat the foundatioon of struct ures and liqquefaction oof the soil under the ffoundation aare the prinnciple seismic hazards ideentified for the design of earthquuake-resista nt structurees. Liquefaaction induced settlement aare estimateed to range up to 1 inchh across thee study areaa with differeential settlements from 75 to 100 perccent of the ttotal settlemment. Actuall liquefactionn settlementts will be highlyy dependentt on magnituude and disstance from the source during a deesign earthqquake

Sp

ectr

al R

esp

on

se A

ccel

erat

ion

, Sa

(g)

event. LLiquefactionn induced seettlements oof this maggnitude are structurees can be aaccounted ffor in structtural designn, as such, necessarry as discusssed in the foollowing paraagraphs.

typically exxceed what most remedial mmeasures w ill be



5.0 RRECOMMENDATIOONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

5.1 GGeotechniccal Consideerations

The folloowing evaluuation and rrecommendaations are based uponn our undeerstanding oof the proposedd developmeent and the rresults from the field expploration. Iff the above-ddescribed prroject conditionns are incorrrect or channged after tthis report, Terracon shhould be nootified and tthese recommeendations m ust be re-evvaluated to mmake approppriate revisioons.

5.2 EEarthwork

The following presennts recommeendations foor site and suubgrade preeparation, annd the placeement of Controolled Fill for tthis project. Earthwork on the projeect should bee observed aand evaluateed by Terraconn personnel.. The evaluation of eaarthwork shhould includee observatioon and suffficient testing of Controlled Fill and subbgrade prepparation, andd other geottechnical co nditions expposed during the constructioon of the prooject.

The initial step in site preparration shoul d be to reemove all toopsoil, orgaanics, and other deleterious material from within the proposeed constructiion area foootprints expoosing native soils. Strippingg should exteend a minimmum of five (5) feet outsside the connstruction arrea footprintt. All deep deppressions reesulting from the removaal of organic material (rooots) and othher debris shhould be backfilled with CControlled FFill subsequuently descrribed. Terracon persoonnel shoulld be contactedd prior to beeginning ea rthworks to verify all unnsuitable maaterials havve been remmoved prior to fill placementt and limit daamage to eqquipment currrently installled.

After strippping and suubgrade reppair, the exis ting subgradde should bee proof-rolled where posssible with a loaaded dump truck or otheer similar coonstruction eequipment. A loaded taandem axle ddump truck, capable of trannsferring a looad of in exccess of 20 toons, should bbe utilized foor this operaation. A geotecchnical enginneer or theirr representaative should monitor prooof-rolling opperations. AAreas that pummp or rut exccessively should be unddercut and rreworked orr replaced wwith controlleed fill, subsequeently describbed. The pproject site sshould be grraded to proomote positiive drainagee and direct stoormwater ruunoff from aareas of acttive construuction both during consstruction andd the operationnal life of thhese structu res. Once the buildingg pads havee been preppared, fill maay be placed ass needed.



5.2.1 MMaterial Typpes Controlleed fill should meet the fo llowing mateerial propertyy requiremeents:

Filll Type1,2,3, 4 USCS Clas sification AAcceptable L

Place Location for ment

Conntrolled Fill SP-SM, SP (Passing #2

P, SC, SM 200<15%)

At grrade

1. CControlled, comppacted fill should consist of approoved materials thhat are free of orgganic matter andd other deleteriouus ddebris.

2. CControlled fill shoould be placed inn uniform lifts andd compacted to aat least 95% of itts Modified Procttor Maximum Dryy DDensity as deter mined by ASTM D1557.

5.2.2 CCompactionn Requiremments

ITEM DESSCRIPTION

Fill Lift TThickness

10-inches self-prope

4 to 6 inc equipmen used

s or less in elled compact

ches in loose nt (i.e. jumpin

loose thickne tion equipmen

e thickness w ng jack or pla

ess when he nt is used

when hand-gu ate compacto

eavy,

uided or) is

Compacction Requireements1 At least 9 Proctor dr

95% of the ry density (AS

material’s ma STM D 1557).

aximum Mod .

dified

Moisturee Content

Within the above th determine of placem

e range of 2 he optimum ed by the Mo

ment and comp

2 percent be moisture co

odified Procto paction.

low to 3 per ontent value

or test at the

rcent e as time

1. We recommendd that engineeered fill be tested for moisture conntent and coompaction duuring placcement. Shoould the resuults of the in -place densitty tests indiccate the speccified moisturre or commpaction limitts have not bbeen met, thee area repres sented by thee test should be reworked and reteested as requ ired until the specified moiisture and commpaction req uirements aree achieved.

5.2.3 UUse of Excaavated Soils as Conttrolled Fill The nearr surface soiils encounteered on site ccontain a higgh percenta ge of clay a nd silt and wwould not classsify as Conttrolled Fill. These soilss are moistuure sensitivee and can bbecome unsstable when weet or exposeed to heavy constructionn traffic. Duue to their hiigh clay/silt content moiisture control ffor compacction effortss can be very difficuult and reqquire intenssive mechaanical manipulaation. If thhe on-site ssoils are ussed as Conntrolled Fill, they will rrequire chemical modificattion with quiick lime or ccement. Typical applicaation rates ffor chemical modification are between 25 to 45 lbss per squaree yard. On-site soils caan be used ffor general ggrading purpposes in non-structural areaas of the sitee.


f


5.3 SShallow Fouundations

The propposed warehhouse struccture may bee supportedd by shalloww, spread foooting founddation systems bearing on insitu or coompacted Coontrolled Filll. Design reecommendaations for shhallow foundatioons for the pproposed struucture are p resented in the followingg paragraphhs.

