Geotechnical Engineering Report - WordPress.com Engineering Report TEXAS HORSE PARK Dallas County, Texas February 26, 2013 Terracon Project No. 94135010 Prepared for: City of Dallas

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTEXAS HORSE PARK

Dallas County, Texas

February 26, 2013

Terracon Project No. 94135010

Prepared for:City of DallasDallas, Texas

Prepared by:Terracon Consultants, Inc.

FYI'-^' ^ x

February 26, 2013

City of Dallas

Park and Recreation. Department1500 Manilla Street, 6FSDallas, Texas 75201

Attn: Mr. Donald Burns

Re: Geoteehnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park.Pemberton Hill Road, Dallas, Texas;Dallas, TexasTerracon Project No. 94135010.

Dear Mr. Burns:

Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services forthe referenced project. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposalnumber P94130056, dated January 11, 2013. This report presents the findings of the subsurfaceexploration and provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed project. Buildinglocations were changed- after field exploration was performed. We recommend additional fieldexploration, laboratory testing and analyses to be performed to confirm recommendations forRiver Ranch Admin building.

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

Sincerely,Terracon Consultants, Inc.

'texas Registration #3272

A * ,' '.'k ^f

•.s.. a.e •r.. . ..ra..•.. ./

SIDDHARTH NEEKHRA %............................

Siddharth Neekhra, P.E. ^ A- L, tm rams, P:E.Project Manager _ <= Senior Principal

Terracon Consultants, I n c. . 8901 Carpenter Free »y, Suite. 1J 8es, Texas 7 ? yj tion Nu. iF-3272

P [ 4j 3 Q [214 630 70 0 t . racoii,ccrr=A rw

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVESUMMARY .............................................................................................................i1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................12.0 PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................1

2 .1 Project Description ...............................................................................................12 .2 Site Location and Description ...............................................................................1

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................... ..............................23 .1 Typical Profile ......................................................................................................23 .2 Groundwater ........................................................................................................3

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ....... . ..............................44.1 Geotechnical Considerations ...............................................................................44.2 Earthwork ............................................................................................................. 4

4.2.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................44.2.2 Suitable Fills .............................................................................................54.2.3 Compaction Requirements .......................................................................54.2.4 Drainage and Utilities ...............................................................................64.2.5 Cut and Fill ...............................................................................................6

4.3 Foundations .........................................................................................................74.3.1 Shallow Foundations ................................................................................74.3.2 Auger Cast Piles (ACP) — Design Parameters ..........................................84.3.3 Auger Cast Piles — Soil Induced Uplift Loads ..........................................104.3.4 L-PILE Parameters .................................................................................104.3.5 Auger Cast Piles - Construction Considerations .....................................124.3.6 Grade Beams/ Pier Caps ........................................................................13

4.4 Seismic Considerations ......................................................................................134.5 Floor System ......................................................................................................14

4.5.1 Structural Floor Slabs .............................................................................154.5.2 Floor Slabs/Flatwork on Moisture Conditioned Subgrade .......................15

4.6 Pavement ...........................................................................................................174.6.1 Pavement Subgrades .............................................................................174.6.2 Pavement Traffic ....................................................................................174.6.3 Pavement Sections .................................................................................18

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS .................................................................. .............................19

APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATIONExhibit A-1 Boring Location PlanExhibit A-2 Field Exploration DescriptionExhibits A-3 through A-27 Boring Logs

APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TESTINGExhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing

APPENDIX C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTSExhibit C-1 General NotesExhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORTTEXAS HORSE PARK

DALLAS, TEXASTerracon Project No. 94135010

February 25, 2013

1.0 INTRODUCTIONThe Texas Horse Park is planned on the west side of Pemberton Hill Road in Dallas, Texas. Ourscope of services included drilling and sampling twenty five soil borings to depths of about 10 to 25feet, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis. The purpose of these services is to provideinformation and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

subsurface soil conditions n foundation design and constructiongroundwater conditions seismic considerationsearthwork pavement recommendations

Building locations were changed after field exploration was performed. We recommend additionalfield exploration, laboratory testing and analyses to be performed to confirm geotechnicalrecommendations for River Ranch Admin building.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

Item Description

Site layout See Appendix A, Exhibit A-1, Boring Location Plan.

Planned improvements Covered arenas, horse barns, office and activity center buildings, feedand equipment storage buildings, drives and parking lots.

Finished floor elevation See Appendix A, Exhibit A-1, Boring Location Plan.

Columns: 10 to 150 kip (as per RFP)Maximum loads (assumed) Walls: 0.50 to 2.0 kips per foot

Slabs: 125 psf (assumed)

2.2 Site Location and Description

Item Description

Location West of Pemberton Hill Road near intersection with Jeane Road,Dallas, Texas

Existing Improvements Wood frame structures to be demolished

Current ground cover Wooded areas, grass land and land under cultivation

Responsive Resourceful i Reliable 1

Geotechnical Engineering Report .Texas Horse Park i Dallas, Texas ms .-Iza

February 26, 2013 A Terracon Project No. 94135010

Item Description

Existing topography About 30 to 40 feet of relief

Below grade walls andRetaining Walls

None

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Typical ProfileBased on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site vary throughout. TheSubsurface conditions for each structure location are as follows:

River Ranch Covered Arena - Borings B-6 through B-9

StratumApproximate Depth to

Bottom of StratumMaterial Encountered Consistency

1 1 to 4 foot Brown fat clay (CH) Soft to very stiff

2 j 5 to 14 foot Red and brown Sandy Clay(CL) Hard

3 Termination depths of 25 feet Poorly Graded Sand (SP) Dense to very dense

River Ranch Camp Activities - Borings B-12 through B-13

StratumApproximate Depth to Material Encountered Consistency

Bottom of Stratum

1 2 to 3 feet Red and brown Sandy Clay (CL) Medium Stiff to very stiff

2 8 feet in boring B-1 2 Clayey Sand (SC) dense

3 Termination depths of 25 feet Poorly Graded Sand (SP)Medium dense to very

dense

Equest Covered Arena and Horse Barn - Borings B-18 through B-20


Material Encountered ConsistencyBottom of Stratum

2 feet in B-1 8 and 6 feet and 23 Red, brown, and gray Sandy Medium Stiff to1 Ifeet in B-1 9 Clay (CL) hard

2 13 to 18, not encountered in B-20 Fat Clay (CH) Hard

3 Termination depths of 25 feet Poorly Graded Sand (SP)Medium dense to

very dense

Responsive .1 Resourceful a Reliable 2

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 i Terracon Project No. 94135010

Equest Admin — Borings B-21


Material Encountered ConsistencyBottom of Stratum

1 13 feet Tan and brown Sandy Clay (CL) Medium Stiff to hard

2 Termination depths of 25 feet Poorly Graded Sand (SP) Very dense

River Ranch Horse Barn — Borings B-24


Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency

1 and 3 8 feet and 20 feet Tan and brown Sandy Clay (CL) Medium Stiff to hard

2 12 feet Fat Clay (CH) Hard

4 Termination depths of 25 feet Poorly Graded Sand (SP) Very dense

Conditions encountered at individual boring locations are indicated on the boring logs.Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soiltypes; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for the boring drilling andsampling can be found in Appendix A of this report. Laboratory test results are present on theBoring logs and in Appendix B

3.2 GroundwaterThe borings were advanced dry using auger drilling techniques, which allows short-termgroundwater observations to be made while drilling. Groundwater seepage was observedduring drilling or at the completion of drilling the borings. The summary of ground waterinformation is presented in the table below.

Boring, Depth During Drilling, feet - Depth After Completion, feet

B-1 24 13

B-3 24 -

B-4 25 -

B-13 24 -

B-18 - 24

B-20 19 21

B-21 13 24

Responsive i Resourceful 3 Reliable 3

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park i Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 A Terracon Project No. 94135010

These groundwater observations provide an indication of the groundwater conditions present atthe time of drilling. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in theamount of rainfall, runoff, landscape irrigation and other factors not evident at the time theborings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times inthe life of the project may be higher than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibilityof groundwater level fluctuation should be considered when developing the design andconstruction plans for the project.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

Active clay soils were encountered in the borings and these soils can subject shallowfoundations bearing in them to significant differential movements due to moisture fluctuations inthe soils. We estimate the potential magnitude of post-construction heave at this site to rangefrom 1 to 5 inches for dry soil conditions that can exist prior to construction.

Auger cast piles and shallow footings are the recommended method of supporting the plannedbuildings and arena structures. If floor slab movements must be limited to less than one inch, afloor system structurally supported above the subgrade is recommended. If potential slabmovements on the order of one inch are acceptable, the floor slab can be supported on amodified subgrade. It should be noted that there is a risk that even 1

/2 inch of movement canresult in unsatisfactory performance. Some of the risks that can affect performance includeuneven floors, floor and wall cracking, and sticking doors.

Flexible base is planned for interior drives and parking areas. Portland cement concrete pavementis planned for fire lanes.

Geotechnical recommendations are presented in the following report sections for the buildingand arena foundations, floor slab preparation and earthwork.

