Attachment_Getoechnical_17282.pdf

State File No.: 751/17282.BDW

INFORMATION FOR BIDDERS - SECTION 00200

Soils & Structures, Geotechnical Investigation Report 02/07/2021

Lexington Harbor Facilities, Comfort Station drawing set dated 04/17/1978

State of Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Bureau of Construction Codes Plan Review

# PR2021BCC-001554 Approved Contingent 08/04/2021

Part 1 of 1

REPORT OF THE

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR

LEXINGTON STATE HARBOR

LEXINGTON

SANILAC COUNTY

MICHIGAN

FEBRUARY 7, 2021

Edgewater Resources

518 Broad Street, Suite 200

St. Joseph, Michigan 49085

Project No. 2020.2081

February 7, 2021

Edgewater Resources

518 Broad Street, Suite 200

St. Joseph, Michigan 49085

Attention: Mr. Colin Hassenger

Regarding: Lexington State Harbor

Geotechnical Report

Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan

Project No. 2020.2081

Dear Mr. Hassenger:

Soils & Structures is pleased to present this geotechnical investigation report for the Lexington

State Harbor project located in Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan.

The investigation included two (2) test borings extended to a depth of 20.0 feet. The test borings were conducted in accordance with ASTM D 1586 procedures.

The report, test boring location plan, and test boring logs are enclosed. The report provides recommendations for site preparation, foundations, fill, floors, and pavement.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide engineering services to Edgewater Resources. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact our office.

Sincerely, Soils & Structures, Inc. Reviewed by:

Michael J. Partenio, P.E. David W. Hohmeyer, P.E.

MJP/mp

Table of Contents Location of Soil Investigation Purpose of Investigation Design Information Tests Performed Description of Soil Description of Groundwater Conditions Description of Site Settlement Recommendations

Site & Subgrade Preparation Foundations Floors Lateral Earth Pressure Excavations Fill Groundwater Management Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavement Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement Quality Control Testing

General Conditions & Reliance

Appendix

Test Boring Location Plan

General Soil Profile

Test Boring Logs

Laboratory Tests

General Soil Information

Page 1 – Lexington State Harbor

Project No. 2020.2081 – February 7, 2021

Location of Soil Investigation

The soil investigation was conducted at the site located at 7411 Huron Avenue in Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan. The parcel number is 152-300-000-035-00.

Purpose of Investigation

The purpose of this investigation is to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed building addition.

Design Information

The project will consist of a 700.0 square foot addition to the existing restroom and shower building. The addition will also include a 280.0 square foot covered porch area. Parking lots and driveways may be included in the project.

The maximum column and wall loads are anticipated to be less than 50,000 pounds and

3,000 pounds per linear foot respectively. Allowable settlements of 0.6 inches for total settlement and 0.4 inches for differential settlement are assumed. If the actual design is significantly different than assumed in this report, then Soils & Structures should be contacted so that the recommendations included in this report may be reviewed and revised if necessary.

The floor elevation of the addition will be equal to the existing building. Fill and excavation may be required to achieve the desired grade. Excavation will also be required for construction of the foundations and utilities. The greatest depth of excavation for construction of the foundations and utilities is anticipated to be approximately 5.0 feet below the floor elevation. Groundwater controls and dewatering may be necessary.

Pavement is assumed to be subjected to automobile and truck traffic. A service life of twenty years was assumed for the pavement subgrade recommendations. The subgrade is assumed to be prepared as recommended in this report.

Page 2 – Lexington State Harbor

Tests Performed

The investigation included two test borings extended to a depth of 20.0 feet. The test borings are designated as Test Boring One and Test Boring Two. The test borings were conducted in accordance with ASTM D 1586 procedures. The locations were determined by Edgewater

Resources. Soils & Structures reviewed the locations for accessibility. An automatic hammer was used to obtain the soil samples. The ASTM D 1586 standard describes the procedure for sampling and testing soil using the Standard Penetration Test. Test Boring One was offset multiple times due to obstructions and refusal during drilling. The final location for

Test Boring One was 20.0 feet southwest of the original location.

The surface elevations at the test boring locations and additional points of reference were approximated using Google Earth. Horizontal measurements are referenced to the

Michigan State Plane Coordinate System. Measurements of additional site-specific reference points were also obtained. The measured test boring locations and surface elevations can be found in Table 1.

Table 1: Measured Test Boring and Points of

Reference Locations and Surface Elevations

Test Boring / Location Elevation

(feet) Northing

(feet) Easting (feet)

Surface Cover

Test Boring One 585.0 649938.5 13613549.5 Asphalt

Test Boring Two 585.0 649939.8 13613592.4 Asphalt

Soil samples were classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System. This method is a standardized system for classifying soil according to its engineering properties. Please refer to the appendix of this report for the Unified Classification System Chart. The classification is shown in the “Material Description” column of the test boring logs.