5.3.1 DDesign Reccommendaations

Deescription Column Wall

Net allow

C

wable bearin

Compacted fi

ng pressure 1

ll or insitu so

1

oils 2,000 psf 2,000 psf

Minimumm dimensionns 24 inches 18 inches

Minimumm embedmennt below fini shed grade 24 inches 24 inches

Approxi loads 3

imate total seettlement froom foundatioon 1 tto 1½ inches 1 to 1½ inches

Estimate foundat

ed differentia ion loads 3

al settlementt from <¾ inch between columns

n <¾ innch over 40 feeet

Ultimate

C

e passive pre

ompacted fil

essure 4

ll or insitu sooils 350 pcf, eqquivalent fluidd density

Ultimatee coefficient of sliding friiction 4 0.30

1. The recommendedd net allowablee bearing presssure is the prressure in exc ess of the minnimum surrounnding overbburden pressuure at the footting base elevvation. Assummes any unsui itable existing fill or soft sooils, if encoountered, will b e undercut andd replaced withh compacted sstructural fill. BBased upon a minimum Facttor of Safetty of 3.

2. The above settlemeent estimates include fill (2 feet) and founddation loads. FFoundation loaads have assuumed that tthe maximum ffooting width is 10 feet for column footings aand 2 feet for c continuous foot ings.

3. The sspread footing foundation exxcavation sidess must be neaarly vertical an nd the concretee should be pllaced neat against these vvertical faces ffor the passive earth pressuree values to be valid. If the loaded side is sl oped or beenched, and tthen backfilledd, the allowab le passive preessure will bee significantly reduced. Pa ssive resisttance in the uppper 3 feet of the soil profilee should be neeglected. If paassive resistancce is used to rresist lateraal loads, the baase friction should be neglecteed.

5.3.2 CConstructioon Consideerations The basee of all founndation excaavations shoould be free of water annd loose soii al prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be pplaced soon after excavaating to reduuce bearing soil disturbaance. Should the soils at bbearing leveel become eexcessively ddry, disturbeed or saturaated, the affeected soil shouuld be recommpacted or rremoved prior to placingg concrete. It is recommmended thaat the geotechnnical engineeer be retaineed to observ e and test thhe soil founddation bearinng materials.

If unsuitaable bearingg soils are encountere d in footingg excavationns, the excaavation could be extendedd deeper to suitable soil s and the foooting could bear directl ly on these ssoils at the lower level or tthe footings can bear on properly ccompacted sstructural baackfill extendding down tto the



suitable soils. Alteernatively, thhe footing excavation may be baackfilled witth #57 stonne or overpourred with leann concrete. Overexcavvation for coompacted st tructural fill pplacement bbelow footings should exteend laterally beyond all edges of thhe footings aat least 8 innches per fooot of overexcaavation deptth below foooting base elevation. The overrexcavation should theen be backfilledd up to the ffooting basee elevation wwith Controlleed Fill placeed in lifts of 10 inches orr less in loose thickness (66 inches or less if comp acted with hhand guidedd equipment ) and compaacted to at leasst 95 percent of the mateerial's modifiied effort maaximum dry density (ASTTM D1557).

5.4 FFloor Slab

5.4.1 DDesign Reccommendaations

Moduluss of subgrad

ITEM

de reaction 150 po point loa

DE

ounds per squ ading conditio

ESCRIPTION

uare inch pe ons

er inch (psi/inn) for

Where aappropriate, saw-cut coontrol joints should be placed in tthe slab to help controol the location aand extent oof cracking. Design and construction of the con ncrete floor sslab should ffollow recommeendations ppresented inn the ACI Design Manual (ACI 3302.1R andd 360R) for the anticipateed loading cconditions. FFloor slab suubgrade shoould be commpacted to 95% of it Moddified Proctor mmaximum drry density (AASTM D15577). The slabb should havve a minimuum thicknesss of 6 inches and be sepaarated from columns annd footings tto allow relaative movemments. Thee slab subgradee should be compacted to 95% of itts Modified Proctor maxximum dry ddensity (ASTTM D1557 or AAASHTO T-1180).

To help prevent the slab from ccurling eitheer a vapor bbarrier or a working maat consistingg of a minimumm of 4 inchess of compaccted stone, ssuch as Gra ded Aggreggate Base Coourse (GABBC) or similar mmaterial, cann be used. Minimum reequirementss for GABC are describbed in the SSouth Carolina Departmentt of Transpoortation’s (SCCDOT) stanndards. Thee use of a sttone will havve an added bbenefit in thhat it will inncrease thee soil suppoort characteeristics of thhe slab secction,


f


potentially resulting in a net decrease iin concretee thickness. There aare also seeveral constructtion advantaages for usinng a stone wworking mat : the stone iis more easily leveled; iit can be spreaad and comppacted in weet weather wwithout ruttingg; can be eaasily drainedd, and it provides a clean wworking surfaace when pl acing concreete and/or stteel reinforccement.

