Maryland State Police MW Studios Barrack J Annapolis Communication Room and Garage 100% Construction Documents (Addendum No.4) DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 1

SECTION 00 0010 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 -- PROJECT INFORMATION

00 0007 - Seals Page 00 0008 - Seals and Signatures 00 0010 - Table of Contents 00 0011 - Maryland Department of General Services Procurement Documents A. Version: Dated 4.28.23 B. State of Maryland Procurement and Contracting documents shall be obtained by each Contractor bidding on this Project through eMaryland Marketplace Advantage; https://procurement.maryland.gov/ C. Division 00 - Procurement and Contracting Documents located on the eMaryland Marketplace Advantage website for this Project are hereby incorporated by reference into these Bid Documents. Procurement and Contracting Documents may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Notice to Bidders - Solicitation Fact Sheet (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

2. Instructions to Bidders For Construction Projects (July 1, 2022) (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

3. General Conditions For Construction Contracts (July 1, 2022) (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

4. Bid/Proposal Affidavit (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

5. Payment of Employee Healthcare Expenses Certification (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

6. Contractor Questionnaire

7. Bid Bond (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

8. Minority Business Enterprise Forms Attachment D (February 5, 2021) (eMaryland Marketplace

Advantage attachment)

9. Veteran-owned Small Business Enterprise (VSBE) Forms Attachment E (September 1, 2022) (eMaryland

Marketplace Advantage attachment)

10. List of Prevailing Wage Rates (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

11. Corporate Diversity Addendum (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

12. Addenda (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

13. List of Drawings (eMaryland Marketplace Advantage attachment)

14. Attachment A - Contract (eMaryland Marketplace attachment)

15. Pre-Bid Conference / Site Visit Information: Refer to: State Finance and Procurement Article Section

14-302(a)(7)(v) and COMAR 21.11.03.09.C.(2)(e).

00 0115 - List of Drawing Sheets 00 3100 - Available Project Information 00 6000 - Forms 00 7346 - Wage Determination Sche

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

DIVISION 01 -- GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 1000 - Summary

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 2

01 2000 - Price and Payment Procedures 01 2100 - Allowances 01 2200 - Unit Prices 01 2500 - Substitution Procedures 01 2501 - Substitution Request Form 01 3000 - Administrative Requirements 01 3001 - Submittal Review and Transmittal 01 3216 - Construction Progress Schedule 01 4000 - Quality Requirements 01 4216 - Definitions 01 4219 - Reference Standards 01 5000 - Temporary Facilities and Controls 01 5213 - Field Offices and Sheds 01 6000 - Product Requirements 01 7000 - Execution and Closeout Requirements 01 7123 - Field Engineering 01 7419 - Construction Waste Management and Disposal 01 7610 - Temporary Protective Coverings 01 7800 - Closeout Submittals 01 7801 - Operation and Maintenance Manual Template 01 7900 - Demonstration and Training

DIVISION 02 -- EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 4100 - Building Demolition

DIVISION 03 -- CONCRETE

03 3000 - Cast-in-Place Concrete

DIVISION 04 -- MASONRY

04 0511 - Masonry Mortaring and Grouting 04 2000 - Unit Masonry

DIVISION 05 -- METALS

05 1200 - Structural Steel 05 2100 - Steel Joists 05 3100 - Steel Deck 05 4000 - Cold-Formed Metal Framing 05 5000 - Metal Fabrications

DIVISION 06 -- WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 1053 - Miscellaneous Rough Carpentry 06 4116 - Plastic-Laminate-Clad Architectural Cabinets 06 6400 - Plastic Paneling

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 3

DIVISION 07 -- THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 1113 - Bituminous Dampproofing 07 1326 - Self-Adhering Sheet Waterproofing 07 2100 - Thermal Insulation 07 2726 - Fluid-Applied Membrane Air-Barriers 07 5423 - Thermoplastic-Polyolefin Roofing (TPO) 07 6200 - Sheet Metal Flashing and Trim 07 7100 - Roof Specialties 07 7200 - Roof Accessories 07 8413 - Penetration Firestopping 07 9200 - Joint Sealants

DIVISION 08 -- OPENINGS

08 1113 - Hollow Metal Doors and Frames 08 3113 - Access Doors And Frames 08 3113.53 - Security Access Doors And Frames 08 3323 - Overhead Coiling Doors 08 3613 - Sectional Doors 08 4113 - Aluminum-Framed Entrances and Storefronts 08 5653 - Security Windows 08 7111 - Door Hardware 08 8000 - Glazing 08 8853 - Security Glazing 08 9119 - Fixed Louvers 08 9200 - Louvered Equipment Enclosures

DIVISION 09 -- FINISHES

09 2216 - Non-Structural Metal Framing 09 2900 - Gypsum Board 09 5113 - Acoustical Panel Ceilings 09 5133 - Acoustical Metal Pan Ceilings 09 6513 - Resilient Base and Accessories 09 6519 - Resilient Tile Flooring 09 6536 - Static-Control Resilient Flooring 09 6723 - Resinous Flooring and Wall Covering 09 8430 - Sound-Absorbing Wall and Ceiling Units 09 9123 - Interior Painting 09 9600 - High-Performance Coatings

DIVISION 10 -- SPECIALTIES

10 1423.13 - Room-Identification Panel Signage 10 2213 - Wire Mesh Partitions

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 4

10 2800 - Toilet, Bath, and Laundry Accessories 10 4416 - Fire Extinguishers 10 5613 - Metal Storage Shelving

