1g1. Country Oaks, Plans & Specs U
I
I ,
. i am. i
CItY O
,__A C ;., . ANHAssEN
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 5 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
` (612) 937-1900
IMEMORANDUM - Y
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ' ^�\\.' y//J/py
IFROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer ( -
DATE: April 19, 1989 .Y/zy/ _
I . �__SUBJ: Approve Plans and Specifications for Country Oaks Addition
File No. 89-1 (pvt)
II
The construction plans for Country Oaks Addition street eet and util-
ity improvements have been submitted by Brandt Engineering on
I behalf of Dave Johnson, Shorewood Oaks Development. The final
plat was approved April 10 , 1989 . These plans and specifications
cover the street, storm sewer, watermain and sanitary sewer
I construction for Country Oaks Drive and Country Oaks Road. Due
to the high ground water table in this area, the plans also show
a house drain system to be constructed. In order to keep
I building foundation drain and sump pump water out of the City ' s
sanitary sewer system, each residence will be required to connect
to this house drain system at the time of building construction.
This is addressed in the development contract.
IThe site proposes to take water service from the existing 6-inch
mains to the north. While the plans show a 6-inch watermain ,
I 8-inch diameter ductile iron pipe will be required since further
development to the south and west of this plat will place
increased demands on the delivery capabilities of the 6-inch ser-
vice.vice. A gate valve shall be added at the end of Country Oaks
Road for future expansion.
The soils report for this subdivision (attached) reveals that
I very poor soils exist on the majority of the site. This not only
impacts the construction for the public utilities and roadway but
also will precipitate the need for potentially extensive building
Ipad soil corrections on many, if not most, of the lots.
It will be the developer ' s responsibility to preferrably make
these lot corrections at the time of site grading or to notify
I prospective buyers that they will need to provide the City with
documentation from a registered soils engineer that either
suitable soils exist for residential building or what soil
I corrections will be done before building on the lot. This is
addressed in the development contract.
I
Don Ashworth
April 19 , 1989
Page 2
In order to achieve gravity flow for the wastewater from the
subdivision, a 372-foot segment of sanitary sewer on Glendale
Drive needs to be relayed and deepened. This is shown on sheet
5 . The roadway will have to be restored to City standards as a
part of this work. The existing manhole on Glendale Drive, if
being abandoned, shall be removed and the street surface
restored.
The plans call for an island to be constructed in the cul-de-sac
on Country Oaks Road . These pose access and maintenance
headaches for the City and therefore should be eliminated.
It is therefore recommended that the construction plans and spe-
cifications as prepared by Brandt Engineering be approved with
the following conditions:
1 . All utilities , including the house drain system, shall be
located within the public right-of-way or utility easements .
2 . A manhole shall be added midway between manhole GG and ,
manhole FF on the house drain system for maintenance access .
3 . All residences in this subdivision which have foundation
drain tile shall be required to be connected to the house
drain system at the time of building construction.
4 . Watermain in the subdivision shall be 8-inch diameter ductile
iron pipe.
5 . A gate valve shall be installed on the watermain at the end '
of Country Oaks Road.
6 . Glendale Drive shall be restored to meet existing pavement
depth or greater ( see typical section attached) , i .e.
approximately 14-inch 2341 wear course, 44-inch full depth
asphalt base ( 2331) on compacted subgrade. '
7 . If abandoned, the existing manhole on Glendale Drive shall be
removed and the pavement restored to the typical section .
8 . Building pad soil corrections shall be made preferrably at
the time of site grading. If left until later, the developer
shall inform all prospective buyers that soils information
will be required from a licensed soils engineer by the City
at the time of permit application, certifying that either
suitable soils exist for residential construction or what
soil corrections will be done before building construction .
9 . The center island shall be eliminated from the cul-de-sac on
Country Oaks Road. '
Ell
' Don Ashworth
April 19 , 1989
Page 3
10 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with
the City prior to signing the final plat and provide the
' financial security as stipulated therein.
11 . All regulatory agency permits shall be obtained prior to
construction and complied with.
' Attachments
1 . Plans.
2 . Typical Section - Glendale Drive.
' 3 . Soils Report.
cc: Ray Brandt, Brandt Engineering
Dave Johnson, Shorewood Oaks Development
1
L.* — — 28'— -- — — — —
—14' -- SOD Ch ,r. .: ' .
3" OF TOPSOIL
( SEE NOTEI )
as
— SLOPE I;4.' PER FT
4.4.• 7 7 1-TT ITT T?TTT-T?t-= 1: ♦ �fafara rare • v, await%
I- T 7 J;,T_77-/-•7•T,/ .�j• 7• f.71--r'f- J(-7 J 777_r`7777•
-1 / /�, ,J r., •ASPHALT CURB -- 1'/2" ASPHALT WEARING COURSE — MHD SPEC 2341
4" HIGH
• — TACK COAT — MHD SPEC 2357
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
41/2" FULL DEPTH ASPHALT BASE — MHD SPEC 2331
GLENDALE DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION
.. .. .. .. .. .. Ns =I = .• NE N
qqi
11
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
I FOR
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
GLENDALE DRIVE NEAR TRUNK HIGHWAY 7
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
11 SHOREWOOD INVESTMENTS ,
GME PROJECT NO. 1263
11
10
II
I
I
I
'BAR 141989
CITY.OF CHANtyAt'v
Copyright 1987 , GME Consultants, Inc.
AT AC r4E r 3
I
. i rfl
GNIE CONSULTANTS, INC. E . . I
CONSULTING ENE %EERS
2083 East Center C+rc+e / Minneapo+�s. MN 55441 / 812/5b -1859 II
May 11, 1987
Shorewood Investments; Inc.
14633 Beacon Circle II
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55391
Attention: Mr. Gary Lindgren GME Project No. 1263
RE: Preliminary subsurface exploration for proposed
residential subdivision on Glendale Drive near
I
Trunk Highway 7 in Chanhassen, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
li
In accordance with our proposal dated May 1, 1987, we have completed
the subsurface exploration for this
I
P project. Enclosed please find
the results of our field exploration and the soil report we have
II
liprepared. Two copies of this report have been sent to the above
address and one copy has been sent to Mr. David Hansing, P.E. I
II
INTRODUCTION II
1
I
10 The development is to consist of 13 lots for single family
dwellings. No specific information as to the design of the II
structures is available as of the date of this report. However, it
is likely that the single family dwellings would be similar to those I
in the area, which include a mix of split levels, full basements,
II
and walk-outs. The type of construction would most likely be
masonry walls to first floor level or adjacent outside grade, and
II
AI wood frame construction above. Such structures typically impart
li GEOTECHNICAL • MATERIALS • ENVIRONMENTAL SOILS
WILLIAM C KWASNY.P.E. THOMAS P VENEMA.P E. WILLIAM E.BLOEMENOAL E.1.7 I
Ili
1
Mr. Gary Lindgren 2 May 11, 1987
1
light to moderately heavy loads to the foundations. Some cutting
and filling would be necessary.
FHA/HUD Data Sheet 79G Requirements
The residential buildings in this subdivision may be designed to be
1
' eligible for FHA/HUD financing. Therefore, the requirements of HUD
1 Data Sheet 79G would be applicable. Briefly described, the
following steps are necessary in the engineering and design process
with respect to earthwork.
1. Soil borings and preparation of soil report by a
' Registered Professional Engineer.
2. Preparation of preliminary Lot and Block Tabulation
for land development with controlled earthwork, to
estimate which buildings will be supported on
compacted fill and which will be supported on
naturally-occurring soil, as well as to define the
11 separation distance between the estimated high
groundwater elevation and floor slab (FHA
regulations require a minimum 4 feet separation) .
' 3. Observation and testing of all soils below
buildings, including naturally-occurring soils and
' all structural fill; to be carried out by a Soil
Engineer, with the observation and testing being.
done before any fill material or concrete is placed
and during the filling operation.
4. Performance of field density tests in the compacted
fill during placement, at a minimum recommended
frequency of 1 test for every 2,500 square feet of
area covered, for every 2 feet of fill.
5. Submittal of test results and report.
CME CONSULTANTS.INC.
of
I
Mr. Gary Lindgren 3 May 11, 1987
:1
This report is intended to satisfy Item 1 above. Its purpose is to
describe the soil and groundwater conditions encountered in our
subsurface exploration;, to review and evaluate these conditions with
respect to the proposed project; and to present recommendations for
feasible methods of foundation and earthwork design and
construction. When the project development plan is completed, the
Soil Engineer should prepare a preliminary Lot and Block Tabulation
as described in Item 2. The services discussed in Items 3 , 4, and 5
should be provided during the earthwork phase.
I
THIS IS A PRELIMINARY REPORT ONLY, BASED ON LIMITED EXPLORATION TO
ANSWER GENERAL QUESTIONS POSED BY SHOREWOOD INVESTMENTS, INC. THIS
REPORT HAS NOT BEEN PREPARED TO MEET THE SPECIFIC NEED OF DESIGN
PROFESSIONALS, CONTRACTORS, OR ANY OTHER PARTIES, AND ANY USE OF
THIS REPORT BY THEM OR WITHOUT THE GUIDANCE OF THE SOIL ENGINEER WHO
PREPARED IT CONSTITUTES IMPROPER USAGE WHICH COULD LEAD TO ERRONEOUS
2i ASSUMPTIONS, FAULTY CONCLUSIONS, AND OTHER PROBLEMS.
FIELD EXPLORATION/LABORATORY TESTING
11
Five borings were drilled for this project as shown on the enclosed
Soil Boring Location Diagram. Mr. Hansing had requested that four
borings be drilled. However, during the drilling operation, it was
agreed that a fifth boring would be added. The borings were drilled
with a truck mounted Mobile B-24 rig. Solid and hollow stem augers
aME CONSULTANTS.INC.
r
I !
11 Mr. Gary Lindgren ren 4 May 11, 1987
Y ,
I
were used to advance the borings to full depth. The soil samples
were obtained by the split barrel method in accordance with ASTM: D
1586 . During the sampling, the Standard Penetration values (N-
values, blows per foot) were recorded. The N-values provide an
P ) P
indication of the density or consistency of the soils and are shown
on the respective logs. The recovered soil samples were
preliminarily classified in the field, sealed in jars to prevent
moisture loss, and returned to our laboratory for examination and
classification by a Soil Engineer.
Groundwater levels were noted in the boreholes during the drilling
operations. To supplement the water levels recorded during our
relatively brief period of observation, temporary open well
piezometers were installed in two of the boreholes. The piezometers
can be used to monitor the groundwater over an extended period of
time. The recorded water levels are shown in the lower left corner
of the respective logs.
