REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COASTAL COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION NEAR I-45 AND FM 1764 LA MARQUE, TEXAS FOR

Transcription

1 REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSIS COAAL COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION NEAR I-45 AND FM 1764 LA MARQUE, TEXAS FOR SLI GROUP, INC. AUGU 10, 2016

2 August 10, 2016 Ms. Johanna Brustmeyer SLI Group, Inc Katy Freeway Houston, Texas ECS Project No. 43:1190 Reference: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Near I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas. Dear Ms. Brustmeyer: As authorized by your acceptance of our Proposal No. 43:434-GP, dated July 20, 2016, ECS- Texas, LLP (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration and engineering analysis for the above referenced project. The notice-to-proceed was received through the Work Order No. F , dated July 22, 2016 from your office. The enclosed report discusses the subsurface exploration procedures, presents the results of our subsurface exploration, laboratory testing programs, and our recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed structure and associated site work. We have enjoyed being of service to you on this project. If there are any questions with regard to the information and recommendations contained in the accompanying report, or if we can be of further assistance to you during design and construction, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully, ECS-TEXAS, LLP TBPE Firm Registration # 8461 Shahed R. Manzur, Ph.D., P.E. Project Engineer Alexander Sarant, P.E. Principal Engineer The seal appearing on this document was authorized by Shahed Manzur, P.E. No on August 10, 2016 [I:\{Projects}\D3 - Geo\ \1190 CCCU\1190.doc] Distribution: Mr. Tom Baiker, AIA SLI Group, Inc. Mr. Alan Balius, AIA SLI Group, Inc. Mr. Chris Adams SLI Group, Inc.

3 REPORT PROJECT Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Near I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas CLIENT SLI Group, Inc Katy Freeway Houston, Texas SUBMITTED BY ECS-Texas, LLP 1050 N. Post Oak Road Suite 130 Houston, Texas PROJECT No. 43:1190 DATE: August 10, 2016

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT OVERVIEW Project Location and Proposed Construction 1 Purposes and Scope of Work 1 Plan Review 2 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Subsurface Exploration Procedures 3 Laboratory Testing Program 3 EXPLORATION RESULTS Published Geology and Soil Surveys 4 Regional Geology 4 Soil Mapping 4 Soil Conditions 4 Groundwater Observations 5 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Existing Fill Soils 6 Potential Vertical Movements 6 Subgrade Improvements 6 Foundation Recommendations 7 Uplift Considerations 8 Lateral Considerations 9 Slab on Grade 9 Monolithic Slab 10 Grade Beams and Perimeter Conditions 11 Retaining Wall/Below Grade Wall Considerations (if required) 11 Pavement Subgrade 13 Pavement Sections 13 CONRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Earthwork Operations 15 Material Specifications 16 Select Fill 16 Lime Stabilized on site CLAY 16 Clay Fill 17 Construction Groundwater Control 17 Foundation Excavation 18 OSHA Soil Classification 18 Closing 19 APPENDIX

5 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW Project Location and Proposed Construction A new single-story Credit Union is proposed to be constructed near I-45 and FM 1764, in La Marque, Texas. The project site is cleared and currently covered with grass and shrubs. Several commercial and retail developments are located in the vicinity of the project site. The current and historical use of the subject property were identified from the aerial photographs as presented in the Appendix. No special features were found on the topographic map within the project site. The project site is generally flat and lies at about ±21 feet MSL to ±23 feet MSL. The elevations and topographic variations were obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey website ( which provided elevation contours in 5 feet intervals. The proposed development consists of a single-story credit union building with associated parking areas, drive lanes, and drive thru area with canopy. We anticipate that the proposed structure will be supported on slab-on-grade supported by spread footings or drilled pier and the parking and drive lanes will consist of rigid reinforced concrete or flexible asphalt pavements for normal light duty and auto traffic. The final site grading plan is not available at the time of this report. We anticipate that planned grading will largely be within 2 ft. of the existing contours without any major cut/fill across the site. Purposes and Scope of Work The purposes of this exploration were to explore the soil and groundwater conditions at the site and to develop engineering recommendations to guide design and construction of the project. We accomplished these purposes by performing the following scope of services: 1. Performing utility locates using Digtest (Texas 811), 2. Drilling a total of five (5) soil borings using a truck mounted drill rig to explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, 3. Reviewing historical aerial photograph and topographic map of the subject parcel, 4. Performing laboratory tests on selected representative soil samples from the borings to evaluate pertinent engineering properties, 5. Analyzing the field and laboratory test results to develop appropriate engineering recommendations, and 6. Preparing this report of our findings and recommendations.

