Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230773 182 Excelsior Site Plan Geotechnical ReportDA.NIEL G. LOUCKS, RE. GEOTECHNICAL ENGI NEER IN G Geotechnical Report For Multi -Family Building Excelsior Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY File No. 4163 Prepared For: Green Springs Capital Group, LLC Prepare&Ry.: Daniel G Loucks, PE NYSPE 068389 18 August 2022 14 AMBER WAY, BALLSTON SPA, NY 12020 ■ 518-369-9453 z E-MAIL- DGLGEOE1tiG@GMAILCOM INTRODUCTION: The subsurface investigation for the proposed Multi -Family Building, Excelsior Ave, Saratoga Springs, New York has been completed. Aztech Environmental Technologies Inc. of Ballston Spa, New York has completed six (6) soil borings at the site. The logs of these borings, along with a location diagram, have been included in the appendix of this report. It is my understanding that the proposed construction will include a three-story building located approximately as indicated on the boring location diagram. The building will have a slab on grade, wood frame design. I understand that the final site design has not been completed. The maximum column loadings will range from 50 to 75 kips. Bearing wall loads will range from 2 to 5 kips per foot of wall. The settlement tolerances are normal. Settlement tolerances are considered to include up to 1 inch of total settlement and 3/4 inch ❑f differential settlement between column locations. The first floor slab will be established within 3 feet of the existing grades at the site. The purpose of this report is to describe the investigation conducted and the results obtained, to analyze and interpret the data obtained; and to make recommendations for the design and construction of the feasible foundation types and earthworks for the project. The recommendations contained in this report are based on the information that was provided up to the date the report was completed. Any changes in the design of the project or changes to the recommendations provided in this report should be brought t❑ my attention t❑ determine if there needs to be any revision of the geotechnical recommendations. I am not responsible for any changes made to the recommendations provided in this report unless I have provided written approval of the changes. When the final site design and grading has been completed, I should be sent a copy t❑ review and determine if additional borings or recommendations are required. The scope ❑f my services has been limited to coordinating the boring and laboratory investigation, analyzing the soils information, and providing a geotechnical report with foundation recommendations. Environmental aspects ❑f the project as well as grading and site design should be performed by qualified others. FIELD INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES: The borings were extended by means of 3.75 inch ZD, hollow -stem augers, by using various cutting bits using circulating drilling fluid to remove the cuttings from the casing and by continuous sampling with a split -spoon sampler_ Representative samples were obtained from the boring holes by means of the split -spoon sampling procedure performed in accor- dance with ASTM D 1586. The standard penetration values obtained from this procedure have been indicated ❑n the soil boring logs. Soil samples obtained from these procedures were examined in the field, sealed in containers, and shipped to the laboratory for further examination, classification, and testing, as applicable. During the investigation, water level readings were obtained at various times where water accumulated in the boring hole. The water level readings, along with an indication of the time of the reading relative to the boring procedure, have been indicated on the soil boring logs. LABORATORY INVESTIGATION: All samples were examined in the laboratory by the soil engineer and classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System. In this system, the soils are visually classified according to texture and plasticity. The appropriate group symbol is indicated on the soil boring logs. Samples exhibiting significant cohesion were tested with a calibrated, spring -loaded, penetrometer. This test is used to estimate the unconfined compressive strength of the soil sample by measuring the soil's resistance to the penetration of the penetrometer needle. The results of these tests are listed ❑n the boring logs. SITE CONDITIONS: The site contains two existing buildings. The ground surface at the site is slopes very gently between the existing buildings and the roadway. To the south of these buildings the ground surface slopes down towards a wooded area. 