Addendum One .pdf

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

DEPARTMENT FOR FACILITIES AND SUPPORT SERVICES

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

INVITATION TO BID NO: RFB-168-25

FOR: Maintenance Facility & Salt Structure Whitley County- District 11 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Williamsburg, Kentucky

DATE: January 30, 2025

RFB-785-2500000395

ADDENDUM NO. One (1)

BIDDER SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES AS SAME SHALL BECOME BINDING

UPON THE CONTRACT TO BE ISSUED IN RESPONSE TO THIS INVITATION TO BID.

Item 1: Refer to addendum to be distributed by Lynn Imaging for all additions, deletions, and/or changes to specifications and/or drawings.

END OF ADDENDUM

Invitation to Bid No. RFB-168-25 For: Maintenance Facility & Salt Structure Whitley County- District 11 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

Susan Ward, Statewide Procurement Analyst II Division of Engineering and Contract Administration

Addendum 01

K Y T C – C o n s t r u c t W h i t l e y C o u n t y M a i n t e n a n c e / S e c t i o n O f f i c e District 11 - Whitley County, Kentucky Engineering File #: 609-C9R4-Z001-A35 Request For Bid #: RFB-168-25

Addendum 01 Date: 29 January 2025

THE BIDDING AND GENERAL DOCUMENTS, NOTES, AND DRAWINGS ARE CLARIFIED OR CHANGED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING. THE BIDDERS SHALL ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS

ADDENDUM ON THE PROPOSAL FORM IN THE SPACE PROVIDED.

GENERAL I TEMS:

A1.1 Rename Project. Project shall be called: “KYTC – CONSTRUCT WHITLEY COUNTY MAINTENANCE /

SECTION OFFICE”.

A1.2 Abbreviations: MF = Maintenance Facility

SEO = Section Engineer Office

SS = Salt Structure (NIC)

ESS = Equipment Storage Shed (NIC)

A1.3 See attached Report of Geotechnical Exploration by CSI.

A1.4 The Building Permits for each building (MF & SEO) have already been submitted for plan review with the Department of Housing, Buildings , and Construction - All fees have been paid.

A1.5 General Contractor shall Complete Affidavit of Assurance and submit it to DHBC for MF & SEO.

A1.6 General Contractor shall submit PEMB Shop Drawings for the MF and Pre-Engineered Wood Trusses for the SEO to DHBC.

A1.7 “Does this project have wage scale?” – NO WAGE SCALE

A1.8 “Are we required to carry Builders Risk Insurance?” – YES, see the General Conditions the front of the Specification Manual.

A1.9 “Are there any Control Monuments?” – YES, see Sheet REF, Topographic Survey (Existing Conditions) and CIVIL Sheets.

ARCHITECTURAL I TEMS:

A R C H I T E C T U R A L D R A W I N G S :

A1.10 See Drawing Sheet SEO|A1, FINISH SCHEDULE LEGEND:

Remove VCT material

A1.11 See Drawing Sheet MF| A102, BUILDING SECTIONS:

Remove any notes referring to the concrete slab as 8” thick – Replace with see Structural Drawings.

A1.12 See Drawing Sheet MF| A501, DETAILS, CANOPY DETAIL A|501:

Add General Note: PEMB manufacturer must provide all structural support for building canopies

– PEMB Mfr., GC, & Erector shall coordinate installation of all new canopies.

A1.13 See Drawing Sheet MF| A302, WALL SECTIONS, All wall sections:

Delete any notes referring to the metal roof panels as lap seam or PBR type (raised trapezoidal) roofing – Add: See PEMB Specifications for Roof panels.

A1.14 See Drawing Sheet MF| A301, REFLECTED CEILING PLAN, Plan Note 005:

Change note 005 to the following: Monorail Hoist Beam location for 3-ton Hoist & Trolley on rigid frame, Line B – PEMB supplier shall design and supply a W-shape type Monorail Hoist Beam of 5-ton capacity max. per Specification Section 110100, Cranes & Hoist – Monorail Hoist Beam length shall be 25’-6” from outside face of rigid frame Line B at line 1 toward center of Garage - Hoist Beam shall be solidly diagonal braced to adjacent rigid frames - The monorail hoist beam shall be designed to resist deflection tolerances of the crane trolley, or a maximum deflection of 1/4” or L/600, whichever is greater - The hoist beam may be supported along its span as necessary to achieve these limits - The monorail hoist beam and its supports shall resist impact loads specified in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 4.9 – Monorail beam shall be clearly labeled “5-ton CAPACITY MAXIMUM” – B.O. Monorail Beam = 18’-7” – Flange width = 6-8”.

A R C H I T E C T U R A L S P E C I F I C A T I O N S :

A1.15 See SPECIFICATION SECTION 064023, INTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL WOODWORK:

All Interior Architectural Woodwork & Casework shall meet AWI Standards.

A1.16 See SPECIFICATION SECTION 087100, HARDWARE SCHEDULE, SET 01:

Delete listed EXIT DEVICE. Revise to the following: 25-R-NL x 510-NL DAN x US32D

A1.17 See SPECIFICATION SECTION 087100, HARDWARE SCHEDULE, SET 03:

Delete listed THRESHOLD & WALL STOP. Revise WALL STOP to WS407-CCV x 626

A1.18 See SPECIFACTION SECTION 087100, DOOR HARDWARE:

Keying is by User Agency. All cores to be BEST.

