SCO-22-25072-01A-Add #1.pdf

https://walkergrouparch.sharepoint.com/sites/WGAServer/Shared Documents/1- Projects/2022/2212.HOGS (Tidewater Research Station)/7- Construction/1- Bidding & Negotiation/Addendum/DACS- Tidewater Research Station - Addendum 01.docx

ADDENDUM NO. 01 DATE: August 13th, 2024

TO: ALL BIDDERS

FROM: The Walker Group Architecture, Inc.

RE: DACS- Tidewater Research Station- Swine Unit Replacement

SCO# 22-25072-01A

The following corrections, clarifications, or supplemental information is to be incorporated into the Contractor(s) bid to perform the Work:

1. B/A304 "Farrowing House" calls for 1/4" recovery board over R-25 Insulation. No one has long enough fasteners for that installation if you could let us know on those plans and spec please? Response: ¼” recovery board shall be omitted. Install metal roof panels over insulation and vapor barrier per manufacturer’s instructions.

2. Looking for clarification on Hardware Set 1 in the Hardware specs. It has Concealed Vertical Rod Exit Device and lockset listed for Opening 109A and 112B, and 115A. Response: Omit concealed vertical rod exit devices for Hardware set 1, Lockset shall be cylindrical lever lock with F109 function.

3. Aluminum Window spec calls for impact rated windows. Can you clarify if storefront door 101A is also to be impact rated? Response: Impact rated glazing is required at storefront.

4. Is building permit going to paid for by Owner? Response: Contractor is responsible for Building permits.

5. Are the Tap and Impact fees going to be covered by Owner? Response: Tap an impact fees are by contractor.

6. There are a lot of Owner provided items on the drawings just want to make sure that none of this has changed including multiple items on Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical Drawings. Response: Refer to drawings for Owner provided items. Nothing has changed.

7. Plans Say Metal Hog Slats and precast concrete slats and girders are Owner provided, is this the case? Response:

Owner will provide slats and lintels.

8. Are the loading chutes Owner provided as shown on plans? Response: Loading chutes and provided by owner.

9. Are feed bins Owner Provided as shown on plans? Response: Feed bins are by owner.

10. Is 4 Ga Galvanized Welded Hog Panel with 2” Openings by Owner or contractor (Plans do not say Owner provided)? Response: The Welded hog panel will be by the contractor. Anything shown in the drawings that is not specifically stated to be by owner shall be provided by the contractor.

11. Is ¼” Polyethylene Board on Walls provided by Owner(plans do not say Owner provided)? Response: Polyethylene boards are by contractor.

12. Are evaporative Coolers Furnished by Owner and installed by contractor as shown on plans? Response:

Evaporative cooler are furnished by owner and installed by contractor.

https://walkergrouparch.sharepoint.com/sites/WGAServer/Shared Documents/1- Projects/2022/2212.HOGS (Tidewater Research Station)/7-

13. Is all equipment on equipment drawings furnished and installed by Owner as shown on drawings? Response: Refer to drawings for specifics on Owner provided equipment.

14. Is Owner taking care of power company fees to bring transformer to site? This is normally the case. The power company does not normally deal directly with contractor. Response: Owner will be responsible for power company fees.

15. The plans show we are running empty conduits to the transformer, is this the intent to let the Permanent power company pull power to the meter base? Response: Secondary conductors from the service transformer will be provided and pulled by Dominion Energy. Coordinate all service details with Dominion Energy to ensure the service transformer is located and installed in accordance with the Dominion Blue Book to ensure Dominion will provide the secondary conductors.

16. Clarify more on the Construction Entrance:

1) 18in of Stone needed. 6” Layer of 2”-3” on top of 12” Stone Base? No Fabric? Response: No Fabric. Provide per drawings.

17. We see pavement markings in the gravel parking area detail, would you still like pavement markings on the stone?

Response: No pavements markings on stone.

18. How will undercut and backfill be paid? Is the Owner adding an allowance for this? Response: As a part of the Contractor’s pricing, the Contractor shall provde site preparation in strict accordance with the project Geotechnical Report (attached). The Contractor shall employ the services of a Geotechnical Engineer to monitor and evaluate the site in accordance with the project Geotechnical Report. Contractor to also provide unit price for excavation and new structural fill. See revised Form of proposal.

19. We see concrete wheel stop @3,000 PSI, what about the PSI for concrete sidewalk, enclosed walkway & concrete apron. Response: 3,000 psi.

20. We believe a wider construction entrance would be more suitable for the job site. We believe 20’ wide would not be ideal for large delivery trucks entering the job. Response: Provide per drawings.

21. Can we get a copy of the Geotech report? Response: See attached for Geotechnical Report.

22. It was mentioned that pea gravel may be used in the internal grass areas. Is this still the plan? Response:

Contractor to provide pea gravel in lieu of grass for 4’ around perimeter of each building and walkway.

