B14-07818_CHANHASSEN SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT_GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORTTable of Contents
Description Page
A. Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
A.1. Project Description..............................................................................................................1
A.2. Purpose................................................................................................................................1
A.3. Background Information and Reference Documents..........................................................1
A.4. Site Conditions.....................................................................................................................2
A.5. Scope of Services.................................................................................................................2
B. Results..............................................................................................................................................3
B.1. Exploration Logs..................................................................................................................3
B.1.a. Log of Boring Sheets...............................................................................................3
B.1.b. Geologic Origins .....................................................................................................3
B.2. Geologic Profile...................................................................................................................3
B.2.a. Geologic Materials .................................................................................................3
B.2.b. Topsoil....................................................................................................................3
B.2.c. Fill...........................................................................................................................4
B.2.d. Organic Deposits ....................................................................................................4
B.2.e. Glacial Deposits......................................................................................................4
B.2.f. Groundwater..........................................................................................................4
B.3. Laboratory Test Results.......................................................................................................5
C. Basis for Recommendations.............................................................................................................5
C.1. Design Details......................................................................................................................5
C.1.a. Building Structure Loads ........................................................................................5
C.1.b. Pavements and Traffic Loads .................................................................................6
C.1.c. Anticipated Grade Changes....................................................................................6
C.1.d. Precautions Regarding Changed Information........................................................6
C.2. Design and Construction Considerations............................................................................6
D. Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................7
D.1. Building and Pavement Subgrade Preparation...................................................................7
D.1.a. Excavations.............................................................................................................7
D.1.b. Excavation Oversizing.............................................................................................9
D.1.c. Excavation Side Slopes...........................................................................................9
D.1.d. Excavation Dewatering...........................................................................................9
D.1.e. Selecting Excavation Backfill and Additional Required Fill.....................................9
D.1.e.1. Wall Backfill Below Floor Slabs...............................................................10
D.1.f. Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill....................................................10
D.2. Spread Footings.................................................................................................................10
D.2.a. Embedment Depth...............................................................................................10
D.2.b. Subgrade Improvement .......................................................................................11
D.2.c. Net Allowable Bearing Pressure...........................................................................11
D.2.d. Settlement............................................................................................................11
D.2.e. Footings in Wall Backfill .......................................................................................11
D.2.f. Grade Supported Interior Slabs (Garage Floors)..................................................11
D.3. Below Grade Walls............................................................................................................12
D.3.a. Drainage Control..................................................................................................12
D.3.b. Selection, Placement, and Compaction of Backfill...............................................12
D.3.c. Configuring and Resisting Lateral Loads...............................................................13
Table of Contents (continued)
Description Page
D.4. Interior Slabs .....................................................................................................................14
D.4.a. Moisture Vapor Protection ..................................................................................14
D.4.b. Randon.................................................................................................................14
D.5. Exterior Slabs.....................................................................................................................15
D.5.a. Isolated Footing and Piers....................................................................................16
D.6. Pavements.........................................................................................................................16
D.6.a. Engineered Fill......................................................................................................16
D.6.b. Subgrade Proofroll ...............................................................................................17
D.6.c. Design Sections ....................................................................................................17
D.6.d. Materials and Compaction...................................................................................17
D.6.e. Subgrade Drainage...............................................................................................18
D.7. Utilities ..............................................................................................................................18
D.7.a. Subgrade Stabilization..........................................................................................18
D.7.b. Selection, Placement and Compaction of Backfill................................................18
D.7.c. Corrosion Protection............................................................................................18
D.8. Construction Quality Control ............................................................................................19
D.8.a. Excavation Observations......................................................................................19
D.8.b. Materials Testing..................................................................................................19
D.8.c. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll..............................................................................19
D.8.d. Cold Weather Precautions ...................................................................................19
E. Procedures......................................................................................................................................20
E.1. Penetration Test Borings...................................................................................................20
E.2. Material Classification and Testing ...................................................................................20
E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification..........................................................................20
E.2.b. Laboratory Testing ...............................................................................................20
E.3. Groundwater Measurements............................................................................................20
F. Qualifications..................................................................................................................................20
F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions..................................................................................20
F.1.a. Material Strata .....................................................................................................20
F.1.b. Groundwater Levels.............................................................................................21
F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility..........................................................................21
F.2.a. Plan Review..........................................................................................................21
F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing...............................................................21
F.3. Use of Report.....................................................................................................................21
F.4. Standard of Care................................................................................................................22
Appendix
Boring Location Sketch
Log of Boring Sheets (ST-1 to ST-19)
Descriptive Terminology
A.Introduction
A.1.Project Description
We understand Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC is planning to develop nine single level twin
home villas, a 132-unit senior apartment building, and associated parking area on the vacant lot
addressed 8637 – 8655 Great Plains Boulevard in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The lot is located near the
northeast quadrant of the intersection of Minnesota State Highway 101 and U.S. Highway 212 in
Chanhassen, Minnesota.
A.2.Purpose
The purpose of our geotechnical evaluation will be to characterize subsurface geologic conditions at
selected exploration locations and evaluate their impact on the design and construction of the proposed
development.
A.3.Background Information and Reference Documents
To facilitate our evaluation, we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents:
We reviewed aerial photographs of the project area using Google Earth and Bing Maps.
We reviewed conceptual site plans indicating the location of the twin home villas and
apartment building. The plans were provided by Sperides Reiners Architects, Inc. (SRA) and
were undated.
We reviewed the Surficial Geology Map for Hennepin County prepared by the University of
Minnesota, Minnesota Geological Survey. The map is denoted as Atlas C-4, Plate 3 of 9,
Surficial Geology, and is dated 1989.
We had conversations with Mr. Eric Reiners of SRA regarding various aspects of the project.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 2
A.4.Site Conditions
The site is currently undeveloped and generally vegetated with grasses, although the site is partially
bordered with trees along the eastern boundary. Site elevations at the soil boring locations range
between approximately 900 and 927.
A.5.Scope of Services
Our scope of services for this project was originally submitted as a Proposal to Mr. Michael Hoagberg of
Chanhassen Senior Living Development, LLC. Tasks performed in accordance with our authorized scope
of services included:
Performing a reconnaissance of the site to evaluate equipment access to exploration
locations.
Staking and clearing exploration locations of underground utilities.
Performing six penetration test borings to 25 feet in the apartment building footprint, nine
penetration test borings to 15 feet at the twin home villa locations, and four penetration test
borings to 10 feet in drive lanes and parking lots.
Performing laboratory tests on selected penetration test samples.
Preparing this report containing a CAD sketch, exploration logs, a summary of the geologic
materials encountered, results of laboratory tests, and recommendations for structure
subgrade preparation and the design of foundations, pavements, interior and exterior slabs,
and utilities.