The soil strength and the allowable soil bearing value were evaluated using the “N” value. The

“N” value is the number of blows required to drive a soil sampler one foot with a standard 140-pound drop hammer. The sampler is driven a distance of 18.0 inches. The number of blows for each 6.0-inch increment is recorded. The sum of the second and third intervals is the “N” value.

The number of blows for each 6.0-inch interval is shown on the test boring logs under the column labeled “Blow Counts”. The “N” value for each sample is shown in the adjacent column.

Page 3 – Lexington State Harbor

Laboratory testing consisted of natural moisture content and particle size (sieve) analysis. The tests were performed on representative soil samples. The tests were performed in accordance with the ASTM Standards D 2216 and D 6913. The moisture content documents the presence of groundwater in the soil. The sieve analysis determines the particle distribution which is used to classify the soil and estimate its properties.

The U.S. Geological Survey Topographic map and the Quaternary Geology map of Southern

Michigan were reviewed. These maps provide general geological information about the region.

Publicly available well log records were reviewed to determine the depth of bedrock.

Description of Soil

The general soil profile consists of a layer of sand which extends to a depth of at least 20.0 feet. The soil profile is a deposit of lacustrine sand and gravel. Lacustrine deposits are soil deposits near lakes formed by glacial activity. These deposits are typically uniform in gradation and other properties.

Bedrock is present at a depth of approximately 120.0 feet. The bedrock consists of sandstone.

Pavement is present in the area of the test borings. The pavement consists of 3.5 inches of asphalt overlying 6.0 inches of gravel.

The upper portion of the sand layer consists of brown, fine to coarse gravelly sand. The upper portion of the sand layer extends to a depth of 8.0 to 11.0 feet. The “N” values of the upper portion of the sand layer range from 10 to 33, indicating that the sand is in a compact to very compact state. The “N” values correspond to an internal friction angle between 30 and 34 degrees. The upper portion of the sand layer will support the foundations, floors, and pavement.

A pocket of gray, fine to coarse gravelly sand with silt is present between depths of 8.0 and

12.0 feet in the area of Test Boring Two. The “N” value of the sand pocket is 54, indicating that the sand is in an extremely compact state. The “N” value corresponds to an internal friction angle of 38 degrees.

Page 4 – Lexington State Harbor

The middle portion of the sand layer consists of fine to medium sand with gravel and wood. The middle portion of the sand layer extends to a depth of 11.0 to 17.0 feet. The “N” values of the middle portion of the sand layer range from 33 to 35, indicating that the sand is in a very compact state. The “N” values correspond to an internal friction angle between 34 and 37 degrees.

The lower portion of the sand layer consists of gray, fine to medium silty sand with gravel and lenses of clay. The lower portion of the sand layer extends to a depth of at least 20.0 feet. The

“N” values of the lower portion of the sand layer range from 45 to 54, indicating the sand is in an extremely compact state. The “N” values correspond to an internal friction angle of 36 degrees.

A pocket of sandy gravel is present between depths of 6.0 and 7.0 feet in the area of Test

Boring One and at a depth of 17.5 feet in the area of Test Boring Two. The “N” values of the gravel pockets are 100, indicating that the gravel is in an extremely compact state. The gravel pockets were encountered and obstructed the drilling process in each relocation attempt for

Test Boring One. This gravel pocket may be a portion of a buried stone revetment.

Description of Groundwater Conditions

The water table is present at depths of 3.0 to 3.5 feet. These depths correspond with the water elevation of Lake Huron. At the time of the investigation, the water elevation of Lake

Huron was approximately 581.8 feet.

Description of Site

The site is located at 7411 Huron Avenue in Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan. The site consists of a parking lot, restroom building, and docks. The site is bordered to the north by a public access beach area. The site is bordered to the south by commercial property. The site is bordered to the east by Huron Avenue. The west side of the site is bordered by Lake

Huron. The surface elevation in the area of the test borings is approximately 585.0 feet.

Photographs #1 and #2 show the site conditions at the time of the investigation.

Page 5 – Lexington State Harbor

Photograph #1: Center portion of the site and existing building. View is to the east. (Project No.

2020.2081, Lexington State Harbor, Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan, December 2020)

Photograph #2: East portion of the site and seawall. View is to the north. (Project No.

2020.2081, Lexington State Harbor, Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan, December 2020)

Page 6 – Lexington State Harbor

Settlement

The maximum settlement of the building addition is anticipated to be less than 0.3 inches provided the recommendations in this report are observed including compaction.

Differential settlement will be approximately one half of the maximum value. These levels of settlement are within the recommended acceptable limits of 0.6 inches of total settlement and 0.4 inches of differential settlement.