5.5 PPavements

5.5.1 SSubgrade PPreparationn On most project sitess, the site grrading is acccomplished rrelatively ea rly in the co nstruction p hase. Howeverr, as constru ction proceeeds, excavattions are maade into thesse areas, ra infall and suurface water saaturates somme areas, hheavy traffic from concrete trucks and other delivery vehhicles disturbs tthe subgrade and manyy surface irreegularities a re filled in wwith loose sooils to tempoorarily improve stability. Ass a result, thhe pavementt subgrades , prepared eearly in the pproject shouuld be carefully evaluated ass the time foor pavement constructionn approachess.

We recoommend thee moisture ccontent and density of the top 12 inches of tthe subgradde be evaluatedd and the paavement subbgrades be pproofrolled wwithin two dayys prior to coommencemeent of actual paaving operati ons. Areas not in comp liance with thhe required ranges of m oisture or deensity should be moisture conditioned and recomppacted. Paarticular attenntion shouldd be paid too high traffic areeas that were rutted annd disturbed earlier and to areas wwhere backfi lled trenche s are located. Areas wheere unsuitab le conditionss are locateed should b e repaired bby removingg and replacingg the materiaals with propperly compaacted fills. If a significaant precipitattion event o ccurs after the evaluation or if the surrface becommes disturbeed, the subg grade shouldd be revieweed by qualified personnel immmediately pprior to pavinng. The subggrade shouldd be in its finnished form aat the time of thhe final revieww.

5.5.2 DDesign Connsiderationns Traffic paatterns and anticipated lloading condditions were not availab le at the timme that this rreport was preppared. Howeever, we antticipate that traffic loads will be prodduced primarrily by autommobile traffic and delivery tr ucks. The thhickness of ppavements ssubjected to heavy truckk traffic shouuld be determin ed using exxpected trafffic volumes, vehicle typ es, and vehhicle loads aand should be in accordannce with locaal, city or couunty ordinancces.

Pavemennt thickness can be deteermined usin g AASHTO, Asphalt Insstitute and/orr other methoods if specific wwheel loads , axle configgurations, freequencies, aand desired pavement life are provvided. Pavemennt performannce is affectted by its e nvironmentaal conditionss. The civil engineer shhould consider the followin g recommenndations in t he design and layout of pavements :

Final grade adjaccent to parkking lots and drives shouuld slope doown from pa vement edgges at a minnimum 2%;

The ssubgrade annd the pave ment surfacce should haave a minimum ¼ inch per foot slo pe to prom ote effectivee surface draainage;


r

r


Pavement drainage should bee installed inn surroundingg areas anticcipated for frrequent wettiing; Joint sealant shouuld be instal led immedia tely; To reeduce moistture migratioon to subgrrade soils, aall landscapped areas in or adjaceent to

pavements shoulld be sealedd;

5.5.3 EEstimates oof Minimumm Pavemennt Thickneess Without performing a detailedd pavementt design annalysis, we recommennd the folloowing pavemennt sections bbe considereed minimum for the propoosed constr uction.

Traffi

Ligh (Car P

Mediu (Truck

Are

Heav (Truck a

Are

Typicaal Pavement SSection Thic

Truck area

entran ap

ic Area A

t Duty Parking)

um Duty Parking

eas)

vy Duty and Drive eas)

turning as and nce/exit rons

Alternative

PCC

AC

PCC

AC

PCC

AC

PCC

Asphalt Concrete Surface Course

-

2.0

-

1.5

-

2.0

-

Asphalt Concrete

Base Course

-

-

-

2.0

-

2.5

-

ckness (inchees)

Portland Cement

Concrete

5.0

-

5.0

---

6.0

-

7.0

d t e 1

Grade Aggrega

Base Cours (GABC

4.0

6.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

9.0

4.0

d ate

e se C)

Tota Thickn

9.0

8.0

9.0

11.5

10.0

13.5

11.0

al ness

0

0

0

5

0

5

0

1. 4,000 psi at 28 days, 4-inch maximu m slump andd 5 to 7 per r ed air mix. PPCCcent entraine pavements aare recomme nded for trassh container pads and in any other arreas subjecteed to heavy wheel loads and/or turning trafficc.

The gradded aggregaate base couurse (GABC) should be compacted to a minimuum of 98 peercent of the maaterial’s moddified Proctoor (ASTM D-1557, Methood C) maximmum dry dennsity. Where base course thhickness exxceeds 6 incches, the material shouuld be placeed and com pacted in twwo or more liftss of equal th ickness.

Asphalt cconcrete agggregates andd base course materialss should connform to the applicable SSouth Carolina Departmennt of Transportation (SSCDOT) "S tandard Sppecifications for Roads and Structurees”, Sectionss for Aggreggate Base CCourse mateerial, Hot Mixx Asphalt B ase Course, and Surface CCourse.


r


We recommend a portland cemment concrette (PCC) paavement be utilized in eentrance andd exit aprons, ddumpster paads, or other areas where extensive wheel maneeuvering aree expected.

Adequatee reinforcemment and nuumber of loongitudinal aand transverse control joints shou ld be placed inn the rigid paavement in aaccordance with ACI reqquirements. The joints sshould be seealed as soon as possiblle (in accorrdance withh sealant mmanufacturerr’s instructioons) to min imize infiltrationn of water innto the soil.

5.5.4 PPavement DDrainage Pavemennts should b e sloped to provide rapi d drainage oof surface wwater. Waterr allowed to pond on or addjacent to t he pavemennts could saaturate the subgrade aand contribuute to premmature pavemennt deterioratioon. In additiion, the paveement subgrrade should be graded too provide poositive drainage within the g ranular basee section.