A1.19 See SPECIFACTION SECTION 110100, CRANES AND HOIST, 1.2:

Provide Monorail Beam to support 5-Ton capacity - Provide specified 3-ton hoist as specified.

A1.20 See SPECIFACTION SECTION 133421, PRE-ENGINEERED METRAL BUILDINGS, Section 2.4.B.1.c.1:

Change rating of wall insulation to R-19 w/ layer of WMP-50 reinforced facing enclosure at interior-side of the girts by Lamtec Corporation with reinforced strapping.

A1.21 See SPECIFACTION SECTION 133421, PRE-ENGINEERED METRAL BUILDINGS, Section 2.4.B.1.b:

Change to Provide double layer of 6” thk. upper layers of perpendicular batt insulation on thermal blocks and 6” thk. lower level with an installed value of R-38 min. Provide WMP-50 reinforced facing enclosure at bottom-side of purlins by Lamtec Corporation with reinforced fall protection strapping.

A1.22 See SPECIFACTION SECTION 133421, PRE-ENGINEERED METRAL BUILDINGS, Section 2.4.C.1:

Add: Provide continuous layer of Energy Saving Fabric Facing (WMP-50 by Lamtec) w/ reinforcing strapping on the interior side of all Garage Maintenance Bay 109, Storage 108, and

Mechanical 106 walls and Ceilings to include the entire maintenance Bay-side of the divider wall w/ offices (erector/GC shall coordinate with wall framing installation) – Provide at interior side of entire PEMB structure exterior perimeter walls and ceilings & any space where PEMB structure is exposed – All girts and purlins shall be completely covered down to 8” below T.O. interior metal wall liner panels – This complete interior system can be installed by the PEMB erector, the GC, or a GC sub-contractor – All joints must be taped – Provide User Agency with spare material (4) square yards of material for pitching and repair.

A1.23 SPECIFACTION SECTION 133421, PRE-ENGINEERED METRAL BUILDINGS, Section 2.7.A:

Remove Description of a PBR type roof panel w/ raised trapezoidal major and intermediate ribs – Replace with 16” wide Standing -seam roof panel with 2” standing-seam.

A1.24 SPECIFACTION SECTION 133421, PRE-ENGINEERED METRAL BUILDINGS, Section 2.7.A:

Add to Roof Panel Accessories: Provide continuous Snow Retention Guards entire length of each gutter side of the building – Provide mounting cleat on each standing seam roof panel by S-5! or equal – Mount 18” from roof edge.

C IV IL I TEMS:

C I V I L D R A W I N G S :

A1.25 See Drawing Sheet C300, GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN:

Delete MF floor elevation of 1014.78’ – Replace with floor elevation of 1114.78’.

A1.26 See Drawing Sheet C400, SITE DETAILS:

Delete Detail H, Header Curb. – Replace with new Integral Curb & Sidewalk Detail H on attached sheet C400.1

A1.27 See Drawing Sheet C400, SITE DETAILS:

Rename Detail D from N.T.S. to 8” Concrete Drive Pavement

C I V I L S P E C I F I C A T I O N S :

A1.28 ” The Special Conditions confirm the Owner will be responsible for 3rd Party Special Inspections for Structural work. Will you require the contractor to pay for non-structural special inspections, site pavements, etc.?”

Refer to Specification Section 312000 Earth Moving, Section 1.2, Item B: Contractor shall provide and pay for testing and inspection during earthwork operations outside of the building footprint.

A1.29 “If unsuitable soils are encountered, would remediation of the unsuitable soils be paid by change order?”

Refer to Specification Section 312000 Earth Moving, Section 3.4, Item E: Extra excavation not identified on the drawings will be paid as a change in work.

A1.30 “If rock is encountered with excavations, would this be paid by change order?”

Refer to Specification Section 312000 Earth Moving, Section 3.4, Item D: All excavation is unclassified.

A1.31 “Where can we get dirt?”

Refer to Specification Section 312000 Earth Moving, Section 2.1 MATERIALS: All suitable soil and fill material shall be sourced from off site – It is the responsibility of the GC to find a source for these materials – DO NOT SOURCE FILL MATERIAL FROM THE EXISTING SITE.

S TRUCTURAL I TEMS:

S T R U C T U R A L D R A W I N G S :

A1.32 See Drawing Sheet MF|S2, FOUNDATION PLAN: Provide 12” thk reinf. concrete slab per Note 1.

A1.33 See Drawing Sheet SEO|S3, FOUNDATION PLAN: Provide 4” thk reinf. Concrete slab per Note 1.

A1.34 Provide minimum depth for footings in Whitley County of 30” below grade.

MEP I TEMS:

M E P S D R A W I N G S :

A1.35 Refer to Drawing Sheet U102 – UTILITY DETAILS:

Provide drop manhole in existing MHD-3 so that the new pipe enters the bottom of the manhole at invert elevation.

A1.36 Refer to Drawing Sheet MF|P101 – PLUMBING FLOOR PLANS:

Provide Hose Bib (HB) in Men’s 104 underneath lavatory in hidden fashion.

A1.37 Refer to Drawing Sheet MF|P201 – PLUMBING RISERS:

Add water hammer arrestor to top of domestic cold-water line at all (3) hose bibb locations.

A1.38 Refer to Drawing Sheet MF|P201 – PLUMBING RISERS:

Add tag “P-9” to domestic water riser Crew Room 107.