Recommendations

Site & Subgrade Preparation

Trees and vegetation in the building and pavement areas should be cleared and removed as part of subgrade preparation. The topsoil should be removed to the extent that all soil with an organic content of 3.0 percent or greater is removed. Soil containing roots should be removed to the extent that the root content by volume is 5.0 percent or less. All roots over 0.5 inches in diameter should be removed. Due to the planned location of the addition, the amount of topsoil to be removed is anticipated to be minimal.

Pavement in the area of the addition will be removed as a part of site preparation. Excavations resulting from removal should be backfilled as necessary.

Fill or excavation may be required to achieve the desired grade. Excavated soil may be retained for use as fill.

Fill should be placed following the recommendations in the “Fill” section of this report. Fill should be compacted to 95.0 percent of the soil’s maximum density to its full depth.

Soil brought to the site for fill should be clean sand and gravel meeting MDOT specifications.

The soil which will be used for fill should be kept free of topsoil and other organic materials.

Compaction tests are recommended to check the compaction of the new fill.

Page 7 – Lexington State Harbor

Foundations

Spread foundations are recommended to support the addition provided the subgrade is prepared as discussed in this section as well as the “Site & Subgrade Preparation” and “Fill” sections of this report including compaction. The foundations are anticipated to be supported on the in-situ soil or fill following site preparation.

Fill below the addition should be compacted to a density of 95.0 percent of the soil’s maximum density to its full depth. In-situ sand should be compacted to 95.0 percent of the sand’s maximum density to a minimum depth of 3.0 feet below the foundations. Compaction tests should be performed in the foundation subgrade to verify these levels of compaction. Soils not exceeding the minimum density should be recompacted.

The recommended minimum cover over exterior foundations is 42 inches for protection against frost heave.

Foundations should not be constructed on frozen soil. During cold weather construction, the foundation subgrade and foundations should be protected from freezing with insulated blankets until backfill is placed over both sides of the foundation. Foundations that are damaged by frost heave should be replaced.

The site classification for seismic design is “D” based on the Michigan Building Code provided the recommendations in this report are observed. The site has a peak ground acceleration of

0.080g with a 2.0 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. The design spectral response acceleration parameters (SD) are 0.075g for the short-term response and 0.039g for the one second response. The corresponding numeric seismic design values for the spectral response acceleration parameters above are 0.080 and 0.063 respectively.

Foundations may be designed using an allowable bearing value of 3,000 pounds per square foot for column footings and 3,000 pounds per square foot for wall foundations provided the recommendations for subgrade preparation in the previous section are followed including compaction. A minimum width of 16.0 inches is recommended for new foundations. The allowable bearing values may be increased 25.0 percent when considering transient loads such as earthquakes and wind.

Page 8 – Lexington State Harbor

Floors

A slab on grade is recommended for the floors. Due to the depth of the water table, a minimum floor elevation of 586.0 is recommended.

A base of 6.0 inches of clean sand is recommended under the floors. The sand should meet

MDOT Class II specifications. Fill under floors should be compacted as specified in the “Fill” section of this report. The in-situ soil meets these specifications.

A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch is recommended for the design of slabs on grade.

Lateral Earth Pressure

Foundation walls with different soil levels on either side should be designed as retaining walls.

Sand should be used as backfill behind retaining and foundation walls. The sand should meet

MDOT Class II specifications. The walls should be designed using a soil density of 130 pounds per cubic foot, a coefficient of active earth pressure of 0.35 for level sand backfill and a coefficient of at rest earth pressure of 0.50. The effects of any surcharge or sloping backfill should also be included in the design. The passive resistance of the existing sand should be calculated using an earth pressure coefficient of 3.0.

Excavations

The in-situ soils are OSHA type “C” soils. Excavations that will be entered by personnel should be based on OSHA requirements for a type “C” soil. Based on OSHA requirements, a maximum allowable side slope of 33 degrees (1.5H:1V) is recommended for excavations 4.0 to 15.0 feet deep. Excavations less than 4.0 feet deep may have vertical side slopes.

Fill

Fill, including the aggregate layers under pavement, should be compacted to a density of 95.0 percent of its maximum density. The maximum density should be determined in accordance with the ASTM D 1557 standard. A maximum thickness per layer of 6.0 inches is recommended.

Page 9 – Lexington State Harbor

Compaction tests are recommended to confirm that the fill is compacted to the required density and may be used as fill.

Soil brought to the site for structural fill should be sand meeting MDOT Class II requirements or ASTM requirements for a SP or SW which are the designations for clean sand. If the volume of clean sand on site is not sufficient to supply all of the fill required for this project, clean sand and drainable aggregate will probably have to be imported.

Fill should not be placed over frozen ground, snow or ice. Soil which contains frozen material should not be used as fill. During winter construction, removal of frozen ground may be necessary prior to placing fill.

