GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

FIGHTING CREEK PARK ADA TRAIL

2505 MANN ROAD

POWHATAN COUNTY, VIRGINIA

JOB NUMBER: 56979.008

PREPARED FOR:

POWHATAN COUNTY

3834 OLD BUCKINGHAM ROAD, SUITE A

POWHATAN, VIRGINIA 23139

NOVEMBER 14, 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. A

1. PROJECT INFORMATION

2. FIELD EXPLORATION

3. LABORATORY TESTING

4. SITE GEOLOGY

5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Ground Surface Cover

5.2 Undisturbed Soils

5.3 Borehole Water Levels

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Site Preparation

6.1.1 General

6.1.2 Subgrade Evaluation

6.1.3 Undercut Potential

6.1.4 Highly Plastic Soils

6.2 Excavations

6.3 Re-use of On-site Soils as Structural Fill

6.4 Structural Fill

6.5 Boardwalk Foundations

6.6 Boardwalk Foundation Settlement

6.7 Seismic Site Classification

6.8 Pavement Sections Shared Use Path

7. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT

8. CLOSURE

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Figures

Appendix B - Boring Logs

Appendix C - Laboratory Test Results

A

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

For your convenience, this report is summarized in outline form below. This brief summary should not be used for design or construction purposes without reviewing the more detailed conclusions and recommendations contained in this report.

1. The subsurface exploration included a visual site reconnaissance, performance of nine (9) hand auger borings to depths of approximately 5 to 8 feet below the ground surface and quantitative laboratory testing.

2. The borings encountered approximately 1 to 8 inches of surficial topsoil material. Below the topsoil, undisturbed soils, and hand auger refusal materials were encountered. Hand auger refusal materials were encountered in one boring, at a depth of approximately 5.5 feet below the ground surface. Water was not encountered within the borings to the depths explored.

3. We recommend that site grading be conducted during the typically warmer summer months.

Near-surface soils encountered in the borings typically consisted of fine-grained Silts, Clays and Sands with considerable fines content that are very moisture sensitive. The near-surface soils can quickly become unstable under construction traffic and necessitate repairs.

4. On-site moderate plasticity soils, excluding topsoil and debris-laden soils, should be suitable for re-use as structural fill. Moisture manipulation of structural fill materials should be anticipated. Layers of highly plastic soils were encountered in our borings, and these soils should not be re-used as structural fill within 2 feet of finished soil subgrades. Based on our laboratory testing, near-surface soils appear to be near to wet of optimum moisture and may require drying prior to their use as structural fill. The addition of lime (AASHTO M216) can be used to aid in the drying process.

5. The proposed timber boardwalk may be supported on shallow foundations bearing in approved undisturbed soils or new structural fill overlying approved undisturbed soils. Shallow foundations may be designed with an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Foundations should bear at least 24 inches below finished soil subgrade. If highly plastic soils are encountered at the footing bearing elevation, they should be undercut an additional 12 inches and replaced with lean concrete (minimum 28-day compressive strength of 500 psi).

6. We recommend the site be considered Seismic Site Classification D based on the latest edition of the Virginia Building Code.

7. If actual structural loading and proposed grades differ from those assumed in this report, we must be contacted to confirm or modify the recommendations of this report.

8. Recommended pavement sections are presented in the body of the report.

1001 Boulders Parkway

Suite 300

Richmond, VA 23225

P 804.200.6500

F 804.560.1016 www.timmons.com

November 14, 2025

Powhatan County

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A

Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Attention: Mrs. Megan Heatwole

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trail

2505 Mann Road

Powhatan County, Virginia

Timmons Group Project No. 56979.008

Mrs. Heatwole:

Timmons Group is pleased to submit this geotechnical engineering report for the referenced project. The objectives of our services were to explore subsurface conditions and provide our geotechnical recommendations for site grading and pavement support.

1. PROJECT INFORMATION

The project site is located within the existing Fighting Creek Park at 2505 Mann Road in Powhatan

County, Virginia. The site currently consists of an existing gravel nature trail running from the existing parking lot in the southwest, to the existing library in the northeast. A Site Vicinity Map is shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A.

Proposed construction is expected to consist of ADA improvements to the existing trail. We understand these improvements will mainly consist of a new approximately 2,600 linear foot pedestrian trail, which generally follows the alignment of the existing gravel trail. Based on provided plans, the trail will begin as a concrete sidewalk adjacent to the existing parking lot in the southwest, and transition to an asphalt paved trail as it enters the exiting wooded area. In addition, we understand that the project will also include the construction of new ADA parking spaces, and replacing an existing timber boardwalk on the southeast side of the trail.

Existing elevations across the site range from approximately 318 to 358 feet Mean Sea Level

(MSL). Based on the proposed grading plan, we expect that maximum cuts and fills of 2 to 3 feet may be necessary to reach finished grades across the site. Based on the structural information made

Geotechnical Engineering Report Project No. 56979.008

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trail - Powhatan County, VA November 14, 2025 available to us at the time of this report, the proposed boardwalk is anticipated to be supported by

6 by 6-inch wooden posts embedded in cast-in place concrete pier foundations with a maximum axial load of 3 kips per pier.

2. FIELD EXPLORATION

The field exploration included a visual site reconnaissance by a representative of Timmons Group and the performance of nine hand auger borings (HA-01 through HA-09). Boring locations were selected by Timmons Group. A representative of Timmons Group established boring locations in the field using GPS equipment. Approximate hand auger boring locations are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A.

Hand auger borings were performed to depths of approximately 5 to 8 feet below the ground surface. Materials refusing hand auger advancement were encountered within boring HA-08 at a depth of roughly 5.5 feet below the ground surface. It is noted that auger refusal materials likely do not represent mass rock as the boring was performed with hand operated equipment.