A1.39 Refer to Drawing Sheet SEO|M101 – HVAC FLOOR PLAN & SCHEDULES:

Refer to Storage 113 – Change “S-1” to “S-2”

A1.40 Refer to Drawing Sheet SEO|M101 – HVAC FLOOR PLAN & SCHEDULES:

Refer to Storage 113 – Change “R-1” to “R-2”.

E N D O F A D D E N D U M 0 1

CONCRETE - INTEGRAL CURB AND SIDEWALKH SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

RTAPHASE:

23.165

DRAWING INFORMATION

DRAWING 11/26/24

DRAWN BY: CH

CHECKED BY: CTH

A&E FILE NO.:

RTA DATE: 12/19/24

DATE: KYTC - WHITLEY CO MAINTENANCE FACILITY

& SALT STRUCTURE

609-C9R4-Z001-A35

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION CABINET

DEPARTMENT FOR FACILITIES AND SUPPORT SERVICES

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

FRANKFORT, KENTUCKY

ADDENDUM #1

C400.1SITE DETAILS

1/27/2025

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Whitley County KYTC Facility Williamsburg, Kentucky CSI Project No. LX240163

Prepared for :

Commonwealth of Kentucky

August 8, 2024

August 8, 2024

Commonwealth of Kentucky Finance and Administration Cabinet Frankfort, Kentucky

Attention: Mr. Joseph Sandman, Architect E-mail: joseph.sandman@ky.gov

Dear Mr. Sandman:

Consulting Services Incorporated of Kentucky (CSI) is pleased to present our report for the geotechnical services completed for your proposed KYTC facilities to be constructed in Williamsburg, Kentucky.

Our report represents information provided to us, readily available published data relevant to the site and site area, our observations and subsurface conditions encountered and our opinion of primary geotechnical conditions (discussion and recommendations) affecting design, construction and performance of the proposed earth and/or rock supported portions of the project.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide our geotechnical services to you and the design team.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for questions or comments about the information contained herein.

Cordially, Shawn D. Mills, EIT, SI Barry F. Bishop, PE Staff Engineer Vice President

Licensed KY 36,777

Geotechnical Exploration Subject: Whitley County KYTC Facility

Williamsburg, Kentucky CSI Project No. LX240163

CONSULTING SERVICES INCORPORATED

Geotechnical & Materials Engineering | IBC Special Inspection | Material Testing mailto:joseph.sandman@ky.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

1 SCOPE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION 1

2 PROVIDED INFORMATION 1

3 AREA/SITE INFORMATION 2

3A AREA TOPOGRAPHY/PHYSIOGRAPHY 2

3B SITE GEOLOGY 2

3C REVIEW OF MINING NOTED ON USGS MAPS 3

3D REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERALS 3

3E PUBLISHED SITE SOIL CONDITIONS 4

3F OTHER PUBLISHED SITE INFORMATION 6

4 SITE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS 6

5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 9

5A SOIL CONDITIONS 9

5B GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS 10

5C BEDROCK INFORMATION 10

6 LABORATORY TESTING 10

GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11

7 DISCUSSION-GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES 11

7A PREVIOUS PLACED (OLD) FILL 11

7B SILTY SOILS 12

7C POSSIBLE UNDERGROUND COAL MINING 12

8 DISCUSSION OF RISK BASED DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS 13

8A ENGINEER SECTION OFFICE 13

8B MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE 14

9 EARTHWORK 14

9A SITE PREPARATION (WORK PRIOR TO FILLING) 14

9B NEW FILL OPERATIONS 15

9C BACKFILL OPERATIONS (FOUNDATION WALLS, UTILITIES, ETC.) 16

9D GENERAL NOTES 16

10 SITE DRAINAGE 16

11 FOUNDATIONS 17

11A SHALLOW SPREAD FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL 17

11B SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL - CONSTRUCTION NOTES 18

11C RAFT FOUNDATION BEARING ON GEOGRID REINFORCED SUBGRADE 19

11D RAFT FOUNDATIONS ON A GEOGRID REINFORCED SUBGRADE - CONSTRUCTION NOTES 19

11E DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS 20

11F DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS - CONSTRUCTION NOTES 21

12 SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION 22

13 CONCRETE SLABS 22

13A ENGINEER SECTION OFFICE SLAB 23

13B MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE SLAB 23

14 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 23

14A ASPHALT PAVEMENT 24

14B RIGID PAVEMENT (CONCRETE) 25

15 NOTES ON THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 25

APPENDICES, FIGURES, PHOTOS AND TABLES

APPENDICES: Site Location Plan

Boring Location Plan

Boring Logs

Field Testing Procedures

Summary of Laboratory Tests

Specific Laboratory Test Tables

Laboratory Testing Procedures

List of Figures

Figure 1. Kentucky Physiographic Map 2

Figure 2. Site Geology 3

Figure 3. Taylor County Karst Areas Map 4

Figure 4. USDA Soil Survey Map of Project Site 5

Figure 5. Site Aerial dated March, 1997 6

Figure 6. Site Aerial dated April, 2010 6

Figure 7. Site Aerial dated October, 2018 6

Figure 8. Site Aerial dated August, 2024 6

List of Photos

Photo 1 7

Photos 2-3 8

Photo 4 9

Photos 5-6 10

List of Tables

Table 1. Web Soil Survey Attributes …………………………………………5

Table 2. Light Duty Asphalt Pavement Section ………………………………………24

Table 3. Heavy Duty Asphalt Pavement Section …………………………………………24

INTRODUCTION

1 SCOPE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

As proposed, we conducted geotechnical services which are summarized in the following report.