23. If the existing access road past the gate to the site is damaged and needs tobe repaired due to construction traffic, will this improvement be considered extra work? Response: No. Damaged caused by Contractor shall be repaired by Contractor

24. Notes 9, 10 on sheet A-204 says owner will provide equipment and contractor to install, but note on QA 101-QA 103 says owner will provide and install all equipment, contractor just to hook up plumbing and electrical. Can you clarify which is correct? Response: Loading chutes and feed bins will be installed by owner. Refer to QA sheets and PME drawings for owner provided contractor installed equipment.

25. On CG101 can we get clarification on required pipe materials? Can SDR 35 or HDPE be used for the 8” and 12”?

Also, Schedule 80 PVC is called out under the access drive, there are many cheaper/better alternatives. I think It’s around $70/LF material only. Response: Provide materials per specifications.

https://walkergrouparch.sharepoint.com/sites/WGAServer/Shared Documents/1- Projects/2022/2212.HOGS (Tidewater Research Station)/7-

26. Door 101A indicates the material is Aluminum, but the framing indicates HM. Please clarify which material the Door & Framing need to be. Response: Door 101A shall be aluminum storefront type.

27. Do you want Large Missile Impact-Resistant on windows, if so then the entry glass on the doors will need to be Impact-Resistant also. Response: Storefront glazing shall be impact rated.

28. Can you identify the amount of mobilizations Hog Slat intends to make for the hog slat installation. Phasing of multiple buildings vs. getting all buildings to install point could change pricing. Response: Hogslat will make multiple mobilizations for slat installation.

29. The project manual shows the trusses requiring PT lumber. Is that a requirement? Response: Trusses are not required to be pressure treated.

30. See attached Pre-Bid Meeting Notes.

31. See attached Pre-Bid Sign -In Sheet

END OF ADDENDUM 01

SCO-Proposal Form 2013 1 of 3

F O R M OF P R O P O S A L

Swine Unit Replacement Contract:

At Tidewater Research Station NC Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services Bidder:

SCO-ID #. 22-25072-01A

Date:

The undersigned, as bidder, hereby declares that the only person or persons interested in this proposal as principal or principals is or are named herein and that no other person than herein mentioned has any interest in this proposal or in the contract to be entered into; that this proposal is made without connection with any other person, company or parties making a bid or proposal; and that it is in all respects fair and in good faith without collusion or fraud. The bidder further declares that he has examined the site of the work and the contract documents relative thereto, and has read all special provisions furnished prior to the opening of bids; that he has satisfied himself relative to the work to be performed. The bidder further declares that he and his subcontractors have fully complied with NCGS 64, Article 2 in regards to E-Verification as required by Section 2.(c) of Session Law 2013-418, codified as N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-129(j).

The Bidder proposes and agrees if this proposal is accepted to contract with the

State of North Carolina through the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services in the form of contract specified below, to furnish all necessary materials, equipment, machinery, tools, apparatus, means of transportation and labor necessary to complete the construction of

Swine Unit Replacement at Tidewater Research Station in Plymouth NC in full in complete accordance with the plans, specifications, and contract documents, to the full and entire satisfaction of the State of North Carolina, and the

Tidewater Research Station with a definite understanding that no money will be allowed for extra work except as set forth in the General Conditions and the contract documents, for the sum of:

SINGLE PRIME CONTRACT:

Base Bid:

Dollars($)

General Subcontractor:

Lic

UNIT PRICES:

Unit prices quoted and accepted shall apply throughout the life of the contract, except as otherwise specifically noted. Unit prices shall be applied, as appropriate, to compute the total value of changes in the base bid quantity of the work all in accordance with the contract documents.

GENERAL CONTRACT:

No. G-1 Excavation of unsuitable soils and backfill with structural fill (CY) Unit Price ($)

GS143-128(d) requires all single prime bidders to identify their subcontractors for the above subdivisions of work. A contractor whose bid is accepted shall not substitute any person as subcontractor in the place of the subcontractor listed in the original bid, except (i) if the listed subcontractor's bid is later determined by the contractor to be non-responsible or non-responsive or the listed subcontractor refuses to enter into a contract for the complete performance of the bid work, or (ii) with the approval of the awarding authority for good cause shown by the contractor.

SCO-Proposal Form 2013 2 of 3

MINORITY BUSINESS PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS

Provide with the bid - Under GS 143-128.2(c) the undersigned bidder shall identify on its bid (Identification of Minority Business Participation Form) the minority businesses that it will use on the project with the total dollar value of the bids that will be performed by the minority businesses. Also list the good faith efforts (Affidavit A) made to solicit minority participation in the bid effort.

NOTE: A contractor that performs all of the work with its own workforce may submit an Affidavit (B) to that effect in lieu of Affidavit (A) required above. The MB Participation Form must still be submitted even if there is zero participation.

