60316.001

SOUTHWEST REGIONAL PARK

FIELD & TRACK UPGRADES

Geotechnical Report www.BeyondET.com

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B

Round Rock, TX 78664

512.358.6048 www.BeyondET.com engineering beyond limits

September 11, 2025

Vía email: bbinkowski@halff.com

Brian Binkowski, PLA, ASLA

Senior Landscape Architect Project Manager

Halff Associates

13620 Briareick Drive, Bldg. C, Ste 100

Austin, Texas 78729

Reference: Geotechnical Report

Southwest Regional Park Field and Track Upgrades

Williamson County, TX

BEYOND Project No. GT25007033

Dear Mr. Binkowski:

Beyond Engineering and Testing, LLC (BEYOND) is pleased to present our geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Southwest Regional Park Field and Track Upgrades in

Williamson County, Texas. Halff (Client) commissioned this geotechnical engineering study to explore and evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site, develop geotechnical design parameters, and provide related construction recommendations for the project. Our geotechnical report describes our field exploration and laboratory testing program, our engineering interpretation pertinent to the project, as well as earthwork guidelines for the project.

We appreciate the opportunity to serve you. We look forward to working with you on construction materials testing services during construction phase. Note that BEYOND is already under contract with Client for this project. A change order is needed to approve testing services during construction phase. Please call us if you have any questions concerning this report or any of our other services.

Respectfully submitted, Beyond Engineering and Testing, LLC

Yanfeng Li, P.E.

Senior Geotechnical Engineer yanfengli Signature

GEOTECHNICAL

REPORT

Southwest Regional Park Field and Track

Upgrades

WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS

Prepared For:

Halff Associates

13620 Briareick Drive, Bldg. C, Ste 100

Austin, Texas 78729

Prepared By:

Round Rock, Texas 78664

512.358.6048 | www.BEYONDET.com

September 11, 2025

BEYOND Project No. GT2507033

SOUTHWEST REGIONAL PARK FIELD AND TRACK UPGRADES

WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS

This Report Prepared By:

Round Rock, Texas 78664

512.358.6048 | www.BeyondET.com

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Derek Barosh Yanfeng Li, Ph.D., P.E.

Project Manager Senior Geotechnical Engineer

FIRM REGISTRATION NO. F-19523 - TEXAS

September 11, 2025 Project No. GT2507033

UNAUTHORIZED USE OR COPYING OF THIS DOCUMENT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED BY ANYONE OTHER

THAN THE CLIENT FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT.

yanfengli Signature yanfengli

PE-TX

yanfengli Stamp

Geotechnical Report | GT2507033

9/11/2025

Williamson County, Texas

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Regional Geology

4.2 Subsurface Stratigraphy

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

5.0 LABORATORY TESTS

5.1 Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results

6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) of Proposed Turf Fields

6.2 Preparation of Turf Subgrade

6.3 Retaining Wall Design Recommendations

6.3.1 Wall Footing Design Parameters

6.3.2 Wall Subgrade Preparation

6.3.3 Wall Lateral Earth Pressure

7.0 CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA

7.1 Site Preparation

7.2 Open Excavations

7.3 Drainage

8.0 LIMITATIONS

APPENDIX A

Figure 1: Project Site Location Map

Figure 2: Borehole Locations Map

Figure 3: Site Vicinity Geologic Map

APPENDIX B

B.1 Boring Log Key

B.2 Logs of Boring

APPENDIX C

C.1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results

C.2 Particle-Size Analysis: ASTM D6913

C.3 Sulfate and Chlorides Content: EPA 300/300.1

9/11/2025 \ Page 1

Geotechnical Report

Williamson County, Texas

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Beyond Engineering and Testing, LLC (BEYOND) is pleased to present our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed Southwest Regional Park

Field and Track Upgrades project located at 3005 County Road 175 in Leander, Texas. The approximate project location is shown on Figure 1, Project Site Location Map, within Appendix A.

The purpose of this geotechnical investigation and report is to:

• Explore subsurface conditions;

• Conduct field and laboratory testing to characterize the engineering properties of subsurface materials;

• Provide subgrade preparation recommendations for the turf field; and

• Provide design parameters for the retaining wall.

The recommendations contained in this report are based upon field and laboratory test results, engineering analyses, experience with similar subsurface conditions, and our project understanding.

2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The project consists of conversion of existing natural grass Fields 6 to 9 to synthetic turf with Field

6 within an existing running track which will be resurfaced as part of this project. Retaining walls will also be constructed on the perimeter of Fields 7, 8 and 9 to retain field fill material and turf system and make the fields level. The retaining wall will be cut quarry block retaining walls up to

6 feet.