Representative soils samples were collected from the borings at approximate one-foot depth intervals. Several bulk samples of near surface soils were also collected from select boring locations to aid our laboratory testing. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were performed within hand auger borings at approximate one-foot depth intervals. The DCP test procedure is as follows: The cone point of the penetrometer is first seated 2 inches into the bearing materials to embed the point. Then the cone point is driven an additional 1-3/4 inches using a 15-pound weight

(hammer) falling 20 inches. The cone point is then driven a second and third increment of 1-3/4 inches each and the number of hammer blows are recorded for each increment. The “average” penetration reading is the average of the second and third blow readings. The penetrometer reading is similar to the standard penetration resistance “N-value” as defined by ASTM D 1586. The penetrometer test results provide an index for estimating soil strength and relative density.

Water levels were measured in open boreholes at the time of drilling. Upon completion, boreholes were then backfilled with auger cuttings. Representative soils samples were returned to our laboratory for visual classification in general accordance with Unified Soil Classification System guidelines.

Hand auger boring logs, which present specific information from the borings, are included in

Appendix B. Stratification lines shown on the boring logs are intended to represent approximate depths of changes in soil types. Naturally, transitional changes in soil types are often gradual and cannot be defined at particular depths.

3. LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples obtained from the borings. This testing consisted of natural moisture content, Atterberg limits, grain size analyses, Standard

Proctor, and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. A summary of laboratory test data and individual laboratory test data sheets are provided in Appendix C.

Based on the Atterberg limits testing and visual classifications, near-surface soils are generally of moderate to high plasticity. Based on comparison of natural moisture contents to the optimum moisture contents of the bulk samples, near-surface soils appear near to wet of optimum compaction moisture. Moisture manipulation of some of the near-surface soils will likely be required prior to their re-use as fill. The time of year the grading occurs will likely have a significant impact on the moisture levels of near-surface soils.

4. SITE GEOLOGY

According to the 1993 Geologic Map of Virginia, the site is located in the Piedmont Physiographic

Province. Within the upland areas, soils within the Piedmont Province are the residual product of in-place chemical and physical weathering of parent rock materials and are termed “residual soils.” The typical residual soil profile consists of finer grain silts and clays near the ground surface which gradually transition to coarser and denser material with depth. In many locations, the transition zone between soil and rock is not well defined. Locally, the transition zone is termed weathered rock. For engineering purposes, weathered rock is defined as residual material in which

Standard Penetration Test N-values are 60 blows per foot or greater. Locally, the site appears to be underlain by Porphyroblastic Garnet-Biotite Gneiss, with the primary bedrock type consisting of gneiss.

5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The following is a summary of subsurface conditions encountered during the exploration.

5.1 Ground Surface Cover

The borings encountered approximately 1 to 8 inches of surficial topsoil material. These topsoil thicknesses may vary across the site and could extend deeper in some areas. In addition, the majority of the proposed project is located within existing wooded areas. Wooded areas may require significantly greater topsoil and organic laden soil removal, as well as removal of root balls during tree removal. We expect these cuts could be on the order of 18 to 24 inches or more.

5.2 Undisturbed Soils

Beneath the ground surface cover, undisturbed soils were encountered in the borings to depths ranging from about 5 to 8 feet below the ground surface. The soils consisted of medium stiff to very stiff lean CLAY (CL), soft to very stiff SILT and Elastic SILT (ML, MH), and very loose to medium dense Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SC). The soils of this layer contained varying amounts of roots, Gravel, and Mica. Average Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) values within the soil profile ranged from 2 to 25+ blows per increment. It is noted that auger refusal was encountered in boring HA-08; however, we do not expect that refusal is indicative of encountering mass rock.

5.3 Borehole Water Levels

At the time of exploration, water was not encountered within the hand auger borings to the depths explored. It is important to realize that groundwater levels will fluctuate with changes in rainfall and evaporation rates. In addition, perched groundwater could be encountered within near-surface soils, particularly after rainfall.

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon our borings, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and past experience with similar projects and subsurface conditions. If actual structural loading and proposed grades differ from those assumed in this report, we must be contacted to confirm or modify the recommendations of this report.

6.1 Site Preparation

6.1.1 General

Site grading will be difficult during periods of extended rainfall and low temperatures that generally occur during the late autumn to early spring months. Near-surface soils generally consist of fine-grained Clays, Silts, and Sands with considerable fines content which are very moisture sensitive. In addition, some near-surface soils are relatively soft. If grading is conducted during a wet time period, soils will tend to rut and pump under rubber-tired traffic and provide poor subgrade support for pavements. Heavy rubber-tired construction equipment should not be allowed to operate on wet or unstable subgrades at this site due to the potential for rutting and other damage to the soils. To reduce potential earthwork problems, site preparation and grading should be scheduled during the typically warmer summer months, if possible. We recommend that exposed subgrades be sloped and sealed at the end of each day to promote runoff and reduce infiltration from rainfall.

Site preparation should begin with the demolition of the existing gravel trail (as applicable) clearing and grubbing of trees, stripping of topsoil, and removal of any other unsuitable materials.

Approximately 1 to 8 inches of surficial topsoil was encountered in the borings. Topsoil stripping activities often mix near-surface materials with underlying “clean” soils and cause stripping depths to be greater than actual ground surface cover depths, particularly during wet periods of the year.

Additionally,, deeper stripping depths associated with root mat should be expected within wooded areas on the site. Topsoil, vegetation, and demolition debris should be wasted from the site.

6.1.2 Subgrade Evaluation

After stripping, exposed soil subgrades in areas to receive fill and finished subgrades should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. To aid the engineer during this evaluation, exposed soil subgrades should be proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck or equivalent. Proofrolling will help to reveal the presence of unstable or otherwise unsuitable surface materials. The following methods are typically used to repair soil subgrades that are observed to rut, pump, or deflect excessively during proofrolling:

• Undercut the unstable soils to firm soils and replace them with suitable, well compacted structural fill.