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS: The specific subsurface conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual soil boring lags. However, to aid in the evaluation ❑f this data, I have prepared a generalized description of the soil conditions based on the boring data. All the borings encountered an upper layer of uncontrolled fill. In borings 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 this uncontrolled fill extends t❑ between 2 and possibly 8 feet. The uncontrolled fill is generally sand with a trace to some silt and varying amounts of gravel. In borings 1, 2, and 4 some of these soils are labeled as possible fill because they are similar to the virgin soils but contained gravel where the deeper virgin sand soils did not contain gravel and they were loose. It is possible these are virgin soils, but additional test pits would be required to estimate the depth of the uncontrolled fill more accurately. In borings 5 and 6 some ash and debris were encountered in the upper uncontrolled fill. At these boring locations the uncontrolled fill extended to between 6 and possibly 12 feet below the existing ground surface. Beneath the uncontrolled fill are layered sand, silt/clayey silt and occasional clay layered soils. These virgin soils are loose t❑ medium dense/soft to stiff. They extended to the bottom ❑f the borings at 17 feet below the existing ground surface. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS: Based ❑n the groundwater levels ❑bserved during the boring investigation, the moisture condition of the samples recovered from the boring holes and coloration of the soil samples, I judge that the groundwater level was located below depth of 4 feet. Perched groundwater tables may occur at higher elevations in the soil profile due to groundwater being retained by layers or lenses of silt or clay soils. Some fluctuation in hydrostatic groundwater levels and perched water conditions should be anticipated with variations in the seasonal rainfall and surface runoff. 4 It should be noted that the groundwater levels were obtained during the drilling procedure_ Actual water levels may vary at the time of construction. Some groundwater could be encountered in soil layers labeled moist t❑ wet on the boring logs. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: As noted, the borings indicate that there is an upper layer of uncontrolled fill at the site. In general the uncontrolled fill varies from between 2 and possibly 8 feet in all the boring except B-6 where the uncontrolled fill could be as deep as 1.2 feet. Also the exact depth of the uncontrolled fill was difficult to determine in some borings because the soils are similar to the virgin soils. In borings 1, 2, 3, and 4 these upper uncontrolled fill soils may be able to be left in place in floor slab areas provided they are proof rolled and are firm. The uncontrolled fill containing ash and other construction debris should be removed and replaced within the proposed building footprint. Additional site investigations such as test pit could be used to estimate the depth of the uncontrolled fill more accurately. Based on the boring results and my understanding the grading and building loads, it is my opinion that the proposed building can be adequately supported on properly designed spread footing foundations resting on firm undisturbed virgin soils or on properly placed and compacted controlled fill soils that rest an these virgin soils. Site work: The proposed building areas should be cleared and grubbed and all organic topsoil and vegetation along with any uncontrolled fill with debris and existing building foundations. The subgrade should be proof -rolled with a 10-ton roller and the proof rolling should be ❑bserved by the soil engineer. This proof rolling will compact the subgrade and reveal the presence of soft spots. If saturated subgrade conditions exist, I recommend that the subgrade be observed and probed by the soil engineer in place of proof rolling. Any soft spots should be excavated and backfilled with controlled fill material. In footing locations all the uncontrolled fill should be removed. 