Exploration locations and surface elevations at the exploration locations were determined using GPS
(Global Positioning System) technology that utilizes the Minnesota Department of Transportation's
(MnDOT’s) permanent GPS Virtual Reference Network (VRN).
Our scope of services was performed under the terms of our September 1, 2013, General Conditions.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 3
B.Results
B.1.Exploration Logs
B.1.a.Log of Boring Sheets
Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and
describe the geologic materials that were penetrated, and present the results of penetration resistance
and other in-situ tests performed within them, laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples
retrieved from them, and groundwater measurements.
Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the auger cuttings.
Because sampling was not performed continuously, the strata boundary depths are only approximate.
The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may
also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions.
B.1.b.Geologic Origins
Geologic origins assigned to the materials shown on the logs and referenced within this report were
based on: (1) a review of the background information and reference documents cited above, (2) visual
classification of the various geologic material samples retrieved during the course of our subsurface
exploration, (3) penetration resistance and other in-situ testing performed for the project, (4) laboratory
test results, and (5) available common knowledge of the geologic processes and environments that have
impacted the site and surrounding area in the past.
B.2.Geologic Profile
B.2.a.Geologic Materials
The general geologic profile at the site consists generally of trace amounts of topsoil at most boring
locations underlain by glacially deposited soils extending to the boring termination depths. The following
subsections discuss the strata in more detail.
B.2.b.Topsoil
Silty sand topsoil with traces of organics and roots was encountered at the boring locations. Two of the
borings had one to 1 1/2 feet of topsoil, however, the majority of the borings encountered only a trace to
a few inches of topsoil.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 4
B.2.c.Fill
One boring (ST-4) encountered a layer of sandy lean clay which is possibly a previously placed fill soil.
This layer extended to about the four foot depth.
B.2.d.Organic Deposits
Organic clay was encountered at ST-4 and ST-5 at depths ranging between approximately four and seven
feet, and zero and four feet, respectively. These depths correspond to elevations between approximately
903 and 908. The organic clay was black and wet.
B.2.e.Glacial Deposits
Glacial till consisting of sandy lean clay (CL) and clayey sand (SC) was encountered beneath the topsoil,
possible fill, and organic clays. The clays soils ranged from rather soft to hard in consistency and the
clayey sands were medium dense based on the encountered penetration resistances.
B.2.f.Groundwater
Groundwater was measured or estimated to be down approximately eight feet and 15 feet in Borings
ST-1 and ST-11, respectively. These depths correspond to elevations 913.5 and 906 based on our
reported datum. Groundwater was not encountered as other exploration borings were advanced.
Due to the coincidence of groundwater and the sand seam encountered at approximately eight feet in
Boring ST-1, and relatively shallow depth at which groundwater was observed, we suspect that the
groundwater was perched. The depth/elevation at which perched groundwater accumulates seasonally
and annually will likely vary.
The groundwater level at boring ST-11 was measured or estimated to be down approximately 15 feet
prior to borehole abandonment. Given the cohesive nature of the geologic materials encountered,
however, it is likely that insufficient time was available for groundwater to seep into the boring and rise
to its hydrostatic level. Piezometers or monitoring wells would be required to confirm if groundwater
was present within the depths explored.
Seasonal and annual fluctuations of groundwater should also be anticipated.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 5
B.3.Laboratory Test Results
The moisture content of the selected soil samples were determined to vary from approximately 15.6 to
23.7 percent, indicating that the tested clayey soils were was likely near or above their probable
optimum moisture content.
Pocket Penetrometer tests were taken on select soil samples to estimate the unconfined compressive
strengths of the soil samples tested. The results of these tests ranged from 1/2 to 3 1/2 tons per square
foot (tsf).
The individual test results can be found in the right hand margin of various log of boring sheets, opposite
the soil sample tested.
C.Basis for Recommendations
C.1.Design Details
The project development consists of nine twin home style villas and a 132-unit living complex. Structural
plans for the project were not available at the time this report was prepared.
The wood framed, slab-on-grade villas have planned finished floor elevations (FFEs) ranging between 914
and 917. The planned location of the villas is in the northern portion of the site where current elevations
range between 908 and 924.
The proposed apartment building is a four story wood framed structure over a precast plank main level
with proposed FFE of 923. An underground garage is planned with a proposed elevation of 912. A single
story wood framed wing addition is planned along the southern boundary of the apartment building. The
wing has the same proposed underground garage and entry level elevations as the main apartment
building.
C.1.a.Building Structure Loads
We have assumed that bearing wall loads associated with the twin home villas will not exceed two kips
per lineal foot (klf); column loads will not exceed 35 kips per column.
Loads associated with the main apartment building will not exceed six klf along bearing walls or 400 kips
per column. The wing addition loads will not exceed four klf along bearing walls or 75 kips per column.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 6
C.1.b.Pavements and Traffic Loads
We have assumed that bituminous pavements, typical of residential neighborhoods, will be subjected to
no more than 50,000 equivalent 18-kip single axle loads (ESALs) over an assumed design life of 20 years.
C.1.c.Anticipated Grade Changes
Existing ground surface elevations are within approximately three to seven feet of the proposed FFEs at
the locations of the twin home villas. Elevations are within approximately two to 12 feet of the proposed
basement level in proximity to the apartment structures. It is likely that the range of cuts and fills across
the site could be as much as 18 feet. It is likely that several areas of the site will have cuts on the order of
six to twelve feet while other areas will require fill on the order of three to six feet.
C.1.d.Precautions Regarding Changed Information
We have attempted to describe our understanding of the proposed construction to the extent it was
reported to us by others. Depending on the extent of available information, assumptions may have been
made based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the
project details, we should be notified. New or changed information could require additional evaluation,
analyses, and/or recommendations.
C.2.Design and Construction Considerations
The geologic materials encountered generally appear to be suitable for support of conventional spread
footings, grade supported slabs, and pavements. The topsoil and organic clays encountered are not
suitable to support fill and structures and are not suitable for use as engineered fill in the building pads
or paved areas. Also, any soft or rather soft clays found in building pad areas should be subcut.
In order to prevent differential settlement, areas of construction immediately adjacent to the tall walls of
the proposed garage excavation will require backfill of granular material. Because it is not likely suitable
granular material will be encountered during excavation and grading activities, they may need to be
imported to the site.
Due to the frost susceptible nature of the clay-rich soils present at anticipated exterior slab and
pavement subgrade elevations, consideration should also be given to incorporating a granular subbase
into the pavement sections. This will enhance subgrade drainage efforts and reduce the potential for
pavement subgrades to become saturated and heave upon freezing; strength loss upon thawing will also
be reduced.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 7
In some areas, the soils present at and just below the proposed foundation levels are sensitive to
disturbance, particularly if they are wet. Contractors should select equipment and construction
techniques that minimize soil disturbance. Foundation soils that do become disturbed should be replaced
with clean sand or clean crushed rock. It may be necessary to place a working surface of rock in
excavations to reduce soils disturbance from construction traffic. Some contingency should be provided
in project budgeting for using these imported materials in the excavation process.