• In-place repair of near-surface soils by scarifying, drying and re-compacting, when weather conditions are suitable. The addition of lime (quicklime or hydrated lime) can be used to aid in the drying process. If lime is used, it should meet the requirement of AASHTO M216, and its mixing with on-site soils should be conducted in accordance with the latest edition of the VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications.

6.1.3 Undercut Potential

The upper 1 foot of soils were relatively soft/loose (Average DCP vales of 0 to 5) in borings HA-

02, HA-03, HA-05, HA-06, and HA-08. It is possible that additional areas of relatively soft/loose soils may be encountered in areas between the boring locations. During favorable weather conditions, we expect these soft/loose soils can be repaired in place. In poor weather conditions, some undercutting/replacement of these soils, or treatment with lime, may be required. The amount of repairs can only be determined by field evaluation at the time of construction. The extent of the repairs will likely depend on the in-place density of the soil, the soil moisture content, level of construction traffic on exposed subgrades prior to proofrolling, and prevailing weather conditions at the time of grading. Performing grading in a period of hot and dry weather will likely increase the potential that some soft/loose subgrade soils can be densified in place.

6.1.4 Highly Plastic Soils

A portion of the near-surface soils were comprised of highly plastic soils (liquid limit of 50 or greater or plasticity index of 30 or greater). Highly plastic soils can have the potential for significant shrink and swell with changes in moisture content. We recommend that highly plastic soils not be re-used as structural fill within 2 feet of finished soil subgrade in the trail area.

6.2 Excavations

As previously discussed, we expect that cuts of up to 2 to 3 feet will be necessary to reach finished grades at this site. Based on these anticipated excavation depths, we expect that excavations will typically extend through low to moderate consistency soils. Past experience indicates that low to moderate consistency soils can be excavated by routine earth moving equipment.

For confined excavations, trench safety must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The contractor will be responsible for all site safety, including the determination of appropriate trench safety measures according to OSHA guidelines.

Water was not encountered within the borings to the depths explored. However, shallow perched groundwater could be present within near-surface soils, particularly after rainfall events. In addition, shallow perched groundwater should be expected within the wetland over which the new boardwalk will cross. The contractor should be prepared to control and remove groundwater seepage that occurs within excavations.

6.3 Re-use of On-site Soils as Structural Fill

Moderate plasticity soils encountered in the borings, excluding topsoil or debris-laden soils, may be re-used as structural fill, provided their moisture content can be properly controlled. A portion of the near-surface soils encountered in the borings consisted of highly plastic soils. We recommend that highly plastic soils not be re-used as structural fill within 2 feet of finished soil subgrades on the site.

The soils encountered in the borings may require drying by way of disking/aerating or lime treatment if they prove to be wet of optimum moisture and therefore unable to achieve the appropriate degree of compaction at their current moisture levels. The lime percentage needed would be determined by the moisture level of soils at the time of fill placement. If lime is used to dry soils, the lime should meet the requirement of AASHTO M216, and lime application/mixing with on-site soils should be in accordance with the most recent edition of the VDOT Road and

Bridge Specifications. Highly plastic soils can be very difficult to manipulate and dry when they are at moisture levels significantly above optimum moisture.

Prevailing weather conditions will have a significant impact on the amount of moisture manipulation (i.e., drying or wetting) required prior to fill placement. At the time of our exploration, near-surface soils appeared near to wet of optimum compaction moisture.

6.4 Structural Fill

On-site soils used for structural fill should be free of debris, contain less than 5 percent organics, have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, have a maximum liquid limit (LL) of 50, and have a maximum plasticity index (PI) of 25. Imported structural fill materials used as structural fill should consist of sands (USCS types SC, SM, SP) or well-graded gravels (GM), have a maximum LL of

30, have a maximum PI of 15, and otherwise meet the requirements above.

Structural fill should be placed in maximum 8 to 10-inch loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The final 12 inches of structural fill relative to finished subgrade should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the

Standard Proctor maximum dry density. Structural fill should be maintained within 3 percent of optimum moisture during placement and compaction.

Site preparation, including fill placement and compaction, should be observed by a qualified soils technician working under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. During fill placement, a sufficient amount of in-place density tests should be conducted to confirm that compaction and fill moisture is in accordance with our recommendations.

6.5 Boardwalk Foundations

Based upon the structural information provided to us at the time of this report, we anticipate that the timber boardwalk will be supported on 6 by 6-inch wooden posts embedded within cast-in-place concrete pier foundations. Furthermore, we understand that the piers will bear roughly 2.5 to 3 feet below the existing ground surface and have a maximum load not exceeding approximately

3 kips per pier. Based on the provided structural information, the borings, laboratory testing, and our engineering analysis, the proposed boardwalk may be supported on shallow foundations bearing in approved undisturbed soils or new structural fill overlying approved undisturbed soils.

Shallow foundations may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf.

Foundations should bear at least 24 inches below finished building pad soil subgrade for frost protection and to develop the required bearing capacity. If highly plastic soils are encountered at the foundation bearing elevation, they should be undercut an additional 12 inches and replaced with lean concrete (minimum 28-day compressive strength of 500 psi). Individual foundations should have a minimum diameter of 18 inches. This recommendation is made to avoid a

“punching” shear failure which can occur with narrow footings.

Foundation excavations should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative prior to reinforcing steel and concrete placement. The evaluation should involve probing of foundation bearing surfaces, advancing shallow hand auger borings, and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing. If loose/soft soils or existing fill are present at bearing elevations, neat-line over-excavation and replacement of foundation bearing soils with VDOT No. 57 stone will be required.

If groundwater or surface water runoff collects in any excavation, it should be removed promptly.