4.2 Earthwork

4.2.1 Site PreparationAreas to receive new fill should be stripped and grubbed. The exposed subgrade should thenbe proof rolled. The proof rolling should be performed with a fully loaded, tandem-axle dumptruck or other equipment providing an equivalent subgrade loading. A minimum gross weight of20 tons is recommended for the proof-rolling equipment. The proof rolling should consist ofseveral overlapping passes in mutually perpendicular directions over a given area. Any soft orpumping areas should be excavated to firm ground. Excavated areas should be backfilled withproperly placed and compacted fill as discussed in Section 4.2.3.

Responsive a Resourceful >a Reliable 4

Geotechnical Engineering Report irTexas Horse Park A Dallas, Texas H eFebruary 26, 2013 31 Terracon Project No. 94135010

4.2.2 Suitable FillsThe on-site soils, free of vegetation, debris, in maximum dimension, are generally suitable forsite grading. If imported fill materials are used, they should be clean soil with a Liquid Limit lessthan 50 percent and no rock greater than 4 inches in maximum dimension.

The material used as select fill should be sandy clay to clayey sand with a Liquid Limit (LL) ofless than 35 percent and a Plasticity Index (PI) between 6 and 15. Clayey sand encounteredduring field exploration can be used as select fill material provided they meet the select fillcriteria mentioned above. Positive drainage must be provided away from the structure toprevent the ponding of water in the select fill.

As an alternate to select fill, flexible base can be used. The base should meet the requirementsof TxDOT Item 247, Type D, Grade 1 or 2. Recycled concrete meeting this gradation isacceptable.

4.2.3 Compaction RequirementsRecommendations for compaction are presented in the following table. We recommend thatengineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should theresults of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have notbeen met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required untilthe specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.

ITEM DESCRIPTION

1. Subgrade preparation to Surface scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches andreceive fill compacted to criteria in either Items 3 or 4.

2. Clay, select fill, and flexiblebase loose lift thickness

9-inches or less

3. Subgrades and fills outside A minimum of 95% maximum standard Proctor dry density

moisture conditioned areas (ASTM D 698) at a minimum of -2 to +2 percentage pointsof optimum moisture content.93% to 98% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density

4. Moisture conditioned soils (ASTM D 698) at a minimum of +3 percentage pointsabove optimum moisture content.A minimum of 95% maximum standard Proctor dry density

5. Select fill and flexible base (ASTM D 698) in the range of -2 to +2 percentage points ofoptimum moisture content.A minimum of 95% maximum standard Proctor dry density

6. Backfill against grade beams (ASTM D 698) at a minimum of +3 percentage pointsabove optimum moisture content.

7. Pavement subgrades, natural A minimum of 95% maximum standard Proctor dry density

or lime-treated (ASTM D 698) in the range of -1 to +3 percentage points ofoptimum moisture content .

Responsive i Resourceful a Reliable 5

Geotechnical Engineering Report . „Texas Horse Park -i Dallas, Texas •February 26, 2013 LI Terracon Project No. 94135010

4.2.4 Drainage and UtilitiesAll grades must be adjusted to provide positive drainage away from the structures. Waterpermitted to pond adjacent or near the structures will result in ground movements that exceedthose discussed in this report. Open ground should preferably be sloped at a minimum of 5percent grade for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the structure. Flatwork and pavementwill be subject to post construction movement. Maximum grades practical should be used forpaving and flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond.

In addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post-constructionmovement of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatworkabuts the structure, care should be taken that joints are properly sealed and maintained toprevent the infiltration of surface water.

Planters located adjacent to the structure should preferably be self-contained, or at leastdesigned to drain away from the building. Sprinkler mains should be located a minimum of fivefeet away from the building lines. If heads must be located adjacent to the structures, thenservice lines off the main should be provided. Roof drains should discharge on pavement or beextended away from the structure.

Care should be taken that utility trenches are not left open for extended periods and they areproperly backfilled. Backfilling should be accomplished with properly compacted on-site soils,rather than granular materials. A positive cut -off at the building line is recommended to helpprevent water from migrating in the utility trench backfill.

4.2.5 Cut and FillThe site existing grades range from El. 408 to El. 440 with a general slope towards southwest.Cut and fills are planned to achieve the planned finished grades. Following table provides asummary of approximate maximum cut and fill information for each building. The fill underbuilding slabs must consist of select fill.

Cut and Fill

BuildingFinished FloorElevation, feet

MaximumCut, feet

Maximum Fill,feet

River Ranch Covered Arena 438.5 0 4

River Ranch Camp Activities Building 435.5 0 5.5

River Ranch Camp Admin Building 436 0 0

Equest Covered Arena 415.9 2 4

Responsive a Resourceful i Reliable 6

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park a Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

Cut and Fill

BuildingFinished FloorElevation, feet

MaximumCut, feet

Maximum Fill,feet

Equest Horse Barn 417.7 2 6.5

Equest Admin 419.5 3 2

River Ranch Horse Barn 434.5 0 0

4.3 Foundations

4.3.1 Shallow FoundationsThe perimeter wall for River Ranch Camp Activities building and Admin building can besupported on continuous strip footings and interior columns on square footings supported onstructural select fill or moisture conditioned clays. Recommendations for select fill or moistureconditioned depths are presented in report Section 4.5. The arena and barn structures can besupported on shallow footings provided they can tolerate greater than one inch movementotherwise a deep foundation system discusses in next section must be used.

Recommended allowable net bearing pressures for footings founded at least 2 feet belowfinished floor grade into moisture conditioned onsite clays or select fill are presented in thefollowing table.

SHALLOW FOOTING RECOMMENDATIONS

Design Element Recommendation

Bearing Stratum Compacted Select Fill or moisture conditioned clays

Select Fill 2,000 psf, Sustained

Strip Footing — Allowable Net Bearing Loads

Pressureconditioned clays 1 psf Sustained1,500,

loads

Select Fill 2,350 psf, Sustained

Square Footing — Allowable Net Bearing - Loads

Pressureconditioned clays 1 psf, Sustained,1,800,

Loads

Responsive ; Resourceful a Reliable 7

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 a Terracon Project No. 94135010

SHALLOW FOOTING RECOMMENDATIONS

Design Element Recommendation

Minimum Footing Embedment BelowFinished Floor

2 feet

Minimum Footing Width 2 feet

Total Estimated Settlement 1.0 inch

Total Differential Settlement 0.5 to 0.75 inches

The allowable net bearing values include a factor of safety of 3 for dead loads. The allowablenet bearing values can be increased by 25 percent for dead and live loads.

The footing subgrade must be free of loose material and water when footings are constructed.The footings must be constructed shortly after the footings are excavated to reducedeterioration of the bearing surface.

4.3.2 Auger Cast Piles (ACP) — Design ParametersDue to seepage observed in the borings and caving potential of non-cohesive soils, auger castpile shafts extending into the dense sands are considered the most positive deep foundationsystem for supporting the proposed structures. Design parameters for auger cast pile systemsare presented below.

Auger cast piles are installed by advancing a hollow-stem auger to a predetermined depth in theground, and then pumping high-strength flowable cement grout into the hole through the bottomof the hollow auger as the auger is slowly withdrawn. The grout is pumped under relatively highpressure and a positive head of grout is maintained above the base of the auger during augerextraction. After the auger is completely removed, reinforcing steel is then placed. Full scale,on-site load tests are customarily performed on auger cast pile to verify the desired capacity isachievable prior to construction. Auger cast piles systems have been installed in North Texas.While the foundation system is not commonly used in the area, they have been used for similarsoil conditions in other parts of Texas and around the country.

Auger cast pile shafts penetrating the dense sands, cemented sands and sandy clays will use acombination of end bearing and skin friction in developing their load canying capacity. Theyshould be initially proportioned using an allowable bearing pressures provided in the table belowfor each building location. This value contains a safety factor of three. Additional load carryingcapacity can be gained by utilizing an allowable skin friction for that portion of the shaftembedded in the dense sands. This skin friction value may be used for compressive or tensileloads. The auger cast pile shafts extend a minimum of 22 feet below existing grade. Deeper

Responsive a Resourceful a Reliable 8

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park i Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 a Terracon Project No. 94135010

penetrations may be required to develop additional skin friction and/or uplift resistance. Aminimum center to center spacing of 2.5 pile diameters is recommended between adjacentpiles.

AUGERCAST PILE BEARING CAPACITY RECOMMENDATIONS

Structure LocationBearing Stratum Allowable End

Bearing, psfAllowable Skin

Friction, psf

River Ranch Covered Arena Sandy Clay 6,750 400

River Ranch Camp Activities Buildingand River Ranch Admin Building Dense Sand 15,000 680

Equest Covered Arena Sandy Clay 3750 225

Equest Horse Barn Sandy Clay 3750 225

Equest Admin Dense Sand 15,000 680

River Ranch Horse Barn Dense Sand 15,000 450

DESIGN NOTES'

Design Parameter Recommendation

Minimum Embedment DepthsMinimum embedment depth 22 feet below existinggrade.