DIVISION 11 -- EQUIPMENT

11 1916 - Detention Gun Lockers 11 3013 - Residential Appliances 11 9400 - Dog Run Equipment

DIVISION 12 -- FURNISHINGS

12 3661.19 - Quartz Agglomerate Countertops

DIVISION 13 -- SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 14 -- CONVEYING EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

14 4500 - Heavy Duty Vehicle Lifts

DIVISION 15 -- RESERVED (NOT USED) (FOR MECHANICAL, SEE DIVISIONS 21, 22, AND 23)

DIVISION 16 -- RESERVED (NOT USED) (FOR ELECTRICAL, SEE DIVISIONS 25, 26, 27, 28, AND 29)

DIVISION 17 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 18 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 19 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 20 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 21 -- FIRE SUPPRESSION

DIVISION 22 -- PLUMBING

22 0100 - Basic Plumbing Requirements 22 0200 - Project Closeout Plumbing 22 0500 - Basic Plumbing Materials and Methods 22 0510 - Plumbing Related Work 22 0513 - Electrical Provisions for Plumbing Equipment 22 0514 - Pipe, Tube and Fittings for Plumbing Equipment 22 0515 - Piping Specialties for Plumbing Systems 22 0519 - Meters and Gauges for Plumbing Piping 22 0523 - Valves for Plumbing Piping 22 0529 - Hangers and Supports for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 0548 - Vibration Isolation for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 0553 - Identification for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 0700 - Plumbing Insulation 22 1116 - Domestic Water Piping

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 5

22 1316 - Soil, Waste and Vent Piping 22 1413 - Storm Water Piping 22 1500 - Compressed-Air Systems 22 3000 - Plumbing Equipment 22 4000 - Plumbing Fixtures 22 6300 - Natural Gas Systems

DIVISION 23 -- HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR-CONDITIONING (HVAC)

23 0100 - Basic HVAC Requirements 23 0200 - Project Closeout HVAC 23 0500 - Basic HVAC Materials and Methods 23 0510 - HVAC Related Work 23 0513 - Electrical Provisions for HVAC Equipment 23 0529 - Hangers and Supports for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 0548 - Vibration Isolation for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 0553 - Identification for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 0593 - Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing for HVAC 23 0700 - HVAC Insulation 23 0800 - Commissioning of HVAC Systems 23 0900 - Automatic Control Systems (Electric-Electronic) 23 2300 - Refrigerant Piping 23 3113 - Low Pressure Ductwork 23 3300 - Duct Accessories 23 3400 - Fans 23 3500 - Special Fans 23 3700 - Air Outlets and Inlets 23 7413 - Packaged Rooftop Air Handling Units 23 8119 - Split Systems Air Conditioning Units 23 8120 - Variable Refrigerant Flow Systems 23 8200 - Heating and Cooling Terminal Units

DIVISION 24 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 25 -- INTEGRATED AUTOMATION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 26 -- ELECTRICAL

26 0100 - Basic Electrical Materials and Methods 26 0200 - Project Closeout Electrical 26 0501 - Inspections, Testing and Start-up 26 0519 - Wires and Cables 26 0526 - Grounding 26 0529 - Supporting Devices 26 0533 - Raceways 26 0534 - Boxes, Fittings and Cabinets

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 6

26 0543 - Underground Electrical Structures 26 0573 - Coordination Study 26 0943 - Lighting Control Systems 26 2416 - Panelboards 26 2726 - Wiring Devices 26 2736 - Electrical Connections 26 2816 - Disconnect, Switches and Contactors 26 2913 - Motor Controllers

26 3353 - UPS

26 4314 - External SPD 26 5100 - Lighting Fixtures 26 5720 - Telephone and Data Systems Support

DIVISION 27 -- COMMUNICATIONS

27 0000 - General Communications Provisions 27 0100 - Common Work Results for Communications 27 0200 - Communications Equipment Room Fittings 27 0536 - Cable Trays for Communications Systems 27 4100 - AudioVisual Systems 27 5000 - Data, Voice and Video Systems 27 5200 - Grounding and Bonding for Communications 27 5800 - Conduit and Backboxes for Communications Systems 27 6000 - Telephone and CATV Utility Service Provisions

DIVISION 28 -- ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 0500 - Common Work Results for Electronic Safety and Security Systems 28 2300 - Security Camera Systems 28 3111 - Fire Dertection and Alarm System 28 4000 - Access Control and Alarm System 28 5200 - Grounding and Bonding for Electronic Safety and Security Systems 28 5800 - Conduit and Backboxes for Electronic Safety and Security Systems

DIVISION 29 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 30 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 31 -- EARTHWORK (NOT USED)

31 1000 - Site Clearing 31 2000 - Earth Moving 31 5000 - Excavation Support and Protection

DIVISION 32 -- EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS (NOT USED)

32 1216 - Asphalt Paving 32 1313 - Concrete Paving

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 7

32 1373 - Concrete Paving Joint Sealants 32 3113 - Chain Link Fences and Gates 32 9200 - Turf and Grasses 32 9300 - Plants

DIVISION 33 -- UTILITIES (NOT USED)

33 0500 - Common Work Results for Utilities 33 1415 - Site Water Distribution Piping 33 4200 - Stormwater Conveyance

DIVISION 34 -- TRANSPORTATION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 35 -- WATERWAY AND MARINE CONSTRUCTION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 36 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 37 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 38 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 39 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 40 -- PROCESS INTEGRATION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 41 -- MATERIAL PROCESSING AND HANDLING EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