5 The removal of any uncontrolled fill should extend to a minimum horizontal distance past the edge of the footings equal to half the depth that the fill extends under the footing. This is equal t❑ a 1:2 (H:V) slope down from the outer edge of the footing t❑ the virgin soil. All uncontrolled fill within the proposed building area should also be removed. A way to stabilize a spongy, but suitable, virgin, subgrade would be to spread a reinforcement or separation type of geo- textile (Mirafi 60OX or approved equal) ❑n the subgrade and follow with a lift of clean, granular fill or uniform crushed stone. The thickness of the controlled fill can range from 1.0 to 2.5 feet, as necessary, to achieve a working mat upon which to construct the remainder of the controlled fill or to place footings. If uniform crushed stone is used as controlled fill a layer ❑f geotextile should be placed between the crushed stone and any sand/gravel controlled fill or virgin soil. A third method for stabilizing spongy areas of the subgrade would be to improve the drainage by use of properly designed drain tiles or by using properly designed sump pit and pump dewatering systems. Using these methods, the local groundwater table maybe able to be lowered sufficiently to aid in stabilizing the subgrade surface. If large quantities of water are encountered vacuum well point dewatering maybe required. The need of a well point or any other type of dewatering program should be evaluated by the contractor before starting construction and be designed by a qualified dewatering contractor ❑r hydrologist. Controlled Fill: Before any controlled fill is placed the site should be inspected to verify that the site has been prepared according to the recommendations contained in this report as required by the current NYS Building Code. Controlled fill can consist of non -organic, on -site or imported soils free ❑f debris and expansive soil/rock and having a maximum particle size ❑f 4 inches. A gradation and proctor should be performed on the proposed soil and submitted to me for approval. Approved, properly placed and compacted material can be used as controlled fill within the proposed building footprint. Free draining controlled fill material should be 6 placed as recommended in this report. Approved on -site or imported soils should not be used in these locations where free draining controlled fill is recommended unless approved by me. Controlled, relatively clean, granular fill can be spread in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in loose thickness. These materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum ASTM Specification D 1557-91 density, modified proctor. On -site, silty soils, will be difficult to compact during wet weather or poor drying conditions. These soils should not be used as controlled fill. If crushed stone is used as controlled fill, it should have a layer of geotextile with a minimum tensile strength of 200 lbs should be placed between the stone and existing soils. The stone should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness and should be compacted with a minimum of 5 passes of a vibratory roller rated at 5 tons or larger. Weathered shale or crushed shale should not be used as controlled fill within the proposed building area. Free Draining Controlled Fill Material: Naturally or artificially graded mixture of sand, natural or crushed stone or gravel conforming to NYS DOT Table 733--04A, Type 2 or 4 as follows and free of any organics, expansive material or asphalt products: U.S. Sieve No. 2 inch 1/4 inch No. 40 No. 200 Percent Passing by Weight 100 30-65 5-40 ❑-10 NYS DOT Table 703-4, Size 2 crushed stone, clean, durable, angular, and of uniform quality throughout: U.S. Sieve No. 1 '-1 inch 1 inch 1/2 inch Percent Passing by Weight 100 90-100 0-15 All controlled fill should be free of organic and/or frozen material. 7 Free -draining controlled fill should have less than 10 percent fines passing the #200 sieve. I recommend performing one field density test for every 2,000 square feet of controlled fill placed, within the overlaying building footprint, but in no case fewer than three tests per lift. I recommend that for foundation wall and footing backfill that in each compacted backfill layer have at least one field in place density test for each 50 feet or less ❑f wall or footing length, but not fewer than two tests along a wall face or footing be performed per lift_ Walls should be backfilled uniformly on each side of the wall t❑ prevent uneven lateral loading on the wall, unless the wall is designed as a retaining wall. Proper placement and compaction of backfill along exterior portions of foundation walls should be provided, especially in locations where there are sidewalks or building entries. Proper placement of backfill materials can reduce possible settlements and the use of properly designed backfill and drainage can reduce possible frost heave movements. Results of the field compaction test results should be sent to my office for review. Copies of