After the bid opening - The Owner will consider all bids and alternates and determine the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Upon notification of being the apparent low bidder, the bidder shall then file within 72 hours of the notification of being the apparent lowest bidder, the following:

An Affidavit (C) that includes a description of the portion of work to be executed by minority businesses, expressed as a percentage of the total contract price, which is equal to or more than the 10% goal established.

This affidavit shall give rise to the presumption that the bidder has made the required good faith effort and Affidavit D is not necessary;

* OR *

If less than the 10% goal, Affidavit (D) of its good faith effort to meet the goal shall be provided. The document must include evidence of all good faith efforts that were implemented, including any advertisements, solicitations and other specific actions demonstrating recruitment and selection of minority businesses for participation in the contract.

Note: Bidders must always submit with their bid the Identification of Minority Business Participation Form listing all MB contractors, vendors and suppliers that will be used. If there is no MB participation, then enter none or zero on the form. Affidavit A or Affidavit B, as applicable, also must be submitted with the bid. Failure to file a required affidavit or documentation with the bid or after being notified apparent low bidder is grounds for rejection of the bid.

SCO-Proposal Form 2013 3 of 3

Proposal Signature Page

The undersigned further agrees that in the case of failure on his part to execute the said contract and the bonds within ten (10) consecutive calendar days after being given written notice of the award of contract, the certified check, cash or bid bond accompanying this bid shall be paid into the funds of the owner's account set aside for the project, as liquidated damages for such failure; otherwise the certified check, cash or bid bond accompanying this proposal shall be returned to the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted this day of

(Name of firm or corporation making bid)

WITNESS: By:

Signature

Name:

(Proprietorship or Partnership) Print or type

Title______________ (Owner/Partner/Pres./V.Pres)

Address

ATTEST:

By: License No.

Title: Federal I.D. No.

(Corp. Sec. or Asst. Sec. only)

Email Address:

(CORPORATE SEAL)

Addendum received and used in computing bid:

Addendum No. 1 Addendum No. 3 Addendum No. 5 Addendum No. 6

Addendum No. 2 Addendum No. 4 Addendum No. 6 Addendum No. 7

DACS- Tidewater Research Station- Swine Unit Replacement

Pre-Bid Meeting Agenda 07.31.24

• Meeting Sign-in Sheet

• Date, Time, and Place of Bid Opening Thursday August 22nd, 2024 at 3:00pm at The Tidewater Research Center Conference Room.

o Bids shall be in a sealed envelope per submittal procedures in Project Manual.

o No bids will be accepted after bid time is called.

• 5% bid bond or a cashier’s check must accompany the bid.

Bid bond or cashiers check (ensured by FDIC) must be provided with bid.

• A Performance & Payment Bond is required for 100% of the contract price.

• MBE Form and Affidavit A or B must be submitted with Bid Affidavit C or D required after notice of low bid within 24hrs

• Proposal to be a lump sum amount. There are no bid alternates at this time.

• Contractor’s responsibility to visit project site and review contract documents before bidding project.

• Request for Information.

All pre-bid RFI’s must be submitted to admin@wgarc.com before 5:00pm on August 13th, 2024.

• List of contacts Chris Walker- Walker Group Architecture chris@wgarc.com - 252-636-8778 admin@wgarc.com- Questions/RFI’s prior to bid date

Rusty Collins stephen.collins@ncagr.gov – 252-793-4118

• Addenda

Final addenda will be issued no later than August 15th, 2024 at 5:00pm.

o Ensure all addenda has been acknowledged in bid Form of proposal mailto:admin@wgarc.com mailto:chris@wgarc.com mailto:admin@wgarc.com-mailto:stephen.collins@ncagr.gov

• Scope of work

- Construction of (4) New Swine facilities. Biosecurity Building, Farrowing Barn, Breeding & Gestation Barn, and a Ween to Finish Barn.

- New Facilities are to replace old facilities on an adjacent piece of land.

- New site development with gravel drives, new well and septic, pump station, security fencing

- The existing Lagoon will be utilized for new facilities.

- Partially enclosed wood walkways will connect all buildings

- Small Well house building

- Propane Tanks & Pad

- Concrete Pads for Feed Bins

- Concrete Pad for Incinerator

Biosecurity Building:

- Wood construction over slab on grade

- Two separated areas (clean side and dirty side)

- Split System HVAC

Farrowing Building:

- Wood construction over Elevated Concrete Pit

- Two farrowing rooms with 52 crates each

- Slab on grade everywhere except pits, which will have metal grating by

Hogslat

- All interior equipment provided and installed by owner

- Contractor to provide electrical and plumbing infrastructure

- Fans and evaporative coolers by Hoglslat, contractor to coordinate utilities

Breeding Gestation Building:

- Open room building

- Bottom pit slab, foundation walls, and concrete piers by contractor. Hoglsat to provide precast lintels and concrete slat flooring

- All interior equipment provided and installed by owner

- Fans and evaporative coolers by Hoglslat, contractor to coordinate utilities

Wean to Finish Building:

- 2 Large Open rooms

- Bottom pit slab, foundation walls, and concrete piers by contractor. Hoglsat to provide precast lintels and concrete slat flooring

- All interior equipment provided and installed by owner

- Fans by Hoglslat, contractor to coordinate utilities

• Site conditions o Parking – cant block access to existing complex o Material storage requirements o Access to building/site - 7-3:30, can make arrangements o Use of facilities- contractor to provide porty potty and temp power o Working on site (noise, safety requirements, hours etc.)