Our services included a review of the project information provided, conducting a subsurface exploration that used test pits to model the soil conditions at the subject site, an analysis of the data and information obtained, and providing recommendations for the earth and/or rock supported portions of the site as listed in our proposal.

2 PROVIDED INFORMATION

Project information was provided to us via email correspondence with Mr. Steven White, RA, AIA of White Pollard Architects on July 9, 2024. A copy of a preliminary geotechnical report for the site area, a site plan with requested boring and test pit locations, and a topographic map was included as provided information.

The project is located southwest of the intersection of I-75 and US-25 in Whitley County, Kentucky. Please reference our Site Location Plan in the Appendix for further details.

Specifically, the site lies about ¼ - mile southwest of the interchange on the northeast side of the road.

We understand construction will include a new 8,000 SF maintenance building along with a 2,000 SF engineer section office. Additionally, new pavements will also be constructed.

We were not supplied with specific structural information for this project. However, we were supplied with a site grading plan indicating existing grades. Existing grades vary from approximately 1107 feet to 1117 feet. We were supplied an FFE of 1114 feet for both the maintenance building and the engineer section office. Based on the preliminary topographic information, the majority of the site earthwork will consist of shallow (less than 5 feet) cuts and fills.

We were not provided any structural loading information for this project. Based on our experience with similar projects, we have assumed the following foundation and building loading conditions:

• Maximum column loads of 50 kips

• Maximum continuous wall loads of 2 kips per linear foot

• Maximum floor slab loading of 100 pounds per square foot (office space) and 1000 pounds per square foot (maintenance structure)

If any of this information is incorrect, please let us know so we can reassess our scope of services needed and provide best fit recommendations for the project.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 1 26

3 AREA/SITE INFORMATION

3A AREA TOPOGRAPHY/PHYSIOGRAPHY

The site is located in the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field Physiographic Region of Kentucky. This area consists of forested hills and V-shaped valleys. Published topographic mapping by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) indicates the elevations in the site vicinity range from 1020 feet to 1120 feet. Figure 1 depicts the location of the site with respect to the regional physiography.

3B SITE GEOLOGY

A review of the USGS Geologic Map of the Wofford Quadrangle (dated 1967) indicates that the project site is underlain by the Breathitt and Lee Formation of the Lower and Middle Pennsylvania rock deposits.

The Breathitt and Lee Formation is typically composed of sandstone, siltstone, shale, and coal seams in alternating layers. Commonly, the sandstone is durable while the other bedrock units are not durable.

The Breathitt and Lee Formation is not associated with typical geologic hazards (sinkholes, faults, etc.). No faults were mapped within 1 mile of the project site. The geologic dip in the area of the project site is between 1 and 2 percent to the southeast. Below is a figure of the location of the site with respect to the area geology.

Figure 1. Kentucky Physiographic Map (site vicinity shown in the circle)

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 2 26

3C REVIEW OF MINING NOTED ON USGS MAPS

Our review of the USGS Wofford Quadrangle maps (topographic and geologic) revealed no coal seams or mining in the area. However there are coal seams mapped on the USGS geologic map at the top of ridges further away form the site.

3D REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERALS

We reviewed publicly available underground mine maps from the Kentucky Mine Mapping Information System through their website www.minemaps.ky.gov. It should be noted that stored underground mining maps were destroyed in a fire at the Department of Mines and Minerals map room in 1948. Although most of the maps were able to be retrieved, not all maps were recovered.

Based on our cursory review of the public records, these maps indicated no mining at/near the site. Please refer to Figure 3 for further details.

Figure 2. Site Geology USGS Liberty Quadrangle (dated 1971). Site vicinity shown by circle.

Figure 2. USGS Wofford Quadrangle (1967) with site vicinity shown in circle

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 3 26 http://www.minemaps.ky.gov

3E PUBLISHED SITE SOIL CONDITIONS

According to the USDA Soil Survey of Whitley County (NRCS website), the soils underlying the project site consist of the following series:

• SLF—Shelocta-Latham Complex, 30 to 60 percent slopes;

• WnC—Wernock silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes;

The following Table 1: Web Soil Survey Attributes describes the soil series characteristics and limitations with respect to construction.

Figure 3. Mine Works Map (site vicinity shown in oval)

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 4 26

Particular issues affecting construction include depth to hard bedrock, depth to saturated zone, large stones, dusty, unstable excavation walls, depth to soft bedrock, too clayey, low strength, frost action, and slope. Due to the previous fill placement and site regrading, the soil survey information listed above may no longer be useful since the site soils have been altered. Thus, the soils described above may be on-site but not in their natural condition. Figure 4 depicts the project site with respect to the mapped soil survey information.

Table 1: Web Soil Survey Attributes

Soil Type Depth to Bedrock (inches)

Depth To Water Table

(inches)

Drainage Class

Dwellings Without Basements

Shallow Excavations

Local Roads and Streets

SLF 60 >80 Well Drained Very Limited Very Limited Very Limited

WnC 40 >80 Well Drained Somewhat Limited Somewhat

Limited Somewhat Limited

Figure 4. USDA Soil Survey Map of the Project Site (site vicinity shown in green border)

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 5 26

3F OTHER PUBLISHED SITE INFORMATION

We have reviewed available aerial photographs, dated as far back as March, 1997. The site appears to be a dump site from the date of our earliest researched aerial photograph. The most recent photograph (August 2024), depicts the area as a dump site, which is how the site currently exists. Please note, the aerial photographs prior to 2010 are of poor quality, thus minor details cannot be easily determined. Please reference the following aerial photographs.