Typical subgrade preparation procedures as outlined in Section D.6 should be used for preparation of the
new pavement areas. These procedures should be anticipated to primarily involve stripping of the
existing topsoil and any organic clays or soft, wet clays, subcutting/filling to proposed grades, proofrolling
the subgrade, and then moisture conditioning and compaction of loose or soft areas of exposed subgrade
soils.
D.Recommendations
D.1.Building and Pavement Subgrade Preparation
D.1.a.Excavations
We recommend removing the topsoil, organic clays, and any near surface soft wet clays from beneath
the proposed building pads, pavement subgrades, and oversize areas. Based on the soil borings,
excavation depths are expected to range from approximately six to 12 feet. Table 1 lists the expected
excavation depths based on the penetration test borings. Note that at several locations, excavations to
estimated footing and slab elevations will extend below the depths needed for soil correction.
Table 1. Anticipated Excavation Depths for Villa and Apartment Construction.
Boring
Surface Elevation
(ft)
Proposed FFE
(ft)
Anticipated Depth of
Soil Correction
Excavation
(ft)
Approximate Bottom
Elevation
(ft)
ST-1 921.8 917 5 917
ST-2 918.9 916 4-6** 915-913
ST-3 912.5 915 1/2 912
ST-4 909.9 915 9-11** 901-899
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 8
Boring
Surface Elevation
(ft)
Proposed FFE
(ft)
Anticipated Depth of
Soil Correction
Excavation
(ft)
Approximate Bottom
Elevation
(ft)
ST-5 908.3 914 4-6** 904 1/2-902 1/2
ST-6 920.5 914 1/4 920
ST-7 922.3 915 1/4 921 1/2
ST-8 921.9 916 1/4 921 1/2
ST-9 924.1 917 1/4 923 3/4
ST-10 924.0 912 1/4 923 3/4
ST-11 921.0 912 1/4 920 3/4
ST-12 916.6 912 1/4 916 1/4
ST-13 915.7 912 5 910 1/2
ST-14 911.7 912 1/4 911 1/2
ST-15 910.0 912 1/4 909 3/4
ST-16 900.0 911* 1/4 899 3/4
ST-17 927.1 920* 1/4 926 3/4
ST-18 924.1 916* 1/4 923 3/4
ST-19 914.8 913* 1/4 914 1/2
*Approximate finished pavement elevation.
**Actual depth of soil correction to be determined in the field by a qualified geotechnical engineer or their representative.
Excavation depths will vary between the borings. Portions of the excavations may also be deeper than
indicated by the borings. Contractors should also be prepared to extend excavations in wet or fine-
grained soils to remove disturbed bottom soils.
Prior to placement of engineered fill or footings, we recommend the exposed soils in the bottoms of the
excavations be surface compacted using a minimum of five passes over the foundation areas with a large
sheep’s foot compactor. This will increase the density of the underlying natural soils and provide a more
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 9
uniformly compacted base to support any additional fill or footings. We recommend this work be
observed by a geotechnical engineer. The engineer may modify these recommendations if this
compaction work causes upward movement (pumping) of groundwater or soil disturbance.
D.1.b.Excavation Oversizing
To provide lateral support to replacement backfill, additional required fill, and the structural loads they
will support, we recommend oversizing (widening) the excavations 1 foot horizontally beyond the outer
edges of the building perimeter footings, or pavement limits, for each foot the excavations extend below
bottom-of-footing or pavement subgrade elevations.
D.1.c.Excavation Side Slopes
The onsite soils generally appear to consist of soils meeting OSHA Type B requirements, which indicate
excavation side slopes should be constructed to lie back at a minimum horizontal to vertical slope of one
to one or flatter. An OSHA-approved competent person or professional engineer should review the
excavation conditions in the field.
All excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations
and Trenches”. This document states that excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor.
Reference to these OSHA requirements should be included in project specifications.
D.1.d.Excavation Dewatering
Although perched water was only encountered in one of the borings, it is possible that water could be
encountered in other parts of the site. If encountered, we recommend removing groundwater from the
excavations. Because this site consists of predominately clayey soil, sumps and pumps can be used to
control water.
D.1.e.Selecting Excavation Backfill and Additional Required Fill
If the bottoms of excavations are wet, we recommend the initial backfill soil consist of at least 2 feet of
coarse sand having less than 50 percent of the particles by weight passing a #40 sieve, and less than 5
percent of the particles passing a #200 sieve. We anticipate that this material will need to be imported to
the site.
On-site soils free of organic soil can be considered for reuse as backfill and fill. The glacially deposited
sandy lean clay, being fine-grained, will be more difficult to compact if wet or allowed to become wet, or
if spread and compacted over wet surfaces.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 10
We recommend that granular subbase material for pavement support consist of sand having less than 12
percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve. We anticipate that this material will also need to
be imported.
D.1.e.1.Wall Backfill Below Floor Slabs
There are at least two locations where exterior and possibly interior slabs at the first floor elevation will
be partially supported on relatively deep wall backfill zones. This occurs next to sections of the basement
level walls. To reduce risks of differential settlement and possible slab damage, we recommend these
areas of backfill consist of sand with less than 12% fines (material passing the #200 sieve). The sand soils
beneath slabs should be compacted to at least 98% of their Standard Proctor density. Refer to section
D.3 of this report for additional recommendations.
D.1.f.Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill
We recommend spreading backfill and fill in loose lifts of approximately six to 12 inches depending on
the soil type and size of compactor used. We recommend compacting backfill and fill in accordance with
the criteria presented below in Table 2. The relative compaction of utility backfill should be evaluated
based on the structure below which it is installed, and vertical proximity to that structure.
Table 2. Compaction Recommendations Summary
Reference
Relative Compaction, percent
(ASTM D 698 – Standard Proctor)
Moisture Content Variance from
Optimum, percentage Points
Below foundations
98 -1 to +2 for Clay Soils
±3 for Sand Soils
Below slabs
95 to 98*
-1 to +3 for Clay Soils
±3 for Sand Soils
Adjacent to Underground Garages
98 -1 to +3 for Clay Soils
±3 for Sand Soils
Below pavements, within 3 feet of
subgrade elevations
100 -1 to +2 for Clay Soils
±3 for Sand Soils
Below pavements, more than 3 feet
below subgrade elevations
95 -1 to +3 for Clay Soils
±3 for Sand Soils
*98% compaction recommended for sand in wall backfill adjacent to tall garage walls (see D.1.e.1.)