6 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 2 The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the results of our field subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, review of available geologic, topographic and photographic information and/or geotechnical data, review of previous geotechnical data, and our local experience on other similar projects in the area. A total of five (5) soil test borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled by representatives of ECS at the project site. The borings were extended to depths ranging from approximately 5 to 20 feet below the existing ground surface. The boring schedule is presented below: Facility Boring Numbers Depth of Borings (feet) Building Area B-1 and B-2 20 Building area, Canopy and Drive Thru B-3 20 Parking Areas and Driveways B-4 and B-5 5 The number and general locations of the borings performed for the current subsurface exploration were selected based upon the proposed footprint of the anticipated site development, location of the structures on the building footprint, and existing topographic conditions at the site. These borings were located in the field for drilling purposes by representatives of ECS. Following drilling operations, laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to identify the soil, and to assist in the determination of their properties. The results of the subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, along with the Boring Location Diagram are included within the Appendix of this report. Plan Review We suggest that ECS be engaged to review the structural and civil design drawings and the pertinent geotechnical related written specifications prior to their substantial completion. The purpose of the review is to determine if our recommendations were interpreted in the manner intended. Often times, this review results in significant improvement to the plans and specifications.

7 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 3 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Subsurface Exploration Procedures The soil borings were performed with a truck mounted drill rig, which utilized continuous flight, solid stem augers to advance the boreholes. Drilling fluid was not used in this process. Following completion of the drilling process, the bore holes were backfilled with the spoils generated during drilling operations. Representative soil samples were obtained by means of the split-barrel and Shelby tube sampling procedures in accordance with AM Specifications D-1586 and D-1587, respectively. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a 2-inch O.D., split-barrel sampler is driven into the soil a distance of 18 inches by means of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through a 12-inch interval is termed the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) value and is indicated for each sample on the boring logs. In the Shelby tube sampling procedure, a thin walled, steel seamless tube with sharp cutting edges is pushed hydraulically into the soil, and a relatively undisturbed sample is obtained. A field log of the soils encountered in the borings was maintained by the drill crew. After recovery, each sample was removed from the sampler and visually classified. Representative portions of each sample were then sealed and brought to our laboratory in Houston, Texas for further visual examination and laboratory testing. Laboratory Testing Program Representative soil samples were selected and tested in our laboratory to check field classifications and to determine pertinent engineering properties. The laboratory testing program included visual classifications (AM D-88), natural moisture content tests (AM D-4643), Atterberg Limits tests (AM D-4318), Passing No. 200 Sieve Test (AM D-1140) and Unconfined Compression tests (AM D-2166). All data obtained from the laboratory testing program are included on the respective boring logs within the Appendix of this report. Soil sample was visually classified, by an experienced Geotechnical Engineer, on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The group symbols for each soil type are indicated in parentheses following the soil descriptions on the boring logs. A brief explanation of the USCS will be included with the boring logs. The engineer grouped the various soil types into the major zones noted on the boring logs. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between materials on the boring logs and profiles are approximate; in situ, the transitions may be gradual. The soil samples from our current exploration will be retained in our laboratory for a period of 30 days, after which they will be discarded unless other instructions are received as to their disposition.

8 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 4 EXPLORATION RESULTS Published Geology and Soil Surveys Regional Geology The site is located within the Beaumont Formation (Qbc), which consists predominantly of clay and mud soils, with silt. These soils can contain beds and lenses of fine sand, and decayed organic matter and many buried organic-rich soil zones that contain calcareous and ferruginous nodules. This material includes plastic and potentially compressible clay that was deposited in flood basins, coastal lakes and former stream channels on a deltaic plain. The thickness of this formation is approximately 5-10 meters along the north edge of the outcrop, and thickens southward in the subsurface to more than 100 meters. Soil Mapping Based on the United States Department of Agriculture soil survey, the site is underlain primarily by the Mocarey-Algoa Complex (Mb) type soils. Soil Conditions Soils encountered in the subsurface exploration are generally described below for the purpose of our discussion herein. These stratum designations do not imply continuity of the materials described, but give the general descriptions and characteristics of the materials at the site. For detailed information at specific boring locations, please refer to the boring logs provided in the Appendix of this report. Existing Fill soil was encountered at the southwest portions of the project site that extended to a depth of about 2 feet below the existing site grades near Boring B-5. Information on the degree of compaction of the Existing Fill soil was not available at the time of this study. Specific recommendations regarding this undocumented fill material are provided in the Analysis and Recommendations section of this report. In general, the soil column down to a depth about 20 feet below the current site grade is characterized by five (5) strata as follows: Stratum 1: Stratum 2: Very stiff, light gray to tan Lean Clay Fill (CL FILL) extending to a depth of about 2 feet below the existing ground level with ferrous nodules and sands in Boring B-5. Medium stiff to hard, light gray to tan, dark brown to reddish brown Lean Clay (CL) to depths ranging from 8 feet to 11 feet below the existing ground surface with ferrous nodules and sands, in Borings B-1 through B-3.