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

BEYOND prepared and executed a field exploration program for the proposed project on July 23, 2025. The approximate boring location is shown on Figure 2, Borehole Locations Map, within

Appendix A of this report. A summary of approximate geographic latitude and longitude coordinate and depth of borehole drilled as part of the subsurface exploration program is presented in

Table 3.0.1.

Table 3.0.1 – Summary of Boring Locations and Depths

Boring No.

Latitude

(degrees)

Longitude

(degrees)

Total Boring

Depth (feet) Field No.

B-1 30.559357 -97.765690 1.0 Field 6

B-2 30.560728 -97.764127 5.0 Field 7

B-3 30.559898 -97.764726 5.0

B-4 30.559543 -97.764173 5.0 Field 8

B-5 30.558771 -97.764778 5.0

B-6 30.558020 -97.764997 5.0 Field 9

B-7 30.558044 -97.765678 5.0

9/11/2025 \ Page 2

Notes: Latitude and longitude coordinates provided in Table 3.0.1 were obtained from a hand-held GPS device with accuracy of approximate 15 to 20 feet.

BEYOND utilized solid stem auger drilling methods to advance the boreholes except at Boring B-

1 where hand auger was used to advance the borehole to auger refusal. We collected samples using Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) split spoon samplers. We collected all samples from the samplers in the field, performed visual soil classification, labeled the samples as to location and depth, and bagged soil samples to minimize moisture changes. We conducted the SPT tests in general accordance with ASTM D1586: Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test

(SPT) and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils. SPT test results are shown on the attached Boring Logs under the “Field Data” column and are preceded by the letter “N”. SPT testing was performed using automatic hammer.

BEYOND prepared field logs for each boring drilled. The field logs contain visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as interpolation of the subsurface conditions between samples. We also observed for groundwater level in the borehole while advancing the boreholes. These observations are discussed in subsequent sections of this report.

The project engineer reviewed the field logs, samples, and laboratory data to make appropriate modifications to the field logs. BEYOND classified soils in general accordance with the Unified

Soil Classification System (USCS). The soil classification symbols on the boring logs are described in the Boring Log Key included in Appendix B. The final logs of boring include modifications based on our laboratory test results and observations performed on the soil samples collected in the field. The final logs of boring describe the materials encountered, strata thickness, the various depths at which the samples were obtained, as well as field test results.

4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Regional Geology

According to the Geologic Atlas of Texas, Austin Sheet (1975), the geology for the proposed project site consists of Alluvium (Qal) underlain by limestone of Edwards Formation (Ked)

Alluvium (Qal): Floodplain deposits, including indistinct low terrace deposits; clay, silt, sand, and gravel; silt and clay, calcareous to surface, dark gray to dark brown; sand largely quartz; gravel, siliceous, mostly chert, quartzite, limestone, and petrified wood, along Colorado River much igneous and metamorphic rock, probably mostly reworked from terrace deposits; fluviatile morphology well preserved with point bars, oxbows, and abandoned channel segments.

Edwards Limestone (Ked): Cretaceous age and consists of relatively soft to extremely hard limestone, dolomitic limestone and dolomite. The limestone is vuggy, honeycombed and porous, oftentimes having solution cavities and voids (karst), and chert. The dolomite and dolomitic limestone of the Edwards is typically softer and when exposed to weathering may take on a soil-like consistency. Weathered remnants of the parent limestone consist of surficial fat and lean clay with various sand and limestone fragment content.

9/11/2025 \ Page 3

Site vicinity geologic map is shown on Figure 3 within Appendix A of this report.

4.2 Subsurface Stratigraphy

As indicated on our logs of boring drilled as part of this study, native soils were encountered beneath the topsoil and extended to the termination depth of the borings. The subsurface soils generally encountered are summarized in Table 4.2.1.

Table 4.2.1 Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy

Stratum

Number

Depth Range

(Approx., ft.)

Soil/Rock Classification and

Consistency/Relative Density/Hardness

I 0.0 – 5.0

Sandy Lean Clay/Fat Clay/Clayey Sand/Clayey Gravel (CL/CH/SC/GC)

- SPT N values from 5 to 50/1.5” (Refusal)

- Soft to hard, loose to very dense

Weathered limestone was encountered at some boring locations with auger refusal.

The above descriptions are general, and depth ranges are approximate because boundaries between different strata are seldom clear and abrupt in the field. In addition, the lines separating major stratum types on the logs of borings do not necessarily represent distinct lines of demarcation of the various strata. Detailed logs of borings for locations drilled as part of this study, which present the stratum descriptions, types of sampling used, laboratory test data, and additional field data, are presented in Appendix B. The Boring Log Key, defining the terms and descriptive symbols used on each log of boring, is also presented in Appendix B.