4 SITE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS

Mr. Shawn Mills, EIT of CSI performed a field reconnaissance, logged test pits, and directed field operations within the proposed project area on July 23, 2024.

The project site currently exists as a leveled dump site. The ground cover is primarily gravel, with areas of grass growth and a few paved sections. Along the northern perimeter of the site, there is a small wooded area with a residential structure within it. To the west, directly across

Figure 5. Aerial Photo dated March, 1997 (Google Earth)

Figure 6. Aerial Photo dated April, 2010 (Google Earth)

Figure 7. Aerial Photo dated October, 2018 (Google Earth)

Figure 8. Aerial Photo dated August, 2024 (Google Earth)

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 6 26

Kentucky Route 25 (KY 25), is the Kentucky Consular Center. The eastern part of the site features freshly dumped piles of spoil materials, indicating ongoing dumping activity. Scattered around the site are other various items, including power line supplies and a dumpster.

Additionally there is a pond on the property far away from the project vicinity.

The project site's topography is generally level on the pad created from dumping, with an elevation ranging from 1113 to approximately 1117 feet, as determined by our test pit elevations.

However, the site drops off to a lower area where fill has not been dumped yet. In this lower area, a salt barn is currently under construction.

Please reference the following photographs as examples of the site conditions as they existed at the time of our exploration.

Photo 1. View looking from above the site.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 7 26

Photo 3. View from the east looking west across the site.

Photo 2. View looking at eastern portion of the site.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 8 26

5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The subsurface conditions encountered at each of our test pit locations are shown on the Test Pit Logs in the Appendix. It should be noted that our test pits were sampled by obtaining bag samples. The Test Pit Logs represent our interpretations of the subsurface conditions based on field logs, visual examination of field samples, and tests of the samples collected. The letters in parentheses following the soil descriptions are the soil and rock classifications in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. It should be noted that the stratification lines shown on the soil boring logs represent approximate transitions between material types. In-situ stratum changes could occur gradually or at slightly different depths.

NOTE: soil borings were not drilled at the site due to a change in the scope of our work during the course of the project.

5A SOIL CONDITIONS

We conducted nine test pits for this project, labeled TP-1 through TP-9. Test pits TP-1 and TP-2 were excavated specifically for the maintenance structure, while TP-3 and TP-4 were for utility installation procedures. Test pits TP-5 through TP-8 were designated for the engineering section office, while test pit TP-9 was for the pavement area.

Two vastly different subsurface conditions exist at this site. The site conditions at the engineer section office are relatively good (in comparison with the remainder of the site). The general subsurface conditions present at the engineer section office consisted of gravel, topsoil, or pavement on the surface, followed by fill material (where encounter), overlaying residual soils, underlain by shale bedrock. The residual soils were primarily composed of orange silty clay, with

Photo 4. View looking from the south looking north across the site.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 9 26 some areas containing significant amount of rock fragments. The encountered bedrock consisted of dark gray shale, which could be broken up using the excavator's teeth.

The general subsurface conditions present at the maintenance structure and pavement areas consist of gravel on the surface, followed by fill material. The fill material is comprised of a mixture of orange, gray, green, and black clays, with rock fragments, concrete fragments and slabs, coal fragments, plastic pieces, bricks, wood fragments, glass bottles, corrugated pipe, and a 5-gallon bucket. During test pit TP-1 excavation, equipment refusal was encountered on a large concrete slab section that could not be removed from the test pit. After encountering the buried concrete slab section, CSI personnel were informed by KYTC personnel that many miles of concrete slab sections have been dumped on this site during the construction of I-75. Photos of the excavated spoils from the test pits are shown below.

5B GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

Groundwater was not observed in any of our test pits. Our test pits were immediately backfilled with the excavated spoils to surrounding grade.

5C BEDROCK INFORMATION

Equipment refusal was encountered in 7 of our 9 test pits at depths ranging from 3.0 to 9.0 feet.

We interpreted this refusal as the top of hard bedrock, except in test pit TP-1. At test pit TP-1, the refusal was due to a buried concrete slab section. Please reference our Test Pit Logs for specific details regarding.

6 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory tests were performed on selected recovered samples from our borings. Detailed descriptions of these tests and the results of our testing are included in the Appendix. Tests performed included:

Photo 6. View of deleterious material in TP-2. Photo 5. View of deleterious material in TP-9.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 10 26

• Natural moisture contents

• Atterberg limits tests

• Percent fines analyses

GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7 DISCUSSION-GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES

Based on our experience with similar projects and the conditions observed during our subsurface exploration, we believe that the engineer section office area is suitable for construction. However, the maintenance structure and pavement areas can be adapted for the proposed construction but these areas will be very difficult (and expensive) to develop. The primary geotechnical concerns are:

• Previous Placed (Old) Fill

• Silty Soils

• Possible Underground Coal Mining

The following sections discuss each issue. However, recommendations to address the issues are contained in later sections of the report.

7A PREVIOUS PLACED (OLD) FILL

During our test pit operations, it should be noted that a thin fill horizon (less than 2 feet) was encountered within the engineer section office near the surface. Beneath this fill, residual soils were encountered to top of rock.

In the other test pits, deeper fill (up to 17 feet or more) was encountered in the areas of the maintenance structure and pavement areas.