the results of soil gradation tests should also be provided to me for review and approval. Building Foundations: I recommend that the proposed structure be supported by spread footing foundations resting on firm virgin, inorganic, soils or on controlled fill which, in turn, rests on these virgin mater- ials. Footings can be designed for a maximum, net, allowable sail bearing pressure of 2500 psf. The soil engineer should observe the footing subgrade at the beginning of the project or if soil conditions change to verify the allowable bearing pressure of the soil encountered and that all the uncontrolled fill has been removed. Loads from adjacent footings or structures should be assumed t❑ distribute based on the elastic theory. Typical Boussinesq 5 charts can be used to approximate loads at various depths and locations due t❑ adjacent structures. A minimum footing width of 2.0 feet is recommended for load bearing strip footings. Isolated footings should be at least 3.0 feet wide. Haunched footings connected to the floor slab can have reduced embedment to 1.5 feet below the top of slab and with can be reduced to 1.5 feet wide. Exterior footings or footings in unheated areas should have a minimum ❑f 4.0 feet of embedment for protection from frost action. Interior footings should have a minimum embedment of 2.0 feet below finished grade to develop the bearing value of the soils. To resist overturning and sliding a static lateral passive pressure of 250 psf per foot of embedment can be used, provided foundations are backfilled with Controlled fill. This static, passive pressure resistance value has been reduced from the calculated full passive pressure because of stress/strain characteristics of the soil. To develop the full, calculated resistance a certain amount of movement or deflection in the structure is required. The amount of movement required to generate this resistance generally greater than is acceptable for structures. I therefore recommend that the full passive pressure not be used. A coefficient of base sliding of 0.4 can be used to resist lateral loads. The passive resistance of the upper two feet ❑f soil, not in floor slab areas, should be ignored due to surface effects of frost and moisture. Any surcharge loading of existing adjacent building foundations or other adjacent structures/utilities should be addressed by the structural engineer using Boussinesq charts. Floor Slabs: Concrete floor slabs can be designed to rest on controlled fills resting on virgin, inorganic materials. A 6-inch layer of well - graded, free -draining, granular material should be placed beneath the floor slab to provide drainage, act as a capillary break, and to provide better and more uniform support. P If vehicle loadings are to be applied to the floor slab, the proposed slab and supporting soils should be analyzed as a pavement structure_ Z recommend that a minimum of 12 inches of free draining controlled granular fill be placed below any concrete pavements. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 psi per inch can be used to design concrete slabs resting ❑n a minimum ❑f 6 inches of free draining controlled fill, that in turn rests an virgin sails. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 psi per inch can be used to design exterior slabs or pavements resting on a minimum of 12 inches of free draining controlled fill. This reduced value is recommended due to seasonal variations that occur due to frost in the soils. Exterior concrete pavements will experience some frost heave movements during the winter and spring. If these movements are not acceptable, then a minimum of 4.0 feet of approved subbase material and properly designed drains would be required below the concrete pavements ❑r sidewalks. The use of properly designed footing drains can also be used to reduce possible frost heave movements adjacent to the proposed structure. If the moisture levels of floor slab areas are critical additional drainage materials and vapor barriers will be required beneath the floor slab. Also, the moisture content of the subbase soils should be carefully monitored to prevent excess water from saturating these subbase soils before the floor slab is poured. This aspect of the design should be performed by qualified others. CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND PROBLEMS: The NYS Building Code Section 17 requires special inspections and follow up reports. These inspections should be performed t❑ verify compliance with the recommendations contained in this report. All excavations of more than a few feet should be sheeted and braced or laid back to prevent sloughing in of the sides. Excavations should not extend below adjacent footings or structures unless properly designed sheeting and bracing or underpinning is installed. 