-No noise requirements, standard safety requirements

• Additional Owner Concerns -Tidewater is looking to have fiber run to buildings -May want pea gravel instead of sod, only in fenced area

• Additional Contractor Concerns

-GC will need to install fans in barn walls.

-Electrical connections by GC -Ventilation controller connections by GC -Weight limit on slat flooring- no lifts can be used on flooring -GC shall provide a Grout joint at perimeter slats less than 1” -1-2 days for lintel/stat installation -Geotech has been performed and can be provided.

-Contractor asked to bring small excavator for test holes, tidewater ok with it just make sure to fill holes -There will be 1” openings in breeding/gestation slats instead of 1-1/2” -GC to hook up power to pen/scale -Tidewater will remove any fencing required around lagoon

• Schedule for completion

The project is scheduled to be completed 545 days after notice to proceed.

• Liquidated damages Liquidated damages will be accessed at $500 per day past the contract completion date.

• Site walk throughs.

The site is accessible for contractor walkthroughs when coordinated with the Tidewater staff. Contact Rusty Collins to schedule access.

• Nothing stated at the conference will change the project documents unless a subsequent addendum is issued.

• Recap and questions mailto:chris@wgarc.com https://walkergrouparch.sharepoint.com/sites/WGAServer/Shared Documents/1- Projects/2022/2212.HOGS (Tidewater Research Station)/7- Construction/1- Bidding & Negotiation/Pre-Bid Meeting/Sign-In Sheet.docx

Pre-Bid Meeting Sign-In Sheet

Project Name/Location: DACS- Tidewater Research Station- Swine Unit Replacement, Plymouth NC

Meeting Date: July 31st, 2024

Attendee Name Company e-mail Address Phone Chris Walker Walker Group Architecture chris@wgarc.com 252-636-8778 Fritz Richards Hog Slat, Inc frichards@hogslat.com 910-590-6366 Will Gautier AR Chesson will@archesson.com 252-217-5512 Dustin Faulkner Barnhill Contracting dfaulkner@barnhillcontracting.com 252-384-2126 Darin Akers Barnhill Contracting dakers@barnhillcontracting.com 252-933-6460 Thomas Wall Pitt Electric Twall@pittelectric.com 252-862-6656 Anthony Sawyer Sawyer & Sons Const. Inc Sawyer2@centurylink.net 252-796-7197 Brent Garlington Trend Const. bgarlington@trendinc.biz 910-723-3743 Bishop Williams Waters Contracting bishopw@waterscontracting.net 919-279-7265 Tommy Corbett NCDA & CS RSD Tommy.corbett@ncagr.gov 252-902-6992 Steve Simon Daniels & Daniels estimating@danddcc.com 252-565-6878 mailto:Ssmith640@halifaxcc.edu mailto:frichards@hogslat.com mailto:will@archesson.com mailto:dfaulkner@barnhillcontracting.com mailto:dakers@barnhillcontracting.com mailto:Twall@pittelectric.com mailto:Sawyer2@centurylink.net mailto:bgarlington@trendinc.biz mailto:bishopw@waterscontracting.net mailto:Tommy.corbett@ncagr.gov mailto:estimating@danddcc.com

Report Cover Page

Tidewater Research Station – Swine Unit Replacement, Phase 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Prepared for:

NRW Engineering 748 Lord Dunmore Drive #101 Virginia Beach, VA 23464

106 Capital Trace, Unit E Elizabeth City, North Carolina

P (252) 335-9765 Terracon.com

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Report Cover Letter to Sign

May 24, 2023

NRW Engineering 748 Lord Dunmore Drive #101 Virginia Beach, VA 23464

Attn: Peyton Mulé P: 757-474-0612 E: pdm@nrwengineering.com

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Tidewater Research Station – Swine Unit Replacement, Phase 1 East side of Research Station Rd.

Plymouth, North Carolina Terracon Project No. K5225062

Dear Mr. Phillips:

We have completed the scope of Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project in general accordance with Terracon Proposal No. PK5225062 dated November 4, 2022. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations and floor slabs for the proposed project.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us.

Sincerely, Terracon

Gerald W. Stalls, Jr., P.E. Bruce R. Spiro, P.E.

Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Geotechnical Engineering Report Tidewater Research Station – Swine Unit Replacement, Phase 1 | Plymouth, North Carolina May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials i

Table of Contents

Report Summary .............................................................................................. i Introduction Project Description Site Conditions Geotechnical Characterization

Field Exploration Field and Laboratory Testing Soil Classification and Index Testing

Geologic Setting Geologic Hazards Seismic Site Class Geotechnical Overview Earthwork

Site Preparation Subgrade Preparation Excavation Fill Material Types Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements Utility Trench Backfill Grading and Drainage Earthwork Construction Considerations Construction Observation and Testing

Shallow Foundations Design Parameters – Compressive Loads Foundation Construction Considerations

Floor Slabs Floor Slab Design Parameters Floor Slab Construction Considerations

Below-Grade Structures Lateral Earth Pressures

Design Parameters Subsurface Drainage for Below-Grade Walls

General Comments

Figures GeoModel Generalized Subsurface Profile

Attachments

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials ii

Exploration and Testing Procedures Site Location and Exploration Plans Exploration and Laboratory Results Supporting Information

Note: Blue Bold text in the report indicates a referenced section heading. This PDF report also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the logo will bring you back to this page.

Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials i

Report Summary

Topic 1 Overview Statement 2

Project Description

The project includes the construction of a new Swine Research and Production facility including 4 new structures ranging from about 2,000 sf to 11,000 sf along with the associated infrastructure components.

Estimated maximum loads: columns - 50 kips; wall loads - 2 kips/ft; slabs - 100 psf.

Up to 1 to 2 feet of fill to achieve final grade.

Minor excavation other than foundation construction and utility installation.

Geotechnical Characterization

Lean clays to a depth ranging from about 2 to 6 feet. Below this, granular and cohesive soils extending to boring termination depths.

Groundwater observed during our exploration and noted to occur at depths ranging from 5 to 7 feet below surface grades.

Earthwork

Remove existing surficial and/or shallow subsurface Organic laden soils (Topsoil and/or Clay with Organics) extending to depths ranging from 6 inches to 2 feet.

Existing soils extending to depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet should not be used for engineered fill.

Clays are sensitive to moisture variation.

Shallow Foundations

Shallow foundations are recommended for building support provided the recommended bearing improvements are successfully completed.

Allowable bearing pressure = 2,000 psf Expected settlements: < 1-inch total, < 1/2-inch differential

Below-Grade Structures

Earth pressures acting are provided in the Lateral Earth Pressure section. Native shallow subsurface soils should not be used as backfill.

Pavements Not included in scope of services.

General Comments

This section contains important information about the limitations of this geotechnical engineering report.

1. If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics above can be used to access the appropriate section of the report by simply clicking on the topic itself.

2. This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials ii

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 1

Introduction

This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and Geotechnical Engineering services performed for the proposed Tidewater Research Station – Swine Unit Replacement, Phase 1 project to be located along the East side of Research Station Rd. in Plymouth, North Carolina. The purpose of these services was to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

■ Subsurface soil conditions

■ Groundwater conditions

■ Seismic site classification per IBC

■ Site preparation and earthwork

■ Dewatering considerations

■ Foundation design and construction

■ Floor slab design and construction

■ Lateral earth pressure

The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of test borings, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and preparation of this report.

Drawings showing the site and boring locations are shown on the Site Location and Exploration Plan, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during our field exploration are included on the boring logs and/or as separate graphs in the Exploration Results section.

Project Description

Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed during project planning. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated, and our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 2

Item Description

Information Provided

Email correspondence received on November 3 and 4, 2022, and March 22, 2023 including a site layout plan dated March 15, 2023.

Project Description

The project includes the construction of a new Swine Research and Production facility including 4 new structures along with the associated infrastructure components.

Proposed Structure

Proposed structures associated with the project include a Bio-security building, a farrowing building, a finishing building, and a gestation building.

Building Construction

The structures will have footprint areas ranging from about 2,000 sf to 11,000 sf. The structures will be of Pre-Engineered Metal framing, and/or masonry foundation walls supported by shallow foundations. Also, both elevated slabs over below grade pits and slabs on grade are to be included.

Finished Floor Elevation

Estimated to coincide with or be within 2 feet above existing site grade elevations.

Maximum Loads

In the absence of information provided by the design team, we used the following loads in estimating settlement based on our experience with similar projects

■ Columns: 50 kips

■ Walls: 2 kips per linear foot (klf)

■ Slabs: 100 pounds per square foot (psf)

Grading/Slopes

Unknown at this time; Proposed finished grade elevation for the building pad is expected to be no greater than 3 feet above existing grades.

Up to about 1 to 2 feet of fill will be required to develop final grades within the pavement and building addition areas (respectively), excluding remedial grading requirements.

Below-Grade Structures

Approximate 2 to 3-foot deep below grade pits constructed of concrete slab and retaining wall designs supporting elevated slabs and/or metal grating.

Pavements Not included in scope of services.