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was not encountered during drilling operations. Upon completing drilling operations, the drill crew backfilled the boreholes using soil cuttings.

Based on the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Groundwater Database of water wells within a 1-mile radius from the project site locations, groundwater levels at adjacent water wells were recorded at depths of 25 to 37 feet below ground surface. These measurements are from submitted driller’s well reports from 2010 to 2020.

It is imperative to note that the short-term groundwater level observations performed as part of this study are not an accurate evaluation of groundwater levels at the project site and should not be interpreted as a comprehensive groundwater study. The observations made during this investigation may also not represent conditions at the time of construction and it should be understood that the presence of groundwater may influence certain construction activities and long-term performance of foundations and pavements. Groundwater levels are highly dependent on climatic and hydrologic conditions before and after construction, and site development including irrigation demands, drainage and other factors. If a detailed groundwater study is desired, a groundwater hydrologist should be retained to perform these services.

9/11/2025 \ Page 4

5.0 LABORATORY TESTS

BEYOND performed various laboratory tests to determine the soil’s physical properties. These tests allow us to classify soils and to assess soil performance under the project design conditions.

Laboratory tests are presented in each respective Log of Boring and in the Summary of Laboratory

Tests in Appendix C. The project geotechnical engineer assigned appropriate laboratory tests on selected soil samples. BEYOND performed the following laboratory methods for soil analyses:

• Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil

Classification System): ASTM D2487;

• Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass: ASTM D2216;

• Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils: ASTM

D4318;

• Standard Test Methods for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than No. 200 (75-μm) Sieve:

ASTM D1140;

• Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve

Analysis: ASTM D6913; and

• Sulfate and Chlorides Content: EPA 300/300.1.

5.1 Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results

Moisture content tests were performed, in accordance with ASTM D2216, on selected soil samples. The test results are provided on Logs of Boring in Appendix B of the report as well as on the Summary of Laboratory Results in Appendix C of this report.

Percent finer than No. 200 (75-μm) sieve tests were performed, in accordance with ASTM D1140, on selected soil samples. The test results are provided on Logs of Boring in Appendix B of the report as well as on the Summary of Laboratory Results in Appendix C of this report

Laboratory test results indicate that the native clay soils have liquid limit (LL) values range from about 23 to 66% and plastic limit (PL) values ranging from 17 to 25%, with Plasticity Index (PI) values ranging from about 6 to 38%. Based on FHWA-NHI-10-016 for the method of identifying potentially expansive soils as shown in Table 5.1.1, the soils at this proposed project site possess marginal to high swell potential.

Table 5.1.1 – Method of Identifying Potentially Expansive Soils (from FHWA-NHI-10-016)

Liquid Limit

(%) Plasticity Index

Potential Swell

Potential Swell

Classification

< 50 < 25 < 0.5 Low

50 to 60 25 to 35 0.5 to 1.5 Marginal

> 60 > 35 > 1.5 High

9/11/2025 \ Page 5

The Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) is the potential ability of a soil material to swell, at a given density, moisture and loading condition, when exposed to capillary or surface water. We estimate the PVR value at the current turf fields ranging from ½ inch to 1½ inch, using the TxDOT method

Tex-124-E.

BEYOND obtained the services of Xenco Laboratories to perform analytical tests to determine the content of soluble sulfate and chloride in the soils at the site. The results of soluble sulfate and chloride content are summarized in Table 5.1.2.

Table 5.1.2 – Results of Soluble Sulfate and Chloride Content

Boring No.

Depth of Sample

(feet)

Soluble Chlorides

(mg/kg)

Soluble Sulfate

(mg/kg)

B-6 2.0 44 59

These test results indicate non-corrosive chloride content and negligible sulfate contents. The

Xenco test results are included within Appendix C.

6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

BEYOND understands the proposed turf conversion project will convert existing natural grass

Fields 6 to 9 to synthetic turf with Field 6 within an existing running track which will be resurfaced as part of this project. Retaining walls will be constructed on the perimeter of Fields 7, 8 and 9 to retain field fill material and turf system and make the fields level. The retaining wall will be cut quarry block retaining walls up to 6 feet.

We recommend that BEYOND’s geotechnical engineer or our qualified representative be retained to observe site construction in this area to assess the need for any over-excavation and re-compaction and/or replacement.

6.1 Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) of Proposed Turf Fields

Estimates of vertical soil movements at the turf fields were evaluated using the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) test method, TEX-124-E. The actual heave could be higher in the case of poor drainage conditions, or irrigation leaks as examples.

