6-ITB 2025-016 Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report.pdf

Table of Contents

Description Page

A. Introduction

A.1. Project Description A.2. Background Information and Reference Documents A.3. Purpose A.4. Site Conditions and History

B. Results B.1. Geologic Overview B.2. Subsurface Conditions B.3. Groundwater B.4. Laboratory Test Results

C. Preliminary Recommendations C.1. Preliminary Foundation Design Recommendations

C.1.a. Preliminary Foundation Design C.1.b. Preliminary Floor Slab Concepts and methods of Soil Improvements C.1.c. Weather

C.2. Preliminary Pavement Considerations C.3. Preliminary Construction Recommendations C.4. Seismic Site Classification C.5. Additional Required Investigations

D. Procedures D.1. Borings D.2. Exploration Logs D.3. Material Classification and Testing

D.3.a. Visual and Manual Classification D.3.b. Laboratory Testing

D.4. Groundwater Measurements E. Qualifications

E.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions E.1.a. Material Strata E.1.b. Groundwater Levels

E.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility E.2.a. Plan Review E.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing

E.3. Use of Report E.4. Standard of Care

Table of Contents (continued)

Description Page

Appendix Soil Boring Location Sketch Log of Boring Sheets BH-01 through BH-10 Descriptive Terminology of Soil

A. Introduction

A.1. Project Description

This Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report addresses the preliminary recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed Burleson Westside Business Park located east of Chisholm Trail Parkway, just southeast of the intersection between County Road 1902 and County Road 1019, in the city of Burleson, Texas. The proposed business park site is approximately 96 acres of vacant land and will be divided into 16 smaller individual lots. Figure 1 below illustrates the proposed business park.

Figure 1. Proposed Project Concept Plan

*Note: Shaded area is not within project scope.

Burleson Westside Business Park Project B2101680 April 26, 2021

Table 1 below provides a summary of the proposed individual lots and potential land usage. Our preliminary recommendations are based on the assumption that the finished grade will be within 2 to 4 feet of the existing grade at the site. Once the final grading plan is developed, please contact us to evaluate the changed condition and provide supplementary recommendations.

Table 1. Site Data Table

BLOCK/LOT # ACREAGE POTENTIAL LAND USES

Blk 1, Lot 1 7.8 Office, Medical Office

*Blk 1, Lot 2 10.2 Office, Medical Office

*Blk 1, Lot 3 9.9 Hotel, Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Fitness

Blk 1, Lot 4 3.9 Hotel, Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Fitness

Blk 1, Lot 5 2.3 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 1, Lot 6 2.3 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 2, Lot 1 2.8 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 2, Lot 2 2.5 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 2, Lot 3 2.4 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 2, Lot 4 2.9 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant, Bank

Blk 2, Lot 5 5.9 Office, Medical Office

Blk 2, Lot 6 12.6 Hospital, Office, Medical Office

Blk 2, Lot 7 9.0 Office, Medical Office

Blk 3, Lot 1 2.2 Office, Medical Office, Retail, Restaurant

Blk 3, Lot 2 6.2 Office, Medical Office

Blk 3, Lot 3 4.7 Office, Medical Office

Public Row 10.4 Public Right -of-way

H.O.A/ Open Space 0.7 Open space, Development Branding

TOTAL 98.0

*North half not within project scope.

A.2. Background Information and Reference Documents

In addition to the provided sources, we have used several publicly available sources of information. We reviewed the following information:

The concept plan for the proposed project provided by the client.

Communications with the client regarding project details.

Aerial images of the site viewed in Google Earth™, imagery dates of January 1995 to November

Texas Geology Web Explorer (https://txpub.usgs.gov/txgeology/)

We have described our understanding of the proposed construction and site to the extent others reported it to us. Depending on the extent of available information, we have made assumptions based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the project details, the project team should notify us. New or changed information could require additional evaluation, analyses, and/or recommendations.

A.3. Purpose

The main purpose of our preliminary geotechnical evaluation was to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed business park development. To accomplish this, this evaluation was conducted in the following phases:

Ten (10) test borings were drilled and sampled at specific locations across the site to obtain soil and rock samples

Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples to evaluate the engineering characteristics of the samples

Engineering analyses were performed to develop preliminary geotechnical design recommendations

A.4. Site Conditions and History

At the time of the field exploration, the property was undeveloped vacant property being utilized for agricultural purposes. Mature tree hedgerows define the property borders to the north, east, and western side. There is a shallow swale lined by trees that bisects the property from southwest to northeast located within the west-center section of the property. As this is a preliminary study, grading plans are not yet available. However, based on available imagery via Google Earth, there are significant changes in elevation across the project site. The site grades range from approximately 854 feet to 871 feet grading from north to south, and from 859 feet to 869 feet grading from west to the east side of the property.