The laboratory testing program consisted of a Soil Engineer
examining each sample to determine the major and minor soil
components, while also noting the color, degree of saturation, and
any lenses or seams found in the samples. The soils were
visually/manually classified on the basis of texture and plasticity
in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS) . The letter symbol in parentheses following the written
ifGME CONSULTANTS,INC.
1
Mr. Gary Lindgren 5 May 11, 1987
II
description on the boring logs is the estimated group symbol based
on the USCS. A chart describing the properties of the groups under I
this system is included in the Appendix of the report.
The Engineer grouped the soils by type into the strata shown on the
II
logs. The stratification lines shown on the logs are approximate;
3 insitu, the transition between soils types may be gradual or abrupt I
in both the horizontal and vertical directions.
ILaboratory moisture content tests were performed on selected soil i
samples. The moisture content tests were performed in accordance
with ASTM: D 2216, and the results are shown on the respective I
I logs.
I
•
We will retain the soil samples remaining after testing for 30 days II
after the date of this report. If you wish to have the samples �
retained beyond this time, we ask that you please advise us;
II
otherwise, the samples will be discarded.
II
SITE CONDITIONS _
II
Topography/Surface Features
II
The topography of the site is relatively flat to gently rolling. A
I . topographic plan of the site was not available. However, ground
II
J. GME CONSULTANTS.INC.
In
11 Mr. Gary Lindgren Y g 6 May 11, 1987
I
surface elevations among the borings vary by less than 7 feet. The
site is bordered by Holy Cross Lutheran Church on the west, an
existing residential development and small ditch on the north, and
wooded areas to the south and west. Vegetation within the
g site
consists of low grasses on the west, and grasses and small trees on
the east. A fenced horse pasture is located in the eastern part of
the site.
Soil Conditions
The soil conditions found in the borings are shown on the respective
logs.
The surface of the site is generally covered with a layer of topsoil
approximately 2 feet to 4 feet in thickness. At some locations, the
underlying soils also contained trace fine roots and wood. The
topsoil consisted of black and gray-brown organic silty and clayey
soils. The organic soils are not suitable for support of the
proposed structures, pavements, utilities, or for reuse as select
fill under buildings. The topsoil is suitable for use in landscaped
areas.
The underlying naturally-occurring non-organic soils are stratified,
including fine to medium sand, clayey sand, silty clay, sandy clay,
and clayey silt. At some locations (borings 2 and 5) the soils
GNU CONSULTANTS.INC.
3
I
Mr. Gary Lindgren 7 May 11, 1987
I
contained traces of roots and wood. The N-values in the naturally-
occurring soils varied irregularly from 1 to 18 blows per foot,
generally indicative of a soft to stiff consistency in the fine
grained soils and a loose condition in the sands. The laboratory
moisture content test results . vary from approximately 23% to 46%,
which we estimate to be substantially above the optimum moisture
content for these soils.
Groundwater Conditions '
ii
Free groundwater was observed in 4 of the 5 borings during our
relatively brief period of observation on May 6, 1987. In borings 2
and 4, temporary open well piezometers were installed to monitor the
groundwater over an extended period of time. The groundwater was
observed in the piezometers on May 8, 1987. The approximate pproximate depths
to groundwater recorded during the drilling operations and the depth
3 to groundwater in the piezometers and the corresponding elevations
are presented in Table No. 1.
The temporary piezometers were installed in accordance with our
understanding of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
regulations for piezometer construction. These piezometers consist
of 2 inch diameter PVC pipe rated to 200 psi capacity. The
piezometers were installed to a depth of approximately 13 feet below ,
the existing ground sutface, with an additional stick up of
GME CONSULTANTS,INC.
Ss
IP
IPMr. Gary Lindgren 8 May 11, 1987
IP
approximately 2 feet above the ground surface. The lowest 5 feet of
iPpipe was slotted and wrapped in geofabric. No couplings or joints
were used in the piezometers. The boreholes were backfilled with
relatively clean sand to approximately 2 feet above the screen.
Above the sand and extending to the ground surface, cement/bentonite
grout was placed. To meet the requirements of the MDH, the
iPtemporary piezometers must be removed or properly abandoned within 6
months of May 6, 1987. As a part of the removal operations, the
boreholes must be backfilled with cement/bentonite grout.
Based on the USGS Excelsior and Mound quadrangle maps, this site is
surrounded by several lakes and lowlying swampy areas. The surface
water elevations of these various bodies of water vary
substantially. The groundwater at this site is probably related to
the water levels in Lake Minnewashta to the east and Lake Virginia
to the west, which are both related to the water level in Lake
Minnetonka. At the time of our subsurface exploration, only an
assumed datum was available to reference our boring and groundwater
elevations. Thus, at this time, the groundwater levels cannot be
related to NVGD datum. However, it can be seen that the groundwater
in the borings rose to substantially shallower depths between the
time they were first observed in the borings, and the subsequent
piezometer readings.
FHA/HUD Data Sheet 79G requires that the lowest basement slab
GNU CONSULTANTS,INC.
A
Mr. Gary Lindgren 9 May 11, 1987
] I
elevation for a dwelling be a minimum of 4 feet above the highest
known groundwater level, without differentiating between perched and
II
hydrostatic water conditions. We recommend that the piezometers be
monitored over an extended period of time to continue defining the II
groundwater conditions at this site. The shallow groundwater must I
be considered when establishing lowest basement slab elevations. It
is possible that full and even split entry basements would not be
I
possible for the proposed dwellings without rising planned grades
for the development. 1
:3
I
REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I
II
Discussion
I
This report presents preliminary assesment of the soil and
groundwater conditions relative to the proposed developments. A II
development plan indicating proposed and existing elevations, and
II
proposed dwelling types and locations is not yet available. Also, a
II
benchmark was not available at the time of our subsurface I
31 exploration such that groundwater depths could be related to NVGD
datum for use in evaluating the FHA requirement that the lowest II
basement slab be separated by a minimum vertical distance of 4 feet
II
above the highest known groundwater level. Thus, the
recommendations in this report are preliminary. However, there are
I
several factors which are important in the design of typical single
li
1 OME CONSULTANTS,INC.
II
MI
! Mr. Gary Lindgren 10 May 11, 1987
family amil dwellings that can be reviewed based on the available
information.
The soils surface (topsoil) and near-surface encountered in our 5
borings would not be suitable for support of single family
dwellings. The topsoil thickness is greater than that which is
typically encountered, extending to depths of 2 to 4 feet. The
Standard Penetration N-values (used as a measure of load bearing
I/ capacity) are low in the upper 4 to 8 feet of borings 2, 4, and 5.
Based on laboratory test results, the moisture content of the near-
surface soils ranges from approximately 23% to 46%. We estimate
that these moisture contents are substantially in excess of the
optimum moisture content. Obtaining adequate compaction of such wet
soils is often difficult and not possible. Also, placing fill at a
moisture substantially in excess of the optimum moisture increases
the likelihood of long term settlements.
The buildings should not be founded on, over, or within the existing
surface topsoil, or the underlying soft to firm naturally-occurring
soils. We recommend subcuting and removing the soft to very loose
soils (soils with N-values less than 6) . It is likely that this
excavation would extend below the groundwater level, thus
complicating the earthwork operation.
ONE CONSULTANTS,INC.
Mr. Gary Lindgren 11
Y g May 11, 1987
:1
The cost of soil correction for this site could be high. In order
to reduce the quantity of soil to be corrected and the cost of
earthwork, it may be feasible to construct "Cluster Buildings"
(townhouses or quadraminiums) . Such buildings would have a smaller
:1 overall footprint and correspondingly less soil correction would be
necessary.
LI
Preliminary details on these recommendations, and our preliminary
recommendations for pavements, utilities, and earthwork construction
:1 considerations, are presented below.
Earthwork
The near-surface topsoil, as well as the near-surface soft or very
loose non-organic soils, should be subcut and removed, and replaced
with compacted backfill. The estimated depth of subcut at each of
the borings is tabulated below. When the development plan is
completed, indicting proposed grades, the estimated depth of subcut
should be reviewed in light of this information.
I
ESTIMATED DEPTH
BORING BORING OF SUBCUT OBSERVED DEPTH
NUMBER ELEVATION FEET OF GROUNDWATER
1 97.4 2.5 N.E.*
2 98 .9 8 3.2 '
3 92.6 2.5 4.2'
4 95.0 8.5 3 '
5 92.7 4 8'
* Groundwater not encountered
OME CONSULTANTS,INC.
IIMr. Gary Lindgren 12 May 11, 1987
I
The depth of subcut is estimated to extend as deep as 8. 5 feet or
more. It is likely that this subcut would extend below the
groundwater level, thus complicating the earthwork operation. The
excavation of unsuitable soil' should be extended laterally beyond
the outside edge of planned footing locations, at least 1 foot for
every 1 foot of critical cut required below the bottom of footing,
or 5 feet whichever is greater. We strongly recommend that the
construction staking be carried out by a Registered Land Surveyor so
that proper oversizing is provided and the building pads are
accurately located. Failure to properly locate the building pads
11 during the earthwork could result in excessive settlement of the
houses because they were built too close to or beyond the limits of
the graded pads. Such mislocations do occur and require extra soil
correction during individual house construction.
I
Excavations for soil correction would likely encounter groundwater
across much or all of the site. The quantity of such groundwater
infiltration would likely be large. Any water which enters
excavations should be completely removed from the excavations prior
to placement of fill or concrete. The base should be free of
standing water or slurry and visible for testing. The earthwork
contractor should provide a dewatering plan prior to the start of
grading. Sump pumps alone may not adequately dewater the
GATE CONSULTANTS,INC. -
SE
II
Mr. Gary Lindgren 13 May 11, 1987
excavations.
Much of the subcut soils would be organic soil, or excessively wet
clay, not suitable for reuse as structural fill. The organic soils
which are subcut and removed should be disposed of off-site or in
1 landscape areas. As a practical matter, reuse of the wet clay
would be difficult. It would be necessary to dry the soils to a
suitable condition prior to reuse. Such drying is possible but
frequently difficult. It would be necessary to stockpile the soils
in a thin lift (approximately 1 to 2 feet) , disk the soils, and
1 allow them to air dry for extended periods of time. During cold or
rainy weather, this is sometimes not possible.
Any fill needed to reach design grades should consist of non-organic
soils free of any foreign material or debris. We recommend that
fill be placed at a moisture content within approximately 4% of the
optimum moisture content. If it is proposed to reuse the naturally-
occurring soils for structural fill, it would be necessary to dry
them prior to placement.