Penetration to develop skin frictionBegin including skin friction 10 feet below existinggrade

2.5 times the diameter of the larger shaft.

Minimum center to center spacing to develop fullcase-by-case.examinedbeShould General

skin frictionreduction guide: varies linearly from the 100%value at a spacing of 2.5 diameters to 50% of thedesign value at 1.0 diameter.

Should be evaluated on a case by case basis by

Groups of 3 or more shafts spaced closer thanTerracon. Alternative installation sequences may

2.5 shaft diametersbe needed to allow for a minimum of 48 hoursconcrete curing time, before installation of adjacentshafts.

Minimum pile diameter 12 inches

Settlement Less than 3/4 inch

Responsive a Resourceful i Reliable 9

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park i Dallas, Texas err"' , mss „February 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

Ultimate load capacity and settlement of the auger cast piles should be verified using load testsprocedures as described in ASTM D1143. Final design auger cast pile capacities andsettlements should be based upon field load testing data. A safety factor of 2.5 (allowablecapacity reduction) is recommended for auger cast pile shafts after ultimate capacity isdetermined by the load test (ASTM D1143).

Settlements of properly constructed auger cast pile shafts are anticipated to be minor andprimarily elastic.

4.3.3 Auger Cast Piles — Soil Induced Uplift LoadsThe auger cast pile will be subject to uplift as a result of heave in the overlying clay soils. Themagnitude of these loads varies with the shaft diameter, soil parameters, and particularly the in-situ moisture levels at the time of construction. The piles must contain sufficient continuousvertical reinforcing and embedment depth to resist the net tensile load.

For the conditions encountered at this site, the uplift load can be approximated by assuming auniform uplift of 1,400 psf over the shaft perimeter for a depth provided in the table below foreach structure location. If the building pads are prepared as discussed in Section 4.5.2, auniform uplift of 800 psf to a depth of 8 feet where moisture conditioned clays are present.

SOIL INDUCED UPLIFT BELOW FINISHED GRADE

Structure Location Depth to Uplift

River Ranch Covered Arena 8 feet

River Ranch Camp Activities Building and Admin Building -

Equest Covered Arena 8 feet

Equest Horse Barn 8 feet

Equest Admin 8 feet

River Ranch Horse Barn 8 feet

4.3.4 L-PILE Parameters

The lateral load parameters for different buildings are provided in the tables below. The valuesare given for use in Ensoft's L-PILE computer program. Suitable p-y modification factors mustbe used to account for group effects of closely spaced auger cast piles.

Responsive a Resourceful Reliable 10

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park a Dallas, Texas _ L _

February 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS - RIVER RANCH COVERED ARENA

Design Parameter Soft Clay Sand Dense Sand

Depth Range, feet 0 to 8 feet 8 feet to14 feet 14 to 25 feet

Material Type for L-PILE Soft Clay Sand (Reese) Sand (Reese)

Effective Unit Weight (pci) 0.072 0.072 0.072

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction K (pci) 100 - 125

Soil Undrained Cohesion (psi) 6.94 - -

Strain Factor, E50 0.02 - -

Friction Angle, degrees - 27 30

Design Parameter Soft Clay Dense Sand Dense Sand

Depth Range, feet 0 to 8 feet 14 to 20 feet 20 to 25 feet



Modulus of Subgrade Reaction K (pci) 100 225 125




LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS — EQUEST ADMIN BUILDING

Design Parameter Soft Clay Sand ' Dense Sand

Depth Range, feet 0 to 8 feet 8 feet to13 feet 13 to 25 feet


Responsive is Resourceful a Reliable 11

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park Dallas, Texas February 26, 2013 :1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS — EQUEST ADMIN BUILDING

Design Parameter Soft Clay Sand Dense Sand


Modulus of Subgrade Reaction K (pci) 100 90 125




LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS - RIVER RANCH HORSE BARN

Design Parameter Soft Clay Stiff Clay Dense Sand

Depth Range, feet 0 to 8 feet 8 feet to13 feet

13 to 25 feet



Modulus of Subgrade Reaction K (pci) 100 1,000 125

Soil Undrained Cohesion (psi) 6.94 27.8 -


Friction Angle, degrees - - 30

4.3.5 Auger Cast Piles - Construction ConsiderationsAuger cast piles shall be made by rotating a continuous flight, hollow-shaft auger into theground to design depth. High strength grout shall then be injected through the auger shaft insuch a way as to exert positive upward grout pressure on the auger flights and positive lateralearth pressure shaft walls, as the auger is being withdrawn. Grout used for the auger cast pilesshould have a flow rate of 10 to 25 seconds when a 3 inch opening (Modified Corps. ofEngineers) flow cone is used.

A minimum of two piles should be tested within the project location prior to commencement offoundation construction using the ASTM D1143 axial pile load test procedure. The tests must be


Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park Dallas, Texas IFebruary 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

performed at Boring B-6 and B-19 locations. After completion of standard loading cycle of thepile load test, the pile should be reloaded until failure or at least three times the design load,whichever comes first. Test piles loaded to failure should not become part of the permanentfoundation system. Load testing should be performed by the auger cast pile contractor in thepresence of the geotechnical engineer of record and/or his designee. Cost of the load testsperformed by the piling contractor should be included in the base bid price.

Very dense sand layers were encountered in our test borings and were penetrated by our augerdrilling rigs. However, harder zones can be encountered and may require special drillingtechniques and/or specialized heavy equipment to penetrate the material. Auger cast-in-placepile shaft installations should be performed with equipment suitable to perform this work, by acontractor with experience with subsurface conditions similar to those encountered at this site.

We recommend that Terracon be retained to observe and document the auger cast pileconstruction. The geotechnical engineer or his representative should document the shaftdiameter, drilling elevation, tip elevation, elevation of butt, quantity of grout placed,reinforcement steel, plumbness, and the minimum penetration into the bearing soils. Significantdeviations from the specified or anticipated conditions should be reported to the owner'srepresentative, the structural engineer and the geotechnical engineer.

4.3.6 Grade Beams/ Pier CapsIf grade beams are used, they must be supported by the auger cast piles. If no moistureconditioning is performed, a minimum void space of 8 inches is recommended between thebottom of grade beams or pile cap extensions and the subgrade. If moisture conditioning isperformed, a minimum void space of 4 inches is recommended between the bottom of gradebeams or pile cap extensions and the moisture conditioned subgrade. This void will serve tominimize distress resulting from swell pressures generated by the clay soils. Structuralcardboard forms are one acceptable means of providing this void beneath cast-in-placeelements. Soil retainers should be used to prevent infilling of the void.

The grade beams should be formed rather than cast against earth trenches. Backfill against theexterior face of grade beams, wall panels and pile caps should be on site materials placed andcompacted as described in section 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements.

4.4 Seismic Considerations

Code Used Site Classification

2009 International Building Code (IBC)' I D 21. In general accordance with the 2009 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2.2. The 2009 International Building Code (IBC) requires a site soil profile determination extending a

depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope requested does not include the

Responsive a Resourceful -a Reliable 13

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park Dallas, Texas uerrifl`February 26, 2013 2 Terracon Project No. 94135010

Code Used I Site Classification

required 100 foot soil profile determination. The borings extended to a maximum depth ofapproximately 30 feet and this seismic site lass definition considers that stiff soil or bedrock existsbelow the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths wouldbe required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. Alternatively, ageophysical exploration could be utilized in order to attempt to justify a higher seismic site class.

4.5 Floor System

Lightly loaded floor slabs and flatwork placed on-grade will be subject to movement as a resultof moisture induced volume changes in the active soils that can occur following construction.The soils expand (heave) with increases in moisture and contract (shrink) with decreases inmoisture. The movement typically occurs as post construction heave.

The potential magnitude of the moisture induced movements is rather indeterminate. It isinfluenced by the soil properties, overburden pressures, thickness of the clay layers, presenceof trees and to a great extent by soil moisture levels at the time of construction. Based on thesoil type and thickness encountered in the borings, potential vertical movements in slabs placedon grade are estimated to be on the order of 2 to 5 inches for dry soil moisture conditions thatcan exist prior to construction. Following table presents the PVR limits at each building location

prior for existing conditions.

POTENTIAL VERTICAL MOVEMENTS

Structure Location PVR, inches

River Ranch Covered Arena 3 to 5

River Ranch Camp Activities Building and River Ranch Admin Building <1

Equest Covered Arena 3 to 5

Equest Horse Barn 3 to 5

Equest Admin 3 to 5

River Ranch Horse Barn 3 to 5


Geotechnical Engineering Repo rt .^Texas Horse Park a Dallas, Texas 6 _ tFebruary 26, 2013 i Terracon Project No. 94135010

A structural floor slab is recommended if floor slab movements are to be limited to less than oneinch. If floor slab movements of about one inch are acceptable, the building floor slabs can besupported on grade. Moisture conditioning of the existing soils beneath the building pad will berequired to reduce movements to about one inch.

