Frontier Geo Report
December 6, 2019 HGTS Project Number: 19-1053
Mr. Luis Berrospid
7406 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Residential Development,
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Berrospid:
We have completed the geotechnical exploration report for the project at 7406 Frontier Trail in
Chanhassen, Minnesota. We understand the existing lot will be split and a new home
constructed on each of the newly split parcels.
One (1) soil boring was completed on the project site that encountered about 4 feet of topsoil
that was underlain by native glacial till soils consisting of sandy lean clay that extended to the
termination depth of the soil boring. The glacial till had a soft consistency from a depth of
about 7 to 12 below the ground surface. Groundwater was not encountered in the soil boring
while drilling and sampling or after removing of the augers from the borehole. We do not
anticipate that groundwater will be encountered during construction.
The vegetation and topsoil are not suitable for foundation or utility support and will need to
be removed from below these areas and replaced with suitable compacted fill. In our opinion,
the underlying denser and stiffer glacial soils are generally suitable for the construction of the
proposed residential development. However, as noted above, some softer clays were
encountered in the borings which will likely need to be removed and replaced with suitable
compacted engineered fill or dried and re-compacted.
Specific details regarding our procedures, results and recommendations follow in the attached
geotechnical exploration report.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Paul Gionfriddo at 612-271-8185.
Sincerely,
HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES, LLC
Paul Gionfriddo, P.E.
Senior Engineer
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT
PROJECT:
Residential Development
7406 Frontier Tail
Chanhassen, Minnesota
PREPARED FOR:
Mr. Luis Berrospid
7406 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PREPARED BY:
Haugo GeoTechnical Services
2825 Cedar Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55407
Haugo GeoTechnical Services Project: 19-1053
December 6, 2019
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
Paul Gionfriddo, P.E.
Senior Engineer
License Number 23093
Expires June 2020
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Project Description 1
1.2 Purpose 1
1.3 Site Description 1
1.4 Scope of Services 1
1.5 Documents Provided 2
1.6 Locations and Elevations 2
2.0 FIELD PROCEDURES 2
3.0 RESULTS 3
3.1 Soil Conditions 3
3.2 Groundwater 3
3.3 Laboratory Tests 3
3.4 OSHA Soil Classification 4
4.1 Proposed Construction 4
4.2 Discussion 5
4.4 Dewatering 7
4.5 Interior Slabs 7
4.6 Below Grade Walls 7
4.7 Exterior Slabs 8
4.9 Utilities 9
4.10 Rain Gardens/Infiltration Rates 9
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 10
5.1 Excavation 10
5.2 Observations 10
5.3 Backfill and Fills 10
5.4 Testing 10
5.5 Winter Construction 11
6.0 PROCEDURES 11
6.1 Soil Classification 11
6.2 Groundwater Observations 11
7.0 GENERAL 11
7.1 Subsurface Variations 11
7.2 Review of Design 12
7.3 Groundwater Fluctuations 12
7.4 Use of Report 12
7.5 Level of Care 12
Soil Boring Location Sketch, Figure 1
Soil Boring Logs, SB-1
Descriptive Terminology
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
We understand that Mr. Luis Berrospid is proposing to split the lot at 7406 Frontier Trail in
Chanhassen, Minnesota to accommodate two (2) lots for single family homes. The project will
also include improving the existing driveway and installing the associated underground
utilities and a rain garden.
1.2 Purpose
Haugo GeoTechnical Services (HGTS) was retained to perform a geotechnical exploration to
evaluate the suitability of site soil and groundwater conditions to support the anticipated
residential structures and underground utilities and provide recommendation for foundation
design and construction.
1.3 Site Description
The project site is located at 7406 Frontier Trail in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The site is situated
west of Frontier Trail, and south of Highland Drive.
At the time of exploration, the west/southwest portion of the site contained an existing house,
garage and a driveway. Most of the project site was wooded with some open areas especially
near the home.
The site generally sloped downward to the southeast with the ground surface elevations
ranging from about 972 on the west end of the property to about 920 on the east/southeast
portion of the lot. The ground surface elevation at the boring location was about 922 feet above
mean sea level (MSL).