Pavemennts should be sloped to provide rapid drainage oof surface wwater. Waterr allowed to pond on or addjacent to thhe pavemennts could saaturate the subgrade aand contribuute to prem mature pavemennt deteriorattion. In addition, the pavement ssubgrade shhould be grraded to proovide positive ddrainage witthin the grannular base seection. Apppropriate subb-drainage oor connectionn to a suitable ddaylight outl et should bee provided too remove waater from thee granular suubbase.

5.5.5 PPavement MMaintenancce The paveement sectioons provide d in this repport represeent minimumm recommennded thickneesses and, as ssuch, perioddic maintenaance should be anticipatted. Prevenntive mainteenance shouuld be planned aand providedd for throughh an on-goingg pavement managemennt program tto slow the raate of pavemennt deterioratiion, and to preserve thhe pavemennt investmennt. Preventtive maintennance consists of both locaalized maintenance (e.gg., crack andd joint sealinng and patcching) and gglobal maintenaance (e.g., surface seealing). Prioor to impleementing a ny maintennance, addi tional engineer ing observaation is rec ommended to determine the typee and exteent of preveentive maintenaance. Even with periodi c maintenannce, some mmovements aand related ccracking maay still occur andd repairs maay be requireed.

6.0 GGENERALL COMMEENTS

Terraconn should be retained to review the final designn plans and specificatio ns so commments can be mmade regard ing interprettation and immplementatioon of our geootechnical reecommendaations in the deesign and sppecificationss. Terracon aalso should be retainedd to provide observationn and testing sservices durring grading, excavationn, foundatioon constructtion and othher earth-reelated constructtion phases of the projecct.

The anallysis and reccommendatiions presentted in this reeport are baased upon thhe data obtaained from the borings perrformed at the indicatedd locations aand from ot her informattion discusssed in



this repoort. This repport does noot reflect varriations that may occur between boorings, acrosss the site, or ddue to the mmodifying effeects of consstruction or wweather. Thhe nature annd extent of such variationss may not bbecome eviddent until duuring or afteer constructioon. If variattions appeaar, we should bbe immediateely notified so that furthher evaluatioon and supplemental reecommendaations can be provided.

The scoppe of servicees for this pproject does not includee either speccifically or byy implicationn any environmmental or biological (e.g. , mold, fungi, bacteria) aassessment of the site oor identificatiion or preventioon of pollutants, hazardoous materials or conditioons. If the oowner is concerned abouut the potential for such conntamination or pollution,, other studiees should bee undertakenn.

This repoort has beenn prepared ffor the excluusive use off our client ffor specific aapplication tto the project ddiscussed annd has beenn prepared i n accordancce with geneerally acceppted geotechhnicalengineerring practicees. No warrranties, eitheer express oor implied, aare intendedd or made. Site safety, exxcavation suupport, and dewatering requirementts are the reesponsibility of others. IIn the event thaat changes in the naturee, design, orr location of the project as outlined in this repo rt are planned, the conclussions and recommendattions containned in this reeport shall nnot be considdered valid unleess Terraconn reviews thhe changes aand either veerifies or moodifies the coonclusions oof this report in writing.


APPPENDIX A

BA

H

TP

C

N.

T.

S.

H

AB

45

HA

B3

CP

T5

3D

MT

1

HA

B6

PR

EV

IOU

S D

MT

LO

CA

TIO

N

HA

B1

S2

CC

CP

PP

TT

T6

4

HA

B2

EN

NN

US

TT

TR

RI

IIA

BL

LVD

DH

PO

O

LE

GE

ND

CO

NE

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

(C

PT

-)

SE

ISM

IC C

ON

E P

EN

ET

RA

TIO

N T

ES

T (

SC

PT

-)

PR

OJE

CT

MN

GR

: P

RO

JEC

TN

O.

KJZ

E

N12

5059

E

XP

LO

RA

TIO

N L

OC

AT

ION

DIA

GR

AM

EX

HIB

IT

DR

AW

NB

Y:

SC

ALE

:F

LAT

BLA

DE

DIL

AT

OM

ET

ER

TE

ST

(D

MT

-)

DA

T/P

TK

N

.T.S

. C

HE

CK

ED

BY

: FI

LEN

O.

Co

nsu

ltin

g E

ng

ine

ers

an

d S

cien

tists

N

OR

TH P

OIN

TE B

UIL

DIN

G P

AD B

KJZ

N

A

A-2

HA

ND

AU

GE

R B

OR

ING

(H

AB

-)

AP

PR

OV

ED

BY

: D

ATE

: 14

50F

IFT

HS

TR

EE

TW

ES

T

NO

RT

HC

HA

RLE

ST

ON

,SC

KJZ

1

0-11

-201

2 P

H:

(84

3) 8

84-1

234

FA

X:

(843

) 88

4-92

34

HA

NA

HA

N

SO

UT

H C

AR

OL

INA

r

Geotechnnical Engineeering Reportt North Poi nte Building PPad B ■ Hanaahan, South CCarolina October 1 8, 2012 ■ Terracon Projecct No. EN1250059

Field Exxploration Descriptioon

The subssurface exp loration connsisted of peerforming a series of CCone Penetraation Test ( CPT) and Flatt Blade Dilaatometer Teest (DMT) soundings. Within one of the CPT sounddings, simultaneeous shear wwave velocitties were coollected for thhe purposess of seismic site classificcation and eartthquake mo deling. In aaddition, Hannd Auger BBorings (HABB’s) were performed foor the surficial ssoil evaluati on. All borings were loocated in thee field by a TTerracon enngineer baseed on the site plan providee by MWV. The testingg depths weere measureed from thee existing grround surface aat the time of our field activities. TThe locationns of the boorings shoulld be considdered accurate only to the ddegree implied by the mmeans and mmethods used to define tthem.