9 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 5 Stratum 3: Stratum 4: Stratum 5: Medium stiff to stiff, dark brown and light gray Silty Low Plasticity Clay (CL-ML) extending to depths ranging from 8 feet to 12 feet below ground surface with sands in Borings B-2 and B-3. Medium dense, light gray to tan and light brown Silty Sand (SM) and Sandy Silt (ML) extending to depths ranging from 11 feet to 16 feet below the existing ground level with clay pockets in Borings B-1 through B-3. Stiff to very stiff, dark brown to reddish brown and mottled gray Fat Clay (CH) extending to the maximum depths of exploration at about 20 feet below the existing ground level with ferrous nodules in Borings B-1 through B-3. These soils exhibited Moisture Contents ranging from 15.5% to 26.5%, Liquid Limits (LL) ranging from 34 to 50 and Plasticity Indices (PI) ranging from 18 to 30 with 38.1% materials passing No. 200 sieve.. Please refer to the attached boring logs for a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings as the stratification descriptions above are generalized for presentation purposes. Groundwater Observations Groundwater level observations were made in each of the borings during the drilling operations. In auger drilling operations, water is not introduced into the boreholes and the groundwater position can often be determined by observing water flowing into and out of the excavation. Furthermore, visual observation of soil samples retrieved can often be used in evaluating the groundwater conditions. Groundwater was observed during drilling at depths ranging 8 feet to 10 feet below the site grade, in Borings B-1 through B-3. Shortly after completion of the drilling, groundwater rose to depths ranging from 5 feet to 6.5 feet in Borings B-1 through B-3. The remaining borings were dry during and shortly after completion of drilling. The highest groundwater observations are normally encountered in the late winter and early spring. Fluctuations in the location of the long-term water table may occur as a result of changes in precipitation, evaporation, surface water runoff, and other factors not immediately apparent at the time of this exploration. Therefore, the ground water conditions at this site are expected to be significantly influenced by surface water runoff and rainfall.

10 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 6 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been developed on the basis of the previously described project characteristics and subsurface conditions. If there are any changes to the project characteristics or if different subsurface conditions are encountered during construction, ECS should be consulted so that the recommendations of this report can be reviewed. Site grading information was not provided during this report. Therefore, the following recommendations are based on the assumption that finished grade in the building area will be within two (2) feet of the existing grades. If the finished floor elevation deviates from this assumed grade, the recommendations provided below should be evaluated by our office. Existing Fill Soils Existing Fill soil was encountered at the site that extended to a depth of about 2 feet below the existing site grades at the southwest portion of the project site near Boring B-5. Information on the relative density of the Existing Fill soil was not available at the time of this study. Without controlled density tests, these soils should be removed, reworked/recompacted and replaced in accordance to the Construction Consideration section of this report. Potential Vertical Movements The clay soils encountered at this site are considered moderately active. These active soils can subject slabs, foundations and paving to movements (due to shrinking and swelling) with fluctuations in their moisture content. Based on test method TEX-1-E in the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Manual of Testing Procedures, and our experience with similar soils, we estimate potential vertical soil movements (PVM) are on the order of 1.5 inches, in dry condition. These potential movements reflect moisture changes in the soil that can occur over the life of the building and after construction is complete. Subgrade Improvements In order to achieve a uniform PVM across the foundation pad and the site and to minimize the risk associated with future movements, we are recommend several building pad subgrade improvements to reduce the PVM to 1.0 inch. These options are noted in the following table: Subgrade Improvement Depth of Depth of Moisture Select Fill (feet) Conditioning (feet) Total Depth of Improved Zone (feet) PVM (inch) Option I Option II