1.4 Scope of Services
Our services were performed in accordance with the HGTS proposal 19-1053 dated October
29, 2019. Our scope of services was performed under the terms of our General Conditions and
limited to the following tasks:
• Completing one (1) standard penetration test soil boring and extending the boring to a
nominal depth of 14 ½ feet.
• Sealing the borehole in accordance with MDH requirements.
• Visually/manually classifying the samples recovered from the soil borings.
• Performing one (1) double ring infiltration test.
• Performing laboratory tests on selected samples.
• Preparing soil boring logs describing the materials encountered and the results of
groundwater level measurements.
• Preparing an engineering report describing soil and groundwater conditions and
recommendations for foundation and pavement design and construction.
2
1.5 Documents Provided
We were provided with a Grading Plan prepared by James R. Hill, Inc. dated March 5, 2019.
The Plan showed the existing site conditions and the location of the proposed houses,
associated street/driveway and pond.
We were not provided with any specific architectural or structural engineering documents or
drawings for the proposed homes.
1.6 Locations and Elevations
The soil boring location and double ring infiltrometer test location were selected and staked
in the field by James R. Hill, Inc. The approximate locations of the soil boring and double ring
infiltrometer test location are shown on Figure 1, “Soil Boring Location Sketch,” in the
Appendix. The sketch was prepared by HGTS using an aerial image from Google Earth as a
base.
Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were obtained by HGTS using GPS
measuring equipment. Elevations were based on the MN County Coordinates System (Carver
County) mean sea level. GPS coordinates at the boring location are also provided in Figure 1
in the Appendix.
2.0 FIELD PROCEDURES
One (1) standard penetration test boring was advanced on November 14, 2019 by HGTS with
a rotary drilling rig, using continuous flight augers to advance the boreholes. Representative
samples were obtained from the borings, using the split-barrel sampling procedures in general
accordance with ASTM Specification D-1586. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a 2-inch
O.D. split-barrel spoon is driven into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.
The number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of an 18-inch
penetration is recorded as the standard penetration resistance value, or "N" value. The results
of the standard penetration tests are indicated on the boring log. The samples were sealed in
containers and provided to the HGTS office for testing and soil classification.
A field log of the boring was prepared by the HGTS drill crew. The logs contained visual
classifications of the soil materials encountered during drilling, as well as the driller's
interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples and water observation notes. The
final boring logs included with this report represent an interpretation of the field logs and
include modifications based on visual/manual method observation of the samples.
The soil boring logs, general terminology for soil description and identification and
classification of soils for engineering purposes are also included in the appendix. The soil
boring logs identify and describe the materials encountered, the relative density or consistency
based on the Standard Penetration resistance (N-value, “blows per foot”) and groundwater
observations.
3
The strata changes were inferred from the changes in the samples and auger cuttings. The
depths shown as changes between strata are only approximate. The changes are likely
transitions, variations can occur beyond the location of the boring.
3.0 RESULTS
3.1 Soil Conditions
The soil boring encountered about 4 feet of sandy lean clay topsoil at the surface that was black
in color. Beneath the topsoil, the soil boring encountered native glacial till soils that extended
to the termination depths of the borings. The glacial till consisted of sandy lean clay that was
brown and grey in color.
Penetration resistance values (N-Values) within the clayey glacial till (sandy lean clay) ranged
from 3 to 7 bpf, indicating the glacial till soils had a soft to medium consistency.
3.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in the soil borings while drilling and sampling or after
removing of the augers from the boreholes. Groundwater appears to be below the depths
explored by our borings.
Water levels were measured on the dates as noted on the boring logs and the period of water
level observations was relatively short. Given the cohesive nature of portions of the soils
encountered, it is possible that insufficient time was available for groundwater to seep into
the borings and rise to its hydrostatic level.
Groundwater monitoring wells or piezometers in conjunction with deeper soil boring(s)
would be required to more accurately determine water levels. Seasonal and annual
fluctuations in the groundwater levels should be expected.
3.3 Laboratory Tests
Laboratory moisture content tests were performed on selected samples recovered from the
soil borings. Table 1 below summarizes the results of the laboratory tests. Results of the
laboratory moisture content tests are shown on the boring logs adjacent to the sample tested.
Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Tests
Boring
Number Sample Number Depth (feet) Moisture Content
(%)*
SB-1 SS-4 7 ½ 33
SB-1 SS-6 12 ½ 22
*Moisture Content tests were rounded to the nearest ½ percent.