Cone Peenetration CClassificatioon The tip reesistance (qqc) is measu red as the mmaximum forrce over thee projected aarea of the ttip. It is a pointt stress rela ted to the beearing capaccity of the sooil. The meeasured qc mmust be correected for porewwater pressuure effects (LLunne et al, 1997), espeecially in clayys and silts where porewwater pressurees typically vvary greatly ffrom hydrosstatic. This ccorrected value is knownn as qt,, which is reported in the Piezzocone Pennetration Loogs. The uu2 position eelement is required for the measurement of pe netration poorewater preessures andd the correcction of tip resistance. The sleeve friction (fs) is uused as a mmeasure of sooil type and can be exprressed by friction ratio: FR = fs/qqt.

The estimmated stratiggraphic proffiles include d in the Pieezocone Pennetration Logs are baseed on relationships betweeen qt, fs, and U2. The norrmalized fricction ratio (F RN) is calcullated by usinng:

fsFRN 1000% qqt vo '

and is inndicative of soil behaviior and is uused to classsify the sooil behavior type. Typiically, cohesivee soils, such as plastic silts and clayys, have highh FR values, low qt values, and gen nerate large exccess penetraation porewaater pressurres. Cohesionless soils s, such as saands, have lower FR's, higgh qt valuess, and typicaally do not generate exxcess penettration porewwater presssures. The folloowing graphh (Robertson, 1990) prresents onee of the acccepted correlations useed to classify ssoils behavioor types.

Exhibbit A-3


Seismic Cone Peneetration Tessting The Seissmic Piezoccone Penetrration Test ((SCPTu) is identical too the CPTu test with aadded instrumentation to deetermine shear wave veelocity with ddepth. The Piezocone Penetration Test (CPTu) hhydraulicallyy pushes an instrumenteed cone throough the sooil while con tinuous readdings are recorrded to a poortable compputer. The iinstrumentedd cone has a cross-secctional area of 10 square ccentimeters ((cm²) with a 60° conical tip. The coone is advannced throughh the groundd at a constant rate of 2 ceentimeters pper second (2 cm/sec). No soil saamples are ggathered thrrough

Exhibbit A-3

t ”


this subssurface inveestigation teechnique. However, in-situ meaasurements of tip and side resistancce and poreewater presssure are taaken every 2 centimetters (approxximately 1 iinch). Porewateer pressure measuremeents are taken directly bbehind the ttip, while a load cell loccated above the cone tip takes side frriction measuurements. TThese meassurements ccan be correelated to variouus soil indexx properties for geotechhnical design. The CPPTu tests weere conducted in accordannce with ASTTM D5778 ““Standard TTest Method for Performming Electronnic Friction Cone and Piezzocone Peneetration Testing of Soils”.

In SCPTTu, the sheear wave veelocity is ccollected viaa an acceleerometer placed abovee the instrumented cone. A shear wwave is generated at thhe ground ssurface, succh as a hammmer striking aa steel platee on the ennd, which prropagates thhrough the soil and is recorded b y the accelerometer at selected intervvals (typicallyy 1 meter). From this ddata, the inteerval shear wave velocitiess of the soill are calculaated. Thesee interval veelocities aree used to deevelop the sshear wave velocity profilee for the sitee, which is ppresented inn the report Appendix. Soil shear wave velocity ddata is used in evaluatioon of liquefa ction potent tial, site classs determinaation, site sppecific analysess, and other ggeotechnicaal design appplications.

Flat Bladde Dilatomeeter Testingg The Flat Blade Dilatoometer Test (DMT) conssists of hydrraulically pusshing a flat ssteel blade aalong a series of rods to a desired deppth. The blaade is a 3.755 inch wide by 0.55 inchh thick with a 2.4 inch circcular membrrane near thhe center. Every 8 innches in depth, the steeel membrane is inflated uusing gas prressure whille two meassurements aare recordedd: A = the pressure at wwhich the memmbrane startts to expannd and B == pressure required to deflect thee membranee 1.1 millimeteers (1/16 incches) into th e surroundinng soil. A sseries of theese pressuree measuremments performeed at varyinng depths is typically called a DMT sounding. Throough developed correlatioons with thee pressure mmeasuremennts, many ggeotechnicall design parrameters caan be calculateed including:: the Dilatommeter Moduulus (ED), mmaterial type, Constraineed Moduluss (M), shear strrength parammeters, and horizontal aand vertical sstresses. Thhese parameeters are ussed to create a strength prrofile for the soil that caan be used in many faccets of geottechnical deesign. DMT tessting is performed in accordancee with ASTTM D6635 Standard TTest Methodd for Performinng the Flat PPlate Dilatommeter.