DIVISION 42 -- PROCESS HEATING, COOLING, AND DRYING EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

DIVISION 43 -- PROCESS GAS AND LIQUID HANDLING, PURIFICATION AND STORAGE EQUIPMENT (NOT

USED)

DIVISION 44 -- POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

DIVISION 45 -- INDUSTRY-SPECIFIC MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

DIVISION 46 -- WATER AND WASTEWATER EQUIPMENT (NOT USED)

DIVISION 47 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

DIVISION 48 -- ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION (NOT USED)

DIVISION 49 -- RESERVED (NOT USED)

END OF SECTION 00 0010

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Table of Contents 00 0010 - 8

This page intentionally left blank

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Available Project Information 00 3100 - 1

SECTION 00 3100 - AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO BIDDERS

A. Certain information relating to existing surface and subsurface conditions and structures is available to Bidders for Bidders' convenience and are intended to supplement rather than serve in lieu of Bidders' own investigations. The information available shall not be a warranty or guarantee of existing conditions. The information available will not be part of the Contract Documents.

1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

A. Geotechnical Report: Entitled BARACK J MARYLAND STATE POLICE 610 TAYLOR AVE. ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 KIM PROJECT NO. G24012, dated May 9, 2024 prepared by Kim Engineering, Inc. 3916 Vero Road, Suite K, Baltimore, MD 21127 .

1. A copy of the original report is available for viewing as appended to this document.

2. The opinions expressed in this report are those of a geotechnical engineer and represent interpretations of subsoil conditions, tests, and results of analyses conducted by a geotechnical engineer. Owner is not responsible for interpretations or conclusions drawn from the data.

3. Any party using information described in the geotechnical report shall make additional test borings and conduct other exploratory operations that may be required to determine the character of subsurface materials that may be encountered.

4. The recommendations described shall not be construed as a requirement of this Contract, unless specifically referenced in Contract Documents.

5. Because subsurface conditions indicated by the soil borings are a sampling in relation to the entire construction area, and for other reasons, the Owner, the Architect, the Architect's consultants, and the firm reporting the subsurface conditions do not warranty the conditions below the depths of the borings or that the strata logged from the borings are necessarily typical of the entire site. Any party using the information described in the soil borings and geotechnical report shall accept full responsibility for its use.

1.3 PERMITS

A. General Contractor shall be responsible for tracking the expiration of all permits during the course of construction up to project closeout unless otherwise indicated. General Contractor shall notify in writing the Architect and the Owner a minimum of 60 calendar days prior to the expiration of any permit. The General Contractor shall be responsible for any/all costs incurred as a result of failing to notify the Architect and the Owner prior to the 60 calendar day deadline for notification.

B. The Architect/Owner has applied for the following permits:

1. Site work and GradingPermit.

a. Status: Approved

2. General Building Permit.

a. Status: Approved

DGS Project No.: PJ-610-230-001 March 5, 2026 (August 7, 2026)

Available Project Information 00 3100 - 2

C. The General Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining and paying for all other required permits including but not limited to all trade permits. Obtainment of permits includes but is not limited to gathering, producing, and submitting all documentation and information required by the AHJ for any/all permits.

PART 2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED)

PART 3 EXECUTION (NOT USED)

END OF SECTION 00 3100

GEOTECHNICAL

ENGINEERING

REPORT

BARACK J MARYLAND STATE POLICE

610 TAYLOR AVE.

ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401

KIM PROJECT NO. G24012 PREPARED FOR

MANNS WOODWARD STUDIOS

10839 PHILADELPHIA ROAD

WHITE MARSH, MD 21162

PREPARED BY

KIM ENGINEERING, INC.

3916 VERO ROAD, SUITE K

BALTIMORE, MD 21127

WWW.KIMENGINEERING.COM

May 9, 2024

Lindsey Kiefer Manns Woodward Studios 10839 Philadelphia Road White Marsh, MD 21162

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services Barrack J Maryland State Police Annapolis, Maryland KIM Project No. G24012

Dear Ms. Kiefer, Kim Engineering Inc. (KIM) is pleased to submit a copy of our report for the above-referenced project. This investigation was conducted in accordance with our agreement dated February 19, 2024.

Services performed include the drilling of five (5) structural Standard Penetration Test

(SPT) soil borings, including three (3) stormwater management (SWM) facilities borings and accompanying continuous flight auger infiltration test borings, field infiltration testing, laboratory testing, and preparation of this geotechnical engineering investigation report. Our geotechnical report includes the following:

• Reviewed available geologic and subsurface information relative to the project site.

• An evaluation of the project site's estimated subsurface soil and groundwater conditions.

• Recommendations for allowable soil bearing capacity for foundation design.

• Recommendations for subgrade preparations for concrete slab-on-grade.

• Stormwater management facility infiltration feasibility recommendations.

• Recommendation for pavement design.

• Seismic site classification information.

• Requirements for backfill and compaction, and subgrade preparation.

• Comments on geotechnical aspects of construction that were readily apparent at the time of, in the area of, and to the depth of the investigation.

Services with respect to surveying for line and grade, specific dewatering recommendations, environmental matters, temporary slopes, retaining walls, seepage analysis, slope stability, erosion control, cost or quantity estimates, plans, specifications, and construction observation and testing were not included in the scope of services.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you for this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact either of the undersigned.

Very truly yours, KIM ENGINEERING, INC.

Kamal Bhusal Project Manager

Tom Labuda, PE, PG Principal Engineer

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT

THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND

THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER

THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, LICENSE NO.:PE 42702

EXPIRATION DATE: 10-12-2024.