4
3.4 OSHA Soil Classification
The soils encountered in the soil boring at the anticipated excavation depths consisted of
sandy lean clay generally corresponding to the ASTM classification of CL. The sandy lean
clay soil will generally be Type B soils under Department of Labor Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines.
Temporary excavations should be constructed at a minimum of 1 foot horizontal to every 1
foot vertical within excavations. Slopes constructed in this manner may still exhibit surface
sloughing. If site constraints do not allow the construction of slopes with these dimensions,
then temporary shoring may be required.
4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Proposed Construction
A single-family home exists of the approximate west half of the property which we
understand will remain. We understand the approximate east half of the property will be split
to accommodate to 2 single family homes, preparing the house pads for those homes,
improving the existing driveway and constructing the associated rain garden and
underground utilities.
Specific architectural or structural engineering documents or drawings for the proposed
homes were not available at the time of this evaluation. Based on the grading plan provided
we anticipate the new homes will have a rear walk-out style foundation. We anticipate that
new homes will include one or two stories above grade with cast-in-place concrete or masonry
block foundation walls supported on concrete spread footings. We anticipate above grade
construction to consist of wood framing, a pitched roof and asphalt shingles.
Based on the assumed construction we estimate wall loadings will range from about 1 to 2
kips (1,000 to 2,000 pounds) per lineal foot and column loads, if any, will be less than 50 kips
(50,000 pounds).
Based on proposed floor grades provided on the grading plan we anticipate the home on Lot
1 will have a basement/lowest floor grade at or near elevation 926.5 feet. With the ground
surface at or near elevation 920 we anticipate that Fills on the order of 6 ½ feet will be required
to attain design grades. The home on Lot 2 will have a lowest floor grade at or near elevation
934. With the ground surface on Lot 2 within the proposed house pad ranging from about
elevation 928 to 940 we anticipate Cuts and Fills on the order of 6 feet to attain site grades
If the proposed loads exceed these values, the proposed grades differ by more than 2 feet from
the assumed values or if the design or location of the proposed development changes, we
should be informed. Additional analyses and revised recommendations may be necessary.
5
4.2 Discussion
The vegetation and topsoil are not suitable for foundation, driveway or utility support and
will need to be removed from below these areas and the oversize areas and replaced with
suitable compacted fill.
Some softer clayey soils were encountered in soil boring SB-1 from about 7 to 12 feet below
the ground surface. Soft clays if encountered will need to be removed and replaced with
suitable compacted engineered fill or removed, moisture conditioned (dried) and
recompacted.
The laboratory moisture contents of the clayey soils generally ranged from about 22 to 33
percent indicating they were likely above their estimated optimum soil moisture content
based on the standard Proctor test. Clayey soil that will be reused ad fill or backfill will likely
require significant moisture conditioning (drying) to meet the recommended compaction
levels. Summer months are typically more favorable for drying wet clays.
In our opinion, the underlying denser and stiffer glacial soils are generally suitable for
foundation support.
Groundwater was not encountered in the soil borings while drilling and sampling or after
removing of the augers from the boreholes. We do not anticipate that groundwater will be
encountered during construction.
The following sections provide recommendations for site development.
4.3 Grading Recommendations
Excavation We recommend that all vegetation, topsoil and soft/loose soils be removed from
below the proposed building and oversize areas. Soils disturbed during construction activities
should be surface compacted to increase their density and uniformity or removed and
replaced with suitable compacted fill. Table 2 below summarizes the anticipated excavation
depths at the soil boring locations. A limited number of borings were completed for this
project and because of that, excavation depths will likely vary and could be deeper.
Table 2. Anticipated Excavation Depths
Boring
Number
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Anticipated
Excavation Depth
(feet)*
Anticipated
Excavation
Elevation (feet)*
SB-1 921.9 4 - 12 918 - 910
*Excavation depths and elevations were rounded to the nearest ½ foot.
Oversizing In areas where the excavations extend below the proposed footing elevations, the
excavation requires oversizing. We recommend the perimeter of the excavation be extended
a foot outside the proposed footprint for every foot below footing grade (1H:1V oversizing).
The purpose of the oversizing is to provide lateral support of the foundation.