Exhibbit A-3


A schemmatic of the front and sside profile oof the Flat BBlade Dilatoometer

Hand Auger Borinngs Hand auger borings were cond ucted in genneral accorddance with AASTM D 14452-80, Stanndard Practice for Soil Inveestigation annd Sampling by Auger BBorings. In thhis test, hand auger boring is drilled byy rotating aand advanc ing a buckeet auger too the desireed depths wwhile perioddically removingg the auger from the hoole to clear tthe auger annd examine the cuttingss. The soils were classifiedd in accorda nce with AS TM D2488.

Exhibbit A-3

CPT LOG NO. SCPT2 Page 1 of 1

PROJECT: Northpointe Building B

BORING LOCATION:

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 80 160 240 320

Depth (ft)

0 0.6

CLIENT: MWV - Northpointe LLC

Northing: 409280 Easting: 2304441

PPoorree PPrreessssuurree uu22

((ttssff)) -0-0-0-0.4.4.4.4 1.21.21.21.2 2.82.82.82.8 4.44.44.44.4

uu00 Sleeve Friction

fs (tsf)

1.2 1.8 2.4 2

SITE: Berkeley County Hanahan, South Carolina

Friction Ratio Rf

(%) 4 6 8

SBT Fr Normalized MAI = 1 (1990)

5

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Very Stiff Fine Grained Soils

10

15

20 Clays-Clay to Silty Clay

25

>>>>>>>> Clays-Clay to Silty Clay

30

Silt Mixtures-Clay Silt to Silty Clay


35 Silt Mixtures-Clay Silt to Silty Clay

Depth (ft)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 - Sensitive, Fine Grained Soils 4 - Silt Mixtures-Clay Silt to Silty Clay 7 - Gravelly Sand to Sand

2 - Organic Soils, Peats 5 - Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt 8 - Very Stiff Clay to Clayey Sand

3 - Clays-Clay to Silty Clay 6 - Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand 9 - Very Stiff Fine Grained Soils

Notes: WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Test Completed: 10/17/2012 Termination Depth: 36.09 ft

8 ft measured water depth 1450 5th Street West

North Charleston, South Carolina

Driller/Rig: JB/Pagani TG 73-200

Project No.: EN125059

Termination Criteria: Target Depth

Exhibit: A4

CPT LOG NO. CPT3 Page 1 of 1


BORING LOCATION:

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 80 160 240 320

Depth (ft)

0 0.6




((ttssff)) -0-0-0-0.4.4.4.4 1.21.21.21.2 2.82.82.82.8 4.44.44.44.4


fs (tsf)

1.2 1.8 2.4 2


Friction Ratio Rf

(%) 4 6 8


5

10

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>> Very Stiff Fine Grained Soils

15



30


Depth (ft)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30







Driller/Rig: JB/Pagani TG 73-200



Exhibit: A4



BORING LOCATION:

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 80 160 240 320

Depth (ft)

0 0.6




((ttssff)) -0-0-0-0.4.4.4.4 1.21.21.21.2 2.82.82.82.8 4.44.44.44.4


fs (tsf)

1.2 1.8 2.4 2


Friction Ratio Rf

(%) 4 6 8


5 >>



15

Clays-Clay to Silty Clay



30


35

Depth (ft)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35







Driller/Rig: RF/Pagani TG 73-200



Exhibit: A4



BORING LOCATION:

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 80 160 240 320

Depth (ft)

0 0.6




((ttssff)) -0-0-0-0.4.4.4.4 1.21.21.21.2 2.82.82.82.8 4.44.44.44.4


fs (tsf)

1.2 1.8 2.4 2


Friction Ratio Rf

(%) 4 6 8


5


10


20

25

30


35

40

Depth (ft)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40










Exhibit: A4



BORING LOCATION:

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 80 160 240 320

Depth (ft)

0 0.6




((ttssff)) -0-0-0-0.4.4.4.4 1.21.21.21.2 2.82.82.82.8 4.44.44.44.4


fs (tsf)

1.2 1.8 2.4

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2

Friction Ratio Rf

(%) 4 6 8

>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>


Depth (ft)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

SBT Fr NormalizedMAI = 1(1990)


Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt












Exhibit: A4

North Pointe Building Pad B Hanahan,SC Flat Blade Dilatometer Test DMT1

EN125059

Date: October 17, 2012 Latitude: 32.954431 Rig: Pagani 220-73 GWT (ft): 8 Longitude: -80.008851 Blade: 507 Operator BR Elevation: N.A. ASTM: D 6635

Before After Average A (bar) 0.1 0.1 0.1 B (bar) 0.4 0.4 0.4 zm (bar) 0 0 0

Increment Depth A B Soil ED ED (bar) KD (ft)

KD(bar) (bar) Classification (bar) 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 10 20 30 40 50 1 1.0 2.1 5.9 Sandy Silt 120 40

02 1.6 2.4 6.4 Sandy Silt 128 27 3 2.3 2.1 9.4 Sand 248 15 4 3.0 4.4 12.5 Silty Sand 277 25 5 3.6 4.7 11.0 Sandy Silt 211 22

26 4.3 5.0 11.0 Silt 200 20 7 4.9 5.3 10.0 Clayey Silt 153 19 8 5.6 5.0 11.5 Sandy Silt 219 15 9 6.2 5.8 15.0 Sandy Silt 317 15

10 6.9 6.6 13.0 Silt 215 16 4 11 7.5 5.4 11.0 Silt 186 12 12 8.2 5.4 10.5 Silt 168 12 13 8.9 4.2 13.5 Silty Sand 321 8 14 9.5 5.5 19.5 Silty Sand 492 10