4.5.1 Structural Floor Slabs

The building floor slabs should be structurally supported above the subgrade if movements areto be limited to less than one inch. A minimum void space of 8 inches is recommended beneaththe structural floor slab.

The minimum void space can be provided by the use of cardboard ca rton forms, or a deepercrawl space. The bottom of the void should preferably be higher than adjacent exterior grades.A ventilated and drained crawl space is preferred under the building for several reasons,including the following:

Ground movements will affect the project utilities, which can cause breaks in the linesand distress to interior fixtures.A crawl space permits utilities to be hung from the superstructure, which greatly reducesthe possibility of distress due to ground movements. It also can provide ready access inthe event repairs are necessary.Ground movements are uneven. A crawl space can be positively drained preventing theponding of water and reducing the possibility of distress due to unexpected groundmovements.

4.5.2 Floor Slabs/Flatwork on Moisture Conditioned SubgradeSlab on grade construction should only be considered if slab movements on the order of oneinch are considered acceptable. Reductions in anticipated movements can be achieved byusing methods developed in this area to reduce on-grade slab movements. A suitable methodfor this site is moisture conditioning the on-site clays and capping them with one foot of selectfill. Any fill required above finished grade must meet the select fill criteria as described inSection 4.2.2 Suitable Fills. Water injection is not recommended because of the low moisturecontents and high strengths of the clays.

The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will becovered with wood, tile, or carpet with a water soluble adhesive. A vapor retarder should beused for other moisture sensitive coverings, impervious coverings, or when the slab will supportequipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slabdesigner and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures andcautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.

It should be noted that excessive water from any source could result in movements greater thanone inch. For example, should leaks develop in underground water or sewer lines or the grades

Responsive a Resourceful m Reliable 15

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park i Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 -1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

around the structure allow ponding of water, unacceptable slab movements could develop. Thearea around the structure must be well drained, landscape beds must not be over watered orallow ponding of water, and utility leaks are promptly repaired. Trees should be planted at leastone-mature tree height from the building. Root barriers should be installed if trees are present orplanned to be planted closer.

Based on dry soil conditions, it is estimated that movements on the order of one inch cangenerally be obtained by moisture conditioning of the in-situ soils in conjunction with a minimumone foot cap of select fill. The depth of moisture conditioning for each building location isprovided in table below. The depth given in the table includes the one foot select fill layer. Themoisture conditioned soils and select fill should extend beyond the building perimeter to includeentrances, abutting sidewalks and other flatwork areas sensitive to movement.

MOISTURE CONDITIONING DEPTH

Structure Location Moisture Conditioning Depth, feet

River Ranch Covered Arena 8

River Ranch Camp Activities Building andRiver Ranch Admin Building

None

Equest Covered Arena 8

Equest Horse Barn 8

Equest Admin 8

River Ranch Horse Barn 8

The moisture conditioning depth is measured from top of finished slab subgrade

Excavation and Replacement

The soil should be excavated to the depths given in the Moisture Conditioning Depth table in theprevious section below the bottom of floor slab. The excavated soils, except for deleteriousmaterials and soils with Pi's greater than 35 can be used in accordance with section 4.2.3Compaction Requirements for moisture conditioned clays.

One foot of select fill or flexible base material must be placed above the moisture conditionedsoils in a short period of time (i.e. within 48 hours) following completion of the moistureconditioning process to prevent the loss of soil moisture. If the surface of the moistureconditioned soils is allowed to desiccate prior to placement of the cap, the desiccated soilsshould be reworked and placed in a moisture conditioned state.


Geotechnical Engineering Report -Texas Horse Park i Dallas, Texas =' = JFebruary 26, 2013 a Terracon Project No. 94135010

4.6 Pavement

4.6.1 Pavement SubgradesSubgrade materials at this site will typically consist of clay soils. These soils are subject to lossof support with the moisture increases that can occur beneath paving. Concrete pavementsmay be placed on compacted subgrade without lime treatment unless required by City of DallasStandards.

A flexible base pavement section is planned for drives and parking lots that are not fire lanes.The upper 8 inches of the flexible base subgrade must be lime stabilized to provide sufficientsubgrade strength to support the paving equipment and future roadway traffic. Five percent limecan be used to estimate the quantity required for stabilization. The required lime content shouldbe determined after the pavement subgrade is rough graded.

The natural subgrade should then be uniformly compacted to the criteria described in section4.2.3 Compaction Requirements. It should then be protected and maintained in a moistcondition until the pavement is placed. Pavement subgrades should be graded to preventponding and infiltration of excessive moisture on or adjacent to the pavement subgrade surface.

Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However asconstruction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, constructiontraffic, desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable forpavement construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefullyevaluated at the time of pavement construction for signs of disturbance or excessive rutting. Ifdisturbance has occurred, pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture adjusted,and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.

4.6.2 Pavement TrafficTraffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available; however, typical concretepavement sections with subgrade stabilization alternatives are provided. These represent a totalof 45,000 18-Kip Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) for Light Duty PCC pavement and100,000 18-Kip ESALs for the Medium Duty PCC pavement. The gravel pavement is designedfor 5,000 ESALs. The Light Duty pavement is intended for passenger car and pickup trucks.The Medium Duty pavement is intended for passenger car, pickup trucks, small delivery trucks,and fire trucks.

If the pavements are subject to heavier loading and higher traffic counts than the assumedvalues, this office should be notified and provided with the information so that we may reviewthese pavement sections and make revisions if necessary.

Responsive a Resourceful Reliable 17

Geotechnical Engineering Report. '.Texas Horse Park i Dallas, Texas

February 26, 2013 m Terracon Project No. 94135010

4.6.3 Pavement SectionsConcrete and flexible pavement sections are presented in the following table.

Pavement Thickness, InchesPavement Section Light Duty Medium Duty Dumpster

45,000 18-kip ESALs 100,000 18-kip ESALs Area

Portland Cement Concrete 5 6 7

Compacted Subgrade 1 8 8 1 8

*AII materials should meet the City of Dallas Standard Specifications for Roadway Construction.

Pavement Section Pavement Thickness, Inches

Surface Course (3/4" Minus Crushed Limestone Surface Course) 3

Flexible Base (TxDOT Item 247, Type A) 8

Lime Stabilized Subgrade 8

*AII materials should meet the City of Dallas Standard Specifications for Roadway Construction.

The concrete should have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 3,000 psi in Light Dutyareas and 3,500 psi in Medium Duty and dumpster areas. It should contain a minimum of4.5±1.5 percent entrained air. As a minimum, the section should be reinforced with No. 3 barson 18-inch centers in both directions.

Pavements will be subject to differential movement due to heave in the site soils. Flat gradesshould be avoided with positive drainage provided away from the pavement edges. Backfillingof curbs should be accomplished as soon as practical to prevent ponding of water.

Openings in pavement, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration intosurrounding pavements. Water collects in the islands and migrates into the surroundingsubgrade soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable forislands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near-surface soils.The civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or tocollect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drainsconnected to the storm water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeablebarriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below thepavement structure.

Responsive n Resourceful i Reliable 18

Geotechnical Engineering Report s ...Texas Horse Park a Dallas, TexasFebruary 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so commentscan be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendationsin the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation andtesting services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth-relatedconstruction phases of the project.

The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtainedfrom the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed inthis report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across thesite, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations maynot become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should beimmediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can beprovided.

The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication anyenvironmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification orprevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about thepotential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to theproject discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnicalengineering practices. No warranties, express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety,excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the eventthat changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report areplanned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be consideredvalid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of thisreport in writing.


APPENDIX AFIELD EXPLORATION

0

0JCa)

U

7

00J

0OJ

OOa)

0

Eo+

0

m

o+

0

O

Oa)

0)

ON

Uu)0d

z

0)

N0

P EMBERTON HILL ROAD

X X —gin/off

^ zg m p8R

Iê

m ^ LL

zJIL

Qa u'

1- w 0

p Z vi

O =^Îmo

z~cL

0W

O N CN dyc F N

v /

a Wa o

N ,

fr

^^—w

ai w d

mf0^ \

/j0 z

_ U vg xc r

m q ^^w^

^

; IiiLE A ò

2vm O N

/r 2V t /^` ra r w

^ ^/ // e m

^ I^^ ^ ^ / ; ` can O VZJ Q'

`X m

Wo /^ W/

/ /^`

/

N U ^~Q0 Q

/ N O ¢ W O

/ '^/

\

N g U' Q2 0Z

Z Q

\ \ `\ \ /// 0 3 DIY m0

H

\ \ / / 0 W J M

\\ // I=— Z^ OKz<

fi

NI It

m m

to o0

m-g

Rf

\ m`

N

NN

Geotechnical Engineering ReportTexas Horse Park a Dallas, Texas gFebruary 26, 2013 1 Terracon Project No. 94135010

Field Exploration DescriptionSubsurface conditions were explored by drilling twenty five borings at the approximate locationsindicated on the Boring Location Plan on Exhibit A-1 in Appendix A. The field exploration wasperformed between January 24 and 28, 2013. The test locations were established in the field bymeasuring from available reference features and estimating right angles and hand held GPS.The boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methodsemployed to determine them.