Fill Material Fill required to attain site grades may consist of any debris-free, non-organic
mineral soil. The exception being within 3 feet of the groundwater table, if encountered, where
6
granular soil with less than 5 percent passing the number 200 sieve and at least 50 percent
retained on the number 40 sieve should be used.
The native glacial till soils generally appear suitable for reuse as structural fill. As discussed
above the laboratory moisture contents of the clayey soils ranged from about 22 to 33 percent
indicating they were likely above their estimated optimum soil moisture content based on the
standard Proctor test. Clayey soil that will be reused ad fill or backfill will likely require
significant moisture conditioning (drying) to meet the recommended compaction levels.
Summer months are typically more favorable for drying wet clays.
The topsoil and other soils that are black in color are not suitable for re-use as fill or backfill.
It may be possible to re-use these materials in “green areas” on the site such as landscaping
berms.
Backfilling Prior to placing additional fill and/or the footings, we recommend any loose or
disturbed soils be surface compacted to increase their density and uniformity with a large self-
propelled vibratory compactor. We recommend that backfill placed to attain site grades be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698), except
the upper 3 feet of pavement areas, where the compaction level should be increased to a
minimum of 100 percent.
Granular fill classified as SP or SP-SM, if used, should be placed within 65 percent to 105
percent of its optimum moisture content as determined by the standard Proctor. Remaining
fill soils should be placed within 3 percentage points above and 1 percentage point below its
optimum moisture content as determined by the standard Proctor. All fill should be placed
in thin lifts and be compacted with a large self-propelled vibratory compactor operating in
vibratory mode.
In areas where fill depths will exceed 10 feet, if any, we recommend that compaction levels be
increased to a minimum of 98 percent of standard Proctor density. Even with the increased
compaction levels a construction delay may be required to allow for post construction
settlement of the fill mass.
Fill and backfill placed on slopes, if any, must be “benched” into the underlying suitable soil
to reduce the potential for slip planes to develop between the fill and underlying soil. We
recommend “benching” or excavating into the slope at 5 feet vertical intervals to key the fill
into the slope. We recommend each bench be a minimum of 10 feet wide.
Foundations We recommend the perimeter footings bear a minimum of 42 inches below the
exterior grade for frost protection. Interior footings may be placed immediately below the slab
provided construction does not occur during below freezing weather conditions. Foundation
elements in unheated areas should bear at least 5 feet below exterior grade for frost protection.
We anticipate the foundations and floor slabs will bear on compacted engineered fill or glacial
soils. With the building pads prepared as recommended it is our opinion the footings can be
designed for a net allowable bearing pressure up to 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf).
We anticipate total and differential settlement of the foundations will be less than 1 inch and
½ inch, respectively across an approximate 30-foot span.
7
4.4 Dewatering
Groundwater was not encountered in the soil borings while drilling or sampling or after
removing of the augers from the boreholes. We do not anticipate that groundwater will be
encountered during construction and do not anticipate that dewatering will be required.
Perched water, if encountered, can likely be controlled with sumps and pumps.
If groundwater is encountered in “clean” sand soils (poorly graded sand or poorly graded
sand with silt) more aggressive dewatering techniques could be required. Where dewatering
is required, we recommend the groundwater level be temporarily lowered to a minimum of 2
feet below the lowest anticipated excavation elevation to allow for construction. In sand soils
we do not recommend attempting to dewater from within the excavation. Upward seepage
will loosen and disturb the excavation, resulting in a “quick condition". Rather, we
recommend groundwater be drawn down below the anticipated excavation bottom.
If dewatering is required, we recommend that a dewatering contractor be consulted to review
the soil boring logs, develop a dewatering plan and evaluate the impact of dewatering on
adjacent structures.
4.5 Interior Slabs
The anticipated floor subgrade will consist of compacted engineered fill or native clayey
glacial till soils. It is our opinion a modulus of subgrade reaction, k, of 200 pounds per square
inch of deflection (psi) be used to design the floor.
If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, we
recommend that a vapor retarder or vapor barrier be placed immediately beneath the slab.