Geotechnical Engineering Services

Annapolis, Maryland

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

3.1 Test Boring

3.2 Infiltration Testing

4.0 GEOLOGY

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 General Stratification

5.2 Groundwater

6.0 SOIL GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

7.1 Foundation Design Consideration

7.1.1 Conventional Spread Footings

7.1.2 Footing Sizing and Subgrade Inspection

7.1.3 Settlement

7.1.4 Surface Drainage

7.2 Ground Bearing Floor Slab

7.3 Seismic Site Coefficient

7.4 Below Grade Wall/ Retaining Wall

7.5 Stormwater Management

7.6 Pavement Construction

7.6.1 Pavement Design

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 General

8.2 Site and Subgrade Preparation

8.3 Fill Material and Compaction

8.4 Groundwater Control and Site Drainage

8.5 Inspection of Subgrades

8.6 Temporary Excavations

Annapolis, Maryland

9.0 LIMITATIONS

APPENDIX A

Site Location Plan Boring Location Plan

APPENDIX B

Subsurface Investigation Identification of Soil

Soil Test Boring Logs Infiltration Test Results

APPENDIX C

Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results

Natural Moisture Contents Particle Size Distribution

Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit Reports USDA Soil Classification Modified Proctor Test Results California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test Results

APPENDIX D

Seismic Site Classification

Annapolis, Maryland

1.0 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following is a summary of our conclusions and recommendations:

1. The subsurface investigation within the proposed construction areas generally indicates existing fill, up to about 2.5 feet thick, consisting of Silty Sand and Clayey Sand in stratum A present in all borings except of SWM-3. Fill is underlain by naturally occurring soils consisting of Silty SAND (SM), Clayey SAND (SC) and Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) in stratum B.

2. Foundation recommendations are presented in section 7.1 of this report.

3. Lateral earth pressures and soil parameters for below grade wall design recommendations are included in Section 7.4 of this report.

4. The in-situ infiltration testing was performed at the proposed stormwater management facilities. The test results are summarized in section 7.5 of this report.

5. Pavement can be supported on the natural soils of Stratum B or new compacted fill over tested and approved subgrade. The recommended pavement section is presented in section 7.6 of this report.

6. Variations in soil conditions may be encountered during construction. Determination of such variations will permit correlation between the subsurface exploration data of this report and actual conditions encountered during construction and verification of conformance with the plans and specifications. We recommend that Kim Engineering, Inc. be retained to perform professional observations of foundation subgrades.

This report is based on information provided to us on the proposed construction. If the project characteristics are changed from those indicated herein, our recommendations may require modifications. Please advise us of any changes to the proposed construction.

We recommend that the project specifications include the following statement:

"A geotechnical report has been prepared for this project by Kim Engineering, Inc. and is available to prospective bidders and/or contractors for informational purposes only. The report has been prepared for design purposes only and may not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid for construction. Contractors wishing copies of this report may secure them from Kim Engineering Inc. at a nominal charge with the understanding that its scope is limited solely to generalized design considerations."

We have prepared this report in accordance with contemporary geotechnical engineering practices and make no warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the professional services provided under the terms of our agreement and included in this report.

Annapolis, Maryland

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The project site is located at 610 Taylor Avenue in Annapolis, Maryland. The site is bordered to the northwest by Taylor Avenue, to the northeast by Ridgely Avenue, to the southeast by the

Maryland State Archives building, and to the southwest by Rowe Boulevard and wooded areas.

According to the provided site plan, the topography of the site slopes towards north and south side from the middle of the proposed site, with elevations ranging from EL 36 feet (ft) to EL 31 ft towards north and elevations ranging from EL 36 ft to EL 28 ft towards south. The site location plan is appended in Drawing No. 1 in Appendix A.

Based on the site plan and information provided to us, the proposed construction will consist of a new single-story garage building, and paved parking lots. The proposed building will be 5,000 square feet, a single-story slab on grade garage structure replacing the existing structure. As per the provided plan the existing floor elevation is at (±)29 feet. We further assume the new garage building’s floor elevation will be the same as the existing building floor elevation.

The structural loads for the proposed building were not provided at the time of this report. To accommodate the new construction, stormwater management (SWM) will be incorporated into the design.

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

3.1 Test Boring

In order to evaluate the subsurface conditions of the site, KIM performed two (2) SPT borings for the new building. Three (3) SPT borings with three (3) accompanying continuous flight auger infiltration test borings were completed for the proposed SWM facilities. The approximate location of the test borings is depicted on the attached Drawing No. 2 in Appendix A (Boring

Location Plan).

The SPT borings for the proposed facility were drilled to predetermined depths ranging from 10

ft. to 25 ft. below the existing grade. The table below summarizes the test boring schedule.

Annapolis, Maryland

Table 1: Summary of Test Borings

Boring Identification

Proposed Structure

Depth of Boring (ft)

Existing Ground Elevation (ft)

Infiltration Test Depths (ft)

B-1 Buildings

25 31 --

B-2 25 36 --

SWM-1 Stormwater Facilities

(SWM)

10.0 28 5

SWM-1 10.0 28 5

SWM-3 10.0 28 5

The test borings were accomplished using a D-50 track mounted drill rig. The exploration program was performed in the field from April 11, 2024. Hollow-stem augers were advanced to pre-selected depths and representative soil samples were recovered with a standard split-spoon sampler in general accordance with ASTM D-1586. Disturbed representative soil samples were recovered while performing the Standard Penetration Test. This test (ASTM D-1586) consists of a 140-pound (lb) hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the standard split spoon sampler (2-inch O.D., 1-3/8-inch I.D.) a distance of 12 inches after an initial set of 6 inches to ensure the sampler is in undisturbed material, is recorded as the Standard

Penetration Resistance (N-Value) of the soil.