615 10.2 4.0 12.0 Silty Sand 273 7 16 10.8 2.6 7.0 Sandy Silt 142 5 17 11.5 3.1 9.4 Silty Sand 211 5 18 12.1 3.4 6.7 Silt 102 6

8

20 19 12.8 3.3 8.4 Sandy Silt 168 6

13.4 2.7 9.2 Silty Sand 219 4 21 14.1 2.8 6.5 Sandy Silt 117 5 22 14.8 5.8 10.0 Clayey Silt 135 9 23 15.4 6.4 10.0 Silty Clay 113 10 10 24 16.1 7.0 10.0 Silty Clay 91 11 25 16.7 7.4 11.0 Silty Clay 113 11 26 17.4 6.9 10.0 Silty Clay 95 10 27 18.0 6.4 10.0 Silty Clay 113 9

1228 18.7 6.6 10.0 Silty Clay 106 9 29 19.4 5.1 8.3 Silty Clay 98 7 30 20.0 5.0 7.9 Silty Clay 87 7 31 20.7 5.0 8.4 Clayey Silt 106 6 32 21.3 4.8 7.9 Clayey Silt 95 6 14 33 22.0 5.7 9.2 Clayey Silt 109 7 34 22.6 6.7 10.0 Silty Clay 102 8 35 23.3 7.3 11.0 Silty Clay 117 8 36 23.9 6.0 9.3 Silty Clay 102 7 16 37 24.6 4.2 6.9 Clayey Silt 80 5 38 25.3 6.4 9.5 Silty Clay 95 7 39 25.9 7.4 10.0 Clay 77 8 40 26.6 6.0 17.0 Silty Sand 383 5

1841 27.2 5.5 14.5 Silty Sand 310 5 42 27.9 5.5 17.5 Silty Sand 419 4 43 28.5 3.7 10.0 Silty Sand 211 3 44 29.2 3.8 5.7 Silty Clay 51 4 45 29.8 7.6 11.5 Silty Clay 124 7 20 46 30.5 8.4 11.5 Silty Clay 95 8 47 31.2 12.5 19.5 Silty Clay 237 10 48 31.8 17.5 28.0 Clayey Silt 364 13 49 32.5 16.0 22.0 Silty Clay 200 13

2250 33.1 16.5 21.5 Clay 164 13 51 33.8 15.5 20.0 Clay 146 12

24

26

28

30

32

34

DMT1 Projects\2012\EN125059\Working Files\Laboratory-Field Data-Boring Logs\Northpoint B\[Terracon Format For DMT.xlsx]Settlement Due to Fill

HAND AUGER BORING LOGS

Project Name: North Pointe Building Pad B

Date: 10/17/12

Project Number: EN125059 Engineer: BTS

Project Location: Hanahan, SC Technician: RF

Test Number

Depth (inches)

Soil Stratigraphy USCS

Classification From To Description and Remarks

HAB by DMT1

0 5 Topsoil

5 10 Light Brown Silty SAND SM

10 48 Light Reddish Brown Sandy CLAY CL

No Groundwater Encountered

HAB by SCPT2

0 4 Topsoil




HAB by CPT3

0 4 Topsoil




HAB by CPT4

0 6 Topsoil


10 13 Light Brown Clayey SAND SC



Exhibit A-6



Date: 10/17/12



Test Number

Depth (inches)



HAB by CPT5

0 8 Topsoil




HAB1

0 6 Topsoil

6 15 Reddish Gray Sandy CLAY CL

15 48 Light Brown Sandy CLAY CL


HAB2

0 6 Topsoil

6 15 Reddish Gray Sandy CLAY CL

15 48 Light Brown Sandy CLAY CL


HAB3

0 6 Topsoil


14 48 Light Reddish Gray Sandy CLAY CL


Exhibit A-6



Date: 10/17/12



Test Number

Depth (inches)



HAB4

0 6 Topsoil


14 48 Light Reddish Gray Sandy CLAY CL


HAB5

0 6 Topsoil

6 10 Brown Silty SAND SM

10 48 Light Reddish Gray and Light Brown Sandy CLAY CL


HAB6

0 6 Topsoil

6 14 Brown Silty SAND SM

14 48 Light Reddish Gray and Light Brown Sandy CLAY CL


Exhibit A-6

Dep

th (

ft)

SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY PROFILE Test Site: North Pointe Building Bad B Date: 17-Oct-2012 Location: Hanahan, SC ASTM: D 6635

Client: MWV Engineer: B Shiver WPC Project No.: EN125059 Operator: B Rozier

Sounding: SCPT2 Elevation: 0 Tip to Geophone (ft): 0.98 Latitude: 32.9543

Cone to Source (ft): 1.64 Longitude: -80.0089

Vs (ft/s)

0 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 Depth

(feet) Vs

(ft/s) 1.6 463 4.9 597

5 8.2 11.5

805 513

14.8 415 18.0 637

10 21.3 24.6

613 1288

27.9 1056 31.2 1214

15 END OF COLLECTED DATA

20

V S (ft/s) 1,2 = Site Class 1,2,3 :

955 D

25

1 Per IBC 2006 Weighted Shear Wave Velocity Criterion (Liquefaction, Soft Clay, etc, Not Considered In This Calculation)

30 2 Shear Wave Velocity of the Hawthorn Foramtion is assumed to exhibit a Vs = 1100 ft/sec below our testing depth.