Some contractors prefer to bury the vapor barrier or vapor retarder beneath a layer of sand to
reduce curling and shrinkage, but this practice often traps water between the slab and vapor
retarder or barrier. Regardless of where the vapor retarder or vapor barrier is placed, we
recommend consulting the floor covering manufacturer regarding the appropriate type, use
and installation of the vapor retarder or vapor barrier to preserve the warranty.
We recommend following all state and local building codes with regards to a radon mitigation
plan beneath interior slabs.
4.6 Below Grade Walls
Foundation walls or below grade (basement) walls will have lateral loads from the
surrounding soil transmitted to them. We recommend general waterproofing of the below
grade walls even with the use of free-draining backfill because of the potential cost impacts
related to seepage after construction. Unless a drainage composite is placed against the backs
of the exterior perimeter below-grade walls we recommend that backfill placed within 2 feet
of those wall consist of sand 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 the #200 sieve. We
recommend the balance of the backfill for the walls consist of sand however the sand may
contain up to 20 percent of the particles by weight passing the #200 sieve.
8
We recommend installing drain tile behind the below grade walls, adjacent to the wall footing
and below the slab elevation. Preferably the drain tile should consist of perforated pipe
embedded in gravel. A geotextile filter fabric should encase the pipe and gravel. The drain
tile should be routed to a storm sewer, sump pump or other suitable disposal site.
Active earth pressures can be used to design the below grade walls if the walls are allowed to
rotate slightly. If wall rotation cannot be tolerated, then below grade wall design should be
based on at-rest earth pressures. We recommend the following soil parameters be used for
below grade/retaining wall design, shown in Table 3. These design parameters are based on
the assumptions that the walls are drained, there are no surcharge loads within a horizontal
distance equal to the height of the wall and the backfill is level.
Table 3. Soil Parameters
Soil Type
Estimated
Unit Weight
(pcf)
Estimated
Friction Angle
(degrees)
At-Rest
Pressure
(pcf)
Active Soil
Pressure
(pcf)
Passive Soil
Pressure
(pcf)
Sand
(SP & SP-SM) 125 32 55 35 400
Other Soils
(CL, SC, SM)
135 28 70 50 375
Resistance to lateral earth pressures will be provided by passive resistance against the wall
footings and by sliding resistance along the bottom of the wall footings. We recommend a
sliding coefficient of 0.35. This value does not include a factor of safety.
4.7 Exterior Slabs
The exterior slabs will likely be underlain by clayey soils which are considered moderately to
highly frost susceptible. If these soils become saturated and freeze, frost heave may occur.
This heave can be a nuisance in front of doors and at other critical grade areas. One way to
help reduce the potential for heaving is to remove the frost-susceptible soils below the slabs
down to bottom of footing grades and replace them with non-frost-susceptible backfill
consisting of sand having less than 5 percent of the particles by weight passing the number
200 sieve.
If this approach is used and the excavation bottoms terminate in non-free draining granular
soil, we recommend a drain tile be installed along the bottom outer edges of the excavation to
collect and remove any water that may accumulate within the sand. The bottom of the
excavation should be graded away from the building.
If the banks of the excavations to remove the frost-susceptible soils are not sloped, abrupt
transitions between the frost-susceptible and non-frost-susceptible backfill will exist along
which unfavorable amounts of differential heaving may occur. Such transitions could exist
between exterior slabs and sidewalks, between exterior slabs and pavements and along the
slabs themselves if the excavations are confined to only the building entrances. To address
this issue we recommend sloping the excavations to remove frost-susceptible soils at a
minimum 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) gradient.
9
Another alternative for reducing frost heave is to support the slabs on frost depth footings. A
void space of at least 4 inches should be provided between the slab and the underlying soil to
allow the soil to heave without affecting the slabs.
4.8 Site Grading and Drainage
We recommend the site be graded to provide positive run-off away from the proposed
buildings. We recommend landscaped areas be sloped a minimum of 6 inches within 10 feet
of the building and slabs be sloped a minimum of 2 inches. In addition, we recommend
downspouts with long splash blocks or extensions for each house.
We recommend the lowest floor grades be constructed to maintain at least a 4-foot separation
between the lowest floor slab and observed groundwater and at least a 2-foot separation
between the lowest floor slab and 100-year flood levels of any adjacent surface water features
such as wetlands, creeks, ponds or ditches.