The PVR procedure derives potential swell from a historic PI versus swell curve. Therefore, the estimated vertical movement values calculated using the PVR method might be different from actual measured movements that occur at the project site.

Based on the provided 60% Plan, cut/fill are proposed at each Field. As shown in Table 6.1.1, the proposed cut or fill depth and the estimated potential vertical movement for dry soil conditions at each boring location was in the order of ½ to less than 1 inch depending on the specific boring locations. We assumed the exported fill material will be low plasticity material will PI no more than 15 in our PVR calculation.

9/11/2025 \ Page 6

Table 6.1.1 Potential Vertical Movement at Each Turf Field with Proposed Cut/Fill

Turf Field No.

Boring(s)

Estimated Cut (-)/ Fill (+)

(feet)

Estimated Potential

Vertical Movement

(inches)

6 B-1 -1 <1

B-2 -3 <1

B-3 +4 <1

B-4 -1 to -3 <½

B-5 +6 <1

B-6 -4 <1

B-7 +6 <1

Additional shrink/swell movements can occur in areas if water is allowed to pond during or after construction on soils with high plasticity, or if highly plastic soils are allowed to dry out prior to fill or concrete placement. High plasticity clay may also experience shrinkage during periods of dry weather as moisture evaporation occurs at the ground surface and the groundwater table drops.

Therefore, uniformity and preservation of the moisture contents of the near surface clays during construction and during the life of the structure is critical to reducing potential shrink-swell movement.

6.2 Preparation of Turf Subgrade

1. Within the turf field footprint and at least 5 feet outside the footprint, remove the existing fill material and fat clay for the cut area and import low PI fill material for the fill area to achieve the proposed cut and fill depth as shown in Table 6.1.1.

2. Specify the gradations and plasticity requirements tabulated below for the select fill.

Retained on 2-1/2” screen 0%

Retained on 7/8” screen 5% - 50%

Retained on 3/8” screen 25% - 65%

Retained on No. 4 sieve 35% - 75%

Retained on No. 40 sieve 60% - 90%

Material passing the No. 40 sieve shall meet the following plasticity requirements:

Passing Maximum Minimum

No. 40 Sieve Plasticity Index Plasticity Index

25% - 40% 15 3

10% - 25% 20 4

9/11/2025 \ Page 7

3. Specify compaction of the exposed subgrade and select fill material to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined using ASTM D698. Hold water contents to within ±2% of the optimum, and maintain compacted lift thicknesses to 6 inches or less.

4. Specify the drainage material as at least 4 inches of Size 57 or 67 crushed stone

(ASTM C33-03 coarse aggregate) or another material satisfying the requirements of

Type I material as defined in ASTM D6088. An impermeable geomembrane liner is recommended to function as a separator between the gravel drainage media and the underlying clay soils.

5. Specify the granular working surface as at least 2 inches thickness of 3/8 inch washed angular stone underneath the proposed synthetic turf system.

6.3 Retaining Wall Design Recommendations

Beyond understands that retaining walls will be constructed on the perimeter of Fields 7, 8 and 9 to retain field fill material and turf system and make the fields level. The retaining wall will be cut quarry block retaining walls up to 6 feet. The design recommendations for retaining wall bearing capacity, subgrade preparation and lateral earth pressure are presented in the following sections.

6.3.1 Wall Footing Bearing Capacity

Wall footings bearing at least 1 ft into compacted select fill in the Fill Area may be sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Wall footings bearing at least 1 ft into on-site clay material in the Cut Area may be sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf.

Horizontal loads acting on the wall will be resisted by friction between the foundation material and the base of the wall. For quarry block wall in good contact with existing clay or compacted select fill, a coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used for sliding resistance. Passive resistance of existing material in front of the wall should be neglected.

6.3.2 Wall Subgrade Preparation

The bottom of the excavation for retaining wall footings should expose undisturbed on-site clay or compacted fill material. Any loose or disturbed materials encountered at the bottom of the excavation should be removed. In addition, there should not be any free water standing in the excavation. The exposed subgrade should be observed by the geotechnical engineer prior to construction of the foundation. If required, the footing subgrade may have to be cleaned or deepened to achieve the stated bearing capacity.

6.3.3 Wall Lateral Earth Pressure

The following are recommended equivalent fluid pressures for below-grade walls using native or imported soils as backfill. When backfilling adjacent to retaining walls, the contractor

9/11/2025 \ Page 8 should be careful not to over-compact soils adjacent to the wall, thus inducing additional lateral stress on the retaining walls. Proper drainage should be provided away from the walls during all phases of construction and post-construction grading.