Fill should be placed in lifts no thicker than approximately 8 to 10
inches. After proper moisture conditioning, granular fill should be
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum Modified Proctor dry
density, ASTM: D 1557; cohesive fill should be compacted to at
least 95% of the maximum Standard Proctor dry density, ASTM: D 698.
F
GM CONSULTANTS.INC.
1 .
IMr. Gary Lindgren 14 May 11, 1987
Depending on final design grade at individual lots, it is possible
that some of the footings would be founded on naturally-occurring
non-organic soils. All soils exposed at footing elevations should
be thoroughly compacted prior to concrete placement. This includes
both new structural fill and naturally-occurring non-organic soils.
Compaction of the naturally-occurring non-organic soils would make
the deposit more uniform and help locate zones not suitable for
structural support. It 'is likely that the majority of the earthwork
at this site would be carried out by the mass grading contractor.
It is possible that for cut lots, the necessary compaction may not
be done during the mass grading phase. It is important that the
recommendation that the base of all excavations be compacted and the
need for subcutting some of the naturally-occurring soils, be
conveyed to individual building contractors.
Foundation Design
For preliminary planning, we recommend that spread footings be used
to support the proposed dwellings. The elevations at which footings
may bear would vary from structure to structure. The bearing soils
would either be compacted structural fill or naturally-occurring
non-organic soils. For preliminary planning, footings founded on
compacted soils beneath which all unsuitable soils have been
removed, may be proportioned for a net allowable soil bearing
GME CONSULTANTS,INC.
__
3 - Mr. Gary Lindgren 15 May 11, 1987
I
pressure not to exceed 1,500 pounds per square foot. The net
allowable soil bearing pressure refers to the pressure which may be
transferred to the bearing stratum in excess of the pressure due to
the surrounding depth of overburden.
1
Exterior spread footings and footings in unheated portions of the
1 buildings, such as garages should be supported at least 4 feet below
final grade to provide protection from frost penetration. In heated
liportions of the buildings, interior footings may be supported 12 to
18 inches below finished floor grade. All continuous footings
li
should have a minimum width of 20 inches to avoid excessively narrow
footings which could result in localized shear failure of the
bearing stratum.
il
1
Floor Slab Subgrade
Al 1
Non-organic soils used to support the footings would be suitable for
support of floor slabs. The final 4 inches of compacted soil
beneath floor slabs should be a clean medium to coarse sand having
less than 3% passing a No. 200, sieve to serve as a leveling course
lias well as a capillary break. This would reduce migration of
Ai moisture upward towards the base of the slab. The granular layer
would also serve as capillary break. However, moisture may
accumulate in the base course zone. Therefore, a plastic vapor
Al barrier of at least 6 mil thickness should be provided over the
ill
111 GME CONSULTANTS,INC.
il
Ni
II
Mr. Gary Lindgren 16 May 11, 1987
I
subgrade layer where covering, carpets, or tile would be placed on
IPthe floor, or where moisture protection is desired.
In order to provide for uniform curing of concrete slabs, we
recommend that the subgrade be thoroughly wetted immediately prior
to concrete placement. The surface of the slab should then be cured
by a positive means, such as a sprayed-on membrane or moisture
11 absorbent material with plastic sheet covering. We recommend that
the slabs be designed in accordance with the recommendations of the
Portland Cement Association and the American Concrete Institute
Standards.
Basements
Where subsurface living space is proposed for the dwellings, we
recommend that perimeter drain systems be installed around the
outside edge of the basement walls, and that the exterior walls be
dampproofed. The perimeter drain system should be installed even if
groundwater is not observed during the earthwork operation. The
drain system should consist of slotted or perforated PVC pipe placed
at foundation level below the floor slab. The zone above and
around the pipe should be backfilled with free draining granular
soil. The drainage system should be connected to an interior sump
pump or drained by gravity to a suitable discharge location.
FHA/HUD Data Sheet 79G requires that the lowest basement slab
GM[CONSULTANT/,INC.
-1
7
Mr. Gary Lindgren 17
May 11, 1987
elevation be a minimum of 4 feet above the highest known groundwater
level. The perimeter drain system is not a satisfactory substitute '
for the separation.
We recommend that the site be graded to provide positive drainage of
runoff away from the buildings in all directions. As a part of that
grading, the free draining granular backfill adjacent to the
basement wall should be compacted to approximately, but not
substantially in excess 'of, 88% of the maximum Modified Proctor.
Greater compaction against the basement walls could create '
excessively high lateral earth pressures against the walls. The
upper most 18 inches of fill adjacent to the basement wall should
consist of relatively impermeable compacted clay to promote runoff
away from the building and reduce infiltration of surface water. '
f
The basement walls should be designed to resist lateral earth
pressures. Several important factors must be considered in the
design of the basement walls, including construction sequence,
backfill soil type, backfill compaction, adjacent surcharge loads, '
and whether the walls are allowed to yield. We recommend using and
equivalent fluid pressure of 50 to 55 pounds per cubic foot in the
wall design.
3
Utility Trenches
OW CONSULTANTS.INC.
Mr. Gary Lindgren ren 18 May 11, 1987
,
ii
As discussed for dwellings, the relatively soft or very loose soil
conditions and high groundwater table would complicate utility
construction. Utilities should not be supported on, over, or within
the soft to very loose naturally-occurring soils. They should be
IFIinstalled in trenches in which unsuitable soils have been subcut and
removed. Utility trench backfill should be placed in loose lifts on
the order of 8 to 10 inches and should be compacted to at least 95%
of the maximum Modified Proctor for granular soils, or 95% of the
maximum Standard Proctor for fine grained soils. Thicker lifts of
trench backfill should not be permitted. The backfill should be
properly moisture conditioned, that is, it should be placed at a
moisture content within approximately 4% of the optimum moisture
content. Inadequate compaction, or wet, saturated backfill material
could cause distress to overlying pavement sections or structural
elements .
The utility trench excavations would likely encounter groundwater in
some areas of the site. All trenches should be dewatered before
placement of bedding, utilities, or structural backfill. Wet site
conditions could also create hazardous working conditions with
respect to side slope stability.
Pavement Subgrade
Topsoil, vegetation, and any other unsuitable materials should be
ifOME CONSULTANTS,INC.
Mr. Gary Lindgren 19 May 11, 1987
stripped from the proposed roadway pavement subgrade. If the
pavement design were sufficiently thick, with the use of geofabric
to separate the base course and the subgrade, it would be possible
to leave the soft or very loose naturally-occurring non-organic
soils below driveways. In either event, all unsuitable soils should
be removed from beneath the proposed public roadway.
Prior to the placement of fill or base course, we recommend that the
subgrade be test rolled with large heavy equipment, such as a fully
loaded dump truck or fully loaded water truck, to help locate zones
not suitable for support of the pavement. The project Soil Engineer
!I
should observe the test rolling operations. Where excessive pumping
or rutting is observed during the test rolling, those areas should
!I be corrected or improved. Fill necessary to reach design subgrade
should be placed in accordance with the recommendations in the
Earthwork section of this report. We recommend that the base course
711 consist of 100% crushed rock meeting Mn/DOT Class 5 specifications.
The pavement base course should be compacted to 95% of the maximum
21 Modified Proctor.
21
With respect to design parameters for pavements, the naturally-
occurring soils at this site vary substantially. Based on Mn/DOT
references, the estimated R-values would range from approximately 6
to 60. We recommend using an R-value of 10 for design of the
pavement section where naturally-occurring soils occur at subgrade
GME CONSULTANTS,MC.
I -
II
Mr. Gary Lindgren 20 May 11, 1987
1
elevation. If imported fill is necessary, the R-value could be
different. It should be anticipated that stabilizing the naturally-
occurring non-organic soils at this site, which are wet to
saturated, would be difficult and it may be necessary to subcut and
remove these soils and replace them with clean granular soils to
achieve a stable base suitable for paving. We would be pleased to
provide additional subgrade design recommendations based on site
specific data.
ICONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
11 If winter construction is proposed for any portion of the project,
special precautions would be needed to prevent the soils from
freezing both before and after placement of concrete. The
naturally-occurring soils and all intermediate layers of fill must
not be allowed to freeze. The contractor should not place concrete
11 or fill over any soil which has been allowed to freeze, nor should
he permit the soils under footings or floor slabs to become frozen
11 after placement of concrete. This can result in post-construction
Isettlement as the soils thaw. The bituminous paving should not be
done over a frozen subgrade. If any earthwork is planned after
11 frost penetrates the soil, ripping would probably be required. This
usually entails extra cost. Only unfrozen backfill should be used,
ifand there may be extra charges for this.
GME CONSULTANTS,INC.
Mr. Gary Lindgren 21 May 11, 1987
We anticipate that the groundwater table would be encountered during
soil correction earthwork at this site. Water entering excavations
from any source, including surface runoff or precipitation, should
be pumped out of the excavations immediately. It should not be
allowed to stand ponded on the soils, since this would soften and
disturb them. Such wet or soft soils are not suitable for support
of foundations, floor slabs, or pavements. Any soils which are
disturbed by standing water or disturbed for other reasons should be
removed prior to placement of fill or concrete. Fill or concrete
should not be placed over such disturbed soils in an attempt to
"squeeze out" the soft soils. This can result in post-construction
settlement of the structures due to the entrapped soft soils, even
if the soft soils are only a few inches thick.
The soils at this site are susceptible to disturbance when wet and
unconfined and subjected to the traffic of construction equipment
21 and workmen. It is the responsibility of the contractor to protect
the soils from being disturbed.
1
The sidewalls of all excavations for this project, including utility
trenches, must be adequately sloped or sheeted and braced in
accordance with pertinent OSHA regulations. We recommend that
contractors working on this project review OSHA Document No. 2207 to
determine the safe slopes that may be cut into the soils of the
types found at this site. Slopes cut vertically or at near-vertical
OW CONSULTANTS,INC.
IP
Mr. Gary Lindgren 22 May 11, 1987
IP
angles may appear to be stable upon first being excavated. However,
IPsuch slopes can fail suddenly for a variety of reasons, including
drying, saturation, or near-by construction activities, such as
stockpiled fill or construction traffic. This sudden failure can
result in unsafe conditions for personnel working in the trenches.
The responsibility to provide safe working conditions on this site
1/ is solely that of the contractor. This responsibility is not borne
in any manner by GME Consultants, Inc.
GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS
This preliminary report has - been prepared based on the soil and
groundwater conditions encountered in our subsurface exploration and
the data related to us by Mr. Gary Lindgren of Shorewood Investments
y y g
and Mr. David Hansing, P.E. This report is intended solely for this
project at the specific location discussed. The recommendations are
preliminary. We would be pleased to provide more specific
recommendations when appropriate during the design process.
The soil and groundwater conditions were determined at 5 locations.
These conditions are pertinent only at the boring locations and
under the environment existing at the time of our subsurface
exploration. The soil and groundwater conditions varied
significantly among the borings. Additional variations in soil and
groundwater conditions probably exist, including deeper xones of
GME CONSULTANTS,INC.
EGE
3
Mr. Gary Lindgren 23
May 11, 1987
unsuitable soil. Such variations would not become apparent until
after construction starts, and could not be determined from our
borings or site reconnaissance. No warranty, either expressed or
implied, is presented in this report with respect to the soil and
Igroundwater conditions at this site. It is not warranted to
extrapolate soil and groundwater conditions between the borings from
the boring logs themselves.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you for this
i] project. If you have any questions regarding this report or if we
can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
--_] contact us. _
1
Sincerely, .
GME CONSULTANTS, INC.
i JJ
k___
William D. Plate, P.E.
Pro ct g' neer
I
lti I hereby certify that this plan,specification,
or re -rt was prepared by me or under my
William C. Kwasny, P direo supervision a that I am el du.v
Principal Engineer R i al Engineer L.:. C. tilt
la ate Minn. ota.
APPENDIX: !
II
Table No. 1
Date " �'" `f 7 Reg. No. . /q
Soil Boring Location Diagram
General Notes II
Soil Boring Logs
Groundwater Data - Table No. 1
Unified Soil Classification Chart
II
Special Notes on Placement of Compacted Fill Soils
WDP:WCK:bjs
1
I ONE CONSULTANTS,INC.
MS
4
f
1
moo'
I GI
�? \, Pnd d,e n''�ve
l' / 90.9'
Holy Cross A-'
II Lutheran •9?.4'
�
Church Site
•9 6'
I .
I795.O' S-5
92.7
I
I ' .
II
II '
II NOTE: Benchmark front door step
at first floor of Holy Cross Lutheran
I Church; assumed datum, 100.0 feet
II _ APPROXIMATE
SCALE
11 0' 100 200'
il SOIL BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM GME CONSULTANTS, INC.
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION 2089 EAST CENTER CIRCLE
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55441
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA # �` 4
IISHOREWOOD INVESTMENTS, INC. { ;: _ WDp WCK 5-11-87 12E3
MB
. . 1
1
i J GENERAL NOTES I
I DRILLING&SAMPLING SYMBOLS. '
1 SL SS with Liner
SS split Spoon — 1 3/8"!.0.,2"O.O.,unless OS . Osterberg Sampler—3"Shelby Tube
otherwise noted HS : Hollow Stem Auger
t ST . Shelby Tube—2"O.D.,unless otherwise noted WS . Wash Sample
I PA : Power Auger FT Fish Trail I
pg Diamond Bit —NX:BX.AX RB : Rock Bit
AS : Auger Sample BS . Bulk Sample
JS . Jar Sample PM . Pressuremeter test-in situ
7 VS : Vane Shear
Standard "N"Penetration Slows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD split spoon,except
I
where noted
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS.
WL : Water Level I
WCI . Wet Cave In
DCI : Dry Cave In
WS . While Sampling
WD , While Drilling
I
BCR. Before Casing Removal
ACR: After Casing Removal
AB : After Boring
1 Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the boring at the times indicated In pervious soils,the
I
4 indicated elevations are considered reliable ground water levels. In impervious soils,the accurate determination of ground
water elevations is not possible in even several days observation,and additional evidence of ground water elevations must
be sought.
l GRADATION DESCRIPTION &TERMINOLOGY:
I
� Coarse Grained or Granular Soils have more than 50%of their dry weight retained on a 4200 sieve,they are described as
boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve,they
I are described as. clays or clayey silts if they are cohesive, and silts if they are non-cohesive In addition to gradation,
granular soils are defined on the basis of their relative in-place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their strength or
I
consistency,and their plasticity
Major Descriptive Term(s)
Component (Of Components Also Percent of
Of Sample Size Range Present in Sample) Dry NJeight
I
Boulders Over 8 in (200mm) Trace 1 —9
Cobbles 8 in to 3 in Little 10_ 19
I
(200mm to 7;mm)
Gravel 3 in to r 4 sieve Some 20—34
(75mm to 2mm)
Sand #4 to 1-1200 sieve And 35—50
----- (2mm to .074mm)
Silt Passing #200 sieve
1 10.074mm to 0.005mm)
Clay Smaller than C.005mm I
CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS. RELATIVE DENSITY OF GRANULAR SOILS.
I
Unconfined Comp
Strength,Ou, tsf Consis�ency N — Blows/ft P.elative Density
I
<0.25 Very Soft 0—3 Very Loose
0.25—0 49 Soft 4 —9 Loose
I
U 50—029 Medium (Firm) 10—29 Medium Dense
1.00— 1.99 Stiff eJ—40 Dense
2 00— 3.99 Very Stiff 50—BO Very Dense
4.00—8.00 Hard 80+ Extremely Dense
' >8.00 Very Hard
I
ij ,SPAS CONSULTANTS.NM ill
Mk
LOG OF BORING 1
PROJECT SITE
II Residential Subdivision Chanhassen, Minnesota
CLIENT ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Mr. Gary Lindgren Mr. David Hansinq, P.E.
II
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONS/FT 2
E
W -D-
LL
W
w 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL 3 1 2 3 4 5
M w Z I- O WATER
II t Z w U r m CONTENT%
LL 111 CI-
a c O I- U j Q STANDARD PENETRATION(BLOWS/FOOT)
oW Za < N SURFACE ELEVATION 97.4 feet a w -®-
N¢ Z 10 20 30 40 50
Gray-brown and black slightly or-
1SS panic silty fine to medium sand and 8
II , 2.2dampytclmoistittle & OL) loose -
2SS 1(topsoil) �-
4$ Brown mottled silty clay - stiff - 15 ® 4131.3%
-'moist - (CL)
I 5 3SS Light gray mottled clayey silt,
6 10 ® •
' trace fine sand - loose - moist- (ML`,, 7.1 5%
4SS 14 ® •
il ' Brown clayey silt to silty clay, I 26.2%
trace fine sand, gravel - stiff -
5SS moist - (CL-ML) 15
lam, 12' I
li li Dark gray fine to coarse sandy clay, I
trace gravel - very stiff - moist -
6SS 18
ID
li End of Boring at 15 feet
Solid Stem Auger used full depth
IBorehole backfilled with cuttings
ii
il — - ,
i '
i _
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 5-6-87
w.L. Groundwater not encountered GIVE CONSULTANTS, INC. BORING COMPLETED 5-6-87
• W.L.
e j uJ C.:17 E.cr•M.e,,..•b+wa,.,m,r -
2083 E..c c...•c.ar RIG B-24 DRILLER TMH
W.L. 161215 9-M....at.awt
~ 161215591859 DRAWN WDP APPROVED WCK
i .
JOBa 1263 SHEET 1 of 5
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries
between soil types:insitu the transition may be gradual.
ma
' LOG OF CORING 2 1
PROJECT SITE
Residential Subdivision Chanhassen, Minnesota
CLIENT ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
I
j Mr. Gary Lindgren Mr. David Hansinq, P.E.
3 W UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONSiFT Z
1 ...
-O-
Q a N 1 2 3 4 5
w 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL 3 I $ ' i i
CO w ZZ i- 0 WATER
w Z w U ~ m CONTENT% I
L'. w a Q J w —a—
aQ Q w Q 0 D Q STANDARD PENETRATION(BLOWS/FOOT)
L41 Q Z Q SURFACE ELEVATION 90.9 feet a W • -='
1 0 N a 3 o + N¢ Z i 10 20 30 40 50
I
Black organic sand, clayey silt,
1SS little roots - soft - moist - (OL)
(topsoil) � i
2SS ,
4
5, I I
3SS Gray mottled silty clay to clayey 1' 8139.2,,silt, trace wood, fine roots -
4SS 7, soft - wet - (CL-ML)
8' ® ® 45::-. 1
4 t
SSS
ZO' ei
Dark gray fine to coarse sand,
trace silt, clay - loose - wet -
(SC-SM) 1 \14' I
15,'6SS Dark gray silty clay - stiff - ( IC`s
t,moist - ICL) 4_,......--
1
End of Boring at 15 feet
3 Solid Stem Auger used full depth
Temporary open-well piezometer
installed to 12.5 feet depth
1
3 _ _
I
I
I
II ..._
1
I ---
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 5-6-87
W L Q 8 fe Whi 1 e dri 1 'ng GME CONSULTANTS, INC. BORING COMPLETED 5-6-87
W. 7.5 feet after drilling_ �� c.
zo � ~
L. RIG B-24 DRILLER TMH
PArnm...*Animaa 55441 1
WL I 3.2 feet May 8, 1987 (6121559-1659 DRAWN WDP APPROVED WCK
JOB" 1263 SHEET 2 of 5
The stratification lines represent approximate boundanes
I
between soil types:insitu the transition may be gradual.
so
LOG OF BORING 3
SITE
marNACT Subdivision
Chanhassen.--- esota
Residential ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
1-4 Mr. David Imo:
•- '' +-sin P.E.
,r, Gary Lindgren
r- �°`VIN COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TONS/FT s
!! i w ri -0-
a DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL 3
1 ? 3 4 5
( w J Z O WATER
P. t� 3 a U m CONTENT%
ir W w -i-
S ' W ¢ rQ- ()D Q 3/1ANDARD PENETRATION(BLOWS/FOOT)
4 i < zo - N SURFACE ELEVATION 92.6 feet C Q z -®-
-- N 0 20 30 40 50
Black organic sandy silt, little � .,
'-'-;1SS roots - firm - damp - (OL)
I 2.5' (topsoil) I _
ASS 6 ® i •
-7 Gray with black stratified fine to ;, 25.5%
3SS medium sand and clayey sand, trace 7
• silt - loose - wet - (SP & SC) I
I14S5 7 0
SS 6 9
27.8 0
Dark gray stratified fine to coarse
sandy clay and clayey sand, trace
II ; gravel - loose to medium dense -
+�,SS moist to wet - (SC-CL) 12
=_ ; End of Boring at 15 feet
Solid Stem Auger used to 4 feet
depth, Hollow Stem Auger used
I below
i Borehole backfilled with cuttings
t
i
4
_1
i _
—1
i ,
1
v*A'ER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS _ B_hING STARTED 5-6-87
^. 5 feet while drilling "T"" GME CONSULTANTS, INC. BJhINgooMPLETED 5-6-87
• 1 4.2 feet 2 hours after zoeae..c... c:o. RlG $-24 DRILLER IMH
drilling .. u..........Mm-- -sss„
(61215591859 DRAWN WDP APPROVED WCK
--- 1263 sHEET 3 of 5
The stratification lines represent approximate I,,,IIr„�
mill between soil types;insitu the transition may tc�reduar
1 LOG OF BORING 4 I
1 PROJECT SITE
Residential Subdivision Chanhassen, Minnesota
t CLIENT ARCHITECT-ENGINEER 1 1
Mr. Gary Lindgren Mr. David Hansing, P.E.