Groundwater Management

Dewatering may be necessary for construction of the foundations. Groundwater may be encountered in excavations. If groundwater is encountered in excavations for utilities and foundations, the excavation bottom may be stabilized by placing a 6.0 to 8.0-inch layer of porous aggregate over the bottom of the excavation. The aggregate will stabilize the bottom of the excavation.

A vapor barrier is recommended under the floor in areas that will be enclosed and heated. The vapor barrier should consist of a 10-mil polyethylene sheet and should be located immediately below the floor slab. The vapor barrier may be omitted in portions of the addition that will not be heated.

The infiltration rate of the in-situ soil will be sufficient for internal drainage of the site. However, due to the site’s proximity to Lake Huron, stormwater will not infiltrate below the Lake Huron’s water elevation. This elevation is approximately 3.0 to 4.0 feet below the existing grade.

Drains around the foundation and under the pavement may be omitted. If required by others, the drains should consist of a 4.0-inch diameter slotted plastic pipe wrapped in filter fabric. Pea gravel should be used for backfill within a 6.0-inch circumference of the drain. Under pavement, the recommended spacing is 50.0 feet. The drain invert should be at a minimum depth of 30.0 inches below the pavement surface.

Page 10 – Lexington State Harbor

Pavement areas should be properly drained to minimize the effects of frost heaving and the loss of subgrade due to water infiltration. The parking lots should be sloped at a minimum of

1.5 percent toward regional low points with catch basins or curb inlets.

Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavement

The recommended preliminary HMA pavement sections listed in Table 2 were developed based on the discussions and assumptions included in this report and the design procedures outlined in the “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.” The subgrade should be prepared as described in the “Site & Pavement Subgrade Preparation” and “Fill” sections of this report. The recommended pavement section materials listed in

Table 2 refer to and should comply with the standard material designations included in applicable MDOT specifications and guidelines including the 2012 MDOT “Standard

Specifications for Construction.”

Table 2: Recommended Pavement Section

Pavement Cross

Section Materials

Standard Duty Heavy Duty

Material Thickness (in) Material Thickness (in)

HMA Wearing Coarse 5E1 1.5 4C 2.0

HMA Base Coarse 13A, 4E1 1.5 3C, 13A 2.0

Aggregate Base 22A, 21AA 8.0 21AA Crushed

Limestone 10.0

Sand Subbase Class II 12.0 Class II 12.0

The recommended asphaltic binders are PG 58-28 for 13A mixes and PG 64-28 for “C” and “E” mixes. The compacted asphalt should be between 94.0 and 97.0 percent of the

Theoretical Maximum Density, as determined via the Superpave “Rice” Method. A tack or

“bond coat” of SS-1h emulsion shall be applied between the leveling and earing course layers at a rate of 0.1 gallons per square yard.

The paving contractor should submit the proposed mix design to the owner for review and approval prior to placement. The HMA pavement should be placed in at least two lifts. The pavement section should be constructed in accordance with MDOT guidelines and specifications as well as applicable state and local requirements.

Page 11 – Lexington State Harbor

Paved areas that display poor workmanship, which may include segregation, “cold screed scrapes”, wearing courses not flush with curbs or rims, roller marks, shoving, smearing or tearing of the mat, flushing, or excessive cold joints should be repaired or replaced by the contractor immediately.

Pavement subgrade, subbase, and aggregate base should be proof rolled using a fully-loaded tri-axle dump truck prior to aggregate base and pavement placement. The site may require undercutting or subgrade stabilization prior to placing sand subbase and aggregate base layers if the traditional construction methods are applied.

The subgrade, sand subbase and aggregate base should be constructed and prepared in accordance with the “Site & Subgrade Preparation” and “Fill” sections of this report and applicable MDOT guidelines and specifications.

Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement

The subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the “Site & Subgrade Preparation” and

“Fill” sections of this report.

A base of 12.0 inches of clean sand that meets MDOT Class II specifications is recommended under the slab on grade concrete pavement. The in-situ soil meets these specifications. A minimum slab on grade concrete pavement thickness of 4.0 to 6.0 inches is recommended for standard and heavy-duty concrete pavement. In the areas of dumpster pads, the pavement thickness should be increased to 8.0 inches and should be reinforced.

The reinforcing should be designed by a structural engineer.

A base of 6.0 inches of clean sand or aggregate is recommended below sidewalk slabs. The sand or aggregate should meet MDOT Class II or 21AA specifications respectively. Soil that contains organic material or has a high fines content should be replaced. The recommended minimum concrete pavement thickness if 4.0 inches for sidewalks surrounded by greenbelt and 5.0 inches for revealed-face slabs.

A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch is recommended for the design of slabs on grade, provided the recommendations in this report are observed. The paving contractor should submit the proposed mix design to the owner for review and approval prior to concrete placement.