Building Code 2015 IBC

Terracon should be notified if any of the above information is inconsistent with the planned construction, especially the grading limits, as modifications to our recommendations may be necessary.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 3

Site Conditions

The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.

Item Description

Parcel Information

This project site is located along the east side of Research Station Road in Plymouth, North Carolina.

Latitude/Longitude (approximate): 35.85499 °/76.656403° See Site Location

Existing Improvements

N/A

Current Ground Cover

Agricultural field.

Existing Topography

Relatively level with elevations ranging from about 16 to 17 feet (WGS84) based on publicly available topographic maps published by Google Earth Pro™ as well as the project existing conditions site plan.

Geotechnical Characterization

We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon our review of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding of the project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis of our geotechnical calculations and evaluation of the site. Conditions observed at each exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. The individual logs can be found in the Exploration Results and the GeoModel can be found in the Figures attachment of this report.

As part of our analyses, we identified the following model layers within the subsurface profile. For a more detailed view of the model layer depths at each boring location, refer to the GeoModel.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 4

Model Layer

Layer Name

General Description

Depth Range

SPT

N-Value Range

Surficial

Soils Topsoil and/or Lean CLAY (CL) with Organics to

0.5 – 2

2 Clay/Sand

Moist to wet, Lean CLAY (CL) with varying amounts of Sand, medium stiff to stiff and/or SAND (SM, SC) with varying amounts of Silt and/or Clay, very loose to loose

0.5 – 2 to

4 – 8 4 to 12

3 Sand Moist to wet, SAND (SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt and/or Clay, very loose to loose

4 – 8 to

8 – 10 3 to 9

4 Clay 1 Wet, Lean CLAY (CL) with varying amounts of

Sand and/or Marine Shell Fragments, very soft to soft to

2 to 4

5 Sand Wet, SAND (SM, SC-SM, SC) with varying amounts of Clay, Silt, and/or Marine Shell

Fragments, very loose

8 – 13 to

13 – 20

W.O.H. 2 to 6

6 Clay 3 Wet, Lean CLAY (CL) with varying amounts of Sand and/or Marine Shell Fragments, medium stiff

13 - 18 to

2 to 7

1. Encountered at boring B-03 only

2. W.O.H. = Weight Of Hammer

3. Not encountered at borings B-03 and B-05 only

The borings were advanced using a mud rotary drilling technique. Drilling fluids (water) are introduced into the bore holes during the drilling operations impairing the ability to accurately determine the groundwater levels. Groundwater was encountered at the time of our field explorations and noted to range from about 5 to 7 feet below existing surface grades. Groundwater conditions may be different at the time of construction.

Mapping by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) indicates a seasonal high groundwater level within 0 to 12 inches of ground surface, which may be contributed by perched water conditions above shallow subsurface cohesive soils.

Groundwater conditions may change because of seasonal variations in rainfall, runoff, and other conditions not apparent at the time of drilling. Long-term groundwater monitoring was outside the scope of services for this project.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 5

Field Exploration

In order to explore the general subsurface soil types and to aid in developing associated foundation design parameters, the following exploration program was performed:

Seven (7) 20-foot deep Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings (designated as B-01 through B-07), drilled within the footprints of the proposed building limits.

The SPT borings were performed with the use of rotary wash “mud” drilling procedures in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The tests were performed continuously from the existing ground surface to depths of 12-feet, and at 5-foot intervals thereafter starting at a depth of 13-feet. The soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4” I.D., 2” O.D., 30” long split-spoon sampler. The sampler was driven with blows of a 140 lb.

hammer falling 30 inches, using an automatic hammer. The number of blows required to drive the sampler each 6-inch increment of penetration was recorded and is shown on the boring logs. The sum of the second and third penetration increments is termed the SPT N-value (uncorrected for automatic hammer). A representative portion of each disturbed split-spoon sample was collected with each SPT, placed in a glass jar, sealed, labeled, and returned to our laboratory for review. All boreholes that penetrated the groundwater table were backfilled upon completion with the drilling spoils.

The boring locations were established by Terracon and were approved by the Client prior to mobilization. The boring locations were staked in the field by a representative of Terracon with a handheld GPS device and by corroborating the location with easily identifiable landmarks. The borings were denoted with their respective boring name using spray paint for the topographical survey personnel. The approximate boring and groundwater monitoring well locations are shown in the Figures attachment of this report.

Field and Laboratory Testing

Soil testing provided by Terracon was performed in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. All soils and materials tests were performed in our AASHTO re:source (formally AMRL) certified Elizabeth City, North Carolina laboratory.

Soil Classification and Index Testing

Representative portions of all soil samples collected during drilling operations were labeled, preserved and transferred to our laboratory in accordance with ASTM D4220 for classification and analysis. Soil descriptions on the boring logs are provided using visual-manual methods in general accordance with ASTM D2488 using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 6

Soil samples that were selected for index testing were classified in general accordance with ASTM D2487. It should be noted that some variation can be expected between samples classified using the visual-manual procedure (ASTM D2488) and the USCS (ASTM D2487). A summary of the soil classification system is provided in the Supporting Information section of this report.