D.2.Spread Footings
D.2.a.Embedment Depth
For frost protection, we recommend embedding perimeter footings of the twin home villas, as well as
structures outside the apartment building and wing addition such as canopies, retaining walls, etc.,
42 inches below the lowest exterior grade. Interior footings may be placed directly below floor slabs. We
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 11
recommend embedding footings not heated during winter construction, and other unheated footings
associated with canopies, stoops, or sidewalks, 60 inches below the lowest exterior grade.
D.2.b.Subgrade Improvement
If small amounts of groundwater are present within footing excavations, or if the foot subgrade soils
become disturbed prior to placing forms or reinforcement, we recommend subcutting the soft or wet
clay and placing a 6- to 12-inch layer of clear rock. The clear rock will provide a stable working surface,
and will allow for flow of water to a drain tile or sump.
D.2.c.Net Allowable Bearing Pressure
We recommend sizing spread footings to exert a net allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per
square foot (psf) for the twin home villas and 4,000 psf for the apartment building. These values include
a safety factor of at least 3.0 with regard to bearing capacity failure. The net allowable bearing pressures
can be increased by one-third their value for occasional transient loads, but not for repetitive loads due
to traffic, or for other live loads from snow or occupancy.
D.2.d.Settlement
Provided the foundation areas are prepared as discussed in this report, we estimate that total and
differential settlements among the footings will amount to less than one and 1/2 inch, respectively,
under the assumed loads.
D.2.e.Footings in Wall Backfill
It takes time for wall backfill to “settle-out” after it has been placed. Footings bearing in exterior wall
backfill may behave differently than nearby footings bearing upon native soils. A construction delay of a
month, or more, would allow the backfill to adjust, but this delay is not practical for many construction
schedules. Alternately, the foundation elements could be extended down to native soils. While this
approach is more expensive, it reduces the risk of excessive differential settlement between the building
and footings supported in the backfill. Refer to sections D.1.e.1. and D.3. for additional recommendations
for wall backfill.
D.2.f.Grade Supported Interior Slabs (Garage Floors)
The lower parking level floor will be supported upon the soils present at approximately 912 in Borings
ST-10 to ST-15. These soils are competent but sensitive to disturbance, particularly when wet. If may be
necessary to subcut these soils if they become disturbed.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 12
We recommend using a modulus of subgrade reaction, k, of 150 pounds per square inch per inch of
deflection (pci) to design the slabs.
D.3.Below Grade Walls
D.3.a.Drainage Control
We recommend installing subdrains behind the basement walls, adjacent to the wall footings, and below
the slab elevation. Preferably, the subdrains should consist of perforated pipes embedded in washed
gravel, which in turn is wrapped in filter fabric. Perforated pipes encased in a filter “sock” and embedded
in washed gravel, however, may also be considered.
We recommend routing the subdrains to a sump and pump capable of routing any accumulated
groundwater to a storm sewer or other suitable disposal site.
General waterproofing of basement walls surrounding occupied or potentially occupied areas is
recommended even with the use of free-draining backfill because of the potential cost impacts related to
seepage after construction is complete.
D.3.b.Selection, Placement, and Compaction of Backfill
Unless a drainage composite is placed against the backs of the exterior perimeter below-grade walls, we
recommend that backfill placed within 2 horizontal feet of those walls consist of sand having less than 50
percent of the particles by weight passing a #40 sieve and less than 12 percent of the particles by weight
passing a #200 sieve. Sand meeting this gradation will need to be imported. We recommend that the
balance of the backfill placed against exterior perimeter walls also consist of sand, though it is our
opinion that the sand may contain up to 20 percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve.
Clay is not recommended as wall backfill where higher elevation slabs will rely on the backfill for support.
However, if clay must be considered in areas not supporting slabs to make up the balance of the below-
grade wall backfill (assuming a drainage composite or sand is placed against the backs of the walls), post-
compaction consolidation of the clay occurring under its own weight can be expected to continue beyond
the end of construction. The magnitude of consolidation could amount to between 1 and 3 percent of
the clay backfill thickness, or wall height, and if not accommodated could cause slabs to settle
unfavorably or be damaged.
Should lean clay still be considered for use as backfill, however, we further recommend that:
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 13
The bottoms of the excavations required for below-grade wall construction are wide enough
to accommodate compaction equipment.
Backfill is placed at moisture contents at least equal to, but not more than three percentage
points above, its optimum moisture content.
Backfill is placed in loose lifts no thicker than 6 inches prior to compaction.
The relative compaction of the backfill is measured through density testing at intervals not
exceeding one test per 50 horizontal feet for each vertical foot of backfill placed.
We recommend a walk behind compactor be used to compact the backfill placed within about 5 feet of
the retaining walls. Further away than that, a self-propelled compactor can be used. Compaction criteria
for below-grade walls should be determined based on the compaction recommendations provided above
in Section D.1.
Exterior backfill not capped with slabs or pavement should be capped with a low-permeability soil to limit
the infiltration of surface drainage into the backfill. The finished surface should also be sloped to divert
water away from the walls.
D.3.c.Configuring and Resisting Lateral Loads
Below-grade wall design can be based on active earth pressure conditions if the walls are allowed to
rotate slightly. If rotation cannot be tolerated, then design should be based on at-rest earth pressure
conditions. Rotation up to 0.002 times the wall height is generally required when walls are backfilled with
sand*. Rotation up to 0.02 times the wall height is required when walls are backfilled with clay.
* To design for sand backfill, excavations required for wall construction should be wide enough and flat
enough so that sand is present within a zone that (1) extends at least two horizontal feet beyond the
bottom outer edges of the wall footings (the wall heel, not the stem) and then (2) rises up and away from
the wall at an angle no steeper than 60 degrees from horizontal. We anticipate these geometric conditions
will be met if the excavations meet OSHA requirements for the types of soils likely to be exposed in the
excavation, and the wall footings are cast against wood forms rather than any portion of the excavation.
Recommended equivalent fluid pressures for wall design based on active and at-rest earth pressure
conditions are presented below in Table 3. Assumed wet unit backfill weights, and internal friction angles
are also provided. The recommended equivalent fluid pressures in particular assume a level backfill with
no surcharge – they would need to be revised for sloping backfill or other dead or live loads that are
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 14
placed within a horizontal distance behind the walls that is equal to the height of the walls. Our design
values also assume that the walls are drained so that water cannot accumulate behind the walls.
Table 3. Recommended Below-Grade Wall Design Parameters
Backfill
Wet Unit Weight
(pcf)
Friction Angle
(deg)
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure, Active
Case
(pcf)
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure, At-Rest
Case
(pcf)
Sand 120 33 35 50
Clay 120 26 50 70
Resistance to lateral earth pressures will be provided by passive resistance against the retaining wall
footings, and by sliding resistance along the bottoms of the wall footings. We recommend assuming a
passive pressure equal to 300 pcf and a sliding coefficient equal to 0.50. These values are un-factored.