For the proposed cut quarry block retaining walls, the active lateral pressure is the appropriate earth pressure to use for design. Positive drainage should be provided to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic water pressure on the walls. If no positive drainage is provided, hydrostatic water pressure should be considered in the design of the walls.

Backfill materials for the retaining wall should be placed and compacted to a minimum compaction of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 and moisture conditioned within

+/- 2% of optimum moisture content. The loose thickness of each layer before compacting shall not exceed 8 inches. Close to retaining walls, smaller compactors should use to prevent excessive lateral pressures against the retaining walls from stress caused by heavy compactors.

Table 6.2.1 – Equivalent Fluid Pressures for Lateral Earth Pressures

Soil Type

Lateral Earth

Pressure Condition

Lateral Earth

Pressure Coefficient

Equivalent Fluid

Pressure

(psf/ft)

Native Sandy Soils & Imported Cohesionless

Soils φ’=30, γt=120 pcf

At-Rest Condition ko=0.5 60

Active Condition ka=0.33 40

Passive Condition kp=3 360

Native Clay Soils & φ’=24, γt=120 pcf

At-Rest Condition ko=0.59 71

Active Condition ka=0.42 50.5

Passive Condition kp=2.37 285

The values apply only to cases where the ground surface is level. BEYOND should be contacted to provide suitable values for cases where the ground surface is sloped. These earth pressure values do not include safety factors or hydrostatic pressure. Surcharge loads should also be considered.

7.0 CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA

In this section, we provide various specifications and construction recommendations to allow earthwork to meet the intent of the geotechnical parameters provided in Section 6. We recommend that BEYOND be retained to provide verification testing services during construction.

This allows us to verify that construction of foundation items is in compliance with our recommendations.

7.1 Site Preparation

Prior to construction, the contractor should establish proper and positive drainage to maintain a relatively dry condition at the proposed construction site. This will be important if any work is

9/11/2025 \ Page 9 attempted during prolonged rainfall periods. Water ponding in construction areas should be avoided.

Site preparation should begin by removing surface debris, vegetation, organic topsoil, and major root systems, if any. Compact resulting subgrade and verify stability using a proof-roll test.

Conduct a proof-roll tests using a loaded dump truck or loaded double-axle water truck with a minimum weight of 20 tons. Passing proof-roll tests must show less than ½-inch deflection and no area pumping. Any soft spots or areas that exhibit pumping should be excavated and re-compacted to a minimum compaction of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM

D698 and moisture conditioned within +/- 2% of optimum moisture content.

The base of each foundation excavation should be observed by the geotechnical engineer or a qualified representative prior to foundation installation.

7.2 Open Excavations

Temporary construction slopes and/or permanent embankment slopes should be protected from surface runoff water. Site grading should be designed to allow drainage at planned areas where erosion protection is provided, instead of allowing surface water to flow down unprotected slopes.

Surcharge loads, either static or dynamic, should not be applied to an excavation slope.

Construction equipment should be prevented from traveling along or near the top of the excavation slope. Monitoring of temporary slopes, trenches, and dewatering during construction should be undertaken by the contractor to detect early warnings of movement within slopes, structures, pavements, etc.

In all cases of excavations in soils, sloped excavations and trench shields are required for excavations greater than four feet in depth. The contractor’s “Competent Person” (as defined by

OSHA) must inspect each trench to determine the type of bench or slope that is actually required.

With all excavations, only a “competent person” shall determine whether sloped, benched, or trench shields can be used. OSHA and applicable state and local standards should be observed and followed. Site safety is the responsibility of the contractor.

7.3 Drainage

Proper drainage should be provided away from the foundation elements during all phases of construction and post-construction grading. Proper drainage is essential to the long-term stability of the structure. Ponding of water near the foundation elements from improper drainage should not be permitted.

8.0 LIMITATIONS

Recommendations contained in this report are based on our field observations and subsurface explorations, limited laboratory tests, and our present knowledge of the proposed construction. It is possible that soil conditions will vary between or beyond the points explored. If soil conditions are encountered that differ from those described herein, we should be notified immediately. If the

9/11/2025 \ Page 10 scope of the proposed design or construction changes from that described in this report, our data should also be reviewed.

We prepared this report in substantial compliance with the generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice, as it exists in the area at the time of our study. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that

BEYOND will conduct an adequate program of tests and observations during the construction phase in order to evaluate compliance with our recommendations.

This report may be used only by the client, their design team, and only for the purposes stated, within three years from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both on site and off site) or other factors may change over time, and additional work may be required with the passage of time.

Any party other than the client who wishes to use this Report shall notify BEYOND of such intended use. Based on the intended use of the report, BEYOND may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release BEYOND from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party.