Page 12 – Lexington State Harbor

Quality Control Testing

Compaction tests (ASTM D 6938) are recommended to confirm that sand and fill in the area of the addition are compacted to the specified density. While fill is being placed, compaction tests should be performed at the rate of one test per 400 cubic yards of fill and throughout the depth of the fill with a minimum of five tests at each 1.0-foot elevation interval. Full time inspection is recommended while sand and fill are compacted in the building area. Compaction tests should be performed under foundations at the rate of one test per 50 linear feet for wall foundations and one test per column foundation. The recommended testing frequency in the floor and pavement subgrade is one test per 2,500 square feet. Tests should also be performed in the backfill over foundations and utilities. The maximum density should be determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557 or ASTM D 4253 procedures.

Asphalt quality control testing should adhere to the 2012 MDOT Standards for Construction.

Asphalt temperatures during placement should be at least 275 degrees Fahrenheit; material that arrives at temperatures below 250 degrees Fahrenheit shall be rejected. Asphalt density testing should be performed with a nuclear density gauge at a minimum rate of one test per

500 square feet of pavement. At least five total verification cores in each course are recommended to assess relative compaction, calibrate the nuclear density gauge, and evaluate thickness. A minimum of two loose mix samples per mix per day should be taken at the plant and delivered to the quality-assurance firm’s laboratory for vacuum extraction-gradations. The asphalt contractor should provide a minimum of two (2) theoretical maximum density verifications per day.

A smooth 0.5 to 0.75-inch diameter rod should be used in conjunction with compaction tests to probe for loose areas under foundations, in fill, and under floors.

A dynamic cone should not be substituted for compaction tests for evaluating fill.

Testing should be performed by technicians supervised by a registered geotechnical engineer.

General Conditions & Reliance

The report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession. The scope of work consisted of performing two test borings and providing soil related recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed addition. The scope of work did not include an environmental study or wetland determination.

Page 13 – Lexington State Harbor

The report and the associated test borings were prepared specifically for the previously described project and site. Soils & Structures should be consulted if a significant change in the scope of the project is made.

The test borings represent point information and may not have encountered all of the soil types and materials present on this site. This report does not constitute a guarantee of the soil or groundwater conditions or that the test borings are an exact representation of the soil or groundwater conditions at all points on this site.

The descriptions and recommendations contained in this report are based on an interpretation of the test borings and laboratory tests. The test borings should not be used independently of the report. If soil conditions are encountered which are significantly different from the test borings, Soils & Structures should be consulted for additional recommendations. The report and test borings may be relied upon by Edgewater Resources for the design, construction, permitting and financing associated with the Lexington State Harbor project located at 7411

Huron Avenue in Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan. The use of the report and test borings by third parties not associated with this project or for other sites has not been agreed upon by

Soils & Structures. Soils & Structures does not recommend or consent to third party use or reliance of the report or test borings unless allowed to review the proposed use of these materials. Unless obtained in writing, consent to third party use should not be assumed. Third parties using the report or test boring logs do so at their own risk and are offered no guarantee or promise of indemnity.

Appendix

Test Boring Location Plan

General Soil Profile

Test Boring Logs

Laboratory Tests

General Soil Information

SITE

JOB NO.: 2020.2081 DATE: 02-03-2021

Soils & Structures, Inc.

6480 Grand Haven Road

Muskegon, Michigan 49441

Lexington, Sanilac County, Michigan

Lexington State Harbor 7411 Huron Avenue

Note: The background of the test boring plan is a portion of an aerial photograph from Google Earth.

TEST BORING LOCATION PLAN

NTS

VICINITY MAP (NTS)

TEST BORING

ONE (original)

Lake Huron

TEST BORING

TWO

TEST BORING

ONE (relocated)

Pr oj ec t I d:

.2

Ti tle

Se cƟ on li ne

Pr oj ec t T itl e:

Le xi ng to n St at e

H ar bo r

Ve rƟ ca l S ca le

1:

Lo ca

Ɵo n:

Le xi ng to n, M ic hi ga n

H or izo nt al S ca le

1:

Cl ie nt

Ed ge w at er R es ou rc es

En gi ne er

M ik e

Pa rt en io

, P .E

0.

Le ge nd K ey As ph al t

Po or ly G ra de d G

R

AV

EL

Po or ly G ra de d

SA

N D

Po or ly G ra de d

SA

N D w ith

SI

LT

SI

LT

Y

SA

N D

N =1

N =3

N =3

N =4

N =5

TB-01

N =1

N =1

N =2

N =5

N =3

TB-02

W at er T ab le

G E

N E

R A

L S

O

IL

P R

O F

IL

E

N O

T E

: T he w at er ta bl e is p re se nt a t a d ep th o f

3.

to

.5 fe et

A S

P H

A

LT

.5 in ch es

G R

A V

E L

6.