4.9 Utilities
We anticipate that the utilities will be supported on compacted engineered fill or native glacial
deposits. In our opinion, these soils are generally suitable for pipe support. We recommend
removing all topsoil, soft/loose or other unsuitable soils, if encountered, beneath utilities prior
to placement.
We recommend bedding material be thoroughly compacted around the pipes. We
recommend trench backfill above the pipes be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent beneath
slabs and pavements, the exception being within 3 feet of the proposed pavement subgrade,
where 100 percent of standard Proctor density is required. In landscape areas, we recommend
a minimum compaction of 90 percent.
Groundwater was not encountered in the soil borings. We do anticipate that groundwater
will be encountered during utility construction and do not anticipate that dewatering will be
required. Perched water, if encountered, can likely be controlled with sumps and pumps. See
Section 4.4 for additional details regarding dewatering.
4.10 Rain Gardens/Infiltration Rates
On November 20, 2019 we attempted to complete the double ring infiltrometer test. We
mobilized a “mini” backhoe to the site and excavated to an elevation of about 917
corresponding to the approximate elevation of the bottom of the rain garden. Soil conditions
at that elevation consisted of “black” organic soil which are generally not well suited for rain
gardens or infiltration. Because of that we extended the excavation to depth of about 10 feet
below the ground surface corresponding to about elevation 910. Soil conditions at that
elevation also consisted of black organic material and we excavated additional pits in an effort
to identify or encounter non-organic soils. The additional test pits also encountered “black”
organic soil conditions and as a result the double ring infiltrometer test was not performed.
Soil boring SB-1 taken within a proposed house pad encountered sandy lean clay at an
approximate elevation of 917. Soils classified as sandy lean clay generally meet the ASTM
Classification CL. The “Minnesota Storm Water Manual”, provides a design infiltration rate
10
of 0.06 inches per hour for sandy lean clay soil. A summary of the estimated design infiltration
rates for various soils is presented in Table 4. These values were obtained from the Minnesota
Stormwater Manual.
Table 4. Design Infiltration Rates
In-situ soils Soil Description Design Infiltration
Rate (in/hr)
SP, SP-SM Poorly Graded Sand 0.8
SM Silty Sand 0.45
SC, SC-SM Clayey Sand 0.06
CL Sandy Lean Clay 0.06
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Excavation
The soils encountered in the soil boring at the anticipated excavation depths consisted of
sandy lean clay generally corresponding to the ASTM classification of CL. The sandy lean
clay soil will generally be Type B soils under Department of Labor Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines.
Temporary excavations should be constructed at a minimum of 1 foot horizontal to every 1
foot vertical within excavations. Slopes constructed in this manner may still exhibit surface
sloughing. If site constraints do not allow the construction of slopes with these dimensions,
then temporary shoring may be required.
5.2 Observations
A geotechnical engineer should observe the excavation subgrade to evaluate if the subgrade
soils are similar to those encountered in the borings and adequate to support the proposed
construction.
5.3 Backfill and Fills
Site soils that will be excavated and reused as backfill and fill appear to be below and above
their assumed optimum moisture content. We anticipate it will be necessary to moisture
condition (dry or wet) these soils to achieve the recommended compaction. We recommend
that fill and backfill be placed in lifts not exceeding 4 to 12 inches, depending on the size of
the compactor and materials used.
5.4 Testing
We recommend density tests of backfill and fills placed for the new house pads. Samples of
the proposed materials should be submitted to our laboratory prior to placement for
evaluation of their suitability and to determine their optimum moisture content and maximum
dry density (Standard Proctor).
11
5.5 Winter Construction
If site grading and construction is anticipated to proceed during cold weather, all snow and
ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading and placement of
fill. No fill should be placed on frozen soil and no frozen soil should be used as fill or backfill.
Concrete delivered to the site should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM and/or
ACI. Concrete should not be placed on frozen soil. Concrete should be protected from freezing
until the necessary strength is obtained. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below the
footings.
6.0 PROCEDURES
6.1 Soil Classification
The drill crew chief visually and manually classified the soils encountered in the borings in
general accordance with ASTM D 2488, “Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-
Manual Procedure).” Soil terminology notes are included in the Appendix. The samples were
returned to our laboratory for review of the field classification by a soils engineer. Samples
will be retained for a period of 30 days.