The borings were performed using a truck-mounted drill rig. Samples of the cohesive soilsencountered in the borings were obtained using thin-walled tube and split barrel samplingprocedures. Upon the completion of drilling, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings andcapped with 6 inch diameter concrete cylinder. The samples were tagged for identification,sealed to reduce moisture loss, and taken to the laboratory for further examination, testing, andclassification.

Field boring logs were prepared by the drill crew. These logs include visual classifications of thematerials encountered as well as interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples.The boring logs included with this report represent the engineer's interpretation of the field logsand includes modifications based on visual evaluation of the samples and laboratory testresults. The boring logs are presented on Exhibit A-3 to A-27 in Appendix A. General Notes tolog terms and symbols are presented on Exhibit C-1 in Appendix C.

Responsive A Resourceful a Reliable Exhibit A-2

BORING LOG NO. B- I Page 1 of 1

PROJECT: Texas Horse Park CLIENT: Parks and Recreation Depa rtment-City of DallasDallas, Texas

SITE: Pemberton Hill RoadDallas, Texas

o LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W a STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS W

ULL

OJ W

L^

a a.- Q

wLU a.I-

_jw( (/)1-

iuZ y ?

Z

aLu

^ r

>c^ L -PL-P I W

p Q U) ^^ Cn aka >'O OW of

DEPTH

_______

v

______________________________

FILL - LEAN CLAY (CU. with crushed limestone, brown 3.5 tsf (HP)

3.0 tsf (HP)

1.5 tsf (HP) 2600 8.7 20 106 46-21-25

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 7400 7.1 11 122 39-14-255.0

•, SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI. tan and gray, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)/.

3.0 tsf (HP)'

0.5 tsf (HP)10-

7

23-22-23N=45

4.... 15

17.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), tan, very dense

N=3.0"

20-

- N=2.0"

25.025

Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

i

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

I Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:D ry auger procedures

See Appendix B for description of laborato ry

procedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:

0 Bo rings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started: 1/29/2013 Boring Completed: 1/29/2013Seepage encountered at 24' during drilling

8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gedco

SJZ atWater at'13 completion

Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-3

BORING LOG NO. B- 2 Page 1 of 1



Q LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG LIMITS W^

Wi= I- WI- KI-

o.Z" u.w >_

a

_ _Q W F--^ a mH

^^W Wwa^

a2 ^W

i^ EOfwoaO

¢m

3zU °W

LL-PLPIU

o^ m

draid r 0 Cn u~i U w

DEPTH 0FAT CLAY (CHI , dark brown, stiff to ve ry stiff 1.0 tsf (HP)

1.5 3.25 tsf (HP)SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. light brown and tan, medium

0.5 tsf (HP) 6stiff

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, medium dense to6-9-11dense

• 5— N=20

12-16-19N=35

11-17-2N=38

8.0SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI. tan and gray, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP)1 0-

/. 14.

-FAT CLAY (CHI. with calcareous nodules, tan and gray, • 4.0 tsf (HP) 10000 9.2 12 123hard 15-

19.0

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI. tan and gray, stifft d 1.5 tsf (HP)20-

x %: 24.0

N=16N=16

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, medium dense25.0

2--—Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

i


tLuL Advancement Method:

D ry auger See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:3 procedures

See Appendix B for desc ription of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andD Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.0

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

r ccn8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100

Boring Started: 1/30/2013 Boring Completed: 1/30/2013g No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gedcon Dry at completion2= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-4




LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 Z Wa STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS w

WLL

OLLU

f-JQK W

HJD Y

fnl.Û,..

o W Z^W

Z-S

L -PL-PIZ

Q W w 0. W a O D WmO y - OW m

DEPTHFILL - SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI, with asphalt, brown andtan

2.0

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. brown, very stiff2.75 tsf (HP) 12 30

s.o 5POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, loose 3-4-6

N=10

N=13FAT CLAY (CH►, with gravel, tan and gray, stiff

5-7-8

N=15

10-

- 9-8-15N=23

15

18.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, tan, dense

22-18-30:.. N=48

20-

2---25 .0Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

i

u= Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

uF) Advancement Method See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

Dry augerrY 9 procedures

See Appendix B for desc ription of laborato ryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon comple tion. abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSj Boring Started: 1/29/2013 Boring Completed: 1/29/2013Seepage encountered at 24' during drilling

e Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: GedconDry at oneticompl

8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100O= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-5

BORING LOG NO. B- 4 Pace 1 of 1

PROJECT: Texas Horse Park CLIENT: Parks and Recreation Department-City of DallasDallas, Texas


o LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST e U

ATTERBERGLIMIT W

w0

WI-}F

r

WI- Z" ti

S {. ty>^w

Wa

p Cn Imo- W o' .Mwa

Z Q W

^Z^,

S2

^W LL-PL PIZ

W

^m^ wWK

u-rn a ^ " D

w0

C0pv~i ri^

DEPTH U

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI. brown, medium stiff 1.0 tsf (HP) 14

0.75 tsf (HP)2.0

•° SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL with calcareous nodules, 3.0 tsf (HP) 6800 4.8 22 105 33-18-15brown, ve r

y stiff3.25 tsf (HP)

' ' 4.5+ tsf (HP' 50

-5FAT CLAY (CHI. shaley, tan and gray, hard

4 21 109 68-23-45

4E5H

480FAT CLAY (CHI, shaley, with calcareous, tan and gray, 4

-har

4 14 12310-

13.0

/

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL1, tan and gray, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP) 5400 2.9 10 11415-

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI , tan, dense26-22-20

A N=42e :. 20-

L7

L.L

7-10-15z ..: 25.0 25

N=25


LStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

n.wAdvancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

— Dry auger proceduresSee Appendix B for description of laboratory

> procedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andZAbandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSc^g - Seepage encountered at 25' during drilling

`^8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100

Boring Started: 1/29/2013 Boring Completed: 1/29/2013

Drill Ri CME 75Rig: Driller. GedcoDr

D

completionatDry5f Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-6

BORING LOG NO. B- 5 Paae 1 of 1

w

0z00

Ca



O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 Z W STRENGTH TEST A L RBERGf-w co = O z

U J Q LU>

a w^t w LL-PL-P

a m W ^^ F- GU

p3W

DEPTHG to ~ C n U)

FAT CLAY (CCH dark brown 1.0 tsf (HP)f 0

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU , light brown 1.75 tsf (HP) ) (POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. light tan, medium dense 8-11-14

• to dense N=25 4 49

7-12-16N=28

5—10-14-17

N=31

11-13-18N=31

9-14-19

10.010

N=33

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) , tan and gray, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP) 12100 2.9 8 11915

ii

17.0• ® POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP). very•

dense

23-28-3N=62

20-

o.'

24-28-33m : 25.0

25N=61



Advancement Method:Dry auger See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

proceduresSee Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:



1rerracon8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100

Boring Started: 1/30/2013 Boring Completed: 1/30/2013No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. GedcoDry at completion


BORING LOG NO. B- 6 Paqe 1 of 1



O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST ATTERBERG LIMITS W

a 05H oV `Ô

^¢ F^ wz jI- `L.I

_ W

w>Fw

_j>-

r wa

Z¢

a^z

29 LL-PL-PlLL- -PI w4^

Surface Elev.: 432 (Ft) o m aw_

u. w O w 0

wDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) O ~ U v' a

FAT CLAY (CHI, dark brown, soft, moist 0•25 tsf (HP)1 4311.0LEAN CLAY (CL) , red brown, medium stiff to hard 0.25 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 7700 13 17 116 41-17-24

4.5+ tsf (HP)4.0 428SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL). red brown 4.5+ tsf (HP)5.0 427 5POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. red brown, dense 4.5+ tsf (HP)

17-23-26N=49

19-20-27N=47

10 --11.0 421

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, with clay seams,brown, very dense

16-25-31N=56

15

17.0 415SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) , light brown, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP) 720-

J !%410

CLAYEY SAND (CL1 , light brown, dense

r.LL 25.0 407 25-

3.5 tsf (HP)



LAdvancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

Dry auger procedures

See Appendix B for description of laborato ry> procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cu ttings upon completion. abbreviations.

9


n8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100

Boring Started: 1/25/2013 Boring Completed: 1/25/2013r No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. Gedcon D Dry at completionn= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-8

BORING LOG NO. B- 7 Page 1 of 1PROJECT: Texas Horse Park CLIENT: Parks and Recreation Depa rtment-City of Dallas

Dallas, Texas


O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z wa STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS wo .- W F- F- WI- K F aZ L^W ^ 2 '^

_a

I=- ^>

^wWa

I-^}

v'i C.D

XLU Z~W

^z72^^ LL-PL-PI W

Surface Elev.: 438 (Ft.) wo ¢ m QwWu. W O °

O ~ O aDEPTH ELEVATION Ft.FAT CLAY (CHI, dark brown, soft 1.5 tsf (HP)

1.25 tsf (HP)2.0 436LEAN CLAY (CL) , dark brown and red brown, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP) 19 105 37-15-22

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4•5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

8.0 430

CLAYEY SAND (SC) , light brown and red, dense 4.0 tsf (HP) 5

4.5+ tsf (HP){3 10

11.0 427POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) , light brown,dense

18-24-25N=49

15-

18.0 420

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPt , with small gravel,17-28-31brown and red, very dense to dense

N=5920-

30-50/5"N=50/5"

• 25.0 41325-



Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:Dry auger procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:


WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION

g

8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100


Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: GedcoDry at completion


BORING LOG NO. B- 8 Paqe 1 of 1



LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS WO

W {-}I-

r

W F- W > S

I- 2>w

Ja

p^ >- LU Z

Uj ^.