in ch es

S A

N D c om pa ct b ro w n fin e to m ed iu m

S

P

N to

G R

A V

E L ex tr em el y co m pa ct gr ay fi ne to c oa rs e sa nd y w ith s ilt

G

P

N

S A

N D v er y co m pa ct b ro w n fin e to co ar se g ra ve lly

S

P

N to

S A

N D v er y co m pa ct g ra y fin e to c oa rs e gr av el ly w ith si lt

(S P

-S M

N

S A

N D v er y co m pa ct g ra y fin e gr av el ly w ith a tr ac e of w oo d an d si lt (S

P

N

S A

N D v er y co m pa ct to e xt re m el y co m pa ct gr ay fi ne to m ed iu m si lty w ith g ra ve l a nd le ns es o f c la y

(S M

N to

S A

N D v er y co m pa ct lig ht b ro w n fin e to m ed iu m w ith g ra ve l an d w oo d

(S P

N

De pt h

G ra ph ic

Material DescripƟon

ASPHALT (3.5")

GRAVEL - gray sandy SAND - compact brown Įne to medium

SAND - very compact brown Įne to coarse gravelly

GRAVEL - extremely compact gray Įne to coarse sandy SAND - very compact light brown Įne to medium with gravel and wood

SAND - very compact light brown to gray Įne to medium silty with gravel

SAND - extremely compact gray silty with lenses of clay and a trace of gravel

Ca uƟ on ar y Co nd iƟ on Sa m pl e Ty pe

N um be r

SPT-A

SPT-B

SPT-C

SPT-D

SPT-E

SPT-F

Re co ve ry

RQ

D

Bl ow

Co un ts

3-5-9

5-10-20

2-6-27

17-22-23

12-20-34

N -V al ue

Sh ea r S tr en gt h (t sf

M oi st ur e Co nt en t (

18.0

11.0

24.0

15.0

AƩerberg Limits

Li qu id Li m it

Pl as

Ɵc Li m it

Pl as

Ɵc ity

In de x U

SC

S

SP

SP

GP

SP

SM

SM

Borehole ID: TB-01 Sheet 1 of 1

Project Name: Lexington State Harbor Project Number: 2020.2081 Project LocaƟon: Lexington, Michigan Logged By: Z.Gill Reviewed By: H.Dolinski Client: Edgewater Resources Survey Datum: NAD 1983 StatePlane Michigan South Hole Depth: 20.00 Date Started: Dec 23 2020 Completed: Dec 23 2020 Northing: 649938.5 EasƟng: 13613549.5 ElevaƟon: 585.00 Drilling Method: 4.25" Hollow Stem Auger Ground Water Levels Equipment: Acker Renegade At Time of Drilling 3.00 on - Groundwater Encountered Hammer Type: AutomaƟc Hammer Notes: Boring oīset 5x due to refusal at 3-5'. Final boring oīset 20' SW.

Ann Arbor • Muskegon • Traverse City (800)-933-3959

De pt h

G ra ph ic

Material DescripƟon

ASPHALT (3.5")

GRAVEL - gray Įne to coarse sandy SAND - compact to very compact brown Įne to medium

SAND - very compact gray Įne to coarse gravelly with silt

SAND - very compact gray Įne gravelly with a trace of wood and silt

GRAVEL - extremely compact gray Įne to coarse with sand and silt

Ca uƟ on ar y Co nd iƟ on Sa m pl e Ty pe

N um be r

SPT-A

SPT-B

SPT-C

SPT-D

SPT-E

SPT-F

Re co ve ry

RQ

D

Bl ow

Co un ts

12-6-5

3-3-7

4-10-16

16-32-22

22-21-14

N -V al ue

Sh ea r S tr en gt h (t sf

M oi st ur e Co nt en t (

17.0

22.0

12.0

14.0

AƩerberg Limits

Li qu id Li m it

Pl as

Ɵc Li m it

Pl as

Ɵc ity

In de x U

SC

S

SP

SP

SP

SP-

SM

SP

GP

Borehole ID: TB-02 Sheet 1 of 1

Project Name: Lexington State Harbor Project Number: 2020.2081 Project LocaƟon: Lexington, Michigan Logged By: Z.Gill Reviewed By: H.Dolinski Client: Edgewater Resources Survey Datum: NAD 1983 StatePlane Michigan South Hole Depth: 17.50 Date Started: Dec 23 2020 Completed: Dec 23 2020 Northing: 649939.8 EasƟng: 13613592.4 ElevaƟon: 585.00 Drilling Method: 4.25" Hollow Stem Auger Ground Water Levels Equipment: Acker Renegade At Time of Drilling 3.50 on - Groundwater Encountered Hammer Type: AutomaƟc Hammer Notes: Refusal at 17.5Ō. Sample Collected at 17.5 Ō.