Care should be exercised during construction of foundations in order not to disturb bearing soils and reduce their bearing strength. Concrete for the foundations should be placed as soon as practical following excavation. If concrete placement is delayed, placement of a concrete “mud mat” should be considered in order to protect exposed foundation bearing soils.

6.6 Boardwalk Foundation Settlement

Based on the assumed structural loads and our analysis, we expect that total foundation settlements for the proposed boardwalk will be one inch or less, provided foundations are constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report. Differential foundation settlements are expected to be less than ½ inches for foundations bearing on similar materials.

6.7 Seismic Site Classification

Based on our test borings and our past experience in the local area, it is our opinion the site should be considered Seismic Site Classification D in accordance with the latest edition of the Virginia

Building Code.

6.8 Pavement Sections Shared Use Path

We expect the asphalt paved ADA trail and concrete sidewalk will receive only pedestrian traffic.

Furthermore, we understand that asphalt paved ADA parking spaces will also be constructed at this site. These parking spaces are assumed to receive low to moderate frequency passenger vehicle traffic. Based on our laboratory testing and experience with similar soils, a California Bearing

Ratio (CBR) value of 7 percent was used for pavement design assuming the in-place subgrade soil is compacted to at least 98 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum dry density. The minimum pavement sections in the following table are recommended to support these traffic conditions.

ADA Pedestrian Trail Concrete Sidewalk ADA Parking spaces

1.5 inches Asphalt

VDOT SM-9.5A

4 Inches VDOT A3A Paving Concrete

(Maximum 10’ Control Joint Spacing)

2 inches Asphalt

VDOT SM-9.5A

6 Inches VDOT 21B Aggregate 4 Inches VDOT 21B Aggregate 8 Inches VDOT 21B Aggregate

All materials and construction methods should conform to the latest edition of the VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. To confirm that the VDOT 21B aggregate has been uniformly compacted and meets VDOT density requirements, in-place density tests should be performed by a qualified soils technician and the area should be thoroughly proofrolled under his observation.

Important factors regarding pavement performance are the condition of subgrade soils at time of construction and post construction drainage. We recommend that all pavement subgrade areas be evaluated prior to base course stone placement. Any areas which deflect or rut during proofrolling must be repaired prior to stone placement. Sufficient testing and observation should be performed during pavement construction to confirm that the required thickness, density, and quality requirements of the specifications are followed.

7. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT

The recommendations contained in this report are made on the basis of the site information made available to us and the surface and subsurface conditions that existed at the time of the exploration.

While this exploration has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices, there remains some potential for variation of the subsurface conditions in unexplored areas of the site. If the subsurface conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from those presented in this report, we should be notified to reevaluate our recommendations. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report.

APPENDIX A

FIGURES

FIGURE

SITE VICINITY MAP

FIGHTING CREEK PARK ADA TRAIL

2505 MANN ROAD

POWHATAN COUNTY, VA

SCALE:

PLOTTED BY:

DATE:

NTS

CHECKED BY:

DLC

11-3-2025 PROJECT NUMBER: 56979.008

Source: Google Earth

NORTH

APPROXIMATE

SITE LOCATION

JRR

T

JOB NO.

SHEET NO.

SCALE

DESIGNED BY

CHECKED BY

D A

TE

DRAWN BY

DATE

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C R

IP

TI

O

N

YO

UR

V

IS

IO

N

AC

HI

EV

ED

T

HR

O

UG

H O

UR

S.

Th es e pl an s an d as so ci at ed d oc um en ts a re th e ex cl us iv e pr op er ty o f T

IM

M O

N S

G R

O U

P a nd m ay n ot b e re pr od uc ed in w ho le o r i n pa rt an d sh al l n ot b e us ed fo r a ny p ur po se w ha ts oe ve r, in cl us iv e, b ut n ot lim ite d to c on st ru ct io n, b id di ng

, a nd

/o r c on st ru ct io n st ak in g w ith ou t t he e xp re ss w rit te n co ns en t o f T

IM

M

O N

S G

R O

U P

11/3/2025

FI

G

H

TI

N G

C R

EE

K P

A R K A

D A T

R A

IL

PO

W

H A

TA

N C

O U

N

TY

V

IR

G

IN

IA

56979.008

2A

B O

R

IN

G L

O C A

TI

O N

P

LA

N

D. CLEMMONS

J. ROBINSON

TH

IS

D

RA

W

IN

G P

RE

PA

RE

D

A T

TH

E

Co rp or at e He ad qu ar te rs

B ou ld er s

Pa rk w ay

R ic hm on d, V A

TE

L

4.

0.

F

AX

.5

.1 w w w .t im m on s.

co m

Y :\8

\G eo te ch ni ca l\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\2

P ro je ct s\

9.

Fi gh tin g

C re ek P ar k

Tr ai l\D ra fti ng

\B or in g

Lo ca tio n

P la n.

dw g | P lo tte d on

1/

3/

:5

P M by

D av is C le m m on s

AS SHOWN

SCALE 1"=80'

160'80'

N A

D

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HAND AUGER BORING

CLD

CLD

S

S

JOB NO.

SHEET NO.

SCALE

DESIGNED BY

CHECKED BY

D A

TE

DRAWN BY

DATE

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C R

IP

TI

O

N

YO

UR

V

IS

IO

N

AC

HI

EV

ED

T

HR

O

UG

H O

UR

S.