No structures were observed on the property. Based on a review of historical aerial images, using Google Earth, it appears that the site has remained relatively unchanged since the original image dated January 1995. An aerial photograph of the site is provided below:

Photograph 1. Aerial Photograph of the Site

Note: Aerial photograph provided by Google Earth.

Project Site

B. Results

B.1. Geologic Overview Based upon our review of available geologic resources and the encountered subsurface conditions, the surface materials at this site are generally comprised of fat and lean clay soils underlain by the Grayson Marl and Main Street Limestone (undivided) Formation, see Figure 2. The Grayson Marl and main street limestone Formation consists primarily of mostly claystone, poorly exposed, with subordinate sandstone and siltstone. Claystone has some silty beds, is yellowish gray and greenish-gray weathering to dark reddish-brown, laminated, and contains seams of gypsum and nodules of iron oxides. Sandstone and siltstone is light yellowish gray weathering to dark yellowish-orange, well-sorted; glauconitic; friable to firmly cemented with calcite; thin-bedded; sparsely fossiliferous and yellowish gray to gray limestone. The rock thickens southwestward from 30 ft to 80 ft. The rock age is from the Late Cretaceous period. The encountered soils were generally consistent with the anticipated geology.

Figure 2. Geologic Map

Project Site

Undivided part of Washita

Group

Grayson Marl and Main Street

Limestone, Undivided (kgm)

Woodbine Formation

(kwb)

(http://txpub.usgs.gov/txgeology)

We based the geologic origins used in this report on the soil types and available common knowledge of the geological history of the site. We did not perform a detailed study of the geologic history as it was outside of our scope of services. However, please note that local variations and anomalies do occur.

B.2. Subsurface Conditions

Table 2 provides a subsoil strata summary of the material encountered during drilling operations within the soil borings performed at the site. Please refer to the Logs of Borings sheets in the Appendix for additional details. The Descriptive Terminology sheets in the Appendix include definitions of abbreviations used in Table 2.

Table 2. Subsurface Profile Summary

Strata Soil Type -

ASTM

Classification

Relative Density/

Consistency

Approximate Depth to

Bottom of Stratum

Commentary and Details

Lean clay and Fat

Clay CL, CH 1.0 to 4.5+ tsf 2 to 21 feet

Calcareous and ferrous deposits were common.

Dark brown to tan.

Stiff to hard consistency.

Encountered in Borings BH-01 to

BH-10.

Moderate to high expansive properties.

Weathered Limestone -

50/2” to 50/5”

SPT

13 to 25 feet

Tan to gray Highly to severely weathered Commonly with thin lean clay seams.

Not observed in test boring BH-06

3 Limestone - 100/0.4” to 100/1.25”

TCP

20-30 feet (termination depth)

Generally gray.

Encountered in all the borings.

Un-weathered.

B.3. Groundwater

Free groundwater was not encountered during or immediately after drilling. Groundwater may take days or longer to reach equilibrium in the boreholes and we immediately backfilled the boreholes, per our scope of work. If the project team identifies a need for a more accurate determination of groundwater depth, we can install piezometers to provide additional information. Project planning should anticipate seasonal and annual fluctuations of groundwater.

B.4. Laboratory Test Results

The boring logs show the results of the laboratory tests, which were performed in general accordance with ASTM Standards. The test results performed are the Atterberg Limit Test, (ASTM D4318), Moisture Content (ASTM D2216), and Percent Finer than No. 200 sieve (ASTM D1140). The Appendix contains the results of these tests.

The in-situ moisture content of the soils encountered varied from approximately 5 to 20 percent. Liquid limits determined for the selected soils tested ranged from 19 to 68 while the plasticity indexes ranged from 5 to 53 indicating low to high plasticity materials located on the site. Atterberg limit testing is necessary to confirm the classification of the subsoils encountered at various depths in the borings and provide an indication of the relative strength and compressibility of the subsoils. Tests indicating the percent passing a No. 200 sieve test indicates the existing materials to be predominately fine-grained materials consisting of clays.

In addition to the index testing outlined above, we also performed ten (10) one-dimensional swell tests. In general, the encountered soils had moisture contents above the plastic limits, therefore, considered in a relatively moist state. Test results are presented below in Table 3 below.