D.4.Interior Slabs
D.4.a.Moisture Vapor Protection
If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, consideration should be
given to placing a vapor retarder or vapor barrier immediately beneath the slab. Some contractors
prefer to bury the vapor retarder or barrier beneath a layer of sand to reduce curling and shrinkage, but
this practice risks trapping water between the slab and vapor retarder or barrier.
Regardless of where the vapor retarder or barrier is placed, floor covering manufacturers should be
consulted regarding the appropriate type, use and installation of the vapor retarder or barrier to
preserve warranty assurances.
D.4.b.Randon
In preparation for radon mitigation systems under residential structures, we recommend that slabs on
grade be constructed over a layer of gas permeable material consisting of a minimum of 4 inches of
either clean aggregate, or sand overlain with a geotextile matting suitable for venting the subgrade. The
clean aggregate material should consist of sound rock no larger than 2 inches and no smaller than
1/4 inch. Sand should have less than 50 percent of the particles by weight passing a #40 sieve and less
than 5 percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 15
Above the gas permeable aggregate or sand, a polyethylene sheeting (6 mil minimum) should be placed.
The sheeting should be properly lapped and penetrations through the sheeting sealed. Penetrations
through the slab and foundation walls should also be sealed.
D.5.Exterior Slabs
All or some of the exterior slabs will be underlain with mostly sandy lean clays and lean clays which are
considered to be moderately to highly frost susceptible. Soils of this type can retain moisture and heave
upon freezing. In general, this characteristic is not an issue unless these soils become saturated due to
surface runoff or infiltration or are excessively wet in-situ. Once frozen, unfavorable amounts of general
and isolated heaving of the soils and related surface features could also develop. This type of heaving
could impact design drainage patterns and the performance of the paved areas or exterior slabs, as well
as any isolated exterior footings and piers. To address most of the heave related issues, we recommend
the general site grades and grades for surface features be set to direct surface drainage away from
buildings, across large paved areas and away from walkways to limit the potential for saturation of the
subgrade and any subsequent heaving. General grades should also have enough “slope” to tolerate
potential larger areas of heave which may not fully settle when thawed.
Even small amounts of frost-related differential movement at walkway joints or cracks can create
tripping hazards. Several subgrade improvement options can be explored to address this condition. The
most conservative and potentially most costly subgrade improvement option to help limit the potential
for heaving, but not eliminate it, would be to remove any frost-susceptible soils present below the
exterior slabs “footprint” down to the bottom-of-footing grades or to a maximum depth of five feet
below subgrade elevations, whichever is less. We recommend the resulting excavation then be refilled
with sand or sandy gravel having less than 50 percent of the particles by weight passing the #40 sieve and
less than 5 percent of the particles by weight passing a #200 sieve.
Another subgrade improvement option would be to build in a transition zone between those soils
considered to be frost-susceptible and those that are not to somewhat control where any differential
movement may occur. Such transitions could exist between exterior slabs and pavements, between entry
way slabs and sidewalks, and along the sidewalks themselves. For this option, the frost-susceptible soils
in critical areas would be removed to a depth of at least five feet below grade as discussed above. The
excavation below the footprint of the sidewalks or other slabs would then be sloped upward at a
gradient no steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) toward the less critical areas. The bottom of the
excavation should then be sloped toward the center so that any water entering the excavation could be
quickly drained to the deepest area for removal. In the deepest areas of the excavation, a series of
perforated drainpipes will need to be installed to collect and dispose of surface water infiltration and/or
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 16
groundwater that could accumulate within the backfill. The piping would need to be connected to a
storm sewer or a sump to remove any accumulated water. If the water is not removed, it is our opinion
this option will not be effective in controlling heave.
Regardless of what is done to the walkway or pavement area subgrade, it will be critical the end-user
develop a detailed maintenance program to seal and/or fill any cracks and joints that may develop during
the useful life of the various surface features. Concrete and bituminous will experience episodes of
normal thermo-expansion and thermo-contraction during its useful life. During this time, cracks may
develop and joints may open up, which will expose the subgrade and allow any water flowing overland to
enter the subgrade and either saturate the subgrade soils or to become perched atop it. This occurrence
increases the potential for heave due to freezing conditions in the general vicinity of the crack or joint.
This type of heave has the potential to become excessive if not addressed as part of a maintenance
program. Special attention should be paid to areas where dissimilar materials abut one another, where
construction joints occur and where shrinkage cracks develop.
D.5.a. Isolated Footing and Piers
Soils classifying as “silt” (USCS symbols ML or MH), “clay” (CL or CH), or as being “silty” or “clayey”
(including but not limited to SP-SM, SC-SM, SM or SC), have the potential for adhering to poured
concrete or masonry block features built through the normal frost zone. In freezing conditions, this soil
adhesion could result in the concrete or masonry construction being lifted out of the ground. This lifting
action is also known as heave due to adfreezing. The potential for experiencing the impacts of adfreezing
increases with poor surface drainage in the area of below grade elements, in areas of poorly compacted
clayey or silty soils and in areas of saturated soils. To limit the impacts of adfreeze, we recommend
placing a low friction separation barrier, such as high density insulation board, between the backfill and
the element. Extending isolated piers deeper into the frost-free zone, enlarging the bottom of the piers
and then providing tension reinforcement can also be considered. Recommendations for specific
foundation conditions can be provided as needed.
D.6.Pavements
D.6.a.Engineered Fill
Fill needed to reach pavement subgrade should be placed in thin lifts not exceeding 12 inches. The
engineered fill placed in paved areas should be compacted to at least 100 percent of Standard Proctor
maximum dry density and within one percent of the optimum moisture content when present within the
upper three feet of pavement subgrade. Below the upper three feet, the compaction level may be
reduced to 95 percent of Standard Proctor maximum dry density and the moisture content should be
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 17
within three percent of optimum moisture content. Compaction tests should be taken to evaluate the
contractor’s method of fill placement.
D.6.b.Subgrade Proofroll
Prior to placing aggregate base material, we recommend proof-rolling pavement subgrades to determine
if the subgrade materials are loose, soft, or weak, and in need of further stabilization, compaction or
subexcavation, and recompaction or replacement. A second proofroll should be performed after the
aggregate base material is in place, and prior to placing bituminous or concrete pavement.
D.6.c.Design Sections
Laboratory tests to determine an R-value for pavement design were not included in the scope of this
project. Based on the clay subgrade, however, it is our opinion that an R-value of 12 can be assumed for
design purposes. For exclusively auto parking, we recommend 3 inches of bituminous over 6 inches of
Class 5 aggregate base. For drive lanes that will have occasional truck traffic, we recommend a pavement
section of 4 inches of bituminous over 10 inches of Class 5 aggregate base. Bus traffic areas (if any)
should have a minimum of 6 inches of bituminous over 12 inches of aggregate base. These pavement
designs also assume that the aggregate base is properly drained.