The N-value, for the majority of subsurface situations, provides a generalized indication of in-situ soil conditions. N-values can be used to provide a qualitative indication of the in-place relative density of granular soils. Similarly, N-values provide an indication of consistency for cohesive soils.

Representative portions of the split-spoon soil samples obtained throughout the exploration program were placed in glass jars and transported to our laboratory for further evaluation and visual classification per the visual-manual identification procedure (ASTM D-2488) and the

Unified Soil Classification System. The soil descriptions and classifications discussed in this report and shown on the attached boring logs are based on visual observation and as previously noted, should be considered approximate.

Soil samples recovered for this project will be stored at Kim Engineering, Inc. for thirty (30) days from the date of this report. After thirty (30) days, the samples will be discarded unless prior notification for an alternate disposition is provided to us in writing.

3.2 Infiltration Testing

Three (3) field infiltration tests were performed adjacent to the test borings SWM-1, SWM-2, and

SWM-3.

Annapolis, Maryland

A continuous flight auger boring was offset 5 feet from the test boring and extended to the test depth of 5 ft. Then, the center plug was removed, and PVC pipe was installed in the borehole.

The pipe was gently tapped to seat it into the base of the boring. The annular space was backfilled with soil material. Subsequent to the installation, a minimum 24-inch head of water was added to the PVC pipe at completion of the installation to satisfy the presoak criterium. After the 24-hour presoak period, KIM engineer returned to the site to conduct in-situ infiltration testing at the location. The field infiltration test was performed in general accordance with the stipulations of the 2000 Maryland Stormwater Design Manual, Appendix D.1.

4.0 GEOLOGY

The site is located within the

Atlantic Coastal Plain

Physiographic Province.

The Coastal Plain Province is underlain by a series of southeasterly dipping layers of relatively unconsolidated sand and clay deposits with lesser amounts of gravel.

According to the “Geologic

Map of the South River

Quadrangle and Portions of the Annapolis Quadrangle, by John D. Glaser (2002)” the project site is underlain mainly by the Aquia and Brightseat Formations of Paleocene age

(TaTbr) described as:

“Most of the Aquia consists of well-sorted, medium-grained sand, always glauconitic to some degree, but rarely totaling more than 50 percent of the sediment. Some beds fine or coarse-grained. Color dark gray-green to olive-green in unweathered sand, "salt and pepper" sand where moderately weathered, and rusty-brown with abundant limonite crusts where deeply-weathered. Bedding massive and thick-bedded with abundant burrow- mottling. Highly fossiliferous in places with large oysters and Turritella dominant.

Most of the Brightscat consists of predominantly fine-grained, poorly sorted sand with as much as 25 percent of glauconite, but generally much less. Color dark-gray to dark greenish-gray where unweathered;

pale-gray to tan in weathered exposures. In places, the basal Brightseat contains some medium to coarse sand with granules, small pebbles, phosphatic clasts, and fish teeth; molluscan ghosts are uncommon.”

Annapolis, Maryland

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 General Stratification

The subsurface conditions discussed below and those shown on the boring logs represent an estimate of the subsurface conditions based on an interpretation of the boring data using geotechnical engineering judgment. Transitions between different soil strata are usually less distinct than those shown on the boring logs. Although individual test borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at the boring locations on the dates shown, they are not necessarily indicative of subsurface conditions at other locations or at other times.

More comprehensive descriptions of the materials encountered are included in the attached test boring logs. The subsurface investigation indicated that the following generalized strata underlie the site in the areas and to the depths investigated.

Ground Cover:

Borings indicated three (3) to four (4) inches of topsoil beneath the ground surface at the boring location B-1 and B-2. Six (6) inches of Asphalt pavement was encountered in all other borings, SWM-1 to SWM-3.

Stratum A (Existing Fill):

Existing Fill was encountered below the ground cover at test boring locations B-1, B-2, SWM-1 and SWM-2. The fill material extended to depths on the order of 2.5 feet and generally consisted of Clayey SAND and Silty SAND with organics. The SPT N-values in the existing fill ranged from 3 to 13 blows per foot (bpf).

Stratum B (Aqua and Brightseat Formation):

Coastal Plain deposited soil of Aqua and Brightseat formations were encountered below the ground cover or fill at the test boring locations. The soil generally consisted of Silty SAND (SM), Clayey SAND (SC), and Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL). The SPT N-Values obtained in the fine-grained soils ranged from 5 to 11 blows per foot (bpf), indicating medium stiff to stiff consistencies. The

SPT N-values in coarse-grained soils ranged from 3 to 58 blows per foot (bpf), indicating very loose to very dense relative densities.

The soil symbols indicated in the stratum descriptions and on the boring logs represent the

Unified Soil Classification (ASTM D-2488) group symbols and are based primarily on visual observation of the specimens recovered. Criteria for visual-manual classification of soil samples are given in Appendix B of this report.

Annapolis, Maryland

5.2 Groundwater

Groundwater level was recorded during drilling or at the completion of the drilling and 24 hours after drilling. Water levels are for the time noted on the boring logs.

The groundwater level encountered at these times is presented in the table below.