Ann Arbor • Muskegon • Traverse City (800)-933-3959

Sample Location

Sample Depth (ft)

Sample ID

Fine Medium Fine Silt

0.0% 0.7% 29.7% 63.6% 0.0%

D85 D50 D15 D10

0.5637 0.2957 0.1791 0.1625

Particle Size (mm) % Passing Particle Size

(mm) % Passing

75.000 100%

37.500 100%

19.000 100%

12.500 100%

9.500 100%

4.750 99%

2.360 98%

1.180 95%

0.600 90%

0.300 51% Technician

0.150 6% Checked

0.075 3.7% Approved

TB-01 Project Number 2020.2081

Particle Size Distribution Report

Project Name Lexington State Harbor

TCLB202101130 Date 1/25/2021

1 Client Edgewater Resources

% +3" % Gravel % Sand % Fines

Coarse Coarse Clay

0.0% 2.3% 0.0%

D60 D30 Loss By Wash

0.3681 0.2291 3.7%

Sieve Hydrometer Material Description

SAND - fine to medium (SP)

Remarks

Hanna

Hanna

Hanna

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

GRAVEL

SAND

Coarse Medium Fine

SILT CLAY

Sample ID

Fine Medium Fine Silt

0.0% 5.0% 20.6% 61.9% 0.0%

D85 D50 D15 D10

1.9694 0.2671 0.1324 0.1093

Particle Size (mm) % Passing Particle Size

(mm) % Passing

75.000 100%

37.500 100%

19.000 94%

12.500 92%

9.500 91%

4.750 89%

2.360 86%

1.180 82%

0.600 72%

0.300 59% Technician

0.150 19% Checked

0.075 2.6% Approved

TB-01 Project Number 2020.2081

Particle Size Distribution Report

Project Name Lexington State Harbor

TCLB202101133 Date 1/25/2021

8.5 Client Edgewater Resources

% +3" % Gravel % Sand % Fines

Coarse Coarse Clay

6.1% 3.9% 0.0%

D60 D30 Loss By Wash

0.3272 0.1920 2.6%

Sieve Hydrometer Material Description

SAND - fine to medium with gravel (SP)

Remarks

Hanna

Hanna

Hanna

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

GRAVEL

SAND

Sample ID

Fine Medium Fine Silt

0.0% 1.0% 31.9% 62.9% 0.0%

D85 D50 D15 D10

0.5463 0.3273 0.1878 0.1694

Particle Size (mm) % Passing Particle Size

(mm) % Passing

75.000 100%

37.500 100%

19.000 100%

12.500 100%

9.500 100%

4.750 99%

2.360 98%

1.180 97%

0.600 94%

0.300 46% Technician

0.150 5% Checked

0.075 2.8% Approved

TB-02 Project Number 2020.2081

Particle Size Distribution Report

Project Name Lexington State Harbor

TCLB202101136 Date 1/25/2021

3.5 Client Edgewater Resources

% +3" % Gravel % Sand % Fines

Coarse Coarse Clay

0.0% 1.5% 0.0%

D60 D30 Loss By Wash

0.3898 0.2427 2.8%

Sieve Hydrometer Material Description

SAND - fine to medium (SP)

Remarks

Hanna

Hanna

Hanna

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

GRAVEL

SAND

Sample ID

Fine Medium Fine Silt

0.0% 33.4% 18.4% 24.4% 0.0%

D85 D50 D15 D10

11.6148 2.1010 0.1918 0.1443

Particle Size (mm) % Passing Particle Size

(mm) % Passing

75.000 100%

37.500 100%

19.000 100%

12.500 87%

9.500 80%

4.750 66%

2.360 52%

1.180 42%

0.600 36%

0.300 27% Technician

0.150 10% Checked

0.075 6.3% Approved

TB-02 Project Number 2020.2081

Particle Size Distribution Report

Project Name Lexington State Harbor

TCLB202101137 Date 1/25/2021

8.5 Client Edgewater Resources

% +3" % Gravel % Sand % Fines

Coarse Coarse Clay

0.5% 17.0% 0.0%

D60 D30 Loss By Wash

3.6906 0.4004 6.3%

Sieve Hydrometer Material Description

SAND - fine to coarse gravelly with silt (SP)

Remarks

Hanna

Hanna

Hanna

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

GRAVEL

SAND

1 General Information for Method of Field Investigation

General Information for Method of Field Investigation

The soil investigation was performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials method ASTM D 1586, which is the “Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils”. Samples of compressible clays or organic soils are obtained in accordance with ASTM D 1587, which is the “Standard Practice for Thin-Walled Tube Sampling of Soils for Geotechnical Purposes.” Rock may be cored in conjunction with the above methods as specified in ASTM D 2113 which is the “Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site Investigation.”

Field Testing

Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) in accordance with ASTM D 1586 were generally performed at depths of 2.0’, 4.5’, 7.0’, 9.5’ and 5.0’ intervals thereafter.