Previously placed fill was encountered in 6 of our 9 test pits at depths ranging from 1.5 to 16.7 feet. It should be noted that we were not provided with any records of this fill placement. We were informed by KYTC personnel familiar with the site that he observed dumping at this site for the last 27 years. Our review of aerial maps confirms our belief that this site has been used as a dump site for numerous years. Thus, we consider the existing fill to be undocumented fill. We expect this fill material is from I-75 construction, The Mint Gaming Hall construction, and other various sites around the community. We believe that this fill was placed in a dump and shove manner with no compactive efforts applied.

Fills placed in an uncontrolled manner have proven to be very problematic. The problems generally arise not from general settlement, but from erratic differential settling of the fill. The settlement of large masses is dependent upon several factors such as fill thickness, degree of compaction, fill contents, and age of the fill mass. Also, fills tend to settle linearly with thicknes

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 11 26

Fills placed in an uncontrolled manner have proven to be very problematic. The problems generally arise not from general settlement, but from erratic differential settling of the fill. The settlement of large masses is dependent upon several factors such as fill thickness, degree of compaction, fill contents, and age of the fill mass. Also, fills tend to settle linearly with thickness.

We typically recommend complete removal of any encountered previously placed fill within the proposed building and pavement areas. We understand this may not be an economically viable option for portions of this project. If any old fill is left in-place beneath the proposed site improvements, the Owner must be aware of the risk of construction over old fill material and hold CSI harmless for poor performance of the site improvements due to construction over the old fill. However, we can make recommendations to reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of unwanted settlement.

7B SILTY SOILS

Our experience, along with published site geology and laboratory testing, indicates the presence of silty soils at the site. An Atterberg limit test has been conducted, confirming the existence of silty clay soils on-site. Silty soils are prone to degradation and become highly unstable during wet periods of the year and/or under heavy construction traffic.

Care must be taken and exercised during earthwork and in areas where construction traffic is expected to minimize repetitive traffic one there site soils. The repetitive traffic will cause the soils to become unstable; therefore, filling operations should only use enough comparative effort to achieve stability and job site requirements for compaction. Also, undercutting and recompaction of these soils usually proves futile (the soil matrix is usually degraded).

During wet periods of weather, undercutting and remedial efforts should be expected.

Construction excavations or earthwork operations should be avoided during wetter seasons of the year. Again, recompaction of silty soils is problematic and other means of stabilization should be considered.

7C POSSIBLE UNDERGROUND COAL MINING

Our cursory review of publicly available underground mining maps do not indicate that any deep mining of coal has occurred directly beneath this project site. However, mining has occurred at significant distance further to the east, south, and west of the site at much higher elevations.

The geologic maps indicate that there are mapped coal seams near the project site. As such, there is always an inherent risk associated with possible deep mining or auger mining of these seams. Voids left within these coal seams (if any) could lead to possible settlement of the structure due to subsidence over time.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 12 26

8 DISCUSSION OF RISK BASED DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Based on the geotechnical data collected from out test pits, we have determined that there are different risk-based options for the development of this site. As with all risk-based options, as the risk to the development decreases the cost of construction will increase - and vice versa.

We don’t believe there is any major concern for construction at the engineer field office (other than a thin layer of fill at the surface). Although the engineer field office area has a thin layer of fill (less than 2 feet), it can easily be removed and replaced.

The area with most concern for this project is the maintenance structure and parking areas that are underlain by 17 feet or more of fill material. As previously discussed, because of the varying depths of undocumented fill that exists on-site, the construction for these areas of the project will be much more difficult (and much higher cost) compared to a normal site.

Typically, we recommend the complete removal of any existing undocumented fill material from beneath project foundations, floor slabs, and pavements. However, this approach is impractical for the maintenance structure and pavement portions of this project site due to the significant fill depths, which may reach 17 feet or more. It appears that the leveled pad was created by dumping spoils in a hollow, resulting in varying fill composition and depths. Based on our test pit data, we observed that the fill is shallower near the north and south edges and deeper towards the center.

Specifically, the depth near KY 25 is relatively shallow but increases further east, exceeding 17 feet (or much greater). Additionally, our data on the deeper fill beneath the proposed maintenance structure is limited due to equipment depth constraints, so actual fill depths could be greater (or much greater) than reported.

Risk-based decisions must be made regarding the development at this site. Since it would not be economically feasible to remove and replace the existing fill with new structural fill material, the Commonwealth of Kentucky and other members of the design team must understand this risk and hold CSI harmless from any future claims due to the decision to leave the existing fill in-place.

While our recommendations can reduce this risk, that risk cannot be entirely eliminated.

Based on our discussion with the design team, we understand that our report should provide risk-based options for the foundations, floor slabs, and pavements. Please reference the following sections detailing these options.

8A ENGINEER SECTION OFFICE

The engineer section office foundations are expected to be shallow spread foundations bearing on residual soils and/or newly structural placed fill (low risk). Additionally, the use of slab-on-grade concrete bearing on residual soil and/or newly structural placed fill (low risk) may be used for the engineer section office. The remainder of this report will assume the thin layer of fill within the engineer field section office is removed and replaced with new fill. Thus, after the removal of the fill material we expect normal construction for this portion of the project.