�j UNCONFINED COMP.,".;,IVE STS;EVGTI!TONS/FT2
I¢ ui N 1 2 3 4 5
w w Q DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL t 4 ' i •
F- O WATER
I CO m CONTENT%
w Zw J U F
w} < JF w -®-
I-- a w C Ca-J a STANDARD PENETRATION(BLOWS/FOOT)
I
w Q z Q SURFACE ELEVATION 95.0 feet a w ' -®-
o a 3 N i U¢ Z 10 20 30 40 50 1
V Black organic sandy, silty clay,
1SS ' little roots - soft to firm - moist- 5
1 2.5 (0L) - (topsoil) I
4 .---"2SS 17 Dark gray with black fine to medium 3 0 • 24.9% - I
I 4' sandy clay with clayey sand - soft -
-"\moist - (CL; trace SC) f 1
-�- 3SS 3 1
Gray mottled silty clay to clayey ® • •
4SS silt,-trace fine to medium sand - 3
8-9 soft wet - (CL-ML) \
- 5SS 9 CSI 9 I] Dark gray fine to coarse sandy clay, 34.9
trace gravel - stiff - moist - (CL)
II
Q 13'
Dark gray clayey fine to medium sand
- 6SS trace gravel; seams fine sandy silt- 8 0 1
`r7T loose - wet - (SC; seams ML)
End of Boring at 15 feet
Solid Stem Auger used full depth II
Temporary open-well piezometer
installed to 13.5 feet depth
II
11
II
- ,
II
I
1
1 -
I
3
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 5-6-87 1
W.L 2 12.5 feet while drilling "l� GME CONSULTANTS, INC. BORING COMPLETED 5-6-87
c..... .,•M.ts...H..ran..r
W L 5 feet df er drilling zae3�cr..•c.�. RIG B-24 DRILLER Ila
W L 3.0 fes_ 1 sµz�559-1959 MG
DRAWN I
May 8. 987 t 1 WDP APPROVED WCK,
II ,. ,
. JOBot 1263 SHEET 4 of 5
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries
between soil types:insitu the transition may be gradual.
I
II , .
11 • GME Consultants, Inc.
GME Project No. 1263
IITABLE NO. 1
GROUNDWATER DATA
IIGroundwater in Groundwater in
Borehole on 5-6-87 Piezometer on 5-8-87
IIGround
Surface
Boring Elevation Depth Elevation Depth Elevation
IINumber Feet Feet Feet Feet Feet
1 97.4 NE NE - -
II 2 90.9 7.5 83 .4 3 .2 87.7
3 92.6 4. 2 88. 4
-
4 95.0 5.0 90. 0 3 .0 92. 0
I/ 5 92.7 8.0 84.7 - -
NOTES: Elevations referenced to the front door step at the
first floor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, assumed
IIdatum, elevation 100.0 feet.
"NE" indicates groundwater not encountered.
ITemporary open-well piezometers installed in borings
2 and 4 only.
I
I
I
I
I
il
il
I
ill
1
1. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
(ASTM: D 2437)
IGrouo in Tye noun Laboratory Msoiffeation sritaris
I ns tfvr M
ora symno
• (D�l3 � �1 and
_ DSO GW mixtures,little growls,grevaiosnd fines Cu Gt o graota then 4;Ct•Ot o%�ao
cs
i •g
g
Poorly traded graven, "44. Not meeting all gradation requirements fdr GW
I i u J GP sand mixtures.little or no fines tr¢
T.f .mot I
c d Silty gravels, grewhsndailt g H . Att rbb.Prgl �
GM mixtures •$ Above «A« Una with P.I.
t u 3Z a:ci��t
between 4 and 7 are eon
I
$ Z Z Z *Nine class requiring use
so i - Y c esnd•day t Atterberg limits above"A" of dual symbols
. a GC mixtures • • • line with P.I.greeter than 7
_ 11
IA Wall-graded lands,gravelly =§ . • • Dig than 8;C • IDS between i and 3
',1 i 7. Z SW sands,little or no f i n e s i Cu Dto � s Oto�eo
1 bl
b a A i • S► Poorly graded sands. gravaily 7 • • t•for sw
� �b I Not mating NI gradation raquiretrten
I. sends,little or no tines I
'SI'-
J i 1--) 'c d 3 $" Atterberg limits below"A"
j, ; ! c i sly --- Silty sends, sand•sik mixtures a u line or P.I.leas than 4 ;Hotting between 4 zone with
I1 and 7 are bortderfine man •
� a � requiring use of dual sytrr
11 ' II it o Clayey sends, send•Nay mix 11 ; 2 Atterber0 Omits chow"A" bolo.
i 1 tura O O F-J 41 line with P.I.greeter than 7
. f• - Inor is silts and vary tine
i: : rands, roc* flour,silty or
ML clay-
ey line ands or Nayey, silts r
min Muhl plasticity -—4 j ' t
For classification red fins of fmf•
waned
t -
j Inorganic days of low to rte soils and fine traetfan of ooeras-
T drum plasticity,gravelly days. 60 grained soils. I
b ' tr+dy days, silty clays, lean --Atterberg Limits plotting In
EC i • { days --hatched arse are borderline dual- _
Al _fictions requiring use of dual C'�"'' J _�
g i 40 symbols. /
} Ot Oritsnic sots and organic filly x —Equation of A-lire: ._-i.
4 - days of low planicity I — Pi-0.73 ILL-20) _nom• r }
.2 1 t
tno.genrc eats, micaceous or J -T
1a►, diatomaceous fins sandy or =gnu •i:) ,OH and M
} silty loin Naetic tilts d ----�+— '
—II ' CM lnoryen.c days of hi¢r piss- CL III
*dry.met days I•
g 1 i I , r
Or}w..c days of m ilium to i—• I
•1 �
/WI daa
r• ty.organic silts 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8° 90 100
n. Liquid omit
1 1 ^ Pear and .the MO*amnia
.ails Plasticity Chart I
g i
I
NI
I
' - =":. i : V ,s 4 :i . =• —_ 7:::::11't 1; � _ a
Ill : i E iSE 3` : . . i•a_
-
:17r;t:::7 : . a : .:.o<°i is - _ Y 11"7.°- •.. .
li
t S Y .L` c a @.' :: ' J ;l L L12`: I -F` . ` �.f t
• J' t f:'.2 z i if 41 T.: L t8: S @I 6.°• a,E"
!': iit•,• i5,- 2 & - ::: 1:zi ` =�:: -7:2,.i;1 !7,' °
!
1 "...i:it 71' l' 5, .i. ':t rE...z.;4.8.> : I .. I i'.tsa: . Ti i E • 77 .: °zaa t
t i•ti-.i' ii".:it! 5, 4-t! Y aN
if] 77. : :S. 1. _e•:: _a-. aL °.• u lice M• ••.`°y.
illli.: :11::' :"i":: 71!`i 91:1 '2211iMI Eii:2. fail:,:i
tt•i; +rL'1_ -ti:" . :f :3 =-18r i.5,:1:::: t.°.CX--. al.-`.-.
ill
__.
i .
Il
,1 ci: w
ii : . - .
t ' .. t. ,I: a: l'iIII ; :Y: -- �_ .`
;, 1i a f.IP : :t: 6 `..t
_ :5 r•2=• ': 'f. t!!! - _.0- .•: • as
ill ' a ;so I. : •• • ° ..
• .t • t •' i7 . ` • Y_a° ::i . 0 -..:r F :e 't• a l t - 7
- ° ` '2• ,,: :_- V.
; 7 i .it - r •• • : . - t:" .°.:.S i 7, +. • . _ `:° . • -E ' ES &
* +i7'! 'i i
.' i5, i•. I= 8;!;Ii : 0 .71:5,4 _ Yai YIT L _ ••
. • • i li: :.:: i _;5,..i•a € .i :.0.4....:p: o :€° :bat
•• -• + 5, ' - - 1 _•-- 27I7° : 704.:::: - a -}• t . • _E
. �_ _ 7 « •. - �
C
_Sa . : ---. °1.;! __3
il +Y .iI- - _:t .f: a -- '..2E.225 S /2...:!!_0!2.. bi ':o2:17 2S °° p25,f�• :" o _ t _°: -t -I. .11“1 1. =i a° <Eoi 1 a" ; --- i° !li: °i i5, ! i? t+ s = a s i • €aa,L I:t: ';et _ . t !_21.1°-.... .7 •7 Y _i-5, 12...1 :F-° : AL: •I 1.J• • L B p_°r - 2•
.f :jl. i5,i°' . . E S. a .".. • L'-:CO ^ "24.0 .!!: .I • : 1a. . -
illi .. .
t' 7 � J�
•i7 . 1 r -� 1i °- t :`' 'Sg. 5F_ _p',f.E : : y o t : r`iyila3y .. : Z:- . g °.Y ~Ff -;;:j.. : .S'7
:5,i I 7.03 5,a,i °: -: =8 .L Lg11`- - ` -
ill I
Geotechnical Services ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
A D
Commercial, Residential 4000 Beau D'Rue Drive,Eagan, MN 55122 (612)452-6913
Municipal, DHUD
HuL' NUUI`I I U 1
.:7 uu.:uRFHCE BOIL i i'ib E TIGHT ION
PROPOSED COUNTRY OAKS SUBDIVISION
Chanhassen . Minnesota
9 February 1989
Project 88158
1
INTRODUCTION
finis report summarizes the findings of a Curtner suo-
surtace soli inveeiiaation completed Dy Allied Test Drill -
._Ofddf`; -Qr the _cults." 'uaks _.=Ddi\.151on in nan^as-
sen . Minnesota. General location of tne anticipateo subdi-
vision is south of Minnesota Fri 7 . near Glendale avenue.
it is essentially to consist of one east-west street , plus
connectors, with lots either side thereot . Tile work was
pertormeo tor David Jonnson , nereatter referred to as tne
"Owner ' .