This is a geotechnical engineering report and is not intended to provide information about possible contaminated soils or the locations of any abandoned underground storage tanks. The owner should consult with an environmental specialist to determine whether this site is suitable from an environmental perspective.

Other standards or documents referenced in any given standard cited in this report, or otherwise relied upon by the authors of this report, are only mentioned in the given standard; they are not incorporated into it or "included by reference," as that latter term is used relative to contracts or other matters of law.

SW Regional Park Field and Track Upgrades

Appendix A

APPENDIX A

MAPS

Figure A.1 – Project Site Location Map

Project Location

Figure A.2 – Borehole Locations Map

Figure A.3 – Site Vicinity Geologic Map Based of Geologic Atlas of Texas, Austin Sheet

Alluvium (Qal): Floodplain deposits, including indistinct low terrace deposits; clay, silt, sand, and gravel;

silt and clay, calcareous to surface, dark gray to dark brown; sand largely quartz; gravel, siliceous, mostly chert, quartzite, limestone, and petrified wood, along

Colorado River much igneous and metamorphic rock, probably mostly reworked from terrace deposits;

fluviatile morphology well preserved with point bars, oxbows, and abandoned channel segments.

Edwards Limestone (Ked): limestone, dolomite, and chert; limestone aphanitic to fine grained, massive to thin bedded, hard, brittle, in part rudistid biostromes, much miliolid biosparite; dolomite fine to very fine grained, porous, medium gray to grayish brown; chert, nodules and plates common, varies in amount from bed to bed, some intervals free of chert, mostly white to light gray;

in zone of weathering considerably recrystallized, "honeycombed," and cavernous forming an aquifer;

forms flat areas and plateaus bordered by scarps;

thickness 60-350 feet, thins northward.

Comanche Peak Limestone (Kc): fine to very fine grained, fairly hard, nodular, light gray, weathers white, extensively burrowed, burrow fillings slightly coarser and darker, typically crops out in scarp face beneath

Edwards Limestone; thickness up to 80 feet, feathers out southward near Williamson-Travis County line.

Keys Valley Marl (Kkv): soft, white; marine megafossils include Exogyra texana, Gryphaea mucronata, and other pelecypods, ammonites, gastropods, and echinoids; thickness up to 50 feet, feathers out southward near Williamson-Travis County line.

Project Location

Appendix B

APPENDIX B

FIELD EXPLORATION

APPENDIX B.1

KEY TO TERMS

Version number:

Beyond Standard v.1.1 (5/14/2025)

LOG OF BORING KEY

TYPICAL MATERIAL SYMBOLS (USCS CLASSIFICATION)

Fill

Lean Clay (CL)

Poorly Graded Sand (SP)

Bedrock

Topsoil

Fat Clay (CH)

Well-Graded Sand (SW)

Basalt

Asphalt

Silt (ML)

Poorly Graded Gravel (GP)

Limestone

Concrete

Elastic Silt (MH)

Well-Graded Gravel (GW)

Sandstone

Silty Clay (CL-ML)

Clayey Gravel (GC)

Siltstone

Clayey Sand (SC)

Silty Gravel (GM)

Shale

Silty Sand (SM) Mudstone

Marl

DRILLING METHOD SYMBOLS SAMPLING METHOD SYMBOLS

Air Rotary

Hollow Stem Auger

Split Spoon Sample

Bulk Sample

Shelby Tube Sample Grab Sample

Mud Rotary

Solid Stem Auger

Texas Cone Penetrometer

Rock Core Sample

- TESTING SYMBOL DEFINITION -

Rock Coring

S – STANDARD PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE

N – SPT N-VALUE (BLOWS FROM 6 TO 18 INCHES)

PP – POCKET PENETROMETER RESISTANCE

TxC – TXDOT CONE PENETRATION RESISTANCE

REC – ROCK CORE RECOVERY

RQD – ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION

SOIL CHARACTERISTICS

Soil Consistency, Cohesive Soils – Clay and Silt Soil Density, Cohesionless Soils – Sand and Gravel Soil Structure

Consistency

(Cohesive)

Uncorrected

SPT N-values

Unconfined Compressive

Strength, qu (tsf)*

Relative Density/Density

(Cohesionless)

Uncorrected

SPT N-values

Calcareous...... Containing calcium carbonate

Slickensided.. The presence of planes of weakness having a slick and glossy appearance

Very soft < 2 < 0.25 Very loose < 4 Interbedded…. Alternating layers of varying materials

Soft 2 – 4 0.25 – 0.50 Loose 4 – 10

Medium Stiff 5 – 8 0.50 – 1.0 Medium Dense 11 – 30

Stiff 9 – 15 1.0 – 2.0 Dense 31 – 50

Very stiff 16 – 30 2.0 – 4.0 Very dense > 50 Hard 31 – 60 > 4.0

Very hard > 60

*Pocket Penetrometer and unconfined compression tests yield qu, within clay.