Representative split-spoon soil samples were selected and subjected to natural moisture, #200 sieve wash, and Atterberg Limits testing in order to corroborate the visual classification. These test results are presented in the Exploration and Laboratory Results section of this report and on the soil test boring logs provided in the Exploration Results section of this report. Generalized subsurface soil profiles are provided in the Figures attachment of this report.

Geologic Setting

The project site is located within the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province.

Numerous transgressions and regressions of the Atlantic Ocean have deposited marine, lagoonal, and fluvial (stream lain) sediments. The regional geology is very complex, and generally consists of interbedded layers of varying mixtures of sands, silts and clays.

During the Mesozoic era, the coastal plain was a broad sloping region well above sea level with loose soil continually eroded from rains and streams flowing toward the ocean.

During the Cenozoic era and occasionally the Mesozoic era, the ocean covered the lowland and then subsided repeatedly, creating terraces each time. Based on our review of existing geologic and soil boring data, the geologic stratigraphy encountered in our subsurface explorations generally conforms to the regional depositional pattern.

Geologic Hazards

Based on NRCS soil mapping, the project site contains hydric soils. Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Federal Register, 1994). Under natural conditions, these soils are either saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation.

The presence of hydric soils is an indicator that the site is susceptible to excessively moist and/or saturated soil conditions that can easily become unstable during construction. Additionally, the site is susceptible to varying surficial and/or near surface soil conditions as well as varying organic laden soil thicknesses given its prior agricultural use.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 7

Seismic Site Class

The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure. The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC). Based on the soil properties observed at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, our professional opinion is that a Seismic Site Classification of D be considered for the project. Subsurface explorations at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 20 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth.

The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program (US Seismic Design Maps) and the 2015 IBC indicate the following seismic site characteristics for a location at the following coordinates:

Latitude….... 35.85498811° Longitude…. -76.65640273°

Max. Considered Earthquake Ground Motion, 0.2 sec. Spectral Response, Ss…….0.102g Max. Considered Earthquake Ground Motion for 1.0 sec. Spectral Response, S1.…0.053g Site Coefficient, Fa….. 1.6 Site Coefficient, Fv….. 2.4 Design Spectral Response Acceleration, SDS… 0.109g Design Spectral Response Acceleration, SD1… 0.085g

Geotechnical Overview

The site appears suitable for the proposed construction based upon geotechnical conditions encountered in the test borings, provided that the recommendations provided in this report are implemented in the design and construction phases of this project.

The subsurface materials generally consisted of Clay with varying amounts of Sand underlain by Sand with varying amounts of silt and clay extending to the maximum depth of the borings. Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from about 5 to 7 feet below existing surface grades during or at the completion of drilling. Based on the existing surface elevations indicated on Google Earth ProTM, it is estimated that the groundwater elevation generally ranges from about 10 to 12 feet (WGS84).

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 8

Based on the conditions encountered and estimated load-settlement relationships, the proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous or isolated, shallow spread footings. Grading for the proposed foundations should incorporate the limits of the foundations plus a lateral distance beyond the outside edge of footings, where space is available. On-site soils to depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet are not considered suitable to be used as engineered fill materials.

The near surface, medium stiff to stiff medium plasticity lean clay could become unstable with typical earthwork and construction traffic, especially after precipitation events. Effective drainage should be completed early in the construction sequence and maintained after construction to avoid potential issues. If possible, the grading should be performed during the warmer and drier times of the year. If grading is performed during the winter months, an increased risk for possible undercutting and replacement of unstable subgrade will persist. Additional site preparation recommendations, including subgrade improvement and fill placement, are provided in the Earthwork section.

The soils which form the bearing stratum for shallow foundations are plastic and exhibit limited potential for shrink-swell movements with changes in moisture. Maintaining a minimum dead load pressure on footings should reduce the anticipated swell movements to tolerable levels. The Shallow Foundations section addresses support of the building directly bearing on native medium stiff to stiff lean clay or engineered fill. However, the anticipated finished floor elevation along with the initial clearing and grading efforts to remove topsoil is expected to provide at least 1.5 feet of well compacted structural fill between the floor slab and the near-surface limited plasticity clays. This structural fill thickness is typically adequate to mitigate the shrink-swell effects of the limited plastic clays. The Floor Slabs section addresses slab-on-grade support of the building.

The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing (presented in the Exploration Results section), engineering analyses, and our current understanding of the proposed project. The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations.

Earthwork

Earthwork is anticipated to include clearing and grubbing, excavations, and engineered fill placement. The following sections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for the work. Recommendations include critical quality criteria, as necessary, to render the site in the state considered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for foundations and floor slabs.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 9

Site Preparation

Prior to placing fill, existing vegetation, topsoil, and root mats should be removed.