10 Footing and floor slab subgrades should be tamped to compact any soil disturbed during the excavation process. A flat plate should be placed on the end ❑f the excavator or backhoe bucket to reduce disturbance of the footing subgrade. A layer of geotextile (min. tensile strength of 200 lbs) and 4 to 12 inches of crushed stone may be required in footing excavations t❑ prevent disturbance of the virgin subgrade during wet weather. The stone and fabric should be placed as described in the Controlled Fill section of this report. Sump -pit and sump -pump -type dewatering may be required in excavations or low areas during wet weather ❑r if groundwater is encountered. If large quantities of groundwater are encountered vacuum wells maybe required to stabilize the subgrade soils. All excavations should be dewatered to a minimum of 1 foot below the bottom of the excavation. All dewatering programs should be designed to prevent bottom heave. Any dewatering program should be performed with properly designed filtration protection on all pumps to prevent loss of ground. As previously noted, some of the cn-site soils contain clayey silt which will make the soils sensitive to moisture content. If the material becomes wet ❑r saturated, it will become spongy and easily disturbed. It will also be difficult to place as controlled fill if it becomes too wet. Imported well draining sand and gravel or possibly crushed stone may be required to prevent disturbance ❑f the subgrade soils during construction. Subgrades should be kept from freezing during construction. Water, snow, and ice should not be allowed to collect and stand in excavations or low areas of the subgrade. Some obstacles, including foundations and utilities and debris, may be encountered in excavations. Design and construction procedures should include measures to limit the potential for slab curl and vapor transmission. The shrinkage properties of the concrete should be controlled and the curing of the concrete controlled. Differential shrinkage between the top and bottom of the slabs could otherwise result in curling of the slabs. The control of vapor transmission through the slab should also be addressed. These phenomena may II be only indirectly related to sail conditions. The architect/ structural engineer should address this aspect of the design. Current American Concrete Institute recommendations for the design and construction ❑f floor slabs and the control ❑f shrinkage, slab curl and vapor transmission can be referred to. Multi -Family Building Excelsior Ave. Saratoga Springs, NY File No. 4163 CONTENTS OF APPENDIX= 1. General Notes 2. Boring Location Diagram 3. Boring Logs 4. Unified Soil Classification System. 5. Soil Use Chart 5. General Qualifications GENERALtnTES DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMB SS Split -Spoon - 111 " T.D., 2" O.D., except where noted S Shelby Tube ----- 2" O.D., except where noted PA Power Auger Sample DB Diamond Bit— NX: BX: AY - CB Carboloy Bit— NM- BY, AM ❑S Osterberg Sampler — 3" Shelby Tube HS : HouseI Sampler WS : Wash Sample FT : Fish Tail RB : Rock Bit WO : Wash Out Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 1.40 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD split spoon, except where noted WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS WL : Wafter Level WCI : Wet Cave In DCI Dry Cave In WS While Sampling WD : While Drilling BCR : Before Casing Removal ACR : After Casing Removal AB After Boring Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the boring at the times indicated_ In pervious soils, the indicated elevations are considered reliable ground water Ievels. In impervious soils the accurate determination of ground water elevations is not possible in even several day's observation, and additional evidence on ground water elevations must be sought. CLASSIFICATI N COHESIONLESS SOII.S -COHESIVE, SAILS "Trace" I% to 10°% If clay content is sufficient so that clay 'Mrace to some" 10% to-20% dominates soil properties, then clay becomes "Some" 20°% to 35% the principle noun with the other major soil «Aiidr, 35% to 50°% constituent as modifiers: i.e., silty clay. Other Loose 0 to 9 Blows minor soil constituents may be added according Medium Dense : 10 to 29 Blows to classification breakdown for cohesionless soils; Dense or 30 to 59 Blows i.e., silty clay, trace to some sand, trace gravel. equivalent Very Dense : �!:60 Blows Soft 0.00-0.59 tons/ftz Medium mo— 0.99 tonslfe Stile : I.00 - 1.99 tons/ft2 Very Stiff 2.00 — 3.99 tons/ft2 Hard 2t 4.00 tonslft' U �- 0 a NN �F B-3 /„►' i I 11 yS-�. .dam lff B-I PROPOSED MULTI-E AMILY GWE-LING 5`_•.o t B-4 8,000 GSF. / FLOOR) � Ax 40' (04 3 —STORY) L APPROX. DEgSITY 0 1,200 SF/U I I - 36 UX-ITS B-5 I i 10, s: =J s r B-6 , } Y PROPOSED PA.,.... ARE A � s tat APPROX. 