BEDROCK CHARACTERISTICS

Hardness Field Identification Weathering Description

Very hard Rock will scratch knife. Core requires many blows of hammer to fracture or chip. Hammer rebounds after impact.

Fresh

No visible sign of rock material weathering; slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces is possible.

Hard Rock can be scratched with knife blade or pick with difficulty.

Slightly weathered

Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and discontinuity surfaces. All rock material may be discolored by weathering and the external surface may be somewhat weaker than in its fresh condition.

Moderate

Hard

Cannot scratch with fingernail but can be peeled with knife.

Fracturing with single blow of hammer.

Moderately weathered

Less than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil.

Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a discontinuous framework or as corestones. A minimum 2 in. diameter sample cannot be broken readily by hand across the rock fabric

Soft

Rock can be scratched with fingernail or knife. Crumbles under firm blow with hammer. Grains from sandstones and mudstones/shales can be rubbed off with fingers.

Highly

More than half of the rock is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a discontinuous framework or as corestones. A minimum 2 in. diameter sample can be broken readily by hand across the rock fabric

Very Soft Can be indented with fingers or crushed with fingers. Can be excavated easily with point of geologic hammer.

Completely

All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. The original mass structure is largely still intact. Material can by granulated by hand.

Residual soil All rock material is converted to soil. Material can be easily broken apart by hand

APPENDIX B.2

LOGS OF BORINGS

Borehole No.: B-1 Client: Halff Associates Project: SW Regional Park Field and Track… Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

22.3

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

54.4

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P C

F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

G

TH

(T

SF

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

U

RE

(P

SI

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.559357, -97.765690 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

TOPSOIL, 0.5 in.

SANDY FAT CLAY (CH), trace gravel, dark brown, soft, moist, calcareous deposits.

- Auger refusal at 1.0 ft

End of boring at 1'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

DRAFT

Borehole No.: B-2

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 5-16-44 N = 60

S = 13-14-16 N = 30

S = 11-25-50/2" N = 75/8"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

6.6

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

29.8

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P

C F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.560728, -97.764127 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SILTY CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC-GM), with sand, dark brown, medium dense to very dense, dry to moist, fine grained, calcareous deposits.

LEAN CLAY (CL), with sand, gravel, light gray, very hard, marly, calcareous deposits.

End of boring at 5'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Borehole No.: B-3

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 5-7-50/3.5" N = 57/9.5"

S = 50/2" N = 50/2"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

19.0

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

31.3

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P

C F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.559898, -97.764726 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

TOPSOIL, 5.0 in.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), with gravel, light brown, very dense, dry, fine grained, calcareous deposits.

-Auger refusal at 3.0 ft.

End of boring at 3'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Borehole No.: B-4

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 3-14-50/6" N = 64/12"

S = 50/1.5" N = 50/1.5"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

11.6

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

55.2

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P

C F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.559543, -97.764173 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

TOPSOIL, 0.5 in.

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, very hard, dry to moist, marly, calcareous deposits, trace of weathered limestone.

- Auger refusal at 2.5 ft

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Borehole No.: B-5

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 7-18-11 N = 29

S = 50/3.5" N = 50/3.5"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

8.1

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

68.5

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P C

F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.558771, -97.764778 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown, stiff to hard, dry to moist, marly, calcareous deposits, trace of weathered limestone.

End of boring at 3'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Borehole No.: B-6

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 4-4-3 N = 7

S = 3-3-15 N = 18

S = 32-50/3" N = 50/3"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

11.6

21.9

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

64.6

79.6

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P C

F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.558020, -97.764997 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace gravel, dark brown, medium stiff to very stiff, dry to moist, calcareous deposits.

FAT CLAY (CH), trace of limestone fragments, light gray, very stiff, dry to moist, calcareous deposits.