L -PL-PISurface Elev.: 432 (Ft.)

worw-a u) j

w W rW

X0- 0 v O O W cr

DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. U

14.

FAT CLAY (CHI, dark brown, medium stiff to very 1.0 tsf (HP)stiff

2.5 tsf (HP)

.25 tsf (HP)

3.75 tsf (HP) 14 117 428LEAN CLAY (CLI , red and dark brown, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 11 37-17-20

4.5+ tsf (HP)10-

14.0 418 18-24-27N=51POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. light brown

i 15- —

17.0 415POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, brown, verydense

46-50/5":. N=50/5"

20-

u

e - 50/5"N=50/5"

40725Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

= Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of fieldp

Notes:D ry auger procedures


See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon comple tion. abbreviations.


;_x.,

Boring Started: 1/25/2013 Boring Completed: 1/25/2013Y No seepage encountered during drilling


3^ 8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-10

C10LL

CLiI..

aLi

C




O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 u, Z w^ STRENGTH TEST o UATTERBERG

LIMITS W-'c? , > O F w H oi

I-- Z—

t^w > i aa

_I-

Wa W

a~

mrLU ¢

W zz

i-L -PL-P1 W

Surface Elev.: 438 (Ft.) o ¢ m Q LL o Ww a

Q_" `" O 0 L W0 to F- 0(0 <) CLDEPTH ELEVATION Ft. vFAT CLAY (CH) , dark brown, stiff to very stiff 1.5 tsf (HP)

2.0 tsf (HP)

1.75 tsf (HP) 2400 4.8 22 1003.0 435LEAN CLAY (CL) , reddish-brown, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)5

4•5+ tsf (HP)

4•5+ tsf (HP)7.0 431POORLY GRADED SAND (CL). orange, dense 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

2.5 tsf (HP) 510-

21-24-26

N=50

15-23-28N=51

15-

-

X 25-31-28N=59

20-

26-34-40

25.0 41325

N=74



Advancement Method See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:Dry auger^Y 9 procedures




i e mcof


Boring Sta rted: 1/25/2013 Boring Completed: 1/25/2013No seepage encountered during drilling



BORING LOG NO. B-10 Paae 1 of 1



O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z Wa STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITSJU

OwrCOW ^F ya zW >_

a

=F ^>

WJ

H-p

W

aY

voro o^

WZW

Î_2

^F.Z

Surface Elev.: 430 (Ft.)Wo

F w¢ m

a 'Q

W_LL W

Of Wa- W

¢F

^ Z S2W

LL-PL-PI 0

O m h- p v) co0 w

aDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLU, dark brown, medium 0.5 tsf (HP)stiff to stiff

0.75tsf(HP)

1.25 tsf (HP) 203.0 427SANDY LEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL (CU. 31-4-5

i3,

reddish-brown, stiff N=9

5.0 425FAT CLAY (CH ). dark brown and red, ve ry stiff to 4.5 tsf (HPhard

-

4.5+ tsf (HP) 19

4.0 tsf (HP)

3.5 tsf (HP)

4.0 tsf (HP)10-

1.0 tsf (HP)

0 1 5

17.0 413CLAYEY SAND (SC) , with gravel, brown and red,very dense

22-50/5"

N=50/5"

20-

\ 48-50/4"L . /i. — N=50/4"

25.0 40525Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

rL

= Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

ui Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

D ry auger procedures

See Appendix B for description of laborato ryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andD Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon comple tion, abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 3

rrEi


Boring Started: 1/25/2013 Boring Completed: 1125/2013T No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gedcon Dry at completion= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-12


0z0I-I-

(0

0w0



LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z WW STRENGTH TEST A L MIBERGJ .- >^ }

F(n

o'- F a

wzW

oW¢ I

w-

}fn

r^p

as a)H(0 (9 ^

WzW

w ^w a. Ewa ¢ ^z ^^ LL-PL-PIz

Surface Elev.: 432 (Ft.) o < m Q LL W g ` OU

W wDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) O

I-0

a

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CILI reddish tan, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP). 3.0 429POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, tan, dense to ve ry 6-9-12dense

N=21

5 20-18-20N=38 6 30

18-22-21N=43

17-20-20N=40

15-18-231 N=41

22-25-21N=46

15-

25-23-25N=48

20-

30-29-3125.0 407

25N=60



Advancement Method:Dry auger

See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:procedures



WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSBoring Started: 1/24/2013 Boring Completed: 1/24/2013


No seepage encountered during drilling

Dry at completion Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gedco


BORING LOG NO. B -I 2 Page 1 of 1



0 LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z LU STRENGTH TEST. ATTERBERG LIMITS W

Ow

So F'-i Q

wo'u -i'

DU1d)-

m f

^zy Zz

QUt-

}=fit? PIL -PLzu+

Surface Elev.: 428 (Ft.)awo

F-wm

aQ

-wwLj N

y a wav

6 wizO

^wr

O ~ 0U w

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. reddish tan, medium 0.5 tsf (HP)

• stiff to stiff1.0 tsf (HP)2.0 426

./ °`. CLAYEY SAND (SC. reddish tan, dense 19-18-18N=36 6 35

20-18-21

5N=39j'.

--

8-22-25', N=47

8.0 420A

11-24-26N=50• POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, medium

dense to dense10-17-22

10 N=39

8-8-10N=18

15-

9-13-21•

N=34C: 20-

. 22.0 406POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI. with small gravel,•tan, dense

11-20-25L

_

? 25.0 403 25A N=45

Boring Terminated at 25 FeetJS

Strati fication lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: AutomaticY

LAdvancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:D ry auger procedures


See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and0 Abandonment Method:Z Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.

0



Boring Sta rted: 1/26/2013 Boring Completed: 1/26/2013No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. GedcoDry at

m

oncompleti

= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-14


WW

0zc00

0WO



O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z Wa STRENGTH TEST o A L MITSRGJ

>QF

(.0(1) W t-

uJ

I_- n z

I 2a wW

LLJa

I- -J

^Wa rn F

(I) 0.-?

z

aW

1-=Wit_)

F-W

Surface Elev.: 434 (Ft.) o Q m Q iLL W a O 0LL-PL-PI

O m O o OwaDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. reddish tan, stiff to very 3-7-6stiff N=13

6-13-21 16 41-18-23..-;

•• . 3.0 431 N=34POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, dense to very 6-29-30dense N=59 7

• 5- 21-35-21 36N=56

19-26-21 7 2518-7N=47

10-14-23N=37

11-15-201 N=35

16-30-23N=53

15-

19.0 415 24-50/5"POORLY GRADED SAND (SP, with small gravel, N=50/5"

20.o reddish tan, very dense 41420-

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. cemented, gray,very dense

50/5"N=50/5"







IrerreaconBoring Started: 1/24/2013 Boring Completed: 1/24/2013

Seepage encountered at 24 during drillingDrill Rig: CME 75 Driller: GedcoDry at completion

8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-15

BORING LOG NO. B-14 Page 1 of 1



a LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 w Z U STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS W-Jv "^

p

Vii=>-F-

F

J w

FoZ .

LL

I a w of a

Ful-,

W

a v_i IZ-

LU z yo

z

Z

¢ WSurface Elev.: 428 (Ft.)

w0

FW g W^LL

dâ ^ZU

pLLL-PL-PI

m¢ w 2 r r U 3 wDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) O ~ o a

FAT CLAY (CH) . with calcareous nodules, reddish 1.0 tsf (HP)brown, ve ry stiff

2.75 tsf (HP) 27 80-23-57

3.75 tsf (HP) 263.0 425

FAT CLAY (CHI, reddish brown and gray, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)4.0 424

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, tan, dense 4.5+ tsf (HP)5

4.5+ tsf (HP)

25-22-26N=48

19-21-21N=42

17-20-2310 N=43

15-18-20N=38

s .

15-

J.'u

16-15-17N=32

20-2 -.n'D :

• 23.0 405

y POORLY GRADED SAND (SP, with gravel, tan,18-22-25dense

z 25.0 403 25--x Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

0


Advancement Method See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:- Dry auger9 procedures

Q See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols ando Abandonment Method:

Z Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion, abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSs :.