Th es e pl an s an d as so ci at ed d oc um en ts a re th e ex cl us iv e pr op er ty o f T

IM

M O

N S

G R

O U

P a nd m ay n ot b e re pr od uc ed in w ho le o r i n pa rt an d sh al l n ot b e us ed fo r a ny p ur po se w ha ts oe ve r, in cl us iv e, b ut n ot lim ite d to c on st ru ct io n, b id di ng

, a nd

/o r c on st ru ct io n st ak in g w ith ou t t he e xp re ss w rit te n co ns en t o f T

IM

M

O N

S G

R O

U P

11/3/2025

FI

G

H

TI

N G

C R

EE

K P

A R K A

D A T

R A

IL

PO

W

H A

TA

N C

O U

N

TY

V

IR

G

IN

IA

56979.008

2B

B O

R

IN

G L

O C A

TI

O N

P

LA

N

D. CLEMMONS

J. ROBINSON

TH

IS

D

RA

W

IN

G P

RE

PA

RE

D

A T

TH

E

Co rp or at e He ad qu ar te rs

B ou ld er s

Pa rk w ay

R ic hm on d, V A

TE

L

4.

0.

F

AX

.5

.1 w w w .t im m on s.

co m

Y :\8

\G eo te ch ni ca l\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\2

P ro je ct s\

9.

Fi gh tin g

C re ek P ar k

Tr ai l\D ra fti ng

\B or in g

Lo ca tio n

P la n.

dw g | P lo tte d on

1/

3/

:5

P M by

D av is C le m m on s

AS SHOWN

SCALE 1"=80'

160'80'

N A

D

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF HAND AUGER BORING

APPENDIX B

BORING LOGS

SANDS WITH

FINES

LIQUID LIMIT

LESS THAN 50

LIQUID LIMIT

GREATER THAN 50

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS

NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

PT

GRAVEL

AND

GRAVELLY

SOILS

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS,

GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO

FINES

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT

MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY

MIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE

SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY

SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY

CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC

SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR

SILTY SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY

SILTS

AND

CLAYS

MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

LARGER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

SMALLER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION

PASSING ON NO.

4 SIEVE

MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION

RETAINED ON NO.

4 SIEVE

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

FINE

GRAINED

SOILS

SAND

AND

SANDY

SOILS

SILTS

AND

CLAYS

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO

HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH

HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS

LETTERGRAPH

SYMBOLS

MAJOR DIVISIONS

COARSE

GRAINED

SOILS

TYPICAL

DESCRIPTIONS

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -

SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO

FINES

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE

OR NO FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

SILT MIXTURES

CLEAN

GRAVELS

GRAVELS WITH

FINES

CLEAN SANDS

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

KEY TO BORING LOG TERMINOLOGY

Relative Density – Used for soils with less than 50% passing No. 200 sieve

Consistency – Used for soils with 50 percent or more passing No. 200 sieve

Relative Density SPT N-Value

(blows/ft) Consistency

SPT N-Value (blows/foot)

Very Loose 0 to 3 Very Soft 0 to 1 Loose 4 to 9 Soft 2 to 4

Medium Dense 10 to 29 Firm 5 to 8 Dense 30 to 50 Stiff 9 to 15

Very Dense Greater than 50 Very Stiff 16 to 30 Hard 31 to 50 Very Hard Greater than 50

Grain Size Terminology (U.S. Standard Sieves) Natural Moisture Content

Term Particle Size Boulder 12 inches +

Dry Very little apparent moisture, dusty Cobble 3 to 12 inches Coarse Gravel ¾ to 3 inches

Moist Damp, but no free water visible Fine Gravel #4 to ¾ inches Coarse Sand #10 to #4 Medium Sand #40 to #10

Wet Visible free water, or in cohesive soil, clearly saturated Fine Sand #200 to #40

Silt and Clay <#200

Project: Fighting Creek Park ADA Trail

Project No:

Performed By: D. Clemmons

Depth

(Feet) 1 2 3 Average

0-0.1 1" Topsoil 0 3 5 8 6

0.1-5 Brown and red-brown, moist, medium stiff to very stiff, 1 8 8 10 9

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL), trace fine gravel. 2 25+ 25+

3 25+ 25+

4 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

0-0.5 6" Topsoil 0 3 4 5 4

0.5-1 Light Brown, moist, soft, Sandy SILT (ML).

1-2 Redish Brown, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 1 6 13 10 11

Clayey SAND (SC).

2-5 Redish Brown, moist, stiff to very stiff, Sandy Lean CLAY (CL). 2 8 13 13 13

3 12 11 18 14

4 12 21 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

0-0.5 6" Topsoil 0 3 5 5 5

0.5-2 Light Brown, moist, fine to medium, loose to medium dense, 1 10 18 15 16

Silty SAND (SM), trace roots.

2-5 Light Brown and Light Gray, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 2 14 25 25 25

Clayey SAND (SC). 3 25+ 25+

4 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

The dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) test procedure is as follows:

The cone point of the penetrometer is first seated 2 inches into the undisturbed bottom of borehole to embed the point. Then the cone point is driven three consecutive 1-3/4 inch depth intervals using a 15-pound weight falling 20 inches. The penetrometer reading is the number of blows required to drive the cone point 1-3/4 inches. An average is taken from the final two readings.

Reference: "Dynamic Cone for Shallow In-Situ Penetration Testing," Sowers and Hedges, 1966.

HAND AUGER BORING LOG

Date Boring Depth

(Feet) Description

DCP Values

56979.008

10/3/2025 HA-01

10/3/2025 HA-03

10/3/2025 HA-02

Performed By: D. Clemmons

Depth

(Feet) 1 2 3 Average

0-0.3 3" Topsoil 0 2 7 8 7

0.3-1 Light Brown, moist, fine to medium, loose, Silty SAND (SM), 1-2 Orangeish Brown, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 1 6 12 18 15

Clayey SAND (SC).

2-4 Light Brown, moist, stiff to very stiff, Sandy SILT (ML). 2 10 10 10 10

3 12 24 20 22

4-5 Orangeish Brown, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 4 25+ 25+

Silty SAND (SM).