Table 2: Summary of Groundwater Readings

Identification

Groundwater during drilling (ft)

Groundwater at End of drilling (ft)

Groundwater 24 hrs.

after drilling (ft)

Depth Elevation Depth Elevation Depth Elevation

B-1 13.5 17.5 14.0 17.0 12.2 18.8

B-2 18.5 17.5 20.2 15.8 17.5 18.5

SWM-1 9 19 Dry -- 9.4 18.6

SWM-2 Dry -- Dry -- 9.6 18.5

SWM-3 Dry -- Dry -- 9.7 18.3

Groundwater level readings are considered to be reliable indication of the water levels at the time indicated. However, fluctuations of groundwater levels as well as perched water may be expected with variations in precipitation, evaporation, surface runoff, and related factors.

6.0 SOIL GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING

Geotechnical laboratory testing was performed on jar samples obtained from selected test borings for soil classification, plasticity index, moisture content and modified proctor. Tests were performed in accordance with their associated ASTM and USDA Standards. The test results are presented in Appendix C. The associated ASTM methods are presented below:

ASTM

Method

Description

D-2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass

D-422 Standard Test Method for Particle-Analysis (Grain Size) D-4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of

Soils D-698 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using

Standard Effort

Annapolis, Maryland

The table below summarizes the laboratory test results:

Table 3: Summary of Laboratory Test Results:

Boring Identification

Sample No.

Depths (ft)

Percent Fines

(-#200)

Liquid Limit

(LL)

Plasticity Index

(PI)

Natural Moisture

USCS

B-2 S-6 13.5-15.0 23.9 31 12 13.1 SC

SWM-1 S-3 5.0-6.5 36.6 24 8 15.0 SC

SWM-2 S-5 5.0-6.5 18.1 NV NP 8.7 SM

SWM-2 Bulk 0.0-5.0 28.7 28 13 10.2 SC

SWM-3 S-3 5.0-6.5 60.9 35 17 13.1 CL

USCS Soil classification as determined by the Unified Soil Classification System.

LL: Liquid limit: the moisture percentage at which soil behavior transitions from plastic to liquid.

PI:

Plastic index: The difference between the plastic and liquid limits (PI = LL – PL), indicates the range of moisture that the soil acts in a plastic manner. The plastic limit is defined as the minimum moisture percentage at which a soil behaves in a plastic manner.

NP

NV

Non-Plastic.

Non-Viscous

Table 4: Summary of Laboratory Test Results – USDA

No.

Sample

No.

Depths

(ft)

Percentage from Material Passing

#10 Sieve

USDA

Classification Sand Silt Clay

SWM-1 S-3 5.0-6.5 63.4 16.6 20.0 Sandy Clay Loam

SWM-2 S-3 5.0-6.5 86.0 9.1 4.9 Loamy Sand

SWM-3 S-3 5.0-6.5 42.9 18.5 38.6 Clay Loam

Table 5: Summary of Laboratory Test Results- Standard Proctor

Boring No. Sample No. Depths (ft) Maximum

Dry Density (pcf)

Optimum Moisture (%) CBR (%)

SWM-2 Bulk 0.0-5.0 130.7 10.2 64.8

Annapolis, Maryland

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

The following evaluations and recommendations are based on our observations at the site, interpretation of the field data obtained during this exploration, and our experience with similar subsurface conditions and projects. Soil penetration data have been used to estimate an allowable bearing pressure using established correlations. Subsurface conditions in unexplored locations may vary from those encountered.

Determination of an appropriate foundation system for a given structure is dependent on the proposed structural loads, soil conditions, and construction constraints such as proximity to other structures, etc. Subsurface exploration aids the geotechnical engineer in determining the soil stratum appropriate for structural support. This determination includes considerations with regard to both allowable bearing pressure and compressibility of the soil strata. In addition, since the method of construction greatly affects the soils intended for structural support, consideration must be given to the implementation of suitable methods of site preparation, fill compaction and other aspects of construction. Once the architectural and structural designs are finalized, KIM should review copies of the plans and specifications to revise or expand our recommendations.

7.1 Foundation Design Consideration

Soil profiles encountered across the proposed new construction site were defined by a thin layer of existing fill in Stratum A underlain by naturally occurring loose to very dense granular soils and very soft to stiff cohesive soils of Stratum B. We understand that the project includes a construction of 5000 square feet, a single-story slab on grade garage structure replacing the existing structure. According to the provided plan, the building may require up to 7 feet of excavation.

Based on subsurface exploration and our experience with similar subsurface conditions and projects, the following foundation recommendation is proposed for the design.

7.1.1 Conventional Spread Footings

Based on the soil borings and our experience with similar construction the proposed garage building can be supported on shallow spread footings bearing directly on the existing firm and approved natural soils of Stratum B or new compacted and tested structural fill. Spread footings supported on firm natural soils or new compacted structural fill can be designed for an allowable net bearing pressure of 2,000 psf.

Annapolis, Maryland

Any existing fill should be removed, and exposed subgrade thoroughly proof rolled using a 20-ton loaded dump truck. Soft and yielding soils including organic layers should be undercut prior to placement of new compacted structural fill. This process consists of removal of surficial topsoil, fill, and soft soil layer and then compacting the exposed soil to at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 prior to placement of a new structural fill as per the recommendations provided in Section 8.3 of this report and at the discretion of a Geotechnical Engineer.

7.1.2 Footing Sizing and Subgrade Inspection

Sizing and other aspects of the design of the foundation should be accomplished by the structural engineer for the project. To reduce the possibility of localized shear failures, strip footings should be a minimum of 18 inches wide, while column footings should be a minimum of 36 inches square. Exterior footing subgrade foundation should be at least 30 inches below the final exterior grade for frost protection. Variable bearing conditions may occur at the project site; therefore, we recommend that the footings be properly reinforced to provide them with greater bending capacity.