Laboratory Testing

Samples obtained from the Standard Penetration Test, ASTM D 1586 or thin walled tube method, ASTM D 1587, were tested in the laboratory for the moisture content and density and/or particle size, where applicable.

When soils sampled possessed sufficient cohesive properties, it was tested for its compressive strength in the unconfined state.

Natural Percent Moisture content (N.P.M.) of the soil is the percentage by weight of water contained in the soil sample compared to the dry weight of the solids of which the soil is composed. The NPM of select samples is determined in accordance with ASTM D 2216.

Natural Density (N.D.) of soil as reported on the appended boring logs is the natural wet density of the soils expressed in pounds per cubic foot.

The unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soils is determined in the laboratory on “undisturbed” select samples in accordance with ASTM D 2166. This test determines the maximum load required at a specified rate to deform the cohesive soil specimen length twenty (20%) percent. The primary purpose of the unconfined compression test is to obtain approximate quantitative values of the compressive strength of soils possessing sufficient coherence to permit testing in the unconfined state. The shear strength of the cohesive soil can be calculated from the results of the unconfined compressive strength test.

Color

When the color of the soils is uniform throughout, the color recorded will be such as brown, gray, and black and may be modified by adjectives such as light and dark. If the soils predominant color is shaded by secondary color, the secondary color precedes the primary color, such as gray-brown, or yellow-brown. If two major and distinct colors are swirled throughout the soil, the colors will be modified by the term mottled; such as mottled brown and gray.

Water Observations

Depth of water recorded in the test boring is measured from the ground surface to the water surface. Initial depth indicates water level during boring, completing depth indicates water level immediately after boring, and depth after “X” number of hours indicates water level after allowing the groundwater rise or fall over a period of time. Water observations in pervious soils are considered reliable groundwater levels for accurate groundwater measurements at the time the test borings were performed unless records are made over several days’ time.

Factors such as weather, soils porosity, etc., will cause the groundwater level to fluctuate for both pervious and impervious soils.

2 General Information for Method of Field Investigation

Sample Type

If not otherwise indicated, the sample is a split-barrel liner sample ASTM D 1586.

“S.T.’ – Shelby tube sample, ASTM D 1587

“A” – disturbed augered sample

“C” – rock core sampled ASTM D 2113

N.P.M. – Natural Percent Moisture of in-situ soils sample

N.D. – Natural Density of in-situ soils sample in pcf.

S.S. – Shear Strength of cohesive soils samples as determined by the Unconfined Compression tests in ksf.

Classification Data – Laboratory data to assist in classification of soils and classification of soils characteristics;

i.e., plastic limit or liquid limit

Test Boring Logs

Particle Size Visual

Boulders Larger than 12” (300 mm)

Cobbles 12” to 3” (300 to 75 mm)

Gravel - Coarse 3” to ¾ “ (75 to 19 mm)

Gravel – Fine 19.0 to 4.75 mm

Sand- Coarse 4.75 to 2.0 mm

Sand - Medium 2.0 to 0.425 mm

Sand - Fine 0.425 to 0.075 mm

Silt 0.075 to 0.002 mm

Clay 0.002 mm and smaller

Soils Components

Major Component Minor Component

Gravel Trace (1 - 10%)

Sand Some (11 - 35%)

Silt/Clay And (36 - 50%)

Condition of Soil Relative to Compactness

Granular Material “N” Value

Loose 0 - 4

Slightly Compact 5 - 7

Compact 8 - 20

Very Compact 21 - 50

Extremely Compact 51 and above

Cohesive Material “N” Value

Soft 0 - 4

Firm 5 - 7

Stiff 8 - 20

Very Stiff 21 - 50

Extremely Stiff 51 and above

“N” values in clay soils are not to be used as a measure of shear strength. However, they may be used as a general indication of strength.

3 General Information for Method of Field Investigation

Unified Soil Classification System Chart

Major Divisions Letter Symbol

Typical Descriptions

Coarse Grained Soils

More than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size

Gravel – Gravelly Soils more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve

Clean gravels

(little or no fines)

GW

Well-Graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

GP

Poorly-Graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

Gravel with Fines

(appreciable amount of fines)

GM

Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures

GC

Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures

Sand and Sandy Soils

More than 50% of coarse fraction passing No. 4 sieve

Clean Sand

(little or no fines)

SW

Well-Graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

SP

Poorly-Graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

Sand with Fines

(appreciable amount of fines)

SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures

Fine Grained Soils

More than 50% of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size

Silts and Clays

Liquid limit less than 50

ML

Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity

CL

Inorganic clays or low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays

OL

Organic silts and organic silty clays or low plasticity

Silts and Clays

Liquid limit greater than 50

MH

Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand or silty soils

CH

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays

OH

Organic clays or medium to high plasticity, organic silts

Highly organic soils

PT

Peat, humus, swamp soils with high organic contents