For enhanced long term performance, consideration should be given to incorporating a 12 inch sand
subgrade into the design, especially in drive lanes. If a 12 inch sand subgrade is considered the drive lane
section could be reduced to 3 1/2 inches of asphalt and six inches of Class 5 aggregate.
The above pavement designs are based upon a 20-year performance life. This is the amount of time
before major reconstruction is anticipated. This performance life assumes maintenance, such as seal
coating and crack sealing, is routinely performed. The actual pavement life will vary depending on
variations in weather, traffic conditions and maintenance.
D.6.d.Materials and Compaction
We recommend specifying crushed aggregate base meeting the requirements of Minnesota Department
of Transportation (MnDOT) Specification 3138 for Class 5. We recommend that the bituminous wear and
base courses meet the requirements of Specifications 2360, Type SP. We recommend the aggregate
gradations for the asphalt mixes meet Gradation B for the base course and Gradation B or A for the
surface course. Gradation A contains a smaller aggregate size than Gradation B and will provide a surface
with less visible aggregate which is desirable for some owners. We recommend the Performance Graded
Asphalt cement be a PG 58-28. (If additional resistance to rutting, scuffing and dimpling is desired, we
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 18
recommend utilizing a PG 64-28. If additional resistance to cold weather cracking is desirable, we
recommend utilizing a PG 58-34.)
We recommend that the aggregate base be compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of its maximum
standard Proctor dry density. We recommend that the bituminous pavement be compacted to at least 92
percent of the maximum theoretical Rice density.
We recommend specifying concrete for pavements that has a minimum 28-day compressive strength of
4,000 psi, and a modulus of rupture (Mr) of at least 600 psi. We also recommend Type I cement meeting
the requirements of ASTM C 150. We recommend specifying five to eight percent entrained air for
exposed concrete to provide resistance to freeze-thaw deterioration. We also recommend using a
water/cement ratio of 0.45 or less for concrete exposed to deicers.
D.6.e.Subgrade Drainage
We recommend installing perforated drainpipes throughout pavement areas at low points and about
catch basins. The drainpipes should be placed in small trenches extended at least 8 inches below the
granular subbase layer – or aggregate base material where no subbase is present.
D.7.Utilities
D.7.a.Subgrade Stabilization
We anticipate that utilities can be installed per manufacturer bedding requirements. If localized soft
areas are encountered at pipe invert elevations, we recommend placing a stabilizing aggregate beneath
the pipe. The depth of the aggregate bedding will vary, however, a minimum of six inches and a
maximum of two feet is commonly used.
D.7.b.Selection, Placement and Compaction of Backfill
We recommend selecting, placing and compacting utility backfill in accordance with the
recommendations provided above in Section D.1.
D.7.c.Corrosion Protection
The soil borings indicated the site consists predominately of clay soils. These soils are considered slightly
to moderately corrosive to metallic conduits. We recommend wrapping metallic pipe that is in contact
with clayey soils or if clayey soils are placed as backfill around the pipe.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 19
D.8.Construction Quality Control
D.8.a.Excavation Observations
We recommend having a geotechnical engineer observe all excavations related to subgrade preparation
and spread footing, slab-on-grade, and pavement construction. The purpose of the observations is to
evaluate the competence of the geologic materials exposed in the excavations, and the adequacy of
required excavation oversizing.
D.8.b.Materials Testing
We recommend density tests be taken in wall backfill and additional required fill placed below spread
footings, slab-on-grade construction, and below pavements.
We recommend Marshall tests on bituminous mixes to evaluate strength and air voids, and density tests
to evaluate compaction.
We also recommend slump, air content, and strength tests of portland cement concrete.
D.8.c.Pavement Subgrade Proofroll
We recommend that proofrolling of the pavement subgrades be observed by a geotechnical engineer to
determine if the results of the procedure meet project specifications, or delineate the extent of
additional pavement subgrade preparation work.
D.8.d.Cold Weather Precautions
If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, all snow and ice should be removed
from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No
frozen soils should be used as fill.
Concrete delivered to the site should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM C 94. Concrete
should not be placed on frozen subgrades. Concrete should be protected from freezing until the
necessary strength is attained. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below footings.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 20
E.Procedures
E.1.Penetration Test Borings
The penetration test borings were drilled with a truck-mounted core and auger drill equipped with
hollow-stem auger. The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Penetration test
samples were taken at 2 1/2- or 5-foot intervals. Actual sample intervals and corresponding depths are
shown on the boring logs.
E.2.Material Classification and Testing
E.2.a.Visual and Manual Classification
The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM
Standard Practice D 2488. A chart explaining the classification system is attached. Samples were placed
in jars and returned to our facility for review and storage.
E.2.b.Laboratory Testing
The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the
appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM procedures.
E.3.Groundwater Measurements
The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced, and again after
auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled or allowed to remain open for an extended period
of observation as noted on the boring logs.
F.Qualifications
F.1.Variations in Subsurface Conditions
F.1.a.Material Strata
Our evaluation, analyses, and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and
subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 21
exploration locations continuously with depth, and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be
inferred to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and can be expected to vary
in depth, elevation, and thickness away from the exploration locations.
Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until
additional exploration work is completed, or construction commences. If any such variations are
revealed, our recommendations should be re-evaluated. Such variations could increase construction
costs, and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them.
F.1.b.Groundwater Levels
Groundwater measurements were made under the conditions reported herein and shown on the
exploration logs, and interpreted in the text of this report. It should be noted that the observation
periods were relatively short, and groundwater can be expected to fluctuate in response to rainfall,
flooding, irrigation, seasonal freezing and thawing, surface drainage modifications, and other seasonal
and annual factors.
F.2.Continuity of Professional Responsibility
F.2.a.Plan Review
This report is based on a limited amount of information, and a number of assumptions were necessary to
help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects
of the designs and specifications, and evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes
have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly
interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications.
F.2.b.Construction Observations and Testing
It is recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction. This will
allow correlation of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered
by the borings, and provide continuity of professional responsibility.
F.3.Use of Report
This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written
approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses,
and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects.
Chanhassen Senior Living Developer, LLC
Project B14-07818
November 18, 2014
Page 22
F.4.Standard of Care
In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under
similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No
warranty, express or implied, is made.
Appendix
4
8
12
12
16
17
1/2
1 3/4
Benchmark:
Elevations were
obtained using
GPS and the State
of Minnesota's
permanent base
station network.
An open triangle in
the water level
(WL) column
indicates the depth
at which
groundwater was
observed while
drilling.
Groundwater levels
fluctuate.
20
SM
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, trace roots, dark brown,
moist.
(Topsoil Fill)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, rather
soft.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
Layers of Poorly Graded Sand at 8 feet.