Boring Started: 1/28/2013 Boring Completed: 1128/2013No seepage encountered during drilling


= Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-16


wW

0ZthO

r

00



Q LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z W STRENGTH TEST ATTERBERGLIMITSa

}F o

v W

= F WX J 0c >- ^( .. F'W 2w Fw g wE Wwa ¢ ^z ^W LL-PL-P z

Surface Elev.: 428 (Ft.) o a m Q LL W F OU

0 LDEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O N ~ O

•

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. brown, medium stiff to 2.25 tsf (HP) 20 37-22-15stiff

0.5 tsf (HP)2.0 426POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI , tan, medium 5-7-9• dense

N=16 7 5

6-8-7N=15

5-4-6-10N=16

8.0 420FAT CLAY (CH. iron stains, tan and gray,

8-11-13very stiff

10.0 418 N=24



Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:D ry auger

procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.


_•





I- BORING LOG NO. B-16 Page 1 of 1



C7 LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 _J iZ

w STRENGTH TESTo

ATTERBERG

LIMITS °'w

O LL w¢ ~ H-i 0. Vii=— WZ ^ F-- LL.a a W W a ^ I-' Ewa

Z^ z 2 LL-PL-P I

Surface Elev.: 410 (Ft.) D m Q L w1- M y0 U G() W a.aDEPTH ELEVATION Ft.

O U)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI, tan, very stiff 2.25 tsf (HP) 131.0 409

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU , tan and gray 2.5 tsf (HP)(408

FAT CLAY (CHI. brown, ve ry stiff to hard 2.0 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 13100 3.9 14 123

4.5+ tsf (HP)5.0 405

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI , tan and gray, hard4.5+ tsf (HP)

7.0 403

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, tan, dense to very 15-22-25dense N=47

19-24-29N=53

10-

13.0 397

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI , with gravel,reddish tan, very dense 21-28-32

N=60

015-

J

W 18.0 392

ZPOORLY GRADED SAND (SP► , cemented, tan

Z and gray, very dense 50/4"0 N=50/4"

20-

21.0 389

0 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP1, cemented, gray,o : very dense

0`W _ 50/3„

N=50/3"Z . : 25(1 385 nr_

Boring Terminated at 25




Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andBorings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started: 1/26/2013 Boring Completed: 1/26/2013

No seepage encountered during drilling 1rerracall Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. GedcoDry at completion



LU

0z00

0)

00



o LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST e ATT MITSRG-J

F

WF ^VU

~^-z

>

a W W w a w W r>-

W w a ¢ ^ Z ^^ LL-PL-PI WSurface Elev.: 410 (Ft) q <0) Q U- Cl) ^ ^ O q

DEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O ^- OO a.

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI brown, medium stiff 0.5 tsf (HP)

0.5 tsf (HP)2.0 408SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU gray and tan, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP) 12 129

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)5.o ao55SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU , with calcareous 4.5+ tsf (HP

•tan and gray, hard

j

nodules,4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 20 110 46-16-30

10 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4,5+ tsf (HP) 8200 7.5 11 1181 5

-•,j18.0 392SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL ► , with gravel, tan, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP)•

20

22.0 388POORLY GRADED SAND (SP, cemented, gray,ve ry dense

50/4"N=50/4"

25.0 385 25—Boring Terminated at 25 Feet


Advancement Method:D ry auger

See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:procedures



WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Ind

I8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100




PROJECT: Texas Horse Park


tC LOCATION See Exhibit A-10UIa

hard

tan and gray, very stiff

8-14-19N=33


CLIENT: Parks and Recreation Department-City of DallasDallas, Texas

•STRENGTH TEST o LIMITS I Ww a z

w >_ o I I I ILL

Zi W Z z Qw }2 wa a o t— LL-PL PICro w

rnLIJ Z

wt= w1JQ ^J

o wSurface Elev.: 414 (Ft.) m Q

ELEVATION Ft. OI and gray, 2.25 tsf (HP)

1.25 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)409 513-15-18

- N=33

12-19-18N=37

15-13-15N=28

1

18200! 2.7 1 10 1 122 1 40-22-18

401

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPI, with gravel, tan,dense to very dense

a,d

oM

mJJw

0Z0J

U,u)

022.0

392

POORLY GRADED SAND (SPA, gray, very dense

o.aw

25.0 389

Boring Terminated at

14-21-32N=5

Stratification lines are approximate. nsitu, the transition may oe gradual. nammer ype: murumauc




WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started: 1/26/2013 Bo ring Completed: 1/26/2013

= No seepage encountered during drilling wDrill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gecko

1 Waterat24'atcompletion8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100





O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 o wa STRENGTH TEST ATTERBERGLIMITSr

V

_ =WI-

O>W

WI-

0â (Ill-v)( .

U' W zwZ

F>-2 LLza W F

_juJj W it w o. ¢ z o LL-PL-PI v

o Surface Elev.: 410 (Ft.) o a m a LL W a. r v O WDEPTH ELEVATION Ft. O o a

LEAN CLAY (CLI , with calcareous nodules, dark 2.5 tsf (HP)brown and gray, very stiff to hard4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 17900 3.4 13 115

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)5-

6.0 404 4.5+ tsf (HP)FAT CLAY (CHI. with calcareous nodules, tan and 4.5+ tsf (HP) 26800 7.2 15 120 53-21-32gray, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

91

13.5 396.5

FAT CLAY (CH) , with calcareous nodules, tan,3.75 tsf (HP) 9000 14.4 18 112hard

1 5

18.0 392SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. gray and tan, very stiffo .. "

c7 i

2.5 tsf (HP).:20-

/.

coo'

.% 23.0 387•

a. POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with gravel and13-18-30cemented seams, tan, dense

Q

? • 25.0 385 25N=48

Boring Terminated at 25 Feet00U-w


wAdvancement Method See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:

"-- Dry augerrY 9 procedures

See Appendix B for desc ription of laboratory> procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols ando Abandonment Method:z Borings backfilled with soil cu tt ings upon completion, abbreviations.U


1 ierraor8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100


Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. GedcoDry at completiontoF Dallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-21




LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 Z wa STRENGTH TEST QATTERBERG

LIMITS W

U- (1)) FU LLO

WI—

F

WI—..-

wz j i— ``

o d W w a L w W w n o W LL-PL-PISurface Elev.: 415 (Ft.) a m M W v t

oO

U

Om F- O w U V w

aDEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) U

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU , reddish tan, medium 0.5 tsf (HP) 14stiff to stiff

1.5tsf(HP),2.0 413

7 , CLAYEY SAND (SC) . red and gray, dense 3.0 tsf (HP) 11 44

sue-' 4.5+ tsf (HP)

J ^.

7 ,7/ tsf (HP) 10 34-20-14

5 4.5+ tsf (HP)

7.0 408CLAYEY SAND (SC) , gray and tan, medium dense 9-13-13

r N=26

10-10-18

10-N=28

0.5 tsf (HP)15-

-',2.16.0 399POORLY GRADED SAND (SP). with small gravel,tan, dense

:.. `:. 12-20-24N=44

r 20-

V22.0 393

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP). cemented, tan,very dense

L'.r 50/4"

. N=50/4"z• : 25.0 390

25Boring Terminated at 25 Feet

S3

L Strati fication lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic

Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:D ry auger procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratory> procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andb Abandonment Method:Z Borings backfilled with soil cu ttings upon completion. abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS jrr a O

Boring Started: 1/26/2013 Boring Completed: 1/26/2013No seepage

encomp

ountletered during drillingO^ ^ Water at 19' at c ion

8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100Dallas, Texas

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: Gedco

Y1 Caved to 21' at backfill Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-22




O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 Z Wa STRENGTH TEST o UATTERBERG

LIMITS WtV O_

W H}1- W F- W >_ Q- H

aZ `^

zti

2 = J> LLl > °(5-. F'W S^^

z

Surface Elev.: 417 (Ft.) wc

W wm

a

Qw Wu- w

Ewa'

¢ ^0

LL-PL-PIw

G ~ 0^y

DEPTH ELEVATION Ft.TT SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. brown, stiff 1.25 tsf (HP)

1.25 tsf (HP)2.0 415

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) , tan, stiff to very stiff 1.5 tsf (HP) 9600 16.9 16 116 41-17-24

4.5+ tsf (HP)4.0 413

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) , with calcareous seams, 4.5+ tsf (HP)tan, hard 5

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+tsf(HP) 21800 3.6 11 118 41-17-24

4.5+ tsf (HP)8.0 409

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU, tan and gray, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.25 tsf (HP)10-

• 13.0 404

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. with gravel, tan,23-25-27very dense

• N=5215-

• 21-22-26N=48

20-

22.0 395POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. cemented, gray,very dense

77 50/2N=50/2"





See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.



Boring Started: 1/2812013 Boring Completed: 1/28/2013Seepage encountered at 13.5' during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller: GedcoWater at 24' at completion





A17ERBERG

O LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z Wa STRENGTH TEST o LIMITS WJ LL O

J H

F

W

F

H

Z_

U

M w

UJ

dI-

Wd. (1)1-

z y ZZ

QO

c? LL-PL-PI WQ

Surface Elev.: 428 (Ft.)Wo

HWm Q

WXLL Nw

o• ^ a ¢ Ô UWO W r O

F c U a

DEPTH ELEVATION Ft.