6.2 Groundwater Observations
Immediately after taking the final samples in the bottom of the borings, the holes were checked
for the presence of groundwater. Immediately after removing the augers from the borehole
the holes were once again checked and the depth to water and cave-in depths were noted.
7.0 GENERAL
7.1 Subsurface Variations
The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from
a limited number of soil borings. Variations can occur away from the borings, the nature of
which may not become apparent until additional exploration work is completed or
construction is conducted. A reevaluation of the recommendations in this report should be
made after performing on-site observations during construction to note the characteristics of
any variations. The variations may result in additional foundation costs and it is suggested
that a contingency be provided for this purpose.
It is recommended that we be retained to perform the observation and testing program during
construction to 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, specifications and construction methods. This
will allow correlation of the soil conditions encountered during construction to the soil borings
and will provide continuity of professional responsibility.
12
7.2 Review of Design
This report is based on the design of the proposed development as related to us for preparation
of this report. It is recommended that we be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the
design and specifications. With the review, we will evaluate whether any changes have
affected the validity of the recommendations and whether our recommendations have been
correctly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications.
7.3 Groundwater Fluctuations
We made water level measurements in the borings at the times and under the conditions stated
on the boring logs. The data was interpreted in the text of this report. The period of observation
was relatively short and fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to rainfall,
flooding, irrigation, spring thaw, drainage and other seasonal and annual factors not evident
at the time the observations were made. Design drawings and specifications and construction
planning should recognize the possibility of fluctuations.
7.4 Use of Report
This report is for the exclusive use of Mr. Luis Berrospid and his design team to use to design
the proposed structure and prepare construction documents. In the absence of our written
approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding
this report. The data, analysis and recommendations may not be appropriate for other
structures or purposes. We recommend that parties contemplating other structures or
purposes contact us.
7.5 Level of Care
Haugo GeoTechnical Services, LLC has used the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised
under similar circumstance by members of the profession currently practicing in this locality.
No warranty expressed or implied is made.
APPENDIX
Haugo GeoTechnical
Services, LLC
2825 Cedar Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Figure #: 1
Drawn By: RD
Date: 11/15/19
Scale: None
Project #: 19-1053
Soil Boring Location Sketch
7406 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, Minnesota
GPS Boring Locations
Boring Number Elevation
(US Survey Feet) Northing Coordinate Easting Coordinate
SB-1 928.1 183614.041 561466.401
Referencing Minnesota County Coordinates Basis – Carver County (GEOID09 Conus model)
Legend
Approximate Soil Boring Location
DRI = Double Ring Infiltration Test
SB-1
DRI-1
Sandy Lean Clay, black, moist. (Topsoil)
(CL) Sandy Lean Clay, brown and grey, trace rust staining, moist,
soft to medium. (Glacial Till)
Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet.
AU
1
SS
2
SS
3
SS
4
SS
5
SS
6
SS
7
1-3-5
(8)
1-3-3
(6)
1-2-1
(3)
1-2-1
(3)
2-3-4
(7)
1-3-4
(7)
33
22
NOTES
GROUND ELEVATION 928.1 ft
LOGGED BY NA
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger/Split Spoon
DRILLING CONTRACTOR HGTS - 750 GROUND WATER LEVELS:
CHECKED BY PG
DATE STARTED 11/14/19 COMPLETED 11/14/19
AT TIME OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered
AT END OF DRILLING --- Not Encountered
AFTER DRILLING --- Not Encountered
HOLE SIZE 3 1/4 inches
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
PL LLMC
DEPTH(ft)0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0 GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPENUMBERRECOVERY %(RQD)BLOWCOUNTS(N VALUE) SPT N VALUE
20 40 60 80
MOISTURE CONT.(%)NOTESPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER SB-1
CLIENT Luis Berrospid
PROJECT NUMBER 19-1053
PROJECT NAME 7406 Frontier Trail
PROJECT LOCATION Chanhassen, MN
GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 12/6/19 09:41 - C:\USERS\PUBLIC\DOCUMENTS\BENTLEY\GINT\PROJECTS\19-1053 7406 FRONTIER TRAIL.GPJHaugo GeoTechnical Services
2825 Cedar Ave South
MN 55105
Telephone: 612-729-2959
Fax: 763-445-2238