Three additional soil borings were pertormeo within
the project area to establish soil profiles , water table '
elevations , inpiace soil compaction or firmness , and otner
information . In addition , borings from an earlier investi- t
gation was consulted . From this data , additional recommen-
cations were developed for site correction and founaation
and slab design for the single family residences antici- '
pated to be located on the proposed lots.
1
MAR 1 4 1989 1
LITY OF CHANI-Hr1JStN
1
I88158
-2-
IrREV I OUS INVESTIGATION (IND REPURT
file west portion of the proposed subdivision was in-
' iestiaated in 1987 by GNE Consultants , Inc . The resulting
report indicated normal to thick topsoil depths , generally
' clayey basal soils , sometimes soft up to 8 of deptn, and
rather high groundwater . Various conclusions and recommen-
nations were made including removal of surface organic
soil and any additional loose or soft soil +rom building
pad areas , using normal spread footings +or residential
ta.�� rar til l o a_ement reduir Eements , i rronitoi-ing of
' soils as tney are exposed , etc . H lot-by-lot tabulation
of suitable soils in relation to proposea structure ele-
vations was not generated at that time.
ihe narrative and recommendations as contained in
' the original report of GME Consultants , dated 11 May 1987 ,
kGME Pro)ect., 1263! should continue in torte for tnis pro-
posed subaivision , except as modified nerein . Phis adden-
dum should be appended to that report.
' SITE OBSERVATIONS , PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
Site terrain is largely similar to that described in
' tne original report except that , in tne additional area to
the east , land is nigher and more wooded . According to a
' recent reaaing taven in an ooservation well installed by
' GME, groundwater is now two to three feet lower than the
level found in lg87 . This is probably the result of the
' drought experienced in 1988. At this time , it should not
be considered a permanent drop in maximum groundwater .
88158 '
the adcitio•n under consiaeratlon herein now will con-
sist
of 27 resioential lots in 3 olocks .
dUR i Ni_, LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS , FIELD INVESTIGATION
the additional boring locations and their deptns were
chosen by Allied Test Drilling Company and were
Y Drilling placed in
a widely =tattered pattern throughout the additional por-
tion of tne site, raking into account terrain , pattern ana
results of previous borings , etc , in an attempt to pest
assess soil conditions reoresent;3tive + t-.a site .
rierer «o the attacreri .il iy.a"_3�r � .•,as.e trap, for y,rich is
a reduction of a map furnished by tne Owner , for a svetcn
ot poring locations . Tne GME oorinas also are piottea , in-
sofar as their location could oe interpreted .
Ground surface elevation at eacn aaaitionai poring
location was determined and referenced to tne same tempo-
rary bench mark estaolisnea oy GME , .the front door step at
the first floor of the nearoy Holy Cross Lutheran Church
karbitrary elevation = 100.00) . This in turn was refer-
enced to Minnesota Department of Transportation Bench Mark
luO4E, -located southeast ot TH 7 , 223 southwest of Leslee
Lurve. This bench mark nas a sea level reference elevation
of 9b6 .22. Sea level datum reference elevations of GME s
oorings are taouiated and attached to the back of this
report .
The borings performed under this additional investi-
gation were accomplished using the Cone Penetrometer meth-
od o+ investigation . Refer to the report attachment tcol-
1 .
I d8158
-4-
1 or--coded ivory ) for a description of this procedure . Also
contained tnerein is a description of methods of soli
classification and groundwater measurement .
' SOIL BORING RESULTS
Httacned are logs for each of the borings Performed
during this portion of the investigation together i-,ith a
' hey explaining terms and entries . ine depth of individual
ia; ers of soil and descriptions may vary somewhat from
nose 1noIc3ted on the logs CUP t0 the ine 'aCt nature Of
auger samDi Lrq and , most important - _ , t - at
' transition oetween soil layers . Note that borings nave
been numbered consistently with the GNE borings .
' the investigation generally re /eats , at Boring b , a
continuation of the pattern of normal to somewnat tnick
topsoil and softer subsoils. Truly suitable soil is not
' achieved until 8 of depth. Groundwater is high . 5 . 75 be-
' low existing surface.
Borings 7 and 8, however , snow an improved condition .
Topsoil is G' deep at Boring 7 and 1 at Boring G. Suit-
able soli levels are at the bottom of this topsoil .
Groundwater is at 12.5 ' in Boring 7 only . Most soils are
' mottled , but this is a typical occurrence in clayey soils.
That is , it occurs as a result of surface water percolat-
ing downward , slowing in tighter soils , and creating a
temporary " zone of saturation " .
I - Note further that two of the borings were performed
twice . Hn earlier set was inadvertently performed witnout
-d-
oo_ainin( penetration data.
it anoula oe pointed out again *_hat grounac-Jater iev-
eis can fluctuate, influenced oy weather and climate,
gracing and arainage of the site , etc , tending to reduce
or increase maximum anticipates groundwater . Accordingly,
it is again emphasized , as explained In the previous re- '
port of GHE, that indications are for the time of testing
only . Groundwater may vary depending on many factors un-
oeterminaDie within the time frame and scope of the inves-
=1;azion authorize° . Eiul :Lers S'ou oe a c•. lsen to
for the remote possioiity of nigner groundwater ieveis .
Cone penetrometer reaoings are adequate for the types
of soils encountered at the levels indicated above, as a '
+unction of Depth below present ground surface.
Refer to each poring log for a more detailed descrip-
tion of soils encountered .
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions ana recommendations as given in the
origninal report continue to oe valid , except as modified '
herein .
1 . f=oundations :
hasea upon interpreted results of the borings, it
appears that the site nas rougnly the same limitations
regarding suitability for construction cnormal topsoil '
aeposlts in upper areas , more significant deposits of
organic soli and high groundwater in lowland areas, and '
the need to perform grade construction to adapt terrain
' 88158
-b-
to tne proposed use ) . (hese iimitaicns are still cor-
' rectaole.
urganic and upper loose material should oe removed
from eacn proposed ouilaing pad area in accordance witn
tne various provisions of the original report. Based
' upon soli boring results, depths of excavation to •com-
petent soils are as follows:
' boring No Depth to Competent
No Soils , ft
1
8
' On the basis of the results of this suosurface soil
iinvestigation , existing ground surface elevations at
eacn proposed house location , and proposed house ele-
vations, a lot-by-lot tabulation of proposed slab and
tooting grades , elevations of suitable soils and
' groundwater , and applicability of DHUD 79-0 require-
' ments ( "cut-and-fill " sheets ) for this proposed devel-
opment have been compiled by the Soils Engineer and at-
tached to this report .
Fill , as required , should be placed , compacted and
IItested as per the "Fill Placement" section of tne orig-
inal report.
Using these methods , normal spread footings may con-
'! tinue to be used for proposed residences .
2. Slabs:
' Based upon the results of this and previous investi-
'
gations, the existing mineral soil , or this soil with
I
II !
88158 '
-7-
fill thereon , is capable of adequate slab support pro- I
video that any organic soils are removed from beneath
the building pad area as outlined .
Meeting the DHUD-required separation of 4' between
slabs and maximum groundwater does appear to present a
problem at this time, however. The magnitude of the ,
problem is indicated on the lot-by-lot tabulation . The
conflict is primarily on the- west ( lower) portion of
the site.
It is possible, however , that site drainage ano 11 s
landform alterations will act to permanently lower ,
groundwater levels on the site. The Owner s consultant
should more fully address this possibility . '
3. Site Preparation , Fill Placement :
Proceed as per original report . The only addition is
tnFo- + i i 1 snnuld nCt. DP al Lowe-J to irE4o:!n corn-
paction , and till should not c•e placed upon trocen sur-
-
+aces. .
4 . Inspections:
The Owner should retain a qualified geotechnical en-
gineering firm to inspect excavations prior to place-
ment of any construction material and to conouct in-
place aensity tests . This firm should bear full respon-
sibility for proper knowledge and interpretation of the
contents of this report .
5. Utility Trenches :
See discussion in the original GME report . However ,
- 1
88158
-8-
Iit tne present period of dry ueatner continues , the
situation may improve somewnat . Also note that t_ne up-
land soils to tne east will have better conditions for
utility in any event.
Iinstallation
ravement Sub rade:
' the recommendations contained in the t;ME report ap-
pears generally sufficient. However, the R-value of 10
seems somewnat low. An R-value of 2'i would be more rea-
sonable given tne nature of mineral soil encountered .
•
t_iP1iTc TIONS OF IN'VE_,1 1LH l l;2N
As per original report .
1 ENGINEER ' S CERTIFIC', `-E
I hereby certify that this plan , specification or re-
port was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and
that I am a duly registered Professional Engineer under
tne Laws of the State of Minnesota.
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
- strick J Hines , PE Date
gistration No 12086
i
I-
11
s _
AILIEO TEST GRILLING COMPANY Attachment to Soils Report
I
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
CONE PENETRATION TEST OF SOIL II
The Cone Penetrometer Test , or "Dutch Cone Test", of
II
• inplace soil compaction supplies data on the engineering
properties of soil which can be used as a guide in design- I
ing earthworks and foundations.
To perform this test, power flight auger borings are II
accomplished to establish soil profiles in the vicinity of
II
proposed construction. The augers are advanced into the
ground by mechanical/hydraulic means and withdrawn every I
five feet . This portion of the test is performed in accord-:
ante with ASTM 0 1452, "Soil Investigation and Sampling by II
Auger Borings" . Nature of subsurface soil is determined by
II
observing and sampling disturbed material found on the flight
auger . Representative samples are retained, sealed and stored
for future testing or reference, if necessary .
IIPrior to drilling each five-foot increment, inplace soil
compaction is tested by the cone penetrometer in accordance
IIwith ASTM 0 3441 , "Deep Quasi-Static Cone . . . Penetration
Tests of Soil" . The basic testing device is a cone , 35 .6 mm
I
in diameter with a 60o apex angle. It is driven into the soil
• by means of a rod rigidly attached to the cone . Resistance to
penetration is measured as hydraulic pressure at one-foot in-
,
tervals . Allowable foundation pressure is determined from II
this penetration resistance together with soil classification II
and other data .
Testing by this method is usually performed to fifteen I
feet of depth unless conditions such as footing depth, un-
suitable soils at proposed termination, etc, require addition-
testing .
(over , please) II
iiii
i .