Guidelines for the estimated footing subgrade are provided for design purposes only. Prior to the placement of reinforcement and concrete, the bases of the footing excavations should be observed, tested, and approved by a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer to verify that soil or aggregated conditions at each footing location are suitable for the design bearing pressure. If loose or unsuitable soils are encountered at planned subgrade levels for any footing, the unsuitable soils should be undercut down to suitable bearing materials. The footing can then be directly supported on competent suitable soils at a greater depth or, alternatively, the design footing bearing level can be restored through placement of lean concrete or compacted aggregate.

7.1.3 Settlement

Based on the boring data and assumed light structural loads, we estimate that total settlements for the conventional shallow foundations should not exceed one inch with differential settlements expected to be less than half the total settlement. The magnitude of differential settlements will be influenced by the distribution of loads and the variability of underlying materials. These settlement values are based on our engineering experience with soils in the general area and assumed structural loading. Quality control during construction is considered to be extreme importance to ensure that subsequent settlements, following the construction process, are kept to a minimum.

Annapolis, Maryland

7.1.4 Surface Drainage

Final grading design must promote drainage away from the proposed building to reduce variations in bearing soil moisture content that might result in expansion or contraction and could cause damage to the foundation. It is recommended that the structural plans contain a note to direct that shallow backfill of the foundations receive some degree of mechanical compactive effort to minimize the surficial permeability of these soils. It would also be advisable that all downspouts be routed into a stormwater management system or discharged at least 10 feet away from the foundation line. We highly recommend that the suitability of subgrade soils should be evaluated by a representative of our firm during the construction phase.

7.2 Ground Bearing Floor Slab

Based on the subsurface conditions, floor slab-on-grade for the new building can be supported by approved competent existing site natural soils or new compacted engineered fill. We do not recommend supporting the concrete slab-on-grade on existing fill. The presence of soft, loose, and organic compressive matter in the fill will cause differential settlement and damage to the concrete surface.

We recommend a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for approved subgrades (k value considers a 1-ft by 1-ft square plate). A minimum 6-inch-thick layer of free-draining aggregate is recommended to be placed below the floor slab to serve as a capillary moisture barrier. A polyethylene membrane or similar vapor barrier should be placed over the aggregate to prevent concrete contamination. Proper mix designs, placement methods, and curing methods must be utilized to reduce the potential for concrete shrinkage issues and curling that are sometimes associated with the use of a vapor barrier. Control joints should be provided to control shrinkage cracks of the concrete floor system.

Slab subgrades are often disturbed after final grading due to ongoing construction activities, utility installations, and weather conditions. We recommend that subgrades that become saturated or lose their support capabilities be removed and replaced with new selected compacted engineered fill.

7.3 Seismic Site Coefficient

We are providing a Seismic Site Class Definition per the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) and American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE 7-16 guidance.

Annapolis, Maryland

Our scope of services did not include a seismic conditions survey to determine site-specific

(accurate) shear wave velocity information. IBC 2018 provides a methodology for interpretation of Standard Penetration Test resistance values (N-values) to determine a Site Class Definition.

However, this method requires averaging N- values over the top 100 feet of the subsurface profile, a depth well in excess of the depths of the test borings.

Based on the subsurface data presently obtained and in general accordance with the 2018 IBC, it appears reasonable to assign the site a Classification “D”.

The U.S. Seismic Design Map Web Application available through the USGS and ASCE websites provides hazard curves, uniform hazard response spectra, and design parameters. These parameters were developed using two percent probability of exceedance (PE) in 50 years. The mapped spectral response acceleration values for the project site are provided in table below.

Table 6: Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Values

Description Period (Sec) Sa

Mapped Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration (Ss) 0.2 0.128

Mapped 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration (S1) 1.0 0.042

For Site Class D, with the above-indicated mapped spectral acceleration values and risk category

II, the calculated site coefficient values and the maximum and design spectral response acceleration values are provided in the table below.

Table 7: Site Coefficients, and Design Spectral Response Acceleration

Site Coefficient (Fa) 1.6

Site Coefficient (Fv) 2.4

Short Period, Maximum Spectral Response Acceleration (SMS) 0.205

1.0 Second Period, Maximum Spectral Response Acceleration (SM1) 0.101

Short Period, Design Spectral Response Acceleration (SDS) 0.137

1.0 Second Period, Design Spectral Response Acceleration (SD1) 0.067

Based on our subsurface investigation and engineering judgement, the proposed site is not susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake magnitude provided by the code.

Annapolis, Maryland

7.4 Below Grade Wall/ Retaining Wall

Below-grade walls or retaining walls associated with the project should be designed to withstand lateral earth pressures from the backfill and supported soils. Additionally, the walls should be designed to resist the lateral components of surcharge loads occurring within a zone defined by a plane extending up at a 45-degree angle from the base of the wall.

We recommend that the buildup of hydrostatic pressures be precluded by specifying a free-draining fill material immediately adjacent to below-grade walls, with a gravity-driven subdrainage system at the base of the walls.

Earth pressures on walls below grade are influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and characteristics of the materials being restrained. The most common conditions assumed for earth retaining wall design are the active and at-rest conditions. Active conditions apply to relatively flexible earth retention structures, such as free-standing walls that require rotation and movement to mobilize soil shear strength without affecting their function. Basement walls are rigidly constrained and should be designed utilizing at-rest conditions. A passive condition also exists to represent the maximum possible pressure that may be developed by soils resisting the forces exerted by the active or at-rest conditions. The magnitude of movement required to completely mobilize the passive forces is often beyond aesthetic and/or structural design tolerances in addition to uncertainties during foundation construction, use of passive pressure should be used cautiously, if at all, and be assigned a factor of safety of no less than two (FS>2).