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 13 26

8B MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE

If the Using Agency would like to assume a low risk option for the construction of the maintenance building, then we recommend the use of drilled shaft foundations. If the Using Agency is willing to assume some risk, the foundations (and floor slab) may be constructed as a raft foundation. Again, the use of a raft foundation will reduce the risk of differential settlement, but the risk of tilting still exists. The maintenance structure foundations are expected to be drilled shaft foundations bearing entirely on rock (low risk) —OR— a raft foundation bearing on a geogrid reinforced subgrade (moderate risk). Shallow spread foundations bearing on the existing fill should not be considered for the maintenance facility due to the presence of the existing fill. Additionally, the use of a structural floor slab connected to the rock bearing foundations (low risk) should be used if drilled shafts are chosen.

If a raft foundation over a geogrid reinforced subgrade foundation is chosen, additional construction considerations are required. When using a raft foundation system, the foundations and floor slab act as a single unit spreading the structural loads across the entire building footprint. Raft foundations can consist of a mat foundation, a post-tensioned slab, or a waffle slab. While a raft foundation does reduce risk for differential settlement, the risk of the entire foundation tilting still exists.

Please note that the remainder of this report will be based on the risk-based alternatives listed above. If other alternatives are chosen, CSI should be allowed to review and amend our recommendations accordingly.

9 EARTHWORK

Historically, more change orders (in total number and costs) occur during the earthwork portion of construction than in almost any other part of the project. Further, the site preparation phase of construction always affects the future performance of project structures and pavements. Add into this, the fact that earthwork is the portion of work most influenced by wet weather and unknown conditions and time-wise, this section of the report could be the most important to prevent and minimize delays and costs during construction and for the life of the project.

Please review the concerns listed in section 7 prior to reading the following recommendations. If problems occur that the recommendations do not address or do not adequately remedy, please contact CSI as soon as possible.

9A SITE PREPARATION (WORK PRIOR TO FILLING)

• remove/relocate all miscellaneous items on-site;

• If applicable, remove/relocate utilities as required by the construction plans;

• All asphalt should be removed and wasted off-site from the building pad areas. The base stone may remain in-place provided it holds up well to proofrolling;

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 14 26

• Excavate the area to required grades. If a raft foundation is utilitzed, the subgrade should be reinforced with geogrid reinforcement. The area for the raft (plus 5 feet horizontally) should be undercut to 5 feet below the FFE (Finished Floor Elevation);

• See Section 10C for details for further details if a raft foundation is chosen;

• Backfill of undercut areas should be performed in accordance with sections 9B and 9C;

• Retain CSI to observe the proofrolling operations and make recommendations for any unstable or unsuitable conditions encountered. This can save time on the construction schedule and save unnecessary undercutting.

We recommend that site grading should take place between about late April to early October.

Earthwork taking place outside this time period will likely encounter wet conditions and weather conditions that will provide little to no assistance with drying the soils.

9B NEW FILL OPERATIONS

The on-site soils are suitable for use as new fill provided it does not contain deleterious material or construction debris. Any off-site fill material should be tested and approved before it is imported to the project site. Off-site soils with a plasticity index (PI) greater than 25 percent should not be used for new fill.

After the subgrade has been approved to receive new fill, the fill may commence with the following procedures and guidelines recommended:

• Place fill in maximum 8-inch thick loose lifts;

• Fill lifts should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density (ASTM D698) and maintain the moisture content of compacted fill within 3 percent of optimum moisture;

• Do not use of an open graded crushed stone (such as No. 57 stone) as structural fill for this project;

• Silty soils exist at this project site, thus CSI does not recommend the use of vibratory compaction equipment on this site.

• Off-site soils with a plasticity index (PI) of greater than 25 percent should not be used new fill;

• Fill compaction requirements should be extended to at least 5 feet outside the structure area;

• See Section 10C for further details relating to geogrid reinforced subgrade if a raft foundation is chosen;

• Maximum particle size of the soil should be limited to 4 inches in any dimension with no concentrations of large fragments;

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 15 26

• Density testing should be performed as a means to verify percent compaction and moisture content of the material as it is being placed and compacted;

• Observation of fill “stability” is also critical, so it is recommended to observe the operation of the filling equipment traversing over the new fill to document movement (similar to proofrolling);

• Soils should not be “overcompacted” and construction traffic should be kept to minimum to assure compaction is achieved and that the soil is not allowed to “break down”;

• Retain a representative of CSI to observe and document fill placement and compaction operations.

9C BACKFILL OPERATIONS (FOUNDATION WALLS, UTILITIES, ETC.)

These materials are placed in more confined areas than mass earthwork materials and therefore cannot be placed in full compliance with sections 9A or 9B. The following are general recommendations for backfill areas:

• Fill lift thicknesses will vary dependent on compaction equipment available and material types, but in no case should exceed 8 inches;

• For crushed stone/aggregate backfills in trenches or wall backfill and when using smaller compaction equipment (such as a plate compactor or trench compactor or similar) the lift thickness should not exceed 4 inches;

• Compaction/moisture percentages and density testing requirements should be the same as in section 9B;

• CSI should be retained to provide additional recommendations for backfill (if necessary).

9D GENERAL NOTES

• For all earthwork operations, positive surface drainage is prudent to keep water from ponding on the surface and to assist in maintaining surface stability;

• The surface should be sealed prior to expected wet weather. This can usually be accomplished with rubber-tired construction equipment or a steel-drum roller;

• If any soil placement problems occur, CSI should be retained to provide additional recommendations, as needed.