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

0-0.3 4" Topsoil 0 3 4 2 3

0.3-3 Gray and orange-brown, moist, fine to coarse, very loose 1 6 9 14 11 to medium dense, Clayey SAND (SC), trace fine gravel. 2 5 10 15 12

3-5 Light Gray, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 3 10 12 10 11

Clayey SAND (SC). 4 20 20 22 21

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

0-0.7 8" Topsoil 0 1 2 4 3

0.7-1 Orangeish Brown, moist, fine to medium, very loose, Clayey SAND (SC).

1-2 Orange-brown, moist, stiff, Sandy Elastic SILT (MH), contains mica 1 10 12 14 13

2-5 Reddish Brown, moist, very stiff, Sandy SILT (ML). 2 20 25+ 25+

3 25+ 25+

4 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 5 feet. No ground water encountered

The dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) test procedure is as follows:

The cone point of the penetrometer is first seated 2 inches into the undisturbed bottom of borehole to embed the point. Then the cone point is driven three consecutive 1-3/4 inch depth intervals using a 15-pound weight falling 20 inches. The penetrometer reading is the number of blows required to drive the cone point 1-3/4 inches. An average is taken from the final two readings.

Reference: "Dynamic Cone for Shallow In-Situ Penetration Testing," Sowers and Hedges, 1966.

HAND AUGER BORING LOG

56979.008

Date Boring Depth

(Feet) Description

DCP Values

10/3/2025 HA-04

10/3/2025 HA-05

10/3/2025 HA-06

Performed By: D. Clemmons

Depth

(Feet) 1 2 3 Average

0-0.4 5" Topsoil 0 2 7 8 7

0.4-1 Dark Gray, moist, fine to medium, loose, Silty SAND (SM), trace roots.

1-4 Gray-brown, moist, stiff to very stiff, Sandy Lean CLAY (CL), 1 10 16 17 16 contains mica. 2 16 18 18 18

3 10 10 12 11

4-6 Light Gray, moist, medium stiff to very stiff, Sandy SILT (ML) 4 7 7 8 7

5 18 18 18 18

6-7 Brown, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, Silty SAND (SM). 6 18 19 20 19

7-8 Brown, moist, very stiff, Sandy Lean CLAY (CL). 7 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 8 feet. No ground water encountered

0-0.3 4" Topsoil 0 3 2 2 2

0.3-2 Light Brown to Light Gray, moist, fine to medium, very loose to 1 6 6 6 6 medium dense, Silty SAND (SM), trace roots from 0 to 2 feet.

2-4 Orange and gray, moist, medium stiff to stiff, Sandy Fat CLAY (CH), 2 8 10 10 10 trace fine gravel. 3 10 7 8 7

4-5 Orangeish Brown, moist, fine to coarse, loose, Clayey SAND (SC), 4 5 5 5 5 trace fine gravel.

5-5.5 Brown, moist, fine to coarse, medium dense, Silty SAND (SM), 5 25+ 25+ trace clay, trace fine gravel.

*Hand Auger termined at 5.5 feet due to auger refusal.

*No gound water encountered

The dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) test procedure is as follows:

The cone point of the penetrometer is first seated 2 inches into the undisturbed bottom of borehole to embed the point. Then the cone point is driven three consecutive 1-3/4 inch depth intervals using a 15-pound weight falling 20 inches. The penetrometer reading is the number of blows required to drive the cone point 1-3/4 inches. An average is taken from the final two readings.

Reference: "Dynamic Cone for Shallow In-Situ Penetration Testing," Sowers and Hedges, 1966.

HA-08

10/6/2025 HA-07

10/3/2025

HAND AUGER BORING LOG

56979.008

Date Boring Depth

(Feet) Description

DCP Values

Performed By: D. Clemmons

Depth

(Feet) 1 2 3 Average

0-0.3 3" Topsoil 0 3 9 9 9

0.3-2 Light Brown, moist, fine to medium, loose, Silty SAND (SM), 1 5 5 6 5 trace roots.

2-5 Orangeish Gray, moist, medium stiff, Sandy Lean CLAY (CL). 2 5 8 8 8

3 10 8 8 8

4 8 8 7 7

5-8 Reddish Brown, moist, fine to medium, medium dense, 5 25+ 25+

Silty SAND (SM). 6 25+ 25+

7 25+ 25+

*Hand Auger terminated at 8 feet. No ground water encountered

The dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) test procedure is as follows:

The cone point of the penetrometer is first seated 2 inches into the undisturbed bottom of borehole to embed the point. Then the cone point is driven three consecutive 1-3/4 inch depth intervals using a 15-pound weight falling 20 inches. The penetrometer reading is the number of blows required to drive the cone point 1-3/4 inches. An average is taken from the final two readings.

Reference: "Dynamic Cone for Shallow In-Situ Penetration Testing," Sowers and Hedges, 1966.

10/6/2025 HA-09

HAND AUGER BORING LOG

56979.008

Date Boring Depth

(Feet) Description

DCP Values

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Project Number:

Project Name: Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Project Location: Powhatan County, Virginia

Client Name: Powhatan County, Virginia

Client Address: 3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample

Lab Boring Sample Sample Depth MC MDD OMC %

No. Number Type Number (feet) USCS (%) G (%) S (%) F (%) LL PL PI (pcf) (%) 0.1" 0.2" 0.1" 0.2" Swell

6154 HA-01 Bulk --- 0.5 to 5 CL 18.7 1.2 47.9 50.9 32 20 12 112.6 16.3 12.3 15.1 15.2 16.3 0.3

6155 HA-05 Bulk --- 0.5 to 5 SC 15.9 1.0 54.9 44.1 28 19 9 113.8 15.0 4.8 8.0 6.6 9.0 1.2

6156 HA-06 HA S-2 1 to 2 MH 32.8 0.0 32.1 67.9 80 45 35 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

6157 HA-07 HA S-3 2 to 3 CL 14.5 0.0 47.0 53.0 44 23 21 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

6158 HA-09 HA S-3 2 to 3 CH 23.7 1.1 42.0 56.8 56 28 28 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

--- Indicates no data

LABORATORY SUMMARY TABLE

Uncorrected CorrectedAnalysis

Grain Size

Atterberg Limits

CBR

56979.008

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Timmons Group / 430 Southlake Boulevard Suite B-15 Richmond, Virginia 23236 / p: 804.200.6500