END OF BORING.
Water observed at 8 feet with 7 feet of hollow-stem auger
in the ground.
Water not observed with 14 1/2 feet of hollow-stem
auger in the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
920.8
917.8
905.8
1.0
4.0
16.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-1 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-1
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
921.8
Depth
feet
0.0
5
5
7
8
12
13
1 1/2
1 3/4
1 1/2
22
SM
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, trace Gravel, dark brown,
moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, wet, rather soft.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, rather soft
to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
917.4
914.9
902.9
1.5
4.0
16.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-2 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-2
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
918.9
Depth
feet
0.0
6
8
11
12
14
17
3/4
2
1
19
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots, dark
brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, medium.
(Possible Fill)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
medium to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, gray, very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 12 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
912.4
908.5
898.5
896.5
0.1
4.0
14.0
16.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-3 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-3
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
912.5
Depth
feet
0.0
6
5
5
5
9
9
1 1/4
1 1/2
1 3/4
20
24
SM
CL
OL
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots, with
Gravel, gray, dry.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown to gray, wet.
(Possible Fill)
ORGANIC CLAY, black, wet.
(Swamp Deposit)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, dark gray, wet, rather soft.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
rather soft to rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, wet, rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 10 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
909.8
905.9
902.9
900.9
895.9
893.9
0.1
4.0
7.0
9.0
14.0
16.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-4 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-4
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
909.9
Depth
feet
0.0
5
5
9
11
11
14
3/4
3 1/2
2 1/2
3 1/2
20
SM
OL
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots, with
Gravel, gray, dry.
(Topsoil)
ORGANIC LEAN CLAY, black, wet.
(Swamp Deposit)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, gray, wet, rather soft.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, gray, wet, rather stiff
to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 11 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
908.2
904.3
902.3
896.3
892.3
0.1
4.0
6.0
12.0
16.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-5 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-5
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
908.3
Depth
feet
0.0
14
16
15
14
16
16
3 1/4
2 1/2
20
SM
CL
SILTY SAND, dark brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
920.4
904.5
0.1
16.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-6 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-6
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
920.5
Depth
feet
0.0
6
12
13
13
12
13
2 1/2
2 3/4
3 1/4
16
SM
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel,
brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
medium to rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
922.2
906.3
0.1
16.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-7 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-7
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
922.3
Depth
feet
0.0
6
9
10
9
14
19
2 1/4
3 1/2
3
21
SM
CL
SC
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots,
brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, wet,
medium dense.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, wet, very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
921.8
909.9
907.9
905.9
0.1
12.0
14.0
16.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-8 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-8
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
921.9
Depth
feet
0.0
6
8
10
11
11
12
1 1/2
2 1/2
1 3/4
2
19
SM
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 15 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
924.0
920.1
908.1
0.1
4.0
16.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-9 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-9
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
1
0
:
0
0
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsf
MC
%Symbol
Elev.
feet
924.1
Depth
feet
0.0
6
7
8
11
14
15
14
14
2 3/4
2 1/4
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, dark brown, wet,
medium.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, gray, wet, stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 25 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
923.9
921.0
905.0
898.0
0.1
3.0
19.0
26.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-10 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-10
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
924.0
Depth
feet
0.0
6
7
9
9
11
13
22
59
2 1/4
2 1/4
2 1/4
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, wet, brown, medium.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, trace Cobble, gray,
wet, very stiff to hard.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water observed at 24 1/2 feet with 25 feet of hollow-stem
auger in the ground.
Water observed at 15 feet with 25 feet of hollow-stem
auger in the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with bentonite grout.
920.9
917.0
902.0
895.0
0.1
4.0
19.0
26.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-11 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-11
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
921.0
Depth
feet
0.0
6
10
10
10
15
14
20
17
2 1/2
2
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, wet, medium.
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, rather
stiff to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, wet, very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 25 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
916.5
913.6
898.6
890.6
0.1
3.0
18.0
26.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-12 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-12
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
916.6
Depth
feet
0.0
3
7
12
10
11
11
13
11
2 3/4
3
2 1/4
SM
CL
SC
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, dark brown, wet.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, soft to
medium.
(Glacial Till)
CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, brown, moist,
medium dense.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, rather
stiff to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 25 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
915.6
909.7
906.7
889.7
0.1
6.0
9.0
26.0
10/16/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-13 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-13
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
915.7
Depth
feet
0.0
18
20
15
17
18
18
15
50/2"
3 1/2
3 1/2
2 1/2
3 1/4
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace Gravel and
roots, gray, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, stiff to
very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, gray, wet, hard.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 25 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 18 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
911.6
907.7
888.7
885.7
0.1
4.0
23.0
26.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-14 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-14
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
911.7
Depth
feet
0.0
6
11
15
16
18
22
21
13
SM
CL
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots, gray,
moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace roots and Gravel, brown, wet,
medium.
(Glacial Till)
FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, with Gravel, brown, wet, rather
stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown to gray, wet,
stiff to very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, wet, stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 25 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 18 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
909.9
907.0
903.0
886.0
884.0
0.1
3.0
7.0
24.0
26.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-15 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-15
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Symbol
Elev.
feet
910.0
Depth
feet
0.0
5
6
13
17
1 3/4
2 3/4
SM
CL
CL
CL
SILTY SAND,, fine- to medium-grained, trace roots, with
Gravel, brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, dark brown to gray,
wet, rather soft to medium.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, wet, stiff.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, wet, very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 10 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Water not observed to cave-in depth of 7 feet
immediately after withdrawal of auger.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
899.9
893.0
891.0
889.0
0.1
7.0
9.0
11.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-16 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerB. Kammermeier
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-16
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
qp
tsfSymbol
Elev.
feet
900.0
Depth
feet
0.0
7
9
12
11
SM
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, with roots, brown, moist.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 10 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
927.0
916.1
0.1
11.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-17 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-17
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Symbol
Elev.
feet
927.1
Depth
feet
0.0
6
8
9
10
SM
CL
CL
SILTY SAND, fine-grained, brown, moist, medium.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace Gravel, brown, wet, medium.
(Glacial Till)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, wet, rather stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 10 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
923.9
918.1
913.1
0.2
6.0
11.0
10/17/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-18 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-18
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Symbol
Elev.
feet
924.1
Depth
feet
0.0
8
10
15
25
SM
CL
SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained, with Gravel, light
brown, dry.
(Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with Gravel, brown, wet, medium
to very stiff.
(Glacial Till)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 10 feet of hollow-stem auger in
the ground.
Boring immediately backfilled with cuttings.