Soil Classification
' Soils were classified by field personnel and verified by
the Soils Engineer according to the Unified Soil Classification
' Method in accordance with ASTM 0 2488, "Description of Soils
(Visual-Manual Procedure)". A summary of soil class types is
attached to this report.
Groundwater
' To establish possible occurance of groundwater in the
region of testing , one or more boring holes were allowed to
' stand for a period of time , that period depending upon the
free-draining nature of soils encountered, and then checked
for standing water or cave-in prior to backfilling . In ad=
' dition , soil samples were checked for mottling (discoiloration
in streaks due to fluctuation of water level ) and saturation.
' However , because of the nature of soil and various meteo-
rological and geological influences which occur over a large
' area and time span and which can affect the site , an accurate
measurement of highest annual groundwater could not be deter-
mined in the time frame allowed for the investigation . Indi-
cated levels , if any , are for the time of testing only .
I
1
_--_--.... ___
INII IIIIII Ell MI MI IIIIII MN INN • • IIII• IIIN MI • INIII MI 111•1 NM IIIIIII
. - I —••••..... -...
• .•-- \ ••,...,••..••• • 4''• 1.-----t_ssri— , --•....—... ..... ■,.......s. ,
... ...
.... ......... 41i . I ....... 1...T■r., . _/
..1--,- . ....:7-- •- t •1)--7----..,-._
's,. -•- '''fir i \I I , ....,.. •
.■:`,...,.:"....Z.4:148 ... ...,.. c.>.- . ... . ,' ,---...1--7 1 , 4, - --..._
- 0. ........._. ......„,;,-.72.,,,) - ,:', .1.1"....... , ---1---•-•____
:- ..........1.7.-4Z> %.% 1 • ---I _,
. c,-.- 'N.-.C, ''• '1'4".r.-• .' q..i . :.1 i ' I ---- •-•"\ I ' i,.y • • i •
s. ,• ., - -• z..--iu, i..1 .
........1.41,. ----.....,„---..,_,„-_, . ... ._ ,. r-!-,,..,'■ il • ' ---
'i,,, ----•—......, .I II 'no • ;VI J..---N l',\ :1,i1:41:--.;i .-.-71.."..c_ !..i 1,-;•._-• 7
....,_ , . \ \\ifii, • ___ .., ;I I, ,L____
11 ,..--'------ -------- __ P__ et..c. {\ Li c.i.,1...._,f.- ..11. ,t. ., •...4,4,.. CZ 1 v. `-
if, /.., ... .."- ' 7-- .,' .......-- ---- *, at:' GIE Bor.ng No 2 l'-■
Ws •
. -.L
. . • i, , • !
•; .-"• • Elev = ')6,3.9\.
_______-.: . .ci,....•-•-•--•••••,...„__, : 4.--, i, \.' - \ I I hi°'•-
• 4, 1 , :.,-N!
‘ ,),,,,..\Z-L---r: ,. f - - )-Z-rs - - - • •-•4,../S"-t•c".2,,,..,-;f1-t ,-:--:-
firik G,1E Boring No \ 1,_14Li - ,. i",9 Allied ---fr•.....•_,..,.,...›,1„.,,-,,,, •T-•1`.!........,-,•••----... • . 'Nw i . '•
, • , 142 I., ' I II Elev = 970.4 . • oring No 6 - .
,,‘ :-..?,„„' Elev = 964.0 ail coT-:?--6' (c.r.?11 1>:e - ,...._.
. jr:...c.........-...c., ....)...i..............?.•.•••••,' i . 1 ,
I: , •• p s
'
I ( All
\ %
-.... ,1...4. r'
6,..•,,, BCC! . 1 . .. I Cm-2; 1.,!..!. L.:<.".•-
, Ili J 1 ! - , . , ,-- f-J . r',
., • ., \ . i f:.,‘->_12./.. 1 s e.,:-..;/ Illirei'..vnlig.N90737. .,.L..1..1. ...., -, .- I- I •':' .4
1.,
0 --;,, . -------:---
Ro.ac
f • 4 '. \
'11
! 'd
,01 ' • .
r---,,
( •I••
( 1 • r -,4
1 5,1
11 q .- • GME Boring No 3 .., ,,
I "...,...,,s, .
‘‘•• I /P.)9 ' ,..r- . I
-----.-----
1. 1 1 •...11 I . .. Z .../.. '
%, , Elev = 956.6 7°7 2 ',/,. 7°, 1 "s1 I 975 -I r-I- I. 1 4177'1.1- 1
. II° '",7i- \\,,\,. ,_ ;."4 ..0 ' - ,_....,-. ..._
.-. - 1
, I . 0.. •!
i• 17 ■,•'.
.;Z 1 .. ,,..-_ —... ....- / ••,•
1"--.' • ---,, ' -- "--~f,-- - -.,,_ '`-...-• " ...; / ; •••
1
. ,.J • 411,-. 7911•11s■----- -.- . - - --- „,;• ,•-/ I •
•i 1 , 3 . r,••■ 'l'
1 • 11
! /
• i 'I
7! I 1 - ' I . ..•
^ 'N. • ', - •- - ' ---
--.-,- - _..111111211111sw--- — . . •
I,11 ' t•
....., . .\z._1( :, •./..4 '. I . , , ‘ .s..,9 , 1.--,
•-•".....--- .',.....------7-Bortng No 8 • s. . .
• 1 -
1, '••,' ' -: • • L-J, 1 •
/Am
c".. \ s
: ',...s.,,••• i,, ; q, ... -r... "4.S .C.. ..;;Ttlell . 971 3 .‘
• 561 ' \SI '' 1 ":''l Tc4. 1. . O'' . ''' L./4'D I I:\ 2 •
i .\\„,' 1
.I. a 11 GME Boring No 4 . 1 • '. Is ! ; 7 ;•-21.,. ..‘,, 6,•• ,• ..i,,,„,. 5 ...;tr.- L.I.,,
, •
1 ---J - ...--.\--,,,;
Elev = 968,0 , 0 •...`,.. ,,, . 7, e I Boring No 5 I •)•• •-•-` , : -77.-. . v J.- -.... '•• -: •
!.':•\ '• - -:' '.:.- BL.,,gek 2 I •
' . I •-- t - ; ' ''' —'
,E.r, = 965.7 • \ :• , ;
•••••,.....„.... 1.4:- • ,,,,,T. rt , I i•• •••-:, f ..,.,
. 1- , — • .:- , V.,,,, ...;,,, i
....,,
' 1 ....,'. 1, •:_,.---/.•• ,•;.., ,-........ i .• ,.... . • :. 1
._
i . . • . _:7....- _____
• . ., . , -. " 1. /
• • ....,
••-•,.4...,-,-•-,....,•;,•„.
. . . ...--..
"••••1••••• \ ;.
I •
.. .....
... .. .•- ..•.• •.... •• ,
•
• .
... . • • . .....-.........,....... . ...... •K..••. • • •• N . •• •,.
• .
. -... .,--- • N ....... •,. .
. ... . ,
SCALE IN FEET
y AWED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
3 50 100 50
I 4000 Beau DRue Drive,Eagan,MN 55122 (612)4524913 . I •
SCALE: 1" = 100' 1 SCHEMATIC OF I DRAWN IlY pH*
. BORING LOCATIONS FOR
Proposed Plat of Country Oaks
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Project 88158
*Note: Base map is a reduced ori9inal from Owner
•
1
, ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
I . PROJECT: 88158 - Proposed Plat of Country Oaks , Chanhassen , Minnesota -
LOG OF BORING NO: 5
' DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 964 .0 SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WS
FEET / DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION # TYPE R W DEN L. Con s P}n
D
I Black Organic Silty Clay Loam FA
1- COL) 300
w/vegetation
I 2- mait:-t 500
Gray Si Plastic Sandy Loam (Sr' ) 500
3- w/tr fine gravel
II v silty 500
4- v moist
5 500
I -
91 Plastic 5. 75'
6- w/a little gravel 500
,elev 9581 ±
1 500
7' saturated
8- 500
I Blue Gray Clay (CH) 500
9- w/tr fine gravel
sl gritty
10- v moist 550
11-
v stiff , resistive
12- 500
1 13- 500
I14- I BOO
15- LEO
End of Boring - No Refusal
18-,
17-1 Bore hole backfilled
I w/cuttings 10-14-88 1
18-
I 19-,
20-
I 21-
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH MUD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief MB
I . 10-13 15' 5'8" 7' Method: 4" Power Flight Auger
10-14 1 :30 15 ' 6 ' 5 '9" 6 Cone Penetrometer
Boring Completed: 10-13-88
'
Is
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT: 88158 - Proposed Plat of Country Oaks , Chanhassen , Minnesota
LOG OF BORING NO: 7
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 973 . g SAMPLE LAB & OTHERTESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WB L.L. Cone Pen
FEET DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATION # TYPE R W DEN p.4, i psi )
Gray-Ok Brown Organic Loam (OL) FA
1- w/vegetation 700
moist
2- 800
3 850
Tan-Brown Clay Loam (CL)
4- damp to moist , mottled 850
5- 850
6 900
Gray-Brown Clay (CH)
7- w/ tr fine gravel 1000
moist , mottled
8- stiff 1000
g- 1100
10- 1400
11-
J
12- Gray-Brown S1Plastic Fine Sandy 600
Loam (SM) , v moist /712i '
13- Gray-Brown Silt Loam (MH) elev 96111 ?00
saturated
14-
800
•
15
1200
plasticity increasing c00
16-
9
17-
00
Blue-Gray Clay (CH) 500
18-1 w/tr fine gravel
moist 1000
19- v stiff , resistive
20 1000
End of Boring - No Refusal
21-
Bore hole backfilled with
cuttings on 20 October 1988
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH MUD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief:, MB
10-14 10. 15 20' 13' Method: 4" Power Fliaht Auaer
10-14 1 : 30 13' 13' & Cone Penetrometer
10-17 2: 00 20 • 17'2" 16'
10-14-88
-10-20 3 :45 13% ' 1214' Boring Completed•
t>,
I ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
IPROJECT: 88158 - Pro-osed Plat of Countr Oak h- ,h- ■■ - -ta
LOG OF BORING NO: 8
I- DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 977 . 3 SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WB L.L. Cone
FEET / DESCRIPTION ANDCLASSIFICATION # TYPE R W !DEN p.L. (pi)Pen
I Black Organic Loam (OL) FA
1 r w/vegetation , moist 500
Lt Brown Clay Loam (CL)
I2- damp 1000
2- Brown Clay (CH) 1000
w/tr gravel
IF4- moist, _mottled 1000
5- 1350
600
6-
700
8- - 1000
I 9- 1200
10- 1700
I11- 1300
1 12-
1?00
13- 1300
I 14-
1500
Blue Gray Clay (CH)
15 w/tr fine gravel 1950
' moist •
I16- stiff , resistive 500
I ;-7 - - - - 500
li 18-
600 '
1000- '
I 19-
V C 1000
20 57 .±
II 21 End of Boring - No Refusal
Bore hole backfilled with
cuttings on 20 October 1988 _ _ _
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
I DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH MUD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief: MB
I - 10-14 12. 00 20' 14 ' none Method: 4" Power Pliant Auaer
10-14 1 :30 13' none & Cone Penetrometer
10-17 2 : 30 20' 19 '7"
I Boring Completed: 10- 14-88
10-20 3:37 19 '7" none
IN
ALLIED
Log TEST Key DRILLING COMPANY
' PROJECT: Boring I
LOG OF BORING NO:
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS,!