End of boring at 4.25'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Borehole No.: B-7

Location: Leander, Texas Project Number: GT2507033

Date Started: 07/23/2025 Date Completed: 07/23/2025

SY

M

BO

L elev depth

(ft)

FIELD DATA

D

RI

LL

IN

G M

ET

H

O D

SA

M

PL

E

G

RA

PH

IC

S:

B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

N

: B

LO

W S/

FT

PP

: T O

N S/

SQ

F

T Tx

C : B

LO

W

C O

U N

TS

RE

C

RQ

D

S = 3-2-3 N = 5

S = 2-8-9 N = 17

S = 13-50/5" N = 50/5"

LABORATORY RESULTS

M O

IS

TU

RE

C

O N

TE

N

T

28.5

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

IN

G

57.1

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

(P

C F)

C O

M

PR

ES

SI

VE

S

TR

EN

S

TR

AI

N

C O

N

FI

N

IN

G P

RE

SS

Logged By Sandeep Driller Steve Zaehler Latitude, Longitude 30.558044, -97.765678 Surface Elevation 0'

During Drilling N/A After Drilling N/A

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

FAT CLAY (CH), trace gravel, light brown, medium stiff to very stiff, dry to moist, calcareous deposits.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), with gravel, reddish brown, dense, fine grained, calcareous deposits.

End of boring at 5'

D ep th (f t)

Notes: GPS Coordinates obtained by handheld device; Groundwater not encountered during or immediately after drilling.

Appendix C

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST

RESULTS

APPENDIX C.1

SUMMARY OF LAB TEST RESULTS

CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

NUMBER:

Location Depth

(ft)

USCS

Water

Content

Dry Unit

Weight

(pcf)

< No. 200 LL PL PI

Compressive

Strength

(tsf)

Strain at Failure

Confining

Pressure

(psi)

Chlorides

(%/weight)

Sulfates

(%/weight) pH

Minimum

Resistivity

(ohm-cm)

B-1 0.0 CH 22 - 54 60 25 35 - - - - - - -

B-2 0.0 GC-GM - - 30 23 17 6 - - - - - - -

B-2 2.0 CL 7 - - - - - - - - - - - -

B-3 0.0 SC 19 - 31 53 18 35 - - - - - - -

B-4 0.0 CL 12 - 55 29 17 12 - - - - - - -

B-5 0.0 CL 8 - 69 - - - - - - - - - -

B-6 0.0 CL 12 - 65 48 20 28 - - - - - - -

B-6 2.0 CH 22 - 80 66 22 44 - - - 0.0044 0.0059 - -

B-7 0.0 CH 29 - 57 58 20 38 - - - - - - -

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS

GT2507033

Halff Associates

SW Regional Park Field and Upgrades

Leander, Texas

Beyond Engineering and Testing, LLC

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B

Round Rock, TX 78664

Telephone: 512.358.6048 www.BeyondET.com

ND Not Detected; D Diluted;

*Denotes Total Unit Weight Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX C.2

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

ANALYSIS RESULTS – ASTM D6913

Client: Halff Associates Project No.:

Project: Williason County SW Regional Park Field Turf Test Method: ASTM D6913

Sample: B-02 at 0.0 ft Test Date:

No. 100 (150 µm)

No. 200 (75 µm)

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 µm)

Tested by: R.N

Umair Ahmed, 01/08/25 Quality Review/Date

31.7

29.8

33.6

3/4 in.

59.1

46.7

69.7

63.9

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 53.5

3/8 in.

40.4No. 20 (850 µm)

No. 40 (425 µm) 36.1

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

GT2507033

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

07/29/25

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

Beyond Engineering & Testing, LLC

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B

(512) 358-6048

Sample: B-03 at 0.0 ft Test Date:

No. 100 (150 µm)

No. 200 (75 µm)

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 µm)

Tested by: R.N

Umair Ahmed, 01/08/25 Quality Review/Date

36.1

31.3

42.8

3/4 in.

74.5

61.7

100.0

89.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 68.6

3/8 in.

56.4No. 20 (850 µm)

No. 40 (425 µm) 50.0

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

GT2507033

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

07/29/25

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

Beyond Engineering & Testing, LLC

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B

Sample: B-06 at 0.0 ft Test Date:

No. 100 (150 µm)

No. 200 (75 µm)

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 µm)

Tested by: R.N

Umair Ahmed, 01/08/25 Quality Review/Date

69.9

64.6

73.5

3/4 in.

93.9

82.9

100.0

100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 88.9

3/8 in.

78.7No. 20 (850 µm)

No. 40 (425 µm) 75.8

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

GT2507033

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

07/29/25

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

Beyond Engineering & Testing, LLC

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B

APPENDIX C.3

Sulfate and Chloride Content Test

Results

Project: Williason County SW Regional Park Field Turf Project No.: GT2507033

Testing Method: EPA 300/300.1

Test Date: 8/5/2025

No. Sample ID & Depth Sulfate Content

(mg SO4/kg)

Chloride Content

(mg/kg)

1 B-06 at 2.0 ft 59.4 44

Quality Review/Date

Tested by: XENCO

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval.

Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

Te-An Wang, 8/6/25

Beyond Engineering & Testing, LLC

3801 Doris Lane, Suite B