54-72 SPACES r _ f Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Project Number: 4163 Boring No. 1 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor: Aztech Drill Rig Type: AN Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental 14 Amber Way Hammer Type: Date: August 2022 Ballston Spa, NY Automatic dgl_geoeng(ammail.com Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop: 518-396-9453 140 Ibs Winches Groundwater De the 4 ft WS m Blow Counts Lithology CL (blows/foot) �, L Soil Group Name: modifier, color, moisture, density/consistency, grain size, Z other descriptors C CL 7 Z yi 7 G = 0 Q E c - 0- Rack Description: modifierm color, hardnessldegree of concentration, bedding y Q and jant characteristics, solutions, void conditions. 1 SS 1-1-2-1 3 0.5 Topsoil Fine to Medium Sand, trace to some Silt, Brown 2 SS 1-1-1-1 2 Moist, Loose (SM) FILL 4.0 3 SS 1-1-1-1 2 Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Gravel, Silt, Brown, Wet, Loost to Medium Dense (SM) Possible Fill 4 SS 2-5-5-7 10 8.0 5 SS 5-4-3-3 7 Fine to Medium Sand, some Silt, Brown, Wet 10 Loose (SM) 6 SS 4-3-1-3 4 13.0 Fine to Medium Sand and Silt, trace Clay, Brown/Gray, Wet Medium Dense (SM-ML) (CL) Occasional Thin Clay Layers 7 SS 10-7-6-7 13 17.0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Protect Number: 4163 Boring No. 2 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor: Aztech Drill Rig Type: ATV Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental 14 Amber Way Hammer Type: Data: August 2022 Ballston Spa, NY Automatic dcligeoenclagmail.com Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop: 518-396-9453 140 Ibs 30 inches Groundwater Depth: 4 ft. WS L � Blow Counts L Lithology E Q. (blows/foot) m *' Soil rarou me- rncdfier, color, moisture, density/consistency, grain size, Y Z M 7 f(D other descriptors �c ta. M E Z x o G m ❑ ro N - Q _ Rath Description: modifierm color, hardnessldegree of concentration, bedding N Q C) and joint characteristics, solutions, void conditions. 1 SS 1-1-3-3 4 Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, Brown 2.0 Moist, Loose (SM) FILL Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, trace Gravel 2 SS 3-1-2-2 3 4.0 Brown, Moist, Loose (SM) FILL Fine to Coarse Sand, some Silt, trace Gravel, Brown 3 SS 2-2-2-5 4 Wet, Loose (SM) Possible Fill 4 SS 3-3-3-2 6 8.0 Fine Sand, some Silt, Brown, Wet, Loose (SM) 5 SS 3-2-1-1 3 1Q 10.0 Fine Sand and Silt, brown/Gray, Wet, Loose (SM-ML) 6 SS 2-2-2-2 4 13.0 Silt, some Sand, trace to some Clay, Brown/Gray Wet, Medium Dense/Stiff (ML)(CL) Occasional Clay Layers 7 SS 6-7-7-7 14 Qu = 1.3 tsf 17.0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Project Number: 4163 Boring No. 3 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor: Aztech Drill Rig Type: ATV Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental 14 Amber Way Hammer Type: Date: August 2022 Ballston Spa, NY Automatic dglgeoeng(a} imail.com Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop: 518-396-9453 140 Ibs 30 inches Groundwater Depth: 6 ft. WS L 4) Blow Counts ran Lithology a (blowstfoot) r 3 Q Soil rarou n N amn: mcdfor, color, mashie, dens itylconsistency, grain size, z e; N 0 other descriptors y d CL ? Z D Gl � C p E tss _ modi4erm color, hardness/degree of concentration, bedding Q [] and joint characteristics, solutions, void conditions. 1 SS 1-1-1-2 2 0.5 Topsoil F-C Sand, trace to some Silt, Brown, Moist, Loose (SM) FILL 2.0 Fine to Coarse Sand, trace Silt, Brown, Moist 2 SS 2-3-1-2 4 4.0 Loose (SM-SP) Fine to Medium Sand, trace to some Silt, Reddish Brown 3 SS 2-5-5-5 10 6.0 Moist to Wet, Medium Dense (SM) Fine to Medium Sand, some Silt, Brown, Wet, Loose (SM) 4 SS 3-3-4-5 7 5 SS 3-2-2-3 4 10 6 SS 5-3-2-2 5 13.0 Clayey Silt, trace to some Sand, Gray, Wet, Loose (ML) 7 SS 3-3-3-3 6 17.0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Project Number: 4163 Boring No. 4 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor. Aztech Drill Rig Type: ATV Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental Hammer Type: Date: August 2022 14 Amber Way Ballston Spa, NY Automatic dalaeeoenp(&cirnail_cQm Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop: 518-396-9453 140 Ibs 30 inches Groundwater