Form No. TR-Moisture Content

Revision No. 1

Revision Date: 8/20/25

Project #: Report Date:

Project Name: Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Project Location: Powhatan County, Virginia

Client Name: Powhatan County, Virginia

Client Address: 3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Water

Lab Sample Sample Sample Sample Depth Content Tested Date

Number Date Location Type Number (ft) USCS (%) By Tested Notes:

6154 10/3/25 HA-01 Bulk --- 0.5 to 5 CL 18.7 GE 10/21/25 1

6155 10/3/25 HA-05 Bulk --- 0.5 to 5 SC 15.9 GE 10/21/25 1

6156 10/3/25 HA-06 HA S-2 1 to 2 MH 32.8 KP 10/14/25

6157 10/6/25 HA-07 HA S-3 2 to 3 CL 14.5 KP 10/14/25

6158 10/6/25 HA-09 HA S-3 2 to 3 CH 23.7 KP 10/14/25 1

Notes:

*ASTM D2488 Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)

1: Specimen size did not conform to minimum mass requirements.

2: More than one material present.

3: An alternate oven temperature was used for drying.

4: A portion of the original sample was excluded from testing.

Matthew Thornton Laboratory Manager 11/5/25

Date

11/5/2025

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

Technical Responsibility Signature Position

OF WATER CONTENT

LABORATORY DETERMINATION

AASHTO T265 Method B

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Timmons Group / 430 Southlake Boulevard Suite B-15 Richmond, VA 23236 / p 804.200.6500

Form No. TR-Class

Revision No. 1.3

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Date:

Depth:

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plastic Index

Maximum Particle Size 3/4" Gravel 1.2% Sand 47.9% Silt and Clay 50.9%

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded, Angular, Hard & Durable

Notes:

Client Address:

Material Classification

ASTM D2487

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

Client Name:

Project Location:

Project Name:

Project #: 11/5/2025

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

3"

#4

Date

11/5/25

2.5"

3/4" 100.0

2"

1.5"

Representative specimens were selected to determine properties of this material. AASHTO T265 Method B was used to determine water content on 10/21/25 by Gordan Ek. AASHTO T11 was used to perform a No. 200 wash based on apparent plasticity and gradation on 10/23/25 by Ken Pruner. A Particle Size Analysis was performed on 10/27/25 by Ken Pruner. Sieve selection for AASHTO T88 was based on specification or engineering judgement. Atterberg Limits were prepared using air dried, pulverized material, processed over a No. 40 sieve, and hydrated with distilled water overnight. AASHTO T89 Method B & T90 were performed on 11/4/25 by Ken

Pruner using an automatic LL device, a flat plastic grooving tool, and a ground glass plate.

SAMPLE INFORMATION

HA-01Location:

Material Description:

10/3/2025

0.5 to 5 feet Lab Control #: 6154

Brown and red-brown, SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace gravel (CL)

Bulk

Sample Type:

Sample #:

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Water Content

Position

Laboratory Manager

#100

#40 84.1

1"

Technical Responsibility Signature

Matthew Thornton

Material Properties

18.7%

%Passing

99.7

63.4

#200 50.9

3/8"

98.8

#10 97.6

3" #4 #200GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t P a s s in g

Millimeters

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Date:

Depth:

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plastic Index

Maximum Particle Size 3/4" Gravel 1.0% Sand 54.9% Silt and Clay 44.1%

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded, Hard & Durable

Notes:

Client Address:

Material Classification

ASTM D2487

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

Client Name:

Project Location:

Project Name:

Project #: 11/5/2025

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

3"

#4

Date

11/5/25

2.5"

3/4" 100.0

2"

1.5"

Representative specimens were selected to determine properties of this material. AASHTO T265 Method B was used to determine water content on 10/21/25 by Gordan Ek. AASHTO T11 was used to perform a No. 200 wash based on apparent plasticity and gradation on 10/23/25 by Ken Pruner. A Particle Size Analysis was performed on 10/27/25 by Ken Pruner. Sieve selection for AASHTO T88 was based on specification or engineering judgement. Atterberg Limits were prepared using air dried, pulverized material, processed over a No. 40 sieve, and hydrated with distilled water overnight. AASHTO T89 Method B & T90 were performed on 11/3/25 by

Gordan Ek using an automatic LL device, a flat plastic grooving tool, and a ground glass plate.

SAMPLE INFORMATION

HA-05Location:

Material Description:

10/3/2025

0.5 to 5 feet Lab Control #: 6155

Gray and orange-brown, fine to coarse CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC)

Bulk

Sample Type:

Sample #:

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Water Content

Position

Laboratory Manager

#100

#40 83.8

1"

Technical Responsibility Signature

Matthew Thornton

Material Properties

15.9%

%Passing

99.2

59.1

#200 44.1

3/8"

99.0

#10 97.7

3" #4 #200GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t P a s s in g

Millimeters

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Date:

Depth:

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plastic Index

Maximum Particle Size #4 Gravel 0.0% Sand 32.1% Silt and Clay 67.9%

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded, Angular, Hard & Durable, Weathered & Friable

Notes:

Client Address:

Material Classification

ASTM D2487

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

Client Name:

Project Location:

Project Name:

Project #: 11/5/2025

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

3"

#4

Date

11/5/25

2.5"

3/4"

2"

1.5"

Representative specimens were selected to determine properties of this material. AASHTO T265 Method B was used to determine water content on 10/14/25 by Ken Pruner. AASHTO T11 was used to perform a No. 200 wash based on apparent plasticity and gradation on 10/15/25 by Ken Pruner. A Particle Size Analysis was performed on 10/29/25 by Ken Pruner. Sieve selection for AASHTO T88 was based on specification or engineering judgement. Atterberg Limits were prepared using air dried, pulverized material, processed over a

No. 40 sieve, and hydrated with distilled water overnight. AASHTO T89 Method B & T90 were performed on

11/4/25 by Ken Pruner using an automatic LL device, a flat plastic grooving tool, and a ground glass plate.