3 Due to the potential for liquefaction, the site would classify as Site Class F, however based upon the exception in ASCE-07, if the fundamental period of the structure is less than 0.5 seconds, the site can be classified as Site Class D.

35 The sturctural engineer should verify the fundamental period of the structure.

GENERAL NOTES

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.

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

Unconfined Compressive

Strength, Qu, psf

Standard Penetration or N-value (SS)

Blows/Ft. Consistency

Standard Penetration or N-value (SS) Blows/Ft. Relative Density

< 500 <2 Very Soft 0 – 4 Very Loose 500 – 1,000 3-4 Soft 5 – 10 Loose

1,001 – 2,000 5-8 Medium Stiff 11 – 30 Medium Dense 2,001 – 4,000 9-15 Stiff 31 – 50 Dense 4,001 – 8,000 16-30 Very Stiff 50+ Very Dense

8,000+ 31+ Hard

Exhibit A-8

UNIFFIED SOILL CLASSI FICATIONN SYSTEEM

Cr

Coars More on No

Fine-G 50% o No. 20

High

A Bas B If fie

or b C Grav

grav grad

D San sand sand

E Cu =

F If so G If fin

iteria for Ass

se Grained Soils than 50% retaine

o. 200 sieve

Grained Soils: or more passes t 00 sieve

hly organic soils

ed on the materi eld sample conta oulders, or both” vels with 5 to 12 vel with silt, GWded gravel with s ds with 5 to 12% d with silt, SW-S d with silt, SP-SC

= D60/D10 Cc =

oil contains 15% nes classify as C

signing Grou

s: ed

Gravels: More than 5 coarse fraction reta No. 4 sieve

Sands: 50% or mo fraction pas No. 4 sieve

he

Silts and C Liquid limit

Silts and C Liquid limit

s:

al passing the 3-ined cobbles or b ” to group name. % fines require d GC well-graded

silt, GP-GC poorly % fines require du

C well-graded sa C poorly graded s

=

6010

2

30

x DD

)(D

% sand, add “with L-ML, use dual s

up Symbols a

50% of

ained on e

C L

G M

re of coarse sses e

C L

S M

Clays: less than 50

In

O

Clays: 50 or more

In

O

Primarily o

-in. (75-mm) siev boulders, or both

dual symbols: G gravel with clay, y graded gravel w

ual symbols: SW and with clay, SP sand with clay

h sand” to group symbol GC-GM, o

and Group N

Clean Gravels: Less than 5% fine

Gravels with Fin More than 12% fin

Clean Sands: Less than 5% fine

Sands with Fines More than 12% fin

norganic:

Organic:

norganic:

Organic:

organic matter, da

ve h, add “with cobb

W-GM well-grad GP-GM poorly with clay.

W-SM well-graded P-SM poorly grad

name. or SC-SM.

ames Using

es C Cu 4 a

Cu 4 a

es: nes C

Fines cla

Fines cla

es D Cu 6 a

Cu 6 a

s: nes D

Fines cla

Fines Cla

PI 7 an

PI 4 or

Liquid lim

Liquid lim

PI plots o

PI plots b

Liquid lim

Liquid lim

ark in color, and

bles

ded

d ded

H If fine I If soi J If Att K If soi

grave L If soi

to gro M If soi

“grav N PI 4 O PI 4 P PI plo Q PI plo

Laboratory T

nd 1 Cc 3 E

nd/or 1 Cc 3

assify as ML or M

assify as CL or C

nd 1 Cc 3 E

nd/or 1 Cc 3

assify as ML or M

assify as CL or C

nd plots on or abo

r plots below “A” l

mit - oven dried

mit - not dried

on or above “A” l

below “A” line

mit - oven dried

mit - not dried

organic odor

es are organic, a il contains 15% terberg limits plot il contains 15 to 2 el,” whichever is il contains 30% oup name. il contains 30% velly” to group na 4 and plots on o 4 or plots below ots on or above ots below “A” line

Tests A G

S

E

MH

CH

E

MH

CH

ove “A” line J

line J

0.75

ine

0.75

add “with organic % gravel, add “wit

t in shaded area 29% plus No. 20 predominant.

% plus No. 200 pr

% plus No. 200, p ame. r above “A” line. “A” line. “A” line. e.

Soil Clas

Group Symbol

G

GW Well-gra

GP Poorly g

GM Silty gra

GC Clayey

SW Well-gra

SP Poorly g

SM Silty sa

SC Clayey

CL Lean cl

ML Silt K,L,M

OL Organic

Organic

CH Fat clay

MH Elastic

OH Organic

Organic

PT Peat

c fines” to group n th gravel” to grou , soil is a CL-ML

00, add “with san

redominantly san

predominantly gra

ssification

Group Name B

aded gravel F

graded gravel F

avel F,G, H

gravel F,G,H

aded sand I

graded sand I

nd G,H,I

sand G,H,I

ay K,L,M

c clay K,L,M,N

c silt K,L,M,O

y K,L,M

Silt K,L,M

c clay K,L,M,P

c silt K,L,M,Q

name. up name. , silty clay.

nd” or “with

nd, add “sandy”

avel, add

Exhibbit A-9

Documents

G eotechnical Engineering Report - WestRock eotechnical Engin N eer North P Han ... Exhibit A-6 Hand Auger Boring Logs ... This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering