625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071 • 770-209-0029 • unitedconsulting.com

REPORT

FOR VHB

Soil Survey SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Rd P.I. No. 0017804 Cherokee County, Georgia Project No. VHB-23-GA-05625-02 August 2, 2023

August 2, 2023

Mr. Tommy Crochet

VHB

1355 Peachtree Street NE

Suite 100

Atlanta, Georgia 30309

Via email: tcrochet@VHB.com

PROJECT: Report of Soil Survey

SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Rd

PI No. 0017804

Cherokee County, Georgia

UC Project No. VHB-23-GA-05625-02

Dear Mr. Crochet:

United Consulting is pleased to submit this Report of Soil Survey for the above referenced project. The report includes a summary of subsurface conditions and our recommendations in accordance with general guidelines and format required by Georgia Department of

Transportation (GDOT). We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project and look forward to working with you on future projects. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely, UNITED CONSULTING

Nhan Pham, EIT

Staff Engineer

Mehdi Moazzami, Ph.D., P.E.

Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Registration No. 23121

NP/MM/nj

H:\GEOTECHNICAL\REPORTS\2021\VHB-21-GA-05625-02_ Sr 140 at Univeter Rd\Soil Survey mailto:tcrochet@VHB.com

Soil Survey Summary

Cherokee County

P.I. No. 0017804 August 2, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOIL SURVEY SUMMARY

LIMITATIONS

Benching Detail

Removal Detail for High Moisture Areas

Pipe Culvert Material Alternate

Figure A – Project Location Map

APPENDIX A

General Notes/Description of Drilling Operations

Figures 1 to 10 - Boring Location Plans

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Testing Procedures

Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2) (2 Pages)

APPENDIX C

Field Exploration Procedures

Photographs of the roadway (5 Pages)

Typed Field Notes (6 Pages)

Particle Size Distribution Report of Sample used for Ditch Lining (1 Page)

SOIL SURVEY SUMMARY

SR 140 at CR 309/Univeter Road

Cherokee County

P.I. No. 0017804

August 2, 2023

1. Location /

Description

This project is for the intersection improvement of SR 140 at CR

309/ Univeter Road. The project on SR 140 starts at Station

15+00 located at about 150 feet south of its intersection with

Brick Mill Road and continues southerly to Station 45+00 at about 250 feet north of its intersection with Old Pioneer Trail.

The project on SR 309/Univeter Road Starts at Station 65+30 and continues northerly to the intersection with SR 140 at

Station 80+00. The project lies southeast of City of Canton in

Cherokee County.

2. Geology This project is geologically sited in Biotite Gneiss/ Mica Schist

Formation of the Georgia Piedmont Region.

3. Rock None encountered.

4. Removal The soils near the proposed grade in the following areas were found to have in-place moisture contents far above the optimum moisture contents. This condition has the potential to cause severe pumping problems during subgrade and base construction. After excavation in these areas is complete, we recommend that 24 inches of subgrade soils beneath the pavement and shoulders be removed and either dried out and replaced, or replaced with drier soils:

SR 140

Station to Station Location

15+00± to 28+00± Left, Right

34+50± to 45+00± Left, Right

CR 309/ Univeter Rd

65+30± to 68+20± Left, Right

This work should be done at the direction of the Engineer, and may be eliminated if the subgrade soils are dry and stable at the time of construction.

5. Waste None of the materials found on this project will require wasting.

mjtully Text Box

EXHIBIT K

Cherokee County

No additional subgrade material will be required on this project.

P.I. No. 0017804

August 2, 2023

6. Subgrade Materials

7. Pavement Design Values

We recommend the following values for use in the pavement design calculations for this project:

Soil Support Value = 2.5

Graded aggregate base is the only base material recommended for use on this project.

8. Ditch Lining We recommend the following values for use in the ditch lining calculations for this project:

Plasticity Index, PI = 19

D75 (mm) = 0.18

Unified Soils Classification System

(USCS) =

MH

Sample No. 1 at Station 16+00, 45’Rt from the “Summary of

Physical Properties GDOT Section 810.2” was used for ditch lining evaluation.

9. Slopes Maximum 2(H):1(V) slopes will be safe for this project.

10. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered at locations of subsurface borings on the project at the time of the investigation.

11. Shrinkage We recommend an average shrinkage factor of 20% for use in the earthwork calculations for this project.

12. Culverts We recommend that a 12-inch blanket of Type II Foundation

Backfill material be placed under the barrel of all box culverts and 48-inch diameter and larger cross-drains on this project.

13. Corrosion Reference should be made to the attached “Pipe Culvert Material

Alternates” chart for materials allowable by the Laboratory corrosion test.

14. Bench Detail Where new fills are to be placed on existing slopes steeper than

3:1, the existing slope should be benched in accordance with the attached detail.

Cherokee County

P.I. No. 0017804

August 2, 2023

15. Additional Subgrade Recommendations

We recommend an additional 4 inches of graded aggregate base, be set up for use at the direction of the Engineer in the following areas:

SR 140

Station to Station Location

15+00± to 17+50± Left, Right

28+00± to 34+50± Left, Right

CR 309/ Univeter Rd

68+00± to 80+00 Left, Right

16. Serrated Slopes Serrated slopes will not be required on this project.

17. Vibration

Monitoring

If parcels with historic structures within 75 feet of the construction limits are confirmed at Final Field Plan Review

(FFPR), contact the Geotechnical Bureau to request a Special

Provision 154 - Construction Vibration Monitoring for the project. Final Right-Of-Way plans should be submitted to the

Geotechnical Bureau along with this request.

18. Special

Problems

No special problems concerning the construction are anticipated for this project were observed during our field work.

LIMITATIONS

This report is for the exclusive use of the VHB, Georgia Department of Transportation

(GDOT), its agents, and the designers of the project described herein, and may only be applied to this specific project. Our conclusions and recommendations have been prepared using generally accepted standards of Geotechnical Engineering practice in the State of

Georgia. No other warranty is expressed or implied. Our firm is not responsible for conclusions, opinions or recommendations of others.

The scope of this evaluation was limited to an evaluation of the load-carrying capabilities and stability of the subsoils. Oil, hazardous waste, radioactivity, irritants, pollutants, molds, or other dangerous substance and conditions were not the subject of this study. Their presence and/or absence is not implied or suggested by this report, and should not be inferred.

Our conclusions and recommendations are based upon design information furnished us, data obtained from the previously described exploration and testing program and our past experience. They do not reflect variations in subsurface conditions that may exist intermediate of our borings and in unexplored areas of the site. Should such variations become apparent during construction, it will be necessary to re-evaluate our conclusions and recommendations based upon “on-site” observations of the conditions.

Cherokee County

P.I. No. 0017804 August 2, 2023

If the design or location of the project is changed, the recommendations contained herein, must be considered invalid unless our firm reviews the changes and our recommendations are either verified or modified in writing.

UNITED CONSULTING

Prepared By: Nhan Pham

Reviewed By: Mehdi Moazzami, P.E.

SCALE: NTS DATE: 3/16/2023 PROJECT No.: VHB-23-GA-05625-02 TITLE: BENCHING DETAIL

PREPARED BY: NP REVIEWED BY: MM SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Rd Cherokee County, P.I. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071 Tel. 770/209-0029 FAX 770/582-2900 www.unitedconsulting.com

SCALE: NTS DATE: REVISIONS: TITLE: REMOVAL DETAIL

PREPARED: NP PROJECT NO.:

CLIENT:

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071 Tel. 770/209-0029 FAX 770/582-2900 www.unitedconsulting.com npham Text Box Station to Station 15+00± to 28+00± 34+50± to 45+00± npham Text Box Location Left, Right Left, Right npham Snapshot npham Typewritten Text

SR 140

npham Text Box PI No. 0017804, Cherokee County SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Rd npham Text Box PI No. 0017804, Cherokee County SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Rd npham Text Box 3/22/2023 npham Text Box

VHB-23-GA-05625-01

npham Text Box

VHB

dkhatri Typewritten Text CR 309/ Univeter Rd dkhatri Text Box Station to Station 65+30± to 68+20± dkhatri Text Box Location Left, Right npham Snapshot

5.26

County: P.I. Number: 0017804

CONCRETE ALLUMINUM

INTERSTATE X

NON

INTERSTATE X X X X X X X

ADT < 1,500 X X X X X X X

1,500 < ADT <

5,000 X X X X X X X

5,000 < ADT <

15,000 X X X X X

ADT > 15,000

& INTERSTATES X

X X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X

Rev. 1-12-16

The Contractor shall provide additional storm sewer capacity calculations if a pipe material other than concrete is selected.

Structural, installation, fill height and backfill requirements of storm drain pipe will be in accordance with Georgia Standard 1030-D or 1030-P and the Standard Specifications

Allowable materials are indicated by an "X".

NOTES:

Pipe used under mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls, within MSE wall backfill, or within five feet of an MSE wall face shall be Class V Concrete Pipe.

PERMANENT SLOPE DRAIN

PERFORATED UNDERDRAIN

SIDE DRAIN

S T O R M

D R A I N

Project Number:

TR

A

V

EL

B

EA

R

IN

G

(I N

SI

D

E R

O A

D B

ED

GRADE > 10%

G R

A D

E

Pipe Culvert Material Alternates

STEEL THERMOPLASTIC

N O

N -T

R A

V

EL

B

EA

R

IN

G

(O

U

TS

ID

E

R O

A D

B

ED

CherokeeVHB-23-GA-05625-02

REINFORCED

CONCRETE

AASHTO M-170

TYPE OF INSTALLATION

PIPE TYPE

CORRUGATED

STEEL ALUMINUM

COATED (TYPE 2)

AASHTO M-36

CORRUGATED

STEEL PLAIN ZINC

COATED

AASHTO M-36

PVC

CORRUGATED

SMOOTH

INTERIOR

ASTM F-949

PVC Profile Wall Drain Pipe AASHTO

M-304

CORRUGATED

SMOOTH LINED

POLYPROPYLENE

AASHTO M 330

POLYMER

COATED STEEL

AASHTO M-245

CORRUGATED

SMOOTHED LINED

HDPE TYPE "S"

AASHTO M-294

pH Resistivity

CORRUGATED

ALUMINUM

AASHTO M-196

CORRUGATED

HDPE

AASHTO M-252

SCALE: NTS PROJECT No.: VHB-23-GA-05625-02 TITLE: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

FIG. A PREPARED BY: NP REVIEWED BY: MM DATE: 3/16/2023 SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Road Cherokee County, P.I. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

APPENDIX A

General Notes/Description of Drilling Operations Figures 1 to 10 - Boring Location Plans npham Snapshot

BORING LOG DATA NARRATIVE OF DRILLING OPERATION

The test borings were made by mechanically advancing helical hollow stem augers into the ground. Samples were collected at regular intervals in each of the borings following established procedures for performing the Standard Penetration Test in accordance with ASTM Specification D 1586. Soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4” I.D. x 2.0” O.D. split barrel sampler. The sampler is first seated 6” to penetrate any loose cuttings and then driven an additional foot with the blows required of a 140-pound hammer freely falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final foot is designated the “standard penetration resistance.” The driving resistance, known as the “N” value, can be correlated with the relative density of granular soils and the consistency of cohesive deposits.

The following table describes soil consistency and relative densities based on standard penetration resistance values (N) determined by the Standard Penetration Test (SPT).

“N” Consistency

Clay and Silt

0-2 3-4 5-8 9-15 16-30 Over 31

Very Soft Soft Firm Stiff Very Stiff Hard

“N” Relative Density

Sand

0-4 5-10 11-19 20-29 30-49 50+

Very Loose Loose Firm Medium Dense Dense Very Dense

SCALE: NTS DATE: 3/22/2023 PROJECT NO: VHB-23-GA-05625-02 TITLE: BORING LOCATION PLAN

FIG. 1

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 2

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 3

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 4

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 5

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 6

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 7

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 8

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 9

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

FIG. 10

PREPARED BY: NP CHECKED BY: MM REVISIONS: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

CHEROKEE COUNTY, P.I. NO. 0017804

CLIENT:

VHB

UNITED CONSULTING

625 Holcomb Bridge Road, Norcross, GA 30071

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Testing Procedures Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2) (2 Pages)

LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES

Moisture Content

The moisture content was determined for selected soil samples obtained in the split-barrel sampler. A representative portion of each sample was weighed and then placed in an oven and dried at 110 degrees Centigrade for at least 15 to 16 hours. After removal from the oven, the soil was again weighed. The weight of the moisture lost during drying thus was determined. From this data, the moisture content of the sample was then calculated as the weight of moisture divided by dry weight of soil, expressed as a percentage. This test was conducted according to ASTM D 2216.

Moisture content is a useful index of a soil's compressibility. If the soil is to be used as fill, the moisture content may be compared to the range of water contents for which proper compaction may be achieved.

California Bearing Ratio (CBR)

The California Bearing Ratio, generally abbreviated to CBR, is a punching shear test and is a comparative measure of the shearing resistance of a soil. The CBR is a semi-empirical index of the strength and deflection characteristics of a soil that has been correlated with pavement performance to establish pavement thickness design curves. The CBR is used with these empirical curves to select thickness of pavement components (i.e., surface course, base course, and sub base).

CBR tests were run generally as described in ASTM D 1883. A representative sample was compacted at the optimum moisture content as determined per ASTM D-698 Standard Proctor. The test was performed on a 6-inch diameter, 4.585-inch thick disc of compacted soil that was confined in a cylindrical steel mold. CBR tests may be run on the compacted samples in either soaked or non-soaked conditions, a soaked test was performed for this project.

During testing, a piston 2 inches in diameter is forced into the soil sample at the rate of penetration 0.05 inches per minute. The CBR number is obtained as the ratio of the load to penetrate the sample to a certain depth to the load required to penetrate a standard sample of crushed stone to a sample depth. The CBR number is usually based on the load ratio for a penetration of 0.10 inches. If, however, the CBR value at a penetration of 0.20 inches is significantly larger, the test is redone. If a second test also yields a larger CBR number at

0.20 inches, the CBR for 0.20 inches is used. The design CBR value is estimated from a plot of Dry Density versus CBR values for 0.1-inch and 0.2-inch penetration. Design values corresponding to a CBR value interpolated at 95% Maximum Dry Density of Standard Proctor test (ASTM D698) is also included in the ‘Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2)’ section in Appendix B.

Standard Proctor

This test determines the maximum dry density that could be achieved by using uniform compaction effort at varying moisture contents. Two primary methods of compaction are used. For standard Proctor, 5.5-lb. rammer is dropped 12 inches and for modified Proctor, 10-

lb. rammer is dropped 18 inches for compaction on the bulk sample in the cylindrical mold.

Compaction is done in 3 and 5 equal layers respectively. The methods are explained in ASTM D 698 and ASTM D 1557, respectively. The results of the Standard Proctor tests are included in the ‘Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2)’ section in Appendix B.

Grain Size (Sieve) Analysis with or without Hydrometer

Grain Size Analysis tests were performed to determine the particle size distribution of selected samples tested. The grain size distribution of soils coarser than a number 200 sieve was determined by passing the samples through a standard set of nested sieves. Materials finer than the number 200 sieve were suspended in water and the grain size distribution computed from the time rate of settlement of the different size particles. Air-dried soil passed through a #200 sieve. 50 grams of that must soak in s/c agent for a minimum of 8 hours. Soil is then put in graduated cylinder with a hydrometer. Readings are taken at specified times. A graph is drawn from data. These tests were similar to those described by ASTM D 421 and D

422. The results are included in the ‘Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2)’ and ‘Summary of USCS Tests’ sections in Appendix B.

Liquid and Plastic Limits (Atterberg Limits)

Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit tests aid in the classification of the soils and provide an indication of the soil behavior with moisture change. The Plasticity Index is calculated by subtracting the Plastic Limit (PL) from the Liquid Limit (LL). The Liquid Limit is the moisture content at which the soil will flow as a heavy viscous fluid and is the upper limit of the plastic range, as determined in accordance with ASTM D 4318. The Plastic Limit is the moisture content at which the soil begins to lose its plasticity, as determined in accordance with ASTM D 4318. The Liquidity Index is the ratio of the difference between the in-place moisture and the plastic limit to the Plasticity Limit. The data obtained are summarized on the enclosed ‘Summary of USCS Tests’ section in Appendix B.

Physical Properties (GDOT Section 810.2)

Materials for roadway construction require evaluation of its suitability by performing Physical Properties tests in accordance with GDOT Section 810 of Standard Specifications and determining the soil classes. The tests require gradation in accordance with GHD: 4 volume change per GHD: 6 and Maximum Density per GHD: 7 or GHD: 67. Details of the procedures and the tests may be obtained by requesting the information from GDOT Office of Materials and Research Division. The summary of test results can be found in ‘Summary of Physical Properties (GDOT 810.2)’ section provided in Appendix B.

SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES (GDOT Section 810.2)

Project No.: VHB-23-GA-05625-02 Project Name: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

P.I. No.: 0017804 County: Cherokee

Sample No. 1 2 3 4 Lab No. Bulk #1 Bulk #2 Bulk #3 Bulk #4 Station 16+00, 45’Rt 18+55, 20’Lt 21+80, 25’Rt 29+80, 15’Lt Location SR 140 SR 140 SR 140 SR 140 Description RED BRN GRLY

CY SDY SLT

RD BRN GRLY

SDY CY SLT

RD BRN SDY CY

SLT

BRN GRLY CY

SLTY SD

PHYSICAL TESTS

2-1/2” Sieve 100 100 100 100 1-1/2” Sieve 100 100 100 100 #10 Sieve 98.3 97.2 100 96.8 #40 Sieve 92.2 88.8 90.3 77.6 #60 Sieve 83.1 78.1 81.8 63.8 200 Sieve 61.8 59.0 65.8 42.2 % Clay 35.5 42.0 42.8 15.2 T Vol Chg 25.1 18.9 17.5 27.1 % Swell 22.1 11.5 9.7 26.0 % Shrinkage 3.0 7.4 7.7 1.2 Max. Dry Den.(pcf) 103.7 101.4 100.0 102.3 % Optimum Moist. 20.3 21.0 24.8 19.1 % Natural Moist. 23.7 27.9 29.4 16.6 Liquid Lmt. (%) 55 46 65 52 Plast. Index (%) 19 18 31 12 Erosion Index 2.53 2.87 2.03 4.94 Resistivity (Ω-cm) 68,000 - - -

CBR/SSV 4.0/2.0 - - -

pH 5.26 - - - D75 (mm) 0.18 0.23 0.18 0.39

CLASSIFICATION

Class IIIC1 IIB4 IIB4 IIIC1

USCS MH ML MH SM

TESTING DATES

Date Sampled 02/22/2023 02/22/2023 02/22/2023 02/22/2023 Date Completed 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 Date Received 03/21/2023 03/21/2023 03/21/2023 03/21/2023

Respectfully Submitted:

SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES (GDOT Section 810.2)

Project No.: VHB-23-GA-05625-02 Project Name: SR 140 AT CR 309/ UNIVETER RD

P.I. No.: 0017804 County: Cherokee

Sample No. 5 6 7 - Lab No. Bulk #5 Bulk #6 Bulk #7 - Station 35+70, 35’Rt 42+40, 20’Rt 66+00, 25’Rt - Location SR 140 SR 140 CR 309/ Univeter Rd - Description RD BRN GRLY

CY SDY SLT

DK RD BRN GRLY

SLTY SDY CLY

BRN CY SDY SLT -

PHYSICAL TESTS

2-1/2” Sieve 100 100 100 - 1-1/2” Sieve 100 100 100 - #10 Sieve 99.0 96.6 99.8 - #40 Sieve 82.5 81.1 90.3 - #60 Sieve 71.7 70.8 79.3 - 200 Sieve 55.5 53.0 59.7 - % Clay 35.6 35.1 36.0 - T Vol Chg 19.5 12.9 18.8 - % Swell 15.5 6.7 13.0 - % Shrinkage 4.0 6.2 5.8 - Max. Dry Den.(pcf) 103.7 104.4 101.5 - % Optimum Moist. 19.9 19.5 21.1 - % Natural Moist. 28.4 24.2 27.4 - Liquid Lmt. (%) 49 52 53 - Plast. Index (%) 17 25 18 - Erosion Index 3.30 3.61 2.79 - Resistivity (Ω-cm) 4,000 - - -

CBR/SSV 3.0/1.5 - - -

pH 6.01 - - - D75 (mm) 0.29 0.30 0.22 -

CLASSIFICATION

Class IIB4 IIB4 IIB4 -

USCS ML CH MH -

TESTING DATES

Date Sampled 02/22/2023 02/22/2023 02/22/2023 - Date Completed 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 - Date Received 03/21/2023 03/21/2023 03/21/2023 -

Respectfully Submitted:

APPENDIX C

Field Exploration Procedures Photographs of the roadway (5 Pages)

Typed Field Notes (6 Pages) Particle Size Distribution Report of Sample used for Ditch Lining (1 Page)

FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

Soil Borings

Auger borings were drilled at various locations throughout the project site in general accordance with Georgia D.O.T. guidelines. The borings were drilled to depths in the range of 5 feet and 13 feet below the existing grade. The boring locations are shown on the attached Boring Location Plans (Figures 1 to 10) provided in Appendix A of this report. The drilling was performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard D-1586. Soil samples obtained were visually evaluated by a Geotechnical Engineer and classified according to the visual-manual procedure (ASTM D-2488-00). A narrative of field operations is also included in Appendix A of this report.

The Project Engineer determined the boring locations based on the roadway stations located on the provided plans and existing site features. The boring locations should, therefore, be considered approximate.

SR 140 at CR 309/ Univeter Road Cherokee County, P.I. No. 0017804

SR 140 - Looking in increasing station from Station 21+80±, 15’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking in decreasing station from Station 21+80±, 15’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking in decreasing station from Station 29+25±, 70’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking in increasing station from Station 29+25±, 70’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking to the left from Station 29+25±, 70’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking to the right from Station 29+25±, 70’ Right of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking in decreasing station from Station 40+25±, 20’ left of Centerline

SR 140 - Looking in increasing station from Station 40+25±, 20’ left of Centerline

CR 309/ Univeter Rd - Looking in decreasing station from Station 68+00± near Centerline

CR 309/ Univeter Rd - Looking in increasing station from Station 68+00± near Centerline

FIELD NOTES (6 Pages)

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

SR 140 - Right 45’ Right of Centerline

16+00 0-12 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIIC1 1 On grassy slope. Sloping slightly down upstation. Moderate downward slope 15’ left. Relatively flat to the right.

Sample #1 Natural Moisture = 23.7% Optimum Moisture = 20.3%

20’ Right of Centerline 18+80 0-8 RD BRN GRLY SDY CY SLT IIB4 2 On gravel apron. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ left. Sloping slightly up upstation. Slight slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right.

25’ Right of Centerline 21+80 0-5 RD BRN SDY CY SLT IIB4 3 On grass shoulder. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 10’ left. Sloping slightly up upstation. Slight slope up to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

Sample #3 Natural Moisture = 29.4% Optimum Moisture = 24.8%

45’ Right of Centerline 25+80 0-5 RD BRN SDY CY SLT IIB4 3 On grassy slope. Relatively flat upstation.

Slight slope down to the left. Slight slope up to the right.

60’ Right of Centerline 31+00 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grassy slope. Relatively flat upstation.

Slight slope down to the right. Slight slope up to the left.

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

50’ Right of Centerline 33+00 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass shoulder. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 2’ left. Relatively flat upstation.

Relatively flat to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

35’ Right of Centerline 35+70 0-5 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIB4 5 On grassy slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 14’ left. Sloping slightly down upstation. Slight slope up to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

Sample #5 Natural Moisture = 28.4% Optimum Moisture = 19.9%

25’ Right of Centerline 39+00 0-5 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIB4 5 On grassy area. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 15’ left. Sloping slightly down upstation. Slight slope up to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

20’ Right of Centerline

42+40 0-5 DK RD BRN GRLY SLTY

SDY CLY

IIB4 6 On grass shoulder. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ left. Sloping slightly down upstation. Relatively flat to the left. Slight slope up to the right.

Sample #6 Natural Moisture = 24.2% Optimum Moisture = 19.5%

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

SR 140 - Left 20’ Left of Centerline

16+00 0-5 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIIC1 1 On grassy slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ right. Sloping slightly down upstation. Moderate slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right.

20’ Left of Centerline 18+55 0-5 RD BRN GRLY SDY CY SLT IIB4 2 On grassy slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ right. Sloping slightly up upstation. Moderate slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right. 5’ downstation from asphalt driveway.

Sample #2 Natural Moisture = 27.9% Optimum Moisture = 21.0%

20’ Left of Centerline 21+90 0-13 RD BRN SDY CY SLT IIB4 3 On grassy slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 8’ right. Sloping slightly up upstation. Moderate slope up to the left.

Slight slope down to the right. 1’ upstation from concrete driveway.

15’ Left of Centerline 25+80 0-5 RD BRN SDY CY SLT IIB4 3 On grassy slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 5’ right. Relatively flat upstation.

Slight slope up to the left. Relatively flat to the right. 10’ upstation from concrete driveway.

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

15’ Left of Centerline 29+80 0-9 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass. Relatively flat upstation.

Relatively flat to the left and right.

Sample #4 Natural Moisture = 16.6% Optimum Moisture = 19.1%

20’ Left of Centerline 33+00 0-8 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass area. Sloping slightly down upstation. Relatively flat to the left. Slight slope down to the right. 5’ from tree line.

10’ Left of Centerline 35+45 0-7 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIB4 5 On grass area. Sloping slightly down upstation. Slight slope down to the right.

Slight slope up to the left. 10’ downstation from asphalt driveway.

20’ Left of Centerline 39+00 0-5 RD BRN GRLY CY SDY SLT IIB4 5 On grass slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 3’ right. Sloping slightly down upstation. Moderate slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right.

20’ Left of Centerline

43+00 0-7 DK RD BRN GRLY SLTY

SDY CLY

IIB4 6 On grass slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ right. Sloping slightly down upstation. Moderate slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right.

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

CR 309/ Univeter Road - Right 25’ Right of Centerline

66+00 0-6 BRN CY SDY SLT IIB4 7 On grass slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 6’ left. Relatively flat upstation.

Slight slope up to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

Sample #7 Natural Moisture = 27.4% Optimum Moisture = 21.1%

20’ Right of Centerline 70+00 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 10’ left. Slight slope down upstation. Slight slope up to the left. Slight slope down to the right.

40’ Right of Centerline 75+00 0-6 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass slope. Moderate slope down upstation. Slight slope down to the left.

Slight slope up to the right. 5’ from tree line.

40’ Right of Centerline 78+00 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass slope. Moderate slope down upstation. Slight slope down to the left.

Slight slope down to the right.

CR 309/ Univeter Road – Left 40’ Left of Centerline

66+80 0-7 BRN CY SDY SLT IIB4 7 On grass. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 10’ right. Relatively flat upstation. Relatively flat to the left and right.

P.I. No. 0017804, Cherokee County

Station Depth (ft) Description Class Sample Notes

25’ Left of Centerline 69+50 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 8’ right. Slight slope down upstation. Relatively flat to the left and right. 15’ downstation from concrete driveway

15’ Left of Centerline 75+00 0-8 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass slope. Edge of existing SR 140 pavement 2’ right. Moderate slope down upstation. Slight slope down to the right.

Relatively flat to the left.

20’ Left of Centerline 77+75 0-5 BRN GRLY CY SLTY SD IIIC1 4 On grass slope. Moderate slope down upstation. Relatively flat to the left. Slight slope up to the right.

United Consulting

Norcross, Georgia

03/02/2023

(no specification provided)

PL= LL= PI=

D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc=

USCS= AASHTO=

Silt-sandy, some clay, trace gravel, red brown 0.5

0.375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #60

#140 #200

100.0 100.0

98.4 98.3 97.1 92.2 83.1 64.3 61.8

36 55 19

0.3615 0.2730 0.0599

0.0200 0.0028

MH A-7-5(12)

VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLIN, INC

SR140 AT UNIVETER ROAD (Soil Survey)

VHB23GA0562502

Material Description

Atterberg Limits

Coefficients

Classification

Remarks

Sample Number: Depth: 0-12' Date:

Client:

Project:

Project No: Figure

SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS?

SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R

GRAIN SIZE - mm.

0.0010.010.1110100

% +3" % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay

0.0 1.6 36.6 26.3 35.5 in in in

½ in in

¾ in

½ in

/8 in

Particle Size Distribution Report npham Typewritten Text 16+00, 45'Rt

Geotechnical-Engineering Report

Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a constructor — a construction contractor — or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical- engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one

— not even you — should apply this report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated.

Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only.

Geotechnical Engineers Base Each Report on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider many unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client’s goals, objectives, and risk-management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report that was:

• not prepared for you;

• not prepared for your project;

• not prepared for the specific site explored; or

• completed before important project changes were made.

Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical-engineering report include those that affect:

• the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;

• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure;

• the composition of the design team; or

• project ownership.

As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes—even minor ones—and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed.

Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical-engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the geotechnical engineer performed the study. Do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time;

man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or natural events, such as floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Contact the geotechnical engineer before applying this report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems.

Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ — sometimes significantly — from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide geotechnical-construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions.

A Report’s Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the confirmation-dependent recommendations included in your report. Confirmation-dependent recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s confirmation-dependent recommendations if that engineer does not perform the geotechnical-construction observation required to confirm the recommendations’ applicability.

A Geotechnical-Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design-team members’ misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering reports has resulted in costly

Important Information about This

Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help.

problems. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team’s plans and specifications. Constructors can also misinterpret a geotechnical-engineering report. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing geotechnical construction observation.

Do Not Redraw the Engineer’s Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical-engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk.

Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make constructors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation.

To help prevent costly problems, give constructors the complete geotechnical-engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise constructors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited;

encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/ or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure constructors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions.

Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and constructors fail to recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly.

Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else.

Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces.

To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold-prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, many mold- prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical- engineering study whose findings are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant;

none of the services performed in connection with the geotechnical engineer’s study were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold prevention. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved.

Rely, on Your GBC-Member Geotechnical Engineer for Additional Assistance Membership in the Geotechnical Business Council of the Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with you GBC-Member geotechnical engineer for more information.

8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org

Copyright 2015 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, or its contents, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical-engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be commiting negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation.

UNITED CONSULTING