Table 3: One-Dimensional Swell Test Results

Boring ID Depth (ft)

Liquid Limit

(LL)

Plastic Limits

(PL)

Plastic Index

(PI)

In-Situ Moisture

Final Moisture

Load (psf)

Percent Vertical

Swell (%)

BH-02 0-2 46 14 32 16.4 24.4 120 4.4

BH-03 2-4 68 15 53 14.6 21 360 4.3

BH-05 0-2 48 24 24 10.6 16.8 120 5.0

BH-05 4-6 - - - 16.9 28.1 360 10.8

BH-07 0-2 52 21 31 23.5 30.5 120 8.5

BH-08 2-4 56 18 38 19.4 27.5 120 4.5

BH-08 4-6 33 15 18 12.2 18.4 600 2.4

BH-09 0-2 38 18 20 17 27.7 120 2.8

BH-09 13-15 - - - 21.4 24.6 1680 2.3

BH-10 0-2 29 14 15 11.1 19.7 120 2.5

Five water-soluble sulfate tests were conducted in general accordance with TEX-145-E. The results are presented in Table 4 below. Elevated sulfates were encountered at this site. Sulfates are known to adversely react with calcium based stabilizing agents such as lime and cement. Per the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Guidelines for Treatment of Sulfate-Rich Soils and Bases in Pavement Structures (September 2005), unless additional measures are considered soils with sulfate contents of 8,000 ppm or higher are not suitable for lime-stabilization.

Table 4: Soluble Sulfate Test Results

Boring ID Depth (ft) Sulfate Level (ppm)

BH-03 2-4 25,920

BH-04 0-2 180

BH-06 0-2 100

BH-08 2-4 7,740

BH09 6-8 1,147

Sulfates often occur in seams and can be difficult to detect during a geotechnical investigation. Project planning should anticipate sulfates throughout the site and the use of calcium-based stabilizing agents is not recommended.

C. Preliminary Recommendations

C.1. Preliminary Foundation Design Recommendations The clayey soils encountered at the project site are considered slightly to highly plastic and potentially slightly to highly expansive. These soils often experience vertical movements as a result of soil moisture content changes that occur beneath areas of the site covered by any proposed building floor slabs, critical flatwork areas, and new pavements. We estimate that the magnitude of potential vertical movement beneath future structures or other covered areas of the site may vary from less than 1 inch in areas of the site where bedrock is within 2 to 3 feet of the surface to as much as 8 inches or greater if the proposed structures are constructed near existing site grades. The magnitude and process for grading of the site below new structures will be critical in determining the actual soil-related movement experienced below future building floor slabs and pavements.

C.1.a. Preliminary Foundation Design It is our opinion that light to heavily loaded office, retail, industrial, and other types of structures constructed on the property may be supported by a system of drilled straight shaft piers with grade beams spanning between the piers. The piers should be brought to bear a minimum of 2 feet into the underlying gray, unweathered limestone bedrock for bearing capacity purposes. The gray unweathered limestone was encountered at depths ranging from as shallow as 13 feet to as deep as 25 feet below the existing grades.

The allowable design end-bearing pressure for piers bearing in the unweathered gray limestone typically range between 40 to 75 kips/square foot. The actual bearing depth and bearing values for straight shaft piers must be determined at the time that final geotechnical studies are performed for individual structures proposed on the site. A design skin friction value of 15% of the end bearing pressure can be applied in the design of the straight shafts for those portions of the pier penetrating greater than 2 feet into the unweathered limestone. Uplift pressures against the drilled shafts that are caused by expansion of the upper clayey soils will, typically vary between 1.0 to 2.0 kips/square foot. These uplift forces occur over the top 2 to 12 feet of the piers and must be considered in the pier design. The design uplift resistance for the portions of the pier bearing in the gray unweathered limestone, typically ranges between 75 to 80% of the allowable skin friction values, neglecting the upper 2 feet of penetration into the gray limestone bedrock.

Depending on the overall grading scheme incorporated at the site, it is possible that shallow spread footing foundations, bearing within the tan weathered limestone or deeper gray unweathered limestone, could be utilized for support of light to moderately loaded structures. Support of these structures on spread footings may be more feasible where the depth to tan or gray limestone is relatively shallow such as those tracts near test boring BH-01. Typical allowable design bearing capacity for spread footings bearing in the tan limestone varies between 3 to 6 kips/square foot. The allowable design bearing capacity for spread footings bearing in the gray unweathered limestone varies between 8 to 12 kips/square foot. Spread footing foundations bearing in the tan weathered limestone must bear at least 1.5 feet or deeper below final grade.

As an alternative to constructing drilled shafts or spread footings to support future buildings, conventionally reinforced, monolithic slab foundations or post-tensioned slab foundations may alternatively be installed for support of relatively lightly loaded multi-family or retail type structures. These stiffened slab foundation systems can be designed to accommodate the anticipated vertical movement when placed directly on unimproved subgrade or the subgrade can be modified as discussed below and the stiffened slab foundations designed for the associated reduced potential vertical soil movement.

C.1.b. Preliminary Floor Slab Concepts and methods of Soil Improvements The estimated potential vertical rise beneath structures constructed on grade at this site is anticipated to vary from less than 1 inch to more than 8 inches. If appropriate soil modification is not performed to reduce the soil-related movement, then the only positive means for isolating floor slabs from the underlying soil movements is to either suspend the slabs over a crawl space of 36 to 48 inches or more above grade.

Suspended slab systems are often constructed in movement-sensitive structures or for the support of movement-sensitive equipment. Alternatively, it may be possible to construct the suspended floor slab system for some structures by installing the concrete for the floor slab on cardboard void boxes depending on the site-specific soil movement conditions.

If slab-on-grade floor systems are to be considered at this site, it should be anticipated that special soil preparation will be required to reduce the potential soil-related vertical movement to within a desired tolerance. Our experience is has been that the general slab on grade design for this area requires that the total post-construction slab movement not exceed 1 inch. Several subgrade modification techniques may be considered to reduce the soil movement to within this criteria. These soil modification methods include:

* Method 1 - Remove a specific depth of the surficial high plasticity clay materials and replace the excavated materials with imported select fill;

* Method 2 - Remove a specified depth of the surficial high plasticity clay materials, moisture condition and replace a portion of the clay materials and complete the balance of the fill with imported select fill;

* Method 3 - Electrochemically pressure inject and in-situ stabilize the surficial clays and install a surface cap of imported special fill; or,

* Method 4 - A combination of the above methods.

The select fill referenced in Method 1 consists of low plasticity silty clay or sandy clay soils with a plasticity index between 7 and 18. These soils are normally imported from off-site borrow pits located close to river or stream channels.

The special fill referenced in Method 3 is a man-made material consisting of the 3/8-inch screening fraction of TxDOT Item 247, Type D recycled concrete. It is our experience that when properly graded and compacted, the special fill material provides good uniform quality, low plasticity, non-expansive fill that assists in reducing the potential vertical movement of the subgrade and provides a strong construction working surface. It is our experience that the special fill material is generally uniform in consistency and properly installed, the completed pad surface will generally withstand construction traffic during rainy periods minimizing weather related delays, providing and added benefit to the construction process.

Braun Intertec evaluated the range of conditions encountered within the test borings to determine the general range of subgrade modification required at the site to reducing the potential vertical movement to 1 inch or less below future building slabs on grade. Based on this analysis, we have developed the following range of conditions for each of the three primary methods:

Method 1: Undercut the building pads from 0.5 to 8 feet or more beneath the finished subgrade. The required variance in depth of required excavation was determined based on conditions encountered at the individual boring locations. Once the excavation is complete, remove the excavated clay soils and backfill the excavation with select fill to the finished subgrade.

Method 2: Undercut the building pads from 0.5 to 12 feet or more beneath the finished subgrade. The required variance in depth of required excavation was determined based on conditions encountered at the individual boring locations. Once the excavation is complete, remove the soils from the building pad areas, moisture condition, and replace the excavated soils as backfill in the excavation. The total depth of moisture conditioning is anticipated to vary between 0.5 to 10 feet. The final 1 to 3 feet of fill to achieve finished subgrade must consist of select fill.

Method 3: Undercut the building pads 1.5 to 3 feet or more beneath the finished subgrade. The required variance in depth of required excavation was determined based on conditions encountered at the individual boring locations. Once the excavation is complete, electrochemically stabilize/pressure inject the underlying clay soils to a depth of 10 feet or until the injection rods refuse on weathered limestone.

Once the injected area meets the specified criteria, the upper 1.5 to 3 feet of the building pads must be backfilled with properly compacted special fill to reach the final subgrade.

Regardless of the method of subgrade modification selected to reduce the potential vertical movement to a desirable magnitude, the moisture content of the soils beneath the building slabs must be maintained in a uniform state until construction is complete and floor slabs are in place. Positive drainage must be maintained to assure surface water drains away from the buildings. Some stabilization or soil modification incorporating one or more of the methods described above should be performed for flatwork areas outside and adjacent to the building limits to mitigate the effects of the underlying expansive clay soils and reduce the potential for a negative drainage condition to occur at the building perimeter.