Depth: 2 ff. WS L Blow Counts Lithology CL (blowsifoot) 0 2 0 SOOI GroUp Name-, modifier, color, moisbire, densitylconsistency, grain size, y? m other descriptors C' Q. 1= � C 0 L C y Q E t Z - • modifierm color, hardnessldegree of concentration, bedding Vj Q andjolnt characteristics, solutions, void conditions. Ss 1-2-1-1 3 Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, Dark Brown 2.0 Moist, Loose (SM-SP) FILL Fine to Medium Sand, trace to some Silt, Brown, Wet 2 SS 2-3-4-2 7 4.0 Loose (SM) Fine Sand, some Silt, Brown, Wet, Loose (SM) 3 Ss 1-2-VVR 2 4 SS 1-1-1-1 2 8.0 Silt, some Clay, trace to some Sand, Brown/Gray 5 SS 1-2-1-2 3 10 10.0 Wet, Loose/Stiff (ML)(CL) Layered Chu r 1.2 tsf Silt, some Sand, trace Clay, Brown/Gray 6 SS 4-3-2-2 5 Wet, Loose (ML) 7 SS 3-2-2-3 4 17.0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Project Number: 4163 Boring No. 5 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor: Aztech Drill Rig Type: ATV Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental Hammer Type: Date: August 2022 14 Amber Way Ballston Spa, NY Automatic dglgeoenq@gmaii.com Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop: 518-396-9453 140 lbs 30 inches Groundwater Depth: 4 ft. WS L slaw Counts Llthology r ° E C. a (blowslfoot) 3 R a w m Soil me: modifier, color, moisture, densitylconsistency, grain size, Z —M 0 C1 other descriptors x7 2 Q. sZ ? 2 m p G7 C EN - a j��Qescription: modifierm color, hardnessldegree of concentration, bedding U] Q U and joint characteristics, solubons, void conditions. 1 SS 5-7-7-7 14 Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, trace Gravel, Ash Dark Brown, Moist, Medium Dense (SM) FILL 2 SS 10-11-8-4 19 4.0 Fine to Coarse Sand, some Clayey Silt, Yellowish Brown 3 SS 2-2-1-3 3 6.0 Wet, Loose (SM) Possible Fill Silt, trace to some Clay, Sand, Brown/Gray, Wet 4 SS 2-2-1-2 3 Loose/Medium Stiff {ML}(CL) 5 SS 2-2-1-2 3 Occasional Clay Layers Qu = 1.0 tsf 10 10.0 Silt and Clay, Brown/Gray, Wet, Loose/Soft 6 SS 3-2-4-2 6 (ML)(CL) Layered. Qu = 0.2 tsf 13.0 Silt, some Sand, trace Clay, Brown/Gray, Wet Loose (ML) 7 SS 2-2-1-2 3 17,0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA Proposed Building at 182 Excelsior Ave, Project Number. 4163 Boring No. 6 Saratoga Springs, NY Drilling Contractor: Aztech Drill Rig Type: ATV Daniel G Loucks PE Environmental Hammer Type: Date: August 2022 14 Amber Way Ballston Spa, NY Automatic Hammer Weight: Hammer Drop- daloeoenan.amail.com 518-396-9453 140 lbs 30 inches Groundwater Depth: 6 ft. WS Blow Counts Lithology C. (blows/foot) Q Group Soil Name: mad fier, color, mo sfure, densitylronsislency, grain size, +� z m other descriptors w yCLz m �. 07 G w s E m _ � Roa Dese iuban- modifierm color, hardnessldegree of concentration, bedding to Q V and joint characteristics, solutions, void conditions. 1 SS 3-8-10-11 18 Gravel, trace to some Sand, Silt, Gray, Moist 2.0 Medium Dense (GM) FILL Fine to Coarse Sand, trace to some Ash, Brick, Silt 2 SS 11-13-11-9 24 Black, Moist, Loose to Medium Dense (SM) FILL 3 SS 5-6-5-4 11 4 SS 4-4-4-3 8 8.0 Fine to Coarse Sand and Clayey Silt, trace Gravel, Dark 5 SS 1-1-1-WR 2 10.0 Gray, Moist to Wet, Loose (SM-ML) FILL 10 Clayey Silt, trace to some Sand, Gray, Wet 6 SS 3-2-3-3 5 12.0 Loose (ML) Possible Fill Silt, some Clay, trace to some Sand, Brown/Gray Loose/Stiff (ML)(CL) Occasional Clay Layers 7 SS 2-2-2-1 4 17.0 End of Boring at 17.0 Feet 20 Daniel G Loucks PE Ground Surface Elevation: NIA C�m�yw `a e3��ua i�1 .2 1; � � w •3 d�v�r�V ... � A�v��'(3 O 1) G W tr owi rt 3 At o w W � a,., E Eo p' n Etc ..G Ea. E chi c CDa `n ! a c1 am _� �V [ Y I o •' m m" a, ti w o `c;£ J ns a m V U � dY Q� p ti U � 4• � � � �.a f 4 Q o` CA i J �� slogm, s junp )o au 3up!nbai sose� vulirdp�eg %ZI of %S - o s �S A8 70 HD %ZI uma—LIE � m s Gsgi = I P O CD :smo{pj s¢ pig?ssol7❑76 Spas p7R!L- lj =vc] call OAZIS a0z o Vm � r Rloms UgVn1;.w Sang)o oasiuuamd no BGcpuzdi (j caA +Ln � 'uG' xapui ?a�}seld ems measi mn� puss pas {ansla 3Q s�9ssmaiad ouimuaiaq U0j1=Vr)9ap] ping J2pun wAsB SW suan�s�S �>;] Bt]jljriu p; ul oA-M3 bars Ujwj osf} 9-�, V G Xn'9G IC }'.'Cb �w N�qrwye• pApG F'b.Z N -0 C , yu~ �C yb ��y V P m �•°E Fa nyp gym.+ G V a� ��x y4E7 aaa.x m a -0 Gu ppp�p -OFu GO.2 3 ._u�u .w V_ W em�io�u� z°p�p�'sY� Tm eaiY p pmp r. Ma cplL. p'-p-.a yc] QV am �n�V 4•-'•y]m}� yVm6O n G ._ b GAR^:mw L1. G' '� y GOm^N��F4 E[iti Go�0.• Au cy�.am _ m Ui�.'C6 n O aA.� ram] ��ma G A F G�mG� ❑ �a.., 7� ymG G Q p'E�F' G CE v O0.�C ti ��GV �V a•�^pT 'd aGo9 c� � v:CC�C� �`m �Pp V is f: �.C.b�cai P.m �� V C E90suR �raCG E^ BOA` �F4QQammG. 