SAMPLE INFORMATION

HA-06Location:

Material Description:

10/3/2025

1 to 2 feet Lab Control #: 6156

Orange-brown, SANDY ELASTIC SILT, contains mica (MH)

HA

S-2

Sample Type:

Sample #:

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Water Content

Position

Laboratory Manager

#100

#40 95.5

1"

Technical Responsibility Signature

Matthew Thornton

Material Properties

32.8%

%Passing

82.6

#200 67.9

3/8"

100.0

#10 99.5

3" #4 #200GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t P a s s in g

Millimeters

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Date:

Depth:

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plastic Index

Maximum Particle Size #4 Gravel 0.0% Sand 47.0% Silt and Clay 53.0%

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded, Angular, Hard & Durable, Weathered & Friable

Notes:

Client Address:

Material Classification

ASTM D2487

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

Client Name:

Project Location:

Project Name:

Project #: 11/5/2025

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

3"

#4

Date

11/5/25

2.5"

3/4"

2"

1.5"

Representative specimens were selected to determine properties of this material. AASHTO T265 Method B was used to determine water content on 10/14/25 by Ken Pruner. AASHTO T11 was used to perform a No. 200 wash based on apparent plasticity and gradation on 10/15/25 by Ken Pruner. A Particle Size Analysis was performed on 10/29/25 by Ken Pruner. Sieve selection for AASHTO T88 was based on specification or engineering judgement. Atterberg Limits were prepared using air dried, pulverized material, processed over a

No. 40 sieve, and hydrated with distilled water overnight. AASHTO T89 Method B & T90 were performed on

11/3/25 by Gordan Ek using an automatic LL device, a flat plastic grooving tool, and a ground glass plate.

SAMPLE INFORMATION

HA-07Location:

Material Description:

10/6/2025

2 to 3 feet Lab Control #: 6157

Gray-brown, SANDY LEAN CLAY, contains mica (CL)

HA

S-3

Sample Type:

Sample #:

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Water Content

Position

Laboratory Manager

#100

#40 90.3

1"

Technical Responsibility Signature

Matthew Thornton

Material Properties

14.5%

%Passing

69.5

#200 53.0

3/8"

100.0

#10 99.4

3" #4 #200GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t P a s s in g

Millimeters

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Sample Date:

Depth:

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plastic Index

Maximum Particle Size 3/8" Gravel 1.1% Sand 42.0% Silt and Clay 56.8%

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded, Angular, Hard & Durable, Weathered & Friable

Notes:

Client Address:

Material Classification

ASTM D2487

PROJECT INFORMATION

56979.008

Client Name:

Project Location:

Project Name:

Project #: 11/5/2025

Information included in this report relates only to material sampled at the time of testing.

3"

#4

Date

11/5/25

2.5"

3/4"

2"

1.5"

Representative specimens were selected to determine properties of this material. AASHTO T265 Method B was used to determine water content on 10/14/25 by Ken Pruner. AASHTO T11 was used to perform a No. 200 wash based on apparent plasticity and gradation on 10/15/25 by Ken Pruner. A Particle Size Analysis was performed on 10/29/25 by Ken Pruner. Sieve selection for AASHTO T88 was based on specification or engineering judgement. Atterberg Limits were prepared using air dried, pulverized material, processed over a

No. 40 sieve, and hydrated with distilled water overnight. AASHTO T89 Method B & T90 were performed on

11/3/25 by Gordan Ek using an automatic LL device, a flat plastic grooving tool, and a ground glass plate.

SAMPLE INFORMATION

HA-09Location:

Material Description:

10/6/2025

2 to 3 feet Lab Control #: 6158

Orange and gray, SANDY FAT CLAY, trace gravel (CH)

HA

S-3

Sample Type:

Sample #:

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Timmons Group.

Water Content

Position

Laboratory Manager

#100

#40 87.4

1"

Technical Responsibility Signature

Matthew Thornton

Material Properties

23.7%

%Passing

100.0

69.0

#200 56.8

3/8"

98.9

#10 97.8

3" #4 #200GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t P a s s in g

Millimeters

56979.008 Soil Lab Database

Form No. TR-CBR

Revision No. 1.1

Revision Date: 4/4/25

Report Date:

Fighting Creek Park ADA Trails

Powhatan County, Virginia

Powhatan County, Virginia

3834 Old Buckingham Road, Suite A, Powhatan, Virginia 23139

Location: Sample Date:

Depth:

Water Content

Compactive Effort (Blows Per Layer) Final Dry Density (pcf)

Initial Dry Density (pcf) Average Final Moisture Content

Moisture Content of Compacted Specimen Moisture Content (top 1" after soaking)

Percent Compaction Percent Swell

Surcharge Weight (lb) Soak Time (hours)

Surcharge Stress (psf) % Retained on 3/4" sieve

Compaction Date Test Date

Compacted By Ken Pruner Tested By Ken Pruner

Notes:

AASHTO T99 Method A was performed on grading complying with CBR specification.

AASHTO T193 was performed on material passing a 3/4-in. sieve & compacted in a 6-inch CBR mold.

19.1%

18.0%

11/3/25

Material Description:…