C.1.c. Weather To account for potential rainfall during construction, we recommend maintaining construction grades to intercept surface water flow into the area and drain water from the area to an appropriate collection point.

After grading, the contractor should compact the soil surface with a smooth drum roller to attempt to lower infiltration. After rain events, the contractor should limit construction traffic until the surface is dry enough that traffic will not mix accumulated surface water into lower portions of the soil.

C.2. Preliminary Pavement Considerations

The soils on the site exhibit significant shrink/swell potential. Therefore, pavements constructed on these soils will be subject to movement from the soils below. The result of these movements causes distress within the pavement section, ultimately leading to higher maintenance frequency and costs than pavements constructed over non-expansive soil conditions.

To aid in mitigating some of the movement-related distress, it is common practice to lime stabilize the upper 6 to 8 inches of soil beneath the pavement areas. However, elevated sulfate levels are anticipated at this site. Sulfates are known to adversely react with lime. Lime-stabilization is not recommended for this site.

Typical pavement sections determined to perform satisfactorily will range from 6 to 9 inches of reinforced concrete. The actual section thickness is determined based upon the anticipated traffic loading and local building authority requirements. In areas where weathered limestone is exposed at the subgrade surface during grading, it may be necessary to over-excavate the limestone 6 to 10 inches and either pulverize and recompact the limestone or replace the limestone with select fill to minimize the point to point contact of the limestone with the underside of the pavement section. Utilizing flexible base materials may be considered in areas of the site in lieu of lime stabilization; however the flexible base should be separated from the underlying subgrade by installing a geo-textile fabric.

C.3. Preliminary Construction Recommendations

Before proceeding with construction, all vegetation, root systems, and other deleterious, non-soil materials must be stripped from proposed construction areas. Braun recommends that all tree roots greater than 2 inches in diameter be removed from the site and not incorporated into the structural fill soils. Some hand labor may be necessary to adequately remove the tree roots from the soil matrix. Additionally, organic material must not comprise more than 5 percent of the soil matrix used as structural fill.

Proper subgrade preparation and placement and construction of the grade raise fill materials will be very critical to the performance of building foundations, floor slabs, and new pavements constructed above or near these soft wet areas and elsewhere on-site. Care should be exercised during the grading operations at the site. The traffic of heavy equipment, including heavy compaction equipment, may create a general deterioration of the shallower, clayey soils. Therefore, it should be anticipated that some construction difficulties could be encountered during periods when these soils are saturated and that it may be necessary to improve, remove or simply stay off of the saturated soils.

Due to the presence of weathered and unweathered limestone encountered in the test borings, field operations such as grading, utility excavations, and straight shaft excavations could encounter difficult excavation conditions, especially upon initial penetration into the limestone layers. Therefore, the contractor should be prepared to handle these difficulties with special rock removal equipment and rock drilling equipment.

C.4. Seismic Site Classification

We did not perform a 100-foot deep boring recommended in the International Building Code (IBC) for seismic site classification. We conservatively assumed the overburden soil consistency continues below the bottom of the borings. Based on the soil boring data and pertinent reference materials, this site meets the criteria for Site Class C as defined in Table 1613.5.2 of Chapter 16 of the 2015 IBC. Based on the collected soil data, laboratory test results, and our analysis, no liquefaction prone layers were identified.

Typically, soil liquefaction occurs in loose, saturated, cohesionless sands and silts or sensitive clays. The soils on-site consisted almost exclusively of dry to moist cohesive soils.

C.5. Additional Required Investigations

Prior to final design and construction, Braun Intertec recommends that final field and laboratory geotechnical studies must be performed for individual structures in order to determine the actual site conditions and to finalize design parameters.

D. Procedures

D.1. Borings

We drilled the borings with a truck-mounted auger drill. We performed the borings in general accordance with ASTM D1586 and ASTM D1587 taking samples continuously to a depth of 10 feet and at 5 ft intervals thereafter to completion. The boring logs show the actual sample intervals and corresponding depths.

D.2. Exploration Logs

The Appendix includes the Log of Boring sheets for our test borings. The logs identify and describe the penetrated geologic materials, and present the results of penetration resistance and other in-situ tests performed. The logs also present the results of laboratory tests performed on test samples and groundwater measurements.

We inferred strata boundaries from changes in the test samples and the auger cuttings. Because we did not perform continuous sampling, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions.