0�[aV smxS VI �Yttl cau 00Gm�mq C'J iL W 5 a. W 0 w w°m c n a z o z E ''��..ss T�'+ Owew =qua' �.: T yW 5m bW Ems- ❑ �°� a '�ti •'ti .°i .�.9i a� �:m" amp, mn'�� a,m o X Y e� E m �.� L.: ^x^' m s•� T F T... U= `� at ❑ df v b]vi m^ Y Cvi Y C�qu nw GO w Y^T.V. :i �•' CC FmF �y^ w¢Eu_ aww,a �a ivvw"y. d" Huai E� j I •j f�� Qe�`� � � � I � � � � � I � � � �U�❑� y � y � U � a n .rtrt C w y CN r� zu� (snag (MEr9 3° 1un¢1ao m au -10 3lga3—MU) .3 SPAW:j Uwao snug vin ' (9zls 7A7cs b •ab q1 se p.n zq Sum ins -w j m � �!s �A�ls p •oti. S Ump mgFinz s[ nopmuzI a asxuoa )o Slsg 11sgl 210K t I s{UAssC) 3 `•E m .� of °ow o u T G C 0 a ! ti wu ❑ E 6e om Em Y•,� FO- 'OF m� Atl x" OS a asg{ n=¢a1II � l nur{ pmb={ 7ds13 pull Sills c .1 (*de p r] - o7 nIq ESu cIvIl-d ql lnoga q ls a . -g -- �- M: R=ls aAOis Wz •oN uugi 4kS4vj j ms aAD'ls jmz -ON UX111 ${ ITIMI14 10 SIInI uuq-1 wOW !j .f Ug Si VTL121H'u )9 ]iM11 =p Won s{ms pouruiE�siao0 s{!as pnu!u1z�ur,3- o � � (song zil) S❑ lunour¢ � Ulf w ,q2p-dds) spuas saug �� spaeg ❑ i 01 =u0{13A1nba A' OS ua4i ssa[ u0ns3g{sss{� {aSL$fA ion i« !n1{{ { p �[S 5A2I5 tr •Oj.j m usgl _io"ms q no!jovj) QVIRM j0)[13q GSgt 7loglj G SPOTS �•• �• G �7 � C DO a V C C i] w u u ma no y K.a. u n a r u P SS C °T§�A o Fw car R mo a E�mm s N =p u p E 0 `''o 0Ev�aro�� aa��x C-5 yy� a.„ m.GY a „. �rAA� A i � EAR AZ2 L=r9q Oaj m u �' � ro ���3 o�av'Y W.c Eater«E�i�m x p'"02a r A«au='m3tio3v a, y u m m xac �tlT ti V b pp ua .s um� U oy Ax�mc QcW� � �•e� m 3 °'!,: is T^ qr1 wN=q W as %��. t6 L''n �❑�rt0�ira �p 7u-C• p^ C my3a m 64 'it $^c a .. T °a •1 Ca•[.'3`4 Lbq oa u C,S-ME 4�12 ii'm.KL°„ n a.0 G== "�- s4� ySi"aEl Z BE crlu oY �E+�`"wm0 q RU of! .3m m A '� vb a.y Awz,� CwQ4 en o c�1.3-2 a qu OF amm��.-tea �e �O �Y k m"v.°3 . m❑ _E -a p� n o�ati�OUtaV m[CAF Us e� s xow��y�'3yp�mm° .-. �7"uIIrCr Thu ~ F V L y 'J rj p��C'W' Lu�t6a3 u._ `oc�a m r r. Uaocs�y�°r�Y'��cu�v �L a Em—xv�m���uc'H 7 sP � d� a�= pp pp pp pp pp p pr`p u) 6 O n d a $ A y a n N I i3 ➢a i i V ado- a vs - �n - n Cl It L gy a 8= W o L7 w V � C ❑ C o � L] ❑ � � '❑ pS V [k �.' P a � C � � � C y P u] E u] � V a T T A S' b ❑ O s �' v o $ p P '� L'] ii1 L. 6 a❑. W fz LQ E 0. fi Li E L E E E - M- p w F4 a G E _ :c -4 3 S E o L a ❑ a ❑ o o o a E E E E E E $ M � :E .c h 0 q�� .a '�' ❑.� P' 8 8 a ❑ r � D � 0 � P � 9 z = o s T O x °" Z p] C7 ❑ L C Si_ L C4 C c z Z 2 Z Z Z o - y z s V fl 0. a g L'3 V O Cj IL L•.. [ a° R• 'd C. Z - a n o 0 � W❑ � e� C � c o_ D y "" a C D � _W M =n SA a ,y - =� � r ❑ u p �: � a y °� � � � u ❑ � z x � r C z 7 z z i j nz Z V O r. Y H r z C y4 z - ❑ - T-"r C7= y U Z a 0 c m a Z 3 m z z% x GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS This report has been prepared in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architect and/or engineer in the design of this project. The scope of the project and location described herein, and my description of the project represents my understanding of the significant aspects relevant to soil and foundation characteristics. In the event that any changes in the design or location of the proposed facilities, as outlined in this report, are planned, I should be informed so the changes can be reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or approved in writing by myself. It is recommended that all construction operations dealing with earthwork, and foundations be inspected by an experienced soil engineer to assure that the design requirements are fulfilled in the actual construction. If you wish, I would welcome the opportunity to review the plans and specifications when they have been prepared so that I may have the opportunity of commenting on the effect of soil conditions on the design and specifications. The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil Borings and/or test pits performed at the locations indicated on the location diagram and from any other information discussed in the report. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between these boring and/or test pits. In the performance of subsurface investigations, specific information is obtained at specific locations at specific times. However, it is a well-known fact that variations in soil and rock conditions exist on most sites between boring locations and also such situations as groundwater conditions vary from time to time. The nature and extent of variations may may not become evident until the course of construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary for a reevalua- tion of the recommendations of this report after performing on -site observations during the construction period and noting the characteristics of any variations.