IN GEOLOGY N WB
FEET ✓ DESCRIPTION ANDCLASSIFICATION TYPE R W DEN L L 1
P.L.
1— l
2— .• '
3- e
- r' Visual Classification of Soil A n Liquid Limit'
4- According to Unified Soil Origin &
Classification Symbol Shown of Soil Plastic Limit
5- in Parentheses
6- Dry Density o
Number of Soil in Pounds
7- Hammer Blows Per Cubic Fool
to Drive r--
8- Split Spoon
One Foot I
9- (dual values indicate
• each 6" increment) �_
10- II By Moisture Content
of Soil as a
11- Y = Yes Percent of Dry
N = No Soil Weight
12- if Soil is
I
13J Water Bearing
' Water Level Length o f Soil I
14- tin Inches )
Recovered in Split
15- Spoon Sample
II16- '
17- Indicates Type of Sample: ,
18- SS = Split Spoon
FA = Flight Auger
19- N = None
I
20—
21—
• WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA I
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH 'MUD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief:
Method:
I
_Boring Completed:._�_ I
es
1 . , „
IllGME Consultants, Inc.
GME Project No. 1263
v
II TABLE NO. 1
GROUNDWATER DATA
' Groundwater in Groundwater in
Borehole on 5-6-87 Piezometer on 5-8-87
IIGround •
Surface
Boring Elevation Depth Elevation Depth Elevation
Il . ;Number Feet Feet Feet Feet Feet
ll - 97.4 970.4 -NE NE ® 955 - -
Ik 2 90.9 963.9 7.5 83.4 956.4 3.2 87.7 960.7
3 92.6 965.6 4.2 88.4 961.4 - -
4 95.0 968.0 5.0 90.0 963.0 3.0 92. 0 965.0
13 5 92.7 965.7 8.0 84.7 957.7
NOTES: Elevations referenced to the front door step at the
first floor of Holy Cross Lutheran Church, assumed
datum, elevation 100.0 feet.
"NE" indicates groundwater not encountered.
1 _ Temporary open-well piezometers installed in borings
2 and 4 only.
Elevations converted to sea level datum by Allied Test
Drilling Company on 9 February 1989 .
Bench Mark is Mn/DOT 1004E , Elevation 966 .22
IIH
li " -i,
,c,..i .
01, i
i . .
In
Ii
IA .
14 •
. .
I
LOT-BY-LOT TABULATION FOR '
"LAND DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED EARTHWORK"
A(IieJ tProjec*' ISB
Subdivision Name: Cou„rl-ry C)0.ks Subdivision Number:
Location: Gleydale Dr+ hear TH 7, C-tnahllassen, Minn Date: 2-2- -8 t.) q rc.b ' VI
79G Applicable 79G Not
Block Elevation (feet) 4-9C4 Fill Required Appli-
& Lot Proposed Estimated Slabs Footings _ Slabs Footings cab1P
No. Existing Surface Base of Ground Base- Base- Base- Base- ' No Fill
Topography at Hnnsp Excavation water ment Garage ment Garag ment Garage ment Garage
),1 X
2. 77 77 7S 73 77 72. 73 Ye y
3 7S' lit. 76 73 7a 7e 71 7Z vz. X
4 7S 7S 72. Yi 71 7s- 70 7 Yz
k
5- 73 74 70 V1 12.1- 70 74 (act 701/z_ x x Bor�„5 7
b 64/7I 70 (41to7 'iL • (a6 70 (0S totoYz. Y x
7 64 '/z. (o7 S3 (0 3 to/ (c.2 (03 Vz Y. X X ' )(
8 10 3 '/z 1.06 SS '/z ss'Aa 62 66 (01 to Z 'IZ. x x x x Boo-;r,9 b
I
M MN • MI • • NM IIN Mil OM • al ei 4iiif 111111 MIS 1111 11111
[ P-B i-LCT TABULATION [•'': : ,
"LAND liE"VELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED EARTHWORK"
Allies) lPro ec- 881,8
Subdivision Name: ('o U r�'l r y Q �� SubdiviErA.on Number:
Location: Glendc4- br • -_•'r r, Mthn►n Date: 2-2--439 Ru, a *_b 'cif
79G Applicable 79G Nct
Block Elevation' (feet) . OO Fill Required Appl.i-
& Lot Proposed Estimated Slabs cable
No. Existing ,Ground ' Forti r�� Slabs F'oot�ng�
Surface Base of Base- Base- ! Base- Base- No Fill
--- ZbpographY ,r NQua Fzccaavar;nom water. rwnt Garage ment J c;�r;igr ment Garage ment Garage
N
77Vz 77 7S 'lz 57t 73 77 72. 73 Vz. Q( ao r:,,,, CL
z 78 rz. 79 7c./z 7S 79 74 7S'/z CK
3 80 80 78 76 8o 7s 76)vL a
4 7SYz 78 73 YZ 74 78 73 74 ya V. V
S 73 74 70 Y2 70 71- lo9 70%z. V
70+- 71 Co 8 .. • (07 71 (a(o [0-7%z d.
-
7 108- 7 0 (o S 64, 70 Go (o(o'L D� K D(
-----4
8 (n5'!z (08 (0( IA- ' ` S1,7 6,4- 60 ( 3 GAIL p( D( PC p\ Z.,..-, n5
T ' 1
9 (o s+ (o7 (Di + 63 . (0-7 (o z_ (0 3 1z k _tx. OC N.
10 (0S 66 6l 61,4 (02 (0(0 (o l 62 Vz d, v. GI, ao r� h'l 3
ll (07 68 (p3 64 48 (o 3 (04YL DX D, 0C
IZ (07 'h. 70 (D3 '/2- , (o(, 7() (PS- (1)(0 1/2-' l( ' g a
N
h
LOT-BY-LOT TABULATION FOR
"LAND DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED EARTHWORK"
All:ed Projec.+ 88ise
Subdivision Name: C OtAh}r., Oaks Subdivision Number:
. Location: &evlciale. Dr. 1 near TH 71 C1'►av11,10ss eAn 1 M i vw % Date: 2.-z-89 R e,, 9 Ve-10 ' if 9
79G Applicable ' 79G Not
Block Elevation (feet) t 90o Fill Required _ Appli-
& Lot Proposed Estimated cable
No. Existing po Ground Slabs Footings Slabs Footings
To rah Surface Base of Base- Base- Base- Base- No Fill
Po9 P Y _ ., _ ., water gent Garage gent GaragE gent Garage gent Garage
I (0S (0(0 S7 40,1 (0Z oo o I (o2 /z h S. k x SOriv1 S l
.
t
2 (a 3 Vx. (o t0 tit $S' (02-1/z (0101/z_ (o 17z. (0 3 )c �c X k
3 (S' 6e Vt. (D2- 1/2. A' toe !'L to t0 Y (�i Y. to 3 x x p
J s�2- L l�OrinC,
I
4- (0 9 (07 (o(0% (o 3 (07 la. (03'/z s.
.
5- (0 8 Vt. l07 ID to (0 3 67 lo z. (03 '4 Ni
to 6 8 (08 lo I- (o4 b8 (03 (04%z x x
7 G4 7o (o('/z o &c0 7o (o S (do'4„ x x k
h 3or;lA y 4
r _ .
l ,
MI IIIII MI OM 1M MI OM NM ! MI MI NM NM =SAW 3.111 3 ONI iiii MN
Attachment `1 LOT-BY-LOT TABULATION FOR
"LAND DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED EARTHWORK"
Project 88158 - Proposed Plat of Country Oaks
Glendale Dr, near TH 7 , Chanhassen , Minnesota
1 . "Existing Topography" is the lowest elevation in the building
' pad area as given in the Preliminary Development Plan or
Grading Plan . If two elevations are given , they are the
lowest elevation in the living area and the garage area ,
' respectively. - - - --
2. "Proposed Surface at House" generally is the elevation in
the garage slab area.
' 3 . "Estimated Base of Excavation" is the estimated lowest ele-
vation of suitable soils capable of supporting the given
foundation loading in the building pad area. If two eleva-
tions are given , they are the lowest suitable soil level in
the living area and the garage area , respectively.
4 . Elevations of slabs and footings are as per the Preliminary
' Development Plan , Grading Plan, or other available informa-
tion , and are based upon typical dimensions and separations
of the indicated type of structure. If more than one type
' of structure is possible or is indicated upon the site,
-then two or more elevations of slabs , footings , et: , are
possible .
5 . An "X" in any of the "79 G Applicable. . . " columns indicates
that , based upon interpolation',of the borings , it is probable
that fill will be required to bring soil surface from the
base of excavation to the bottom of footing or slab. As
' -this is an estimate at the time of the soils investigation ,
AN INSPECTION OF THE PREPARED SITE, BEFORE FILL PLACEMENT,
SHOULD BE PERFORMED.
' 6 . If the "79G Not Applicable. . . " column is checked, it indicates
that , based upon the borings , it is probable that slabs and
footings can rest upon soil encountered at the elevation of
' slab; and fo.-tin•`s . Aaaih AN INSr :("_In . OF THE
PERFORMED BASF CF y � -
:A� ATION Shc :Lr EE O :ER Y SC:IL E�Ri' :
RESULTS
AND INTERF3L,FTION OR y .:'y CHANGES IN bCi_.i iN.. CONFIGURAr'IO:,
' This should he done regardless of how obvious the situation _
may be.
7. Note that , in several instances , the clearance requirement
I _
of 4 ' between basement slab and groundwater is not met. This
could be addressed at a later time ; grading and draining the'
site could result in permanently lowered groundwater levels.
I :
•