D.3. Material Classification and Testing

D.3.a. Visual and Manual Classification We visually and manually classified the geologic materials encountered following ASTM D2488. The Appendix includes a chart explaining the classification system.

D.3.b. Laboratory Testing The exploration logs in the Appendix note most of the results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples. The remaining laboratory test results follow the exploration logs. We performed the tests in general accordance with ASTM or AASHTO procedures.

D.4. Groundwater Measurements

The drillers checked for groundwater while advancing the test borings, and again after auger withdrawal.

We then filled the boreholes as noted on the boring logs.

E. Qualifications

E.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions

E.1.a. Material Strata We developed our evaluation, analyses, and recommendations from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth. Therefore, we must infer strata boundaries and thicknesses to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and project planning should expect the strata to vary in depth, elevation, and thickness, away from the exploration locations.

Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until performing additional exploration work, or starting construction. If future activity for this project reveals any such variations, you should notify us so that we may reevaluate our recommendations. Such variations could increase construction costs, and we recommend including a contingency to accommodate them.

E.1.b. Groundwater Levels We made groundwater measurements under the conditions reported herein and shown on the exploration logs and interpreted in the text of this report. Note that the observation periods were relatively short, and project planning can expect groundwater levels to fluctuate in response to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, surface drainage modifications, and other seasonal and annual factors.

E.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility

E.2.a. Plan Review We based this report on a limited amount of information, and we made several assumptions to help us develop our recommendations. We should be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications. This review will allow us to evaluate whether we anticipated the design correctly, if any design changes affect the validity of our recommendations, and if the design and specifications correctly interpret and implement our recommendations.

E.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing We recommend retaining us to perform the required observations and testing during construction as part of the ongoing geotechnical evaluation. This will allow us to correlate the subsurface conditions exposed during construction with those encountered by the borings and provide professional continuity from the design phase to the construction phase. If we do not perform observations and testing during construction, it becomes the responsibility of others to validate the assumption made during the preparation of this report and to accept the construction-related geotechnical engineer-of-record responsibilities.

E.3. Use of Report

This report is for the exclusive use of the addressed parties. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses, and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects.

E.4. Standard of Care

In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality.

No warranty, express or implied, is made.

Appendix

Soil Boring Location Sketch

Log of Boring Sheets BH-01 through BH-10

BH-07

BH-08

BH-09

BH-06

BH-05

BH-04

BH-03

BH-02

BH-01

C O

U N

T Y

R O

A D

APPROXIMATE

SITE BOUNDARY

BH-10

Project No:

B2101680

Drawn By:

Date Drawn:

Checked By:

Last Modified: 4/13/21

Drawing No:

F:\2021\B2101680\CAD\B2101680.dwg,Geotech,4/13/2021 8:55:18 AM

B2101680

LAO

4/13/21

DB

Burleson Westside Buisness Park

East of Chisholm Trail Parkway, off County Road 1902

Burleson, Texas

Boring Location Sketch braunintertec.com 952.995.2000

Minneapolis, MN 55438 11001 Hampshire Avenue S

SCALE: 1" = 500'

500'250'

N

DENOTES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF

BORING

Elev./ Depth ft

2.0

13.0

25.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

FAT CLAY (CH), with roots, and Limestone fragments, brown, hard LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

24-50/2"

(REF)

50/6"

(REF)

33-50/4"

(REF)

50/0"

(REF)

50/3"

(REF)

50/0.5" - 50/0.25"

(100/0.75")

50/0.25" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.4") qₚ tsf

>4.50

MC

Pa ss

N o.

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st s or

R em ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-01

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.53097 LONGITUDE: -97.42148

DRILLER: SUB-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/16/21 END DATE: 03/16/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

Water not observed while drilling.

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-01 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

6.5

13.0

20.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

LEAN CLAY (CL), dark brown, with trace of roots, with limestone fragments (weathered limestone)

- tan below 4'

LIMESTONE, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

8-22-13 (35)

27-50/0"

(REF)

50/1"

(REF)

50/1"

(REF)

50/0.5" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.6") qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-02

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52203 LONGITUDE: -97.41942

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-02 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

6.0

11.0

16.0

20.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

FAT CLAY (CH), with calcareous deposits, dark brown, hard, trace of roots

LEAN CLAY (CL), with Limestone fragments, reddish brown, very stiff, weak cementation, ferrous seams, trace of ironstone fragments

LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

SH

SH

10-7-10 (17)

49-50/4"

(REF)

33-29-50/2"

(REF)

qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

2.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f

U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-03

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52340 LONGITUDE: -97.41716

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: D. Bien START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-03 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