To prevent unforeseen increases in lateral loading, large vehicular and heavy excavation equipment should not operate within a lateral distance equal to the wall height or five (5) feet, whichever is greater. Grading during site development and construction should be maintained to meet the intent of the final design, thus preventing channeled drainage toward partially complete retaining wall structures that could result in delay or damage. This may require diversion dikes, level spreaders, or berms that are not depicted on the erosion and sediment control plan. It is highly recommended that these changes be discussed with the civil design firm to verify that they will not overload storm water management facilities.

The underlying table provides typical parameters for AASHTO #57 crushed stone as well as the encountered on-site soils and import material that might be utilized for the design of retaining structures/walls. The values assigned to the latter are somewhat conservative due to the variable composition of representative samples. Suitable on-site soils would include silty sand (SM) after verification of natural moisture content.

Annapolis, Maryland

Table 8: Below-Grade Wall Design Parameters

Earth Pressure Condition AASHTO #57 On-Site Soils 1

Active (KA) 0.22 0.36

At-Rest (KO) 0.36 0.53

Passive (KP) 4.60 2.88

Moist Unit Weight () 110 pcf 120 pcf

Angle of Internal Friction () 40 28

Sliding Coefficient (soil-concrete) 0.55 0.35

Note 1: Classified as Silty Sand (“SM”), or more granular.

Use of the parameters assumes that a full-height drainage system has been installed and maintained during construction and throughout the life of the structure. The system should conform to section 1805 of the IBC relating to damp-proofing as groundwater is in excess of five

(5) feet below the potential foundation elevation assumed for the project.

7.5 Stormwater Management

Based on the 2000 Maryland Stormwater Design Manual, Appendix D.1, a minimum field infiltration rate of 0.52 inches per hour is required for infiltration practices. Lower infiltration rates preclude the use of infiltration practices. Infiltration practices are also precluded if groundwater or bedrock are encountered within four feet of the bottom of the proposed facility.

No bedrock was encountered at the site at depths of investigation. Groundwater 24-hour level readings are provided in Table 2.

The infiltration test result for the location tested is included in Appendix B. Estimated infiltration rates, USDA Classification and hydrologic soil groups are presented in table below.

Table 9: Estimated Infiltration Rate

Boring No.

Test Depth

(ft)

In-situ Infiltration Rate (in/hr)

USDA Soil Classification

USDA

Recommended

Infiltration Rate (in/hr)

Hydrologic Soil

Grouping

SWM-1 5.0 19.08 Sandy Clay Loam 0.17 C

SWM-2 5.0 24.00 Loamy Sand 2.41 A

SWM-3 5.0 3.96 Clay Loam 0.09 D

Annapolis, Maryland

For design purposes, we recommend using the value of the last hour field infiltration rate and minimum USDA infiltration rate associated with the textural classification.

The field investigation indicates that infiltration practices should be feasible at the test depth for boring location SWM-2 based on the observed field infiltration rate, USDA soil classification, and absence of groundwater within 4 feet of the proposed bottom of the SWM facility. However, the infiltration practices may not be feasible at the test depths at the boring locations SWM-1 and

SWM-3 based on USDA soil classification.

7.6 Pavement Construction

Our analysis and design for the corresponding asphalt pavement sections was completed in accordance with the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993. We utilized a design California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of 64.8 based on the laboratory test results obtained from the representative bulk samples collected at the soil boring location B-1. We have utilized the assumed ADT based on our engineering practices, and previous pavement design experiences.

7.6.1 Pavement Design

Light Duty Flexible Pavement

Using CBR value of 64.8, and assuming all the traffic information as per our experience, the following light duty pavement cross sections are recommended for those areas which servs only the lightly loaded vehicles:

• 1.5-inch Asphaltic Concrete Surface/Wearing Course (9.5 mm Super Pave)

• 3-inch Asphaltic Concrete Base Course (19.0 mm Super Pave)

• 6-inch Subbase, Graded Aggregate Base (GAB)

Heavy Duty Flexible Pavement

The above recommended light duty pavement is not suitable for heavily loaded vehicles like fire trucks. Using CBR value of 64.8, and assuming the traffic information as per our experience for the heavily loaded vehicles (H-25 loading), the following heavy duty pavement cross sections are recommended:

• 2-inch Asphaltic Concrete Surface/Wearing Course (9.5 mm Super Pave)

• 4-inch Asphaltic Concrete Base Course (19.0 mm Super Pave)

• 8-inch Subbase, Graded Aggregate Base (GAB)

Annapolis, Maryland

Rigid Pavement

It is also our opinion that the suggested flexible pavement section may not be suitable for the support of heavy, concentrated wheel loads. Therefore, we recommend that rigid Portland cement concrete pavement sections recommended below should be provided for the fire truck storage areas:

• 7-inch Reinforced Concrete Pavement

• 6-inch Subbase, Graded Aggregate Base (GAB)

The Portland cement concrete pavement section should consist of air-entrained Portland cement concrete having a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi).

For the rigid pavement, the Portland cement concrete slab area should be large enough to support the H-25 loading truck.

The pavement sections provided above have been developed for post construction traffic conditions. Since the supportive qualities of these pavement sections for their respective uses are reliant…