Complete stripping of the topsoil and/or organic laden clay should be performed in the proposed building areas. We estimate that a cut depth ranging from about 6 inches to 2 feet below existing surface grades will be required to remove the topsoil as well as the organic laden clay (Boring B-06) from within the building areas. Topsoil and/or organic laden clay thicknesses may extend deeper within isolated areas. The stripping of topsoil and/or organic laden clay should extend at least 5 feet beyond the outside edge of building foundations.

Where fill is placed on existing slopes steeper than 5H:1V, benches should be cut into the existing slopes prior to fill placement. The benches should have a minimum vertical face height of 1 foot and a maximum vertical face height of 3 feet and should be cut wide enough to accommodate the compaction equipment. This benching will help provide a positive bond between the fill and natural soils and reduce the possibility of failure along the fill/natural soil interface.

Although no evidence of fill or underground facilities (such as septic tanks, cesspools, basements, and utilities) was observed during the exploration and site reconnaissance, such features could be encountered during construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should be removed, and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction.

Subgrade Preparation

Following the site stripping to remove topsoil and prior to structural fill placement the natural subgrade soils should be evaluated by a Geotechnical Engineer. Structural fill placed beneath the entire footprint of the building and pavement areas should extend horizontally a minimum distance of 5 feet beyond the outside edge of footings and 3 feet beyond pavement perimeters. The majority of the near-surface materials (CLAY: CL) anticipated to be developed as excavation spoils are not considered suitable for use as structural fill.

The natural subgrade should be proofrolled with an adequately loaded vehicle such as a fully-loaded tandem-axle dump truck. The proofrolling should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer or representative. Areas excessively deflecting under the proofroll should be delineated and subsequently addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer and removed by the contractor. Excessively wet or dry material should either be removed or moisture conditioned and recompacted.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 10

Based upon the subsurface conditions determined from the geotechnical exploration, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively workable;

however, the workability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or other factors. If unworkable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and drying.

Excavation

We anticipate that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. The bottom of excavations should be thoroughly cleaned of loose soils and disturbed materials prior to backfill placement and/or construction.

Fill Material Types

Fill required to achieve design grade should be classified as structural fill and general fill.

Structural fill is material used below, or within 5 feet of structures or constructed slopes.

General fill is material used to achieve grade outside of these areas.

Reuse of On-Site Soil: Excavated on-site soils extending to depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet are not recommended to be reused as Structural Fill and should not be placed beneath settlement sensitive structures and within foundation bearing zones. Portions of the on-site soil have an elevated fines content and will be sensitive to moisture conditions (particularly during seasonally wet periods) and may not be suitable for reuse when above optimum moisture content.

Material property requirements for on-site soil for use as general fill and structural fill are noted in the table below:

Property General Fill Structural Fill

Composition Free of deleterious material Free of deleterious material

Maximum particle size 6 inches

(or 2/3 of the lift thickness) 3 inches

Fines content Not limited Less than 20% Passing No.

200 sieve

Plasticity Not limited Maximum plasticity index of 6

GeoModel Layer Expected to be

Suitable1 1, 2, 3 3

1. Based on subsurface exploration. Actual material suitability should be determined in the field at time of construction.

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 11

Imported Fill Materials: Imported fill materials should meet the following material property requirements. Regardless of its source, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade.

Soil Type 1 USCS Classification

Acceptable Parameters (for Structural Fill)

Granular

GW, GP, GM,

SW, SP, SM

Less than 20% passing No. 200 sieve Liquid Limit less than 20

Plasticity index less than 6

1. Structural and general fill should consist of approved materials free of organic matter and debris. A sample of each material type should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for evaluation prior to use on this site.

Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements

Structural and general fill should meet the following compaction requirements.

Item Structural Fill General Fill

Maximum Lift Thickness

10 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-propelled compaction equipment is used.

4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided equipment (i.e. jumping jack or plate compactor) is used.

Same as structural fill

Minimum Compaction Requirements 1

98% of maximum 92% of maximum

Water Content Range 1

Granular: -2% to +2% of optimum

As required to achieve min.

compaction requirements

1. Maximum density and optimum water content as determined by the Standard Proctor test (ASTM D 698).

May 24, 2023 | Terracon Project No. K5225062

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials 12

Utility Trench Backfill

Any soft or unsuitable materials encountered at the bottom of utility trench excavations should be removed and replaced with structural fill or bedding material in accordance with public works specifications for the utility be supported. This recommendation is particularly applicable to utility work requiring grade control and/or in areas where subsequent grade raising could cause settlement in the subgrade supporting the utility.

Trench excavation should not be conducted below a downward 1:1 projection from existing foundations without engineering review of shoring requirements and geotechnical observation during construction.

Trench backfill should be mechanically placed and compacted as discussed earlier in this report. Compaction of initial lifts should be accomplished with hand-operated tampers or other lightweight compactors.