10.0

13.0

20.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

LEAN CLAY (CL), dark brown, hard, clay with roots, limestone fragments

- tan below 2'

LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

17-22-50/4"

(REF)

14-50/4"

(REF)

12-10-22 (32)

50/2"

(REF)

50/0.75" - 50/0.25" (100/1") qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-04

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.51921 LONGITUDE: -97.41951

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/16/21 END DATE: 03/16/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-04 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

9.0

13.0

25.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

LEAN CLAY (CL), dark brown, hard, clay, limestone fragments, with trace of roots (weathered limestone)

- tan below 3'

LIMESTONE, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

SH

11-11-20 (31)

23-50/4"

(REF)

41-50/2"

(REF)

50/0.5" - 50/0.25"

(100/0.75")

50/0.25" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.4") qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-05

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52072 LONGITUDE: -97.41762

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-05 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

18.0

20.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

LEAN CLAY (CL), dark brown, hard, with calcareous nodules, trace roots

- tan below 3'

- with limestone fragments below 6'

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

SH

8-13-18 (31)

19-22-29 (51)

20-29-37 (66)

50/2"

(REF)

qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-06

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52184 LONGITUDE: -97.41549

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: D. Bien START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-06 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

2.0

6.0

15.0

25.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

FAT CLAY (CH), with Limestone fragments, dark brown, hard, clay with roots LEAN CLAY (CL), tan, stiff, with limestone fragments, with calcareous deposits.

- hard below 4' LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

10-6-7 (13)

18-12-20 (32)

35-50/4"

(REF)

35-50/3"

(REF)

11-50/5"

(REF)

50/0.75" - 50/0.5"

(100/1.25")

50/0.5" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.6") qₚ tsf

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-07

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.51761 LONGITUDE: -97.41766

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/16/21 END DATE: 03/16/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-07 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

4.0

12.0

18.0

20.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

FAT CLAY (CH), with Limestone fragments, dark brown, hard, with trace of roots

LEAN CLAY (CL), tan, hard, with occasional limestone fragments

LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

SH

SH

9-19-20 (39)

11-18-21 (39)

50/4"

(REF)

50/3"

(REF)

qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-08

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.51907 LONGITUDE: -97.41590

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: SUB START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-08 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

6.0

21.0

25.0

30.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

FAT CLAY (CH), dark brown, hard

LEAN CLAY (CL), with calcareous deposits, brown, hard

LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin lean clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

20"

SH

17"

SH

21"

SH

13"

SH

17"

SH

15"

SH

10"

32-50/2"

(REF)

50/0.75" - 50/0.25" (100/1") qₚ tsf

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f

U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

7.6

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-09

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52046 LONGITUDE: -97.41409

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: D. Bien START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-09 Sheet 1 of 1 ft

8.0

16.0

24.0

W at er Le ve l Description of Materials

(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-

USACE EM 1110-1-2908)

LEAN CLAY (CL), tan, hard, with calcareous deposits, with limestone fragments

LIMESTONE, tan, moderately weathered to highly weathered, with occasional thin clay seams

LIMESTONE, gray, unweathered

END OF BORING

Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings

Sa m pl e Blows

(Blows/ft) Recovery

SH

22-15-19 (34)

7-12-22 (34)

15-19-50/3"

(REF)

50/6"

(REF)

33-50/1"

(REF)

50/0.75" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.9")

50/0.25" - 50/0.1"

(100/0.4") qₚ tsf

>4.50

MC

Atterberg Limits

LL

PL

PI

D ry

U ni t W t.

pc f U n.

C om

St r.

ts f

Te st ar ks

LOG OF BORING

See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations

Project Number B2101680 Geotechnical Evaluation Burleson Westside BP Burleson, Texas

BORING: BH-10

LOCATION: See attached sketch

LATITUDE: 32.52482 LONGITUDE: -97.41865

DRILLER: Savage-Max/Robert LOGGED BY: D. Bien START DATE: 03/15/21 END DATE: 03/15/21

SURFACE

ELEVATION: RIG: 55 METHOD: SSA SURFACING: Grass WEATHER: Sunny

B2101680 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:04/22/2021 BH-10 Sheet 1 of 1

Based on Standards ASTM D2487/2488

(Unified Soil Classification System)

Group

Symbol Group NameB

Cu ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D GW Well-graded gravelE

Cu < 4 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D GP Poorly graded gravelE

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelE F G

Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelE F G

Cu ≥ 6 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D SW Well-graded sandI

Cu < 6 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D SP Poorly graded sandI