10 SITE DRAINAGE

For this project, controlling water is crucial to reduce the risk of experiencing unwanted settlements, particularly for the maintenance building. All surface drainage should be designed to flow away from the building. All roof drains, trench drains, and foundation drains should be piped, and carried away from the building. We recommend not constructing any landscaped areas around the buildings. If possible, pavements should be placed up to the edge of the

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 16 26 buildings to reduce the risk of water infiltration into the subgrade. If the previously placed fill is left in-place (which is expected), water infiltration can wash away the fines between the larger fill particles (such as concrete slabs) and induce soil piping. This can greatly increase the risk of settlement (differential in particular, or tilting in the case of a raft foundation).

As the on-site soils are silty, any ponding water will degrade the subgrade conditions, and make traversing the site with construction equipment difficult. During construction, water should not be allowed to pond in excavations or undercutting will likely be required. During the life of the project, slope the subgrade and other site features so that surface water flows away from the site structures. Structure roof drains (if any) should be piped away to proper storm drainage systems. Diversion ditches should be used to keep surface water from accumulating at or near site structures.

For excavations during construction, most free water could likely be removed via sump pumps and open channel flow (ditches) at or near the source of seepage. If normal dewatering measures prove insufficient due to shallow water conditions, CSI should be retained to provide recommendations on the issue.

Wet conditions are possible in excavations on-site during site construction and karst features such as springs are common to the underlying geology. Daylighting wet zones for drainage or the use of french/rock drains may be prudent or cost effective methods of de-watering wet areas of the site. Pumping with long-flexible hoses day-lighted hundreds of feet away or other types of sumping could also be utilized if necessary. CSI should be retained to observe all excavations in locations of springs or other water-bearing features.

11 FOUNDATIONS

This section of the report provides guidelines and design considerations for shallow spread foundations on soil, particularly for the Engineer Section Office. This section also provides guidelines and design considerations for raft foundations bearing on a geogrid reinforced subgrade and drilled shaft foundations specifically for the maintenance structure. As such, each of these foundation options are discussed separately. If there are any changes in the project criteria or structure locations, CSI should be allowed to review the recommendations to determine if any modifications are required. The following foundation recommendations will apply to each structure as appropriately discussed in Section 8 of this report.

NOTE: due to the change in scope of work during the course of the project, we do not believe we have met the engineering standard of care for the maintenance structure portion of this project.

11A SHALLOW SPREAD FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL

For the engineer section office shallow spread foundation bearing on residual soil and/or newly placed engineered fill is acceptable. Shallow spread footings bearing on soil may be sized using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf).

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 17 26

Foundations should bear on the stiff or better residual soil, or newly placed engineered fill.

Foundations should not bear on existing fill (if encountered).

If soft/wet soil conditions are encountered during foundation excavations, the soil should be undercut to stiff or better residual soils. If excessive undercutting (2 feet or greater) is encountered during foundation undercutting, a CSI Geotechnical Engineer should be consulted prior to additional undercuts. Backfill should then consist of structural soil fill, dry DGA (Dense Graded Aggregate), or flowable fill (greater than 300 psi).

Additional design considerations for spread foundations bearing directly on stiff or better residual soil or newly placed fill are outlined as follows:

• Design all footings with a minimum 24 inches width;

• All exterior footing bottoms should bear at least 24 inches below finished exterior grading (Kentucky Building Code, Table 1809.5 for Whitley County);

• Interior footings (those not exposed to freezing) may be placed at nominal depths or 18 inches deep, whichever is deeper;

• Do not use thickened slab sections or turned-down edges to support load bearing walls;

• Include control joints at suitable intervals in the walls of structures and in areas where changes in support from native soil to fill are anticipated, to help accommodate differential foundation movements.

A detailed settlement analysis was beyond the scope of this exploration. However, based on the expected structural loads, the anticipated behavior of soil types encountered during field activities, and our experience with similar projects, we expect that total settlements will not exceed 1-inch, and that differential settlements will not exceed ½-inch along continuous footing distances of 30 feet or less. We recommend the structures be designed to accommodate these magnitudes of total and differential settlements.

11B SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL - CONSTRUCTION NOTES

Any soils can lose strength if they become wet, so we recommend the foundation subgrades be protected from exposure to water. For foundation construction, we also recommend the following procedures.

• For soils that will remain exposed overnight or for an extended period of time, place a "lean" concrete mudmat over the bearing areas. The concrete should be at least 4 inches thick. Flowable fill concrete or low-strength concrete is suitable for this cover, as conditions allow.

• Disturbed soil should be removed prior to foundation concrete placement;

• Foundation bearing conditions should be benched level;

Whitley County KYTC Facility- Williamsburg, KY August 8, 2024 CSI Project Number LX240163 of 18 26

• Areas loosened by excavation operations should be recompacted prior to reinforcing steel placement;

• Loose soil, debris, and excess surface water should be removed from the bearing surface prior to concrete placement;

• Retain a CSI geotechnical engineer to observe all foundation excavations and provide recommendations for treatment of any unsuitable conditions encountered.

11C RAFT FOUNDATION BEARING ON GEOGRID REINFORCED SUBGRADE

As previously discussed, we recommend that a raft foundation constructed over a geogrid reinforced subgrade be considered as a moderate risk option to reduce the risk of settlement related issues. For a raft foundation bearing on a geogrid reinforced subgrade, we recommend a design maximum allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf be used for raft foundation design.

We also recommend a k-value (modulus of subgrade reaction) value of 50 pounds per square inch per inch (pci) for the design of the raft foundation. The edges of the raft foundation should bear at least 24 inches below finished exterior grading (Kentucky Building Code, Table 1809.5 for Whitley County).

As previously mentioned, raft foundations can consist of a mat foundation, a post-tension slab, or a waffle slab.