914.7
903.8
0.1
11.0
10/1/14 1" = 4'DATE:SCALE:DRILLER:
Tests or NotesWL
Braun Intertec Corporation, Bloomington MN 55438 ST-19 page 1 of 1
3 1/4" HSA, AutohammerR. Hansen
L O G O F B O R I N G
(S
e
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
v
e
T
e
r
m
i
n
o
l
o
g
y
s
h
e
e
t
f
o
r
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
b
b
r
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
LOCATION: See attached sketch.
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or D2487, Rock-USACE EM1110-1-2908)
Description of Materials
ST-19
METHOD:
BORING:
BPF
B14-07818LO
G
O
F
B
O
R
I
N
G
N
:
\
G
I
N
T
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
A
X
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
2
0
1
4
\
0
7
8
1
8
.
G
P
J
B
R
A
U
N
_
V
8
_
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
.
G
D
T
1
1
/
1
9
/
1
4
0
9
:
5
9
Braun Project B14-07818
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
Chanhassen Senior Housing Project
8623-8635 Great Plains Boulevard
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Symbol
Elev.
feet
914.8
Depth
feet
0.0
Descriptive Terminology of Soil
Standard D 2487 - 00
Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
(Unified Soil Classification System)
Rev. 7/07
DD Dry density, pcf
WD Wet density, pcf
MC Natural moisture content, %
LL Liqiuid limit, %
PL Plastic limit, %
PI Plasticity index, %
P200 % passing 200 sieve
OC Organic content, %
S Percent of saturation, %
SG Specific gravity
C Cohesion, psf
Angle of internal friction
qu Unconfined compressive strength, psf
qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf
Liquid Limit (LL)
Laboratory Tests
Pl
a
s
t
i
c
i
t
y
I
n
d
e
x
(
P
I
)
Drilling Notes
Standard penetration test borings were advanced by 3 1/4” or 6 1/4”
ID hollow-stem augers unless noted otherwise, Jetting water was used
to clean out auger prior to sampling only where indicated on logs.
Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix “ST”
(Split Tube). All samples were taken with the standard 2” OD split-tube
sampler, except where noted.
Power auger borings were advanced by 4” or 6” diameter continuous-
flight, solid-stem augers. Soil classifications and strata depths were in-
ferred from disturbed samples augered to the surface and are, therefore,
somewhat approximate. Power auger borings are designated by the
prefix “B.”
Hand auger borings were advanced manually with a 1 1/2” or 3 1/4”
diameter auger and were limited to the depth from which the auger could
be manually withdrawn. Hand auger borings are indicated by the prefix
“H.”
BPF: Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration
test, also known as “N” value. The sampler was set 6” into undisturbed
soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances were then counted
for second and third 6” increments and added to get BPF. Where they
differed significantly, they are reported in the following form: 2/12 for the
second and third 6” increments, respectively.
WH: WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer
and rods alone; driving not required.
WR: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of rods
alone; hammer weight and driving not required.
TW indicates thin-walled (undisturbed) tube sample.
Note: All tests were run in general accordance with applicable ASTM
standards.
Particle Size Identification
Boulders ............................... over 12”
Cobbles ............................... 3” to 12”
Gravel
Coarse ............................ 3/4” to 3”
Fine ................................. No. 4 to 3/4”
Sand
Coarse ............................ No. 4 to No. 10
Medium ........................... No. 10 to No. 40
Fine ................................. No. 40 to No. 200
Silt ....................................... No. 200, PI 4 or
below “A” line
Clay ..................................... No. 200, PI 4 and
on or above “A” line
Relative Density of
Cohesionless Soils
Very loose ................................ 0 to 4 BPF
Loose ....................................... 5 to 10 BPF
Medium dense ......................... 11 to 30 BPF
Dense ...................................... 31 to 50 BPF
Very dense ............................... over 50 BPF
Consistency of Cohesive Soils
Very soft ................................... 0 to 1 BPF
Soft ....................................... 2 to 3 BPF
Rather soft ............................... 4 to 5 BPF
Medium .................................... 6 to 8 BPF
Rather stiff ............................... 9 to 12 BPF
Stiff ....................................... 13 to 16 BPF
Very stiff ................................... 17 to 30 BPF
Hard ....................................... over 30 BPF
a. Based on the material passing the 3-in (75mm) sieve.
b. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders or both” to group name.
c. Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = (D30)2
D10 x D60
d. If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.
e. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt
GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay
GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt
GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay
f. If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM.
g. If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.
h. If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.
i. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
SW-SM well-graded sand with silt
SW-SC well-graded sand with clay
SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt
SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
j. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
k. If soil contains 10 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel” whichever is predominant.
l. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name.
m. If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name.
n. PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
o. PI 4 or plots below “A” line.
p. PI plots on or above “A” line.
q. PI plots below “A” line.
Poorly graded sand h
Peat
Well-graded gravel d
PI plots on or above “A” line
PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line j
PI 4 or plots below “A” line j
Fi
n
e
-
g
r
a
i
n
e
d
S
o
i
l
s
50
%
o
r
m
o
r
e
p
a
s
s
e
d
t
h
e
No
.
2
0
0
s
i
e
v
e
Co
a
r
s
e
-
g
r
a
i
n
e
d
S
o
i
l
s
mo
r
e
t
h
a
n
5
0
%
r
e
t
a
i
n
e
d
o
n
No
.
2
0
0
s
i
e
v
e
Soils Classification
Gravels
More than 50% of
coarse fraction
retained on
No. 4 sieve
Sands
50% or more of
coarse fraction
passes
No. 4 sieve
Silts and Clays
Liquid limit
less than 50
Highly Organic Soils
Silts and clays
Liquid limit
50 or more
Primarily organic matter, dark in color and organic odor
Group
Symbol
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and
Group Names Using Laboratory Tests a
Group Name b
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
CL
ML
OL
OL
SC
Poorly graded gravel d
Silty gravel d f g
Clean Gravels
5% or less fines e
Gravels with Fines
More than 12% fines e
Clean Sands
5% or less fines i
Sands with Fines
More than 12% i
Fines classify as ML or MH
Fines classify as CL or CH Clayey gravel d f g
Well-graded sand h
Fines classify as CL or CH
Fines classify as ML or MH Silty sand f g h
Clayey sand f g h
Inorganic
Organic Liquid limit - oven dried
Liquid limit - not dried 0.75
Inorganic
Organic
PI plots below “A” line
Lean clay k l m
Liquid limit - oven dried
Liquid limit - not dried 0.75
CH
MH
OH
OH
Fat clay k l m
Elastic silt k l m
Organic clay k l m n
Organic silt k l m o
Organic clay k l m p
Organic silt k l m q
Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 C
PT
Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 C
Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 C
Cu 6 and/or 1 CC 3 C
0 10 16 20
30 40 50 60 70 80
90 100 110
7
“U”
L
i
n
e
“A”
L
i
n
e
10
20
30
40
50
60
4
0
ML or OL
MH or OHCL o
r
O
L
CH
o
r
O
H
CL - ML
Silt k l m