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandF G I

Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandF G I

CL Lean clayK L M

PI < 4 or plots below "A" lineJ ML SiltK L M

Organic OL

CH Fat clayK L M

MH Elastic siltK L M

Organic OH

PT Peat Highly Organic Soils

Silts and Clays

(Liquid limit less than

50)

Silts and Clays

(Liquid limit 50 or more)

Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor

Inorganic

Inorganic

PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" lineJ

PI plots on or above "A" line

PI plots below "A" line

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and

Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA

Soil Classification

C o ar se

-g ra in e d S o ils m o re t h an r et ai n ed o n

. 2 s ie ve

Fi n e -g ra in e d

S o ils o r m o re p as se s th e

. 2 s ie ve

Sands

(50% or more coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve)

Clean Gravels

(Less than 5% finesC)

Gravels with Fines

(More than 12% finesC)

Clean Sands

(Less than 5% finesH)

Sands with Fines

(More than 12% finesH)

Gravels

(More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve)

Liquid Limit − oven dried

Liquid Limit − not dried <0.75

Organic clay K L M N

Organic silt K L M O

Liquid Limit − oven dried

Liquid Limit − not dried <0.75

Organic clay K L M P

Organic silt K L M Q

Particle Size Identification Boulders.............. over 12" Cobbles................ 3" to 12" Gravel

Coarse............. 3/4" to 3" (19.00 mm to 75.00 mm) Fine................. No. 4 to 3/4" (4.75 mm to 19.00 mm)

Sand Coarse.............. No. 10 to No. 4 (2.00 mm to 4.75 mm) Medium........... No. 40 to No. 10 (0.425 mm to 2.00 mm) Fine.................. No. 200 to No. 40 (0.075 mm to 0.425 mm)

Silt........................ No. 200 (0.075 mm) to .005 mm Clay...................... < .005 mm

Relative ProportionsL, M trace............................. 0 to 5% little.............................. 6 to 14% with.............................. ≥ 15%

Inclusion Thicknesses lens............................... 0 to 1/8" seam............................. 1/8" to 1" layer.............................. over 1"

Apparent Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils Very loose ..................... 0 to 4 BPF Loose ............................ 5 to 10 BPF Medium dense.............. 11 to 30 BPF Dense............................ 31 to 50 BPF Very dense.................... over 50 BPF

A. Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve.

B. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name.

C. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:

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

D. Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = 𝐷30 2 / (𝐷10 𝑥 𝐷60)

E. If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.

F. If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM.

G. If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.

H. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:

SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

I. If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name.

J. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is CL-ML, silty clay.

K. If soil contains 15 to < 30% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant.

L. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name.

M. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name.

N. PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above “A” line.

O. PI < 4 or plots below “A” line.

P. PI plots on or above “A” line.

Q. PI plots below “A” line.

Laboratory Tests DD Dry density, pcf OC Organic content, % LL Liquid limit WD Wet density, pcf qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf PL Plastic limit P200 % Passing #200 sieve MC Moisture content, % PI Plasticity index qU Unconfined compression test, tsf

Consistency of Blows Approximate Unconfined Cohesive Soils Per Foot Compressive Strength Very soft................... 0 to 1 BPF................... < 0.25 tsf Soft........................... 2 to 4 BPF................... 0.25 to 0.5 tsf Medium.................... 5 to 8 BPF .................. 0.5 to 1 tsf Stiff........................... 9 to 15 BPF................. 1 to 2 tsf Very Stiff................... 16 to 30 BPF............... 2 to 4 tsf Hard.......................... over 30 BPF................ > 4 tsf

Drilling Notes:

Blows/N-value: Blows indicate the driving resistance recorded for each 6-inch interval. The reported N-value is the blows per foot recorded by summing the second and third interval in accordance with the Standard Penetration Test, ASTM D1586.

Partial Penetration: If the sampler could not be driven through a full 6-inch interval, the number of blows for that partial penetration is shown as #/x" (i.e. 50/2"). The N-value is reported as "REF" indicating refusal.

Recovery: Indicates the inches of sample recovered from the sampled interval. For a standard penetration test, full recovery is 18", and is 24" for a thinwall/shelby tube sample.

WOH: Indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer and rods alone; driving not required.

WOR: Indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods alone; hammer weight and driving not required.

Water Level: Indicates the water level measured by the drillers either while drilling ( ), at the end of drilling ( ), or at some time after drilling ( ).

Moisture Content:

Dry: Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch.

Moist: Damp but no visible water.

Wet: Visible free water, usually soil is below water table.

3/2019