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU. with gravel, brown, 0.5 tsf (HP)medium stiff

2.0 426 0.5 tsf (HP)

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, medium 6-8-914

dense to dense N=17 8

5-10-10N=20

_- ___ —5 - — ______

7-6-11N=17

8-10-12N=22

- 9-12-18N=30

10- --

22-25-38• N=63

15- --

J ,W _ .' 18.0 410

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP1. with gravel, tan,o24-26-39very dense

N=6520-

m.O.

o:18-25-41

z • 25.0 403 nr N=66

at

strattication lines are app roximate. in-situ, the transition may oe graauai. r,d..... a yNa• ^^ a


See Appendix B for description of laborato ryprocedures and additional data (if any).


WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started: 1/28/2013 Boring Completed: 1/28/2013No seepage encountered during drilling

Drill Rig: CME 75 Iflriller: GedcoDry at completion





LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 Z w^ STRENGTH TEST eATTERBERG

LIMITS WF

Z2 _

W H

^>

i-W

W h-

~>

W

>

> _

(O()

,-. lr F.

~W

sZ "

2ti

a W W w a ^ W Ewa ^ z ^ LL-PL-PI WSurface Elev.: 431 (Ft.) o a m Q W o W

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) OI— 0 (0 a

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI , tan, ve ry stiff to hard 2.0 tsf (HP) 4100 6.5 15 119 37-15-22

4.5 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)3.0 428

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), tan, mediumdense to dense

6-12-145- N=26

5-11-18 5 25-17-8 6

7.0 424 N=29

i SANDY LEAN CLAY (CU, reddish tan and gray, 13-12-24hard N=36

15-18-30

N=4810-

4.5+ tsf (HP)15

4.5+ tsf (HP)20-

23.0 408POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. tan, dense

21-20-28

25.0 40625

N=48





See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andAbandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion, abbreviations.

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS^^ C '



D ri ll Rig: CME 75 Driller: GedcoDry at oncompleti





o LOCATION See Exhibit A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST oATTERBERG

LIMITS WO

w= wry w >x ^r z a LL

aa

L -PL-PIz

Surface Elev.: 431 (Ft.)W

oF w

ma

Qw

W

LL Ww a

a. W v rz0 OW2

LU

wO O v a

DEPTH ELEVATION Ft.LEAN CLAY (CU, brown, ve ry stiff to hard 3.0 tsf (HP)

3.75 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 9900 14.4 15 1213.0 428

LEAN CLAY (CLI , brown and gray, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP) 10 37-18-195 -

4.5+tsf(HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)7.0 424?TT. SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) , reddish brown and gray, 4.5+ tsf (HP)/.'/ 6.0 hard a23

FAT CLAY (CHI. shaley, tan and gray, hard

10-

12.0 419SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI , tan and gray, hard

4.5+ tsf (HP) 12000 3.2 10 1241

J / ,

4.5+ tsf (HP)20.0 all

20-POORLY GRADED SAND (SP. with gravel, tan,very dense

AL

ii -. .-

32-25-28Z 25.0 406

25=N53

Boring Terminated at 25 Feet020t

Q Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automaticfraw

Advancement Method See Exhibit A-2 for description of field Notes:— Dry augero procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratory> procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andO Abandonment Method:z Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations.

OWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS0

rracon8901 Carpenter Freeway, Suite 100

Boring Started: 1/2812013 Boring Completed: 1/28/2013m No seepage encountered during

Drill Rig: CME 75 Driller. GeckoDry at completionDallas, Texas Project No.: 94135010 Exhibit: A-26

BORING LOG NO. B-25 Pane 1 of 1



o LOCATION See Exhib it A-1 W Z a STRENGTH TEST o UATTERBERG

LIMITS W

LL_ =

a

,

WLu

W

o. ^W)-~

(01

itwa

o

¢

wW

z

Z)

^(9 L -PL-PI WSurface Elev.: 432 (Ft.) o a m Q I w 0. it 8 W w

p cn I- 0(0 CI) Q.DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) v

FAT CLAY (CH). dark brown, stiff to hard 1.0 tsf (HP) 25 46-21-25

1.5 tsf (HP)

1.25 tsf (HP) 2700 12.3 22 105

2.25 tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)5.0 427

5FAT CLAY (CH). light brown, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)

4.5+ tsf (HP)t.0 424

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI. tan, hard 4.5+ tsf (HP) 7400 3.2 14 116 44-16-28

4.5+ tsf (HP)10.0 422Boring Terminated at 10 Feet






r c ",


Boring Started: 1/2812013 Boring Completed: 1/28/2013No seepage encountered during drilling



APPENDIX BLABORATORY TESTING

APPENDIX CSUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

Standard Penetration TxDOT Coneor N-value (SS) Penetrometer (TC) Relative Density

Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft.0-3 0-8 Very Loose4-9 8-20 Loose

10-29 20-80 Medium Dense30-49 80-5"/100 Dense

> 50 5"/100 to 0/100 Very Dense

GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY

Major Componentof Sample

Particle Size

Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm)Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm)Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm)

Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm)

GENERAL NOTES

DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:SS: Split Spoon —1 '18" I. D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem AugerST: Thin-Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power AugerTC: TxDOT Cone Penetrometer Test HA: Hand AugerDB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B RB: Rock BitBS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary

The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler(SS)the last 12 inches of the total 18-inchpenetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". For TxDOT conepenetrometer (TC) the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches or penetration ininches after 100 blows using a 170-pound hammer falling 24 inches, reported as "blows per foot" or inches per 100 blows, and is notconsidered equivalent to the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value".

WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:

WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling N/E: Not EncounteredWCI: Wet Cave in WD: While DrillingDCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing RemovalAB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal

Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at othertimes and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater.In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soilshave more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand.Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as days if they areplastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents maybe added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on thebasis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS

Unconfined Standard PenetrationCompressive or N-value (SS) Consistency

Strength, Qu, psf Blows/Ft.<500 0-1 Very Soft

500-1,000 2-4 Soft1,001 — 2,000 4 - 8 Medium Stiff2,001 —4,000 8-15 Stiff4,001 — 8,000 15-30 Very Stiff

8,000+ > 30 Hard

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL

Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent ofConstituents Dry Weight

Trace < 15With 15-29

Modifier > 30

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION

Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of PlasticityTerm

Constituents Dry Weight IndexTrace <5 Non-plastic 0With 5-12 Low 1-10

Modifiers > 12 Medium 11-30High 30+

Responsive a Resourceful a Reliable Exhibit C-1

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laborato ry Tests A

Soil ClassificationGroupSymbol

Group NameB

Gravels:More than 50% of

; coarseCoarse Grained Soils: fraction retained on I

No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels:Less than 5% fines c

Cu ? 4 and 1 <_ Cc <_ 3 E GW Well-graded gravel FCu <4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravel F

Gravels with Fines:More than 12% fines c

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,c•"Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F ^"

More than 50% retainedon No. 200 sieve Sands:

50% or more of coarsefraction passesNo. 4 sieve

Clean Sands:Less than 5% fines °

Cu ? 6 and 1 < Cc <_ 3E SW Well-graded sand'Cu <6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E SP j Poorly graded sand

I Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines °

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G'"•I

Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G•"•'

Silts and Clays:Liquid limit less than 50

Fine-Grained Soils:

^ I norganicPI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line j CL Lean clay K•`'M

PI < 4 or plots below "A" line ML Silt KLM

Òrganic:Liquid limit - oven dried

< 0.75 OLOrganic clay K•`•M•"

Liquid limit -not dried Organic silt K,L M,0

50% or more passes theNo. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays:Liquid limit 50 or more

Inorganic:PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay K,L,M

PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt M

Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried

< 0.75 OHOrganic clay K•L•M•P

Liquid limit - not dried K L MOrganic silt

Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat

A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieveIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobblesor boulders, or both" to group name.

c Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-gradedgravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorlygraded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.

° Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-gradedsand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly gradedsand with sift, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

z

E Cu = D601D 10 Cc'" (D30)

D10 x D.,F If soil contains ? 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

60

For classification of fine-grained'soils and fine-grained fraction

50 of coarse-grained soils .--.....,-- --.....

Equation of "A" - lineHorizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.

>< 40 then P1=0.73 (LL-20)

p Equation of "U" - line? Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7,

30 ......then P1=0.9 {LL 8) ,r....:...._....

cn ^, G

a

H If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.If soil contains ? 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name.

j If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with

gravel," whichever is predominant.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.0 PI <4 or plots below "A" line.P PI plots on or above "A" line.o PI plots below "A" line.

^ r E ` 0

2i0j ;P

G',ì

MH or OH

107 r o -ILL M ML or OL

{ l

0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

Responsive Resourceful a Reliable Exhibit C-2

Documents

Geotechnical Engineering Report - WordPress.com Engineering Report TEXAS HORSE PARK Dallas County, Texas February 26, 2013 Terracon Project No. 94135010 Prepared for: City of Dallas