11 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 7 Specific recommendations for material requirements and installation procedures may be found in the Construction Considerations section of this report. The improved soil zone should extend at least 5 feet beyond the structure footprint, and include any flatwork sensitive to movements such as sidewalks or pavements. Some of the risks associated with placing slabs or foundations on improved subgrades may include uneven floors, floor and wall cracking and sticking doors or windows. The higher the designed PVM, the higher the risk for future performance issues. ECS should be contacted should lower movement tolerances be preferred. Foundation Recommendations Based on our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, we are providing the following recommendations to support the proposed structure on a shallow foundation system consisting of slab-on-grade supported on drilled pier and/or monolithic slab-on-grade type foundation. Drilled Pier Foundations Drilled pier foundation system may be utilized to support the proposed structure. Drilled piers should be proportioned and founded at sufficient depths to provide both axial compressive load capacity and uplift resistance. Based on the results from the field exploration and laboratory test results data the allowable loads for the drilled piers are recommended as: Drilled Piers Recommendations Foundation Type Minimum Depth below Existing Grade Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Dead Load (Dead and Sustained Live Load) Net Allowable Bearing Pressure for Total Load (Dead Load and Live Load) Underreamed or Straight Shafts 8 Feet 2,500 PSF 3,750 PSF The above recommended drilled pier allowable end bearing pressures incorporate a design safety factor of 3 against axial compression dead loads plus sustained live loads and a design safety factor of 2 against axial compression dead loads plus sustained and transient live loads. The minimum clear spacing between edges of adjacent piers should be at least one (1) bell diameter. The shaft diameter should be increased to the diameter of the bell, should the straight shafts be used in place of underreamed piers due to the construction difficulties. Drilled pier foundations that are designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations in this report could be subjected to long term total and differential movements of about 1.0 and 0.5 inch, respectfully. The following items should be considered during the design and construction of the drilled piers: The bell to shaft ratio should be limited to 2:1. In case of borehole sloughing (caved in condition), straight shafts are recommended.

12 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 8 Based on our current groundwater observations, the drilled pier excavations may encounter groundwater. If groundwater is encountered during construction, any water inflow must be pumped out immediately using a sump-pump. The drilling contractor must be prepared for this condition and be prepared to case the piers. We anticipate that the drilled pier may be installed using dry method of construction. However, a slurry method of construction may be required for the drilled pier installations due to the potential seasonal variations in groundwater depth, variations in the subsoils stratigraphy, strengths and corresponding potential borehole collapsing. The drilling contractor should be prepared to encounter for any such situations. Due to the potential subsoil variations and potential groundwater fluctuations, we recommend that the four corner and one center piers be drilled first to better evaluate the constructability of the drilled piers recommended herein. Once this information is field verified, all other piers need to be constructed accordingly. The drilled pier excavations should be free of loose materials and water prior to concrete placements. Concrete should be poured immediately after drilling the pier holes. The drilled piers installations should be followed in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Reference Specifications for the construction of drilled piers (ACI 336.1) and commentary (ACI 336.1R-98). Additionally, The U.S. Department of Transportation publication No. FHWA-NHI , Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods should be followed during the design and construction of the drilled piers. The construction of the piers should be observed as a means to verify compliance with design assumptions and to verify: (1) the bearing stratum; (2) length and diameter; (3) the removal of all smear zones and cuttings; (4) that groundwater seepage, when encountered, is correctly handled; and (5) that the piers are vertical (within the acceptable tolerance). Uplift Considerations The drilled piers should contain sufficient reinforcing steel throughout their entire length to resist uplift (tensile) forces due to post-construction heave of the clay soils. The magnitude of uplift is difficult to predict and will vary with the in-situ moisture contents at the time of construction. Based on the planned building subgrade preparation, we recommend using a uniform uplift of 1,000 psf over the entire pier perimeter to a depth of 6 feet. This uniform uplift may be ignored within the select fill zone and reduced to 500 psf where moisture conditioned soils are used. The uplift forces created due to the expansive soils and imposed structural loadings can be resisted by the underreamed portion the pier, weight of the pier itself and the dead load on the pier. The uplift resistance of underreamed drilled piers at the site can be estimated using the following equation: U r = B r + W p + P DL

13 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 9 Where: U r = Uplift resistance of the pier (kips) B r = Resistance contributed by the underreamed portion of the pier (kips) W p = Weight of the pier (kips) P DL = Dead Load acting on the pier (kips) The resistance contributed by the underreamed portion of the pier should be calculated as shown in the following equations. The following formulas incorporate a factor of safety of approximately 2. Br = 1 (D 2 d 2 ) Piers at least 12 feet below adjacent finished grade Br = 3 (D 2 d 2 ) Piers at least 15 feet below adjacent finished grade Br = 7 (D 2 d 2 ) Piers at least 18 feet below adjacent finished grade Where: D = Diameter of the underream (feet) d = Diameter of the pier shaft (feet) Lateral Considerations Resistance to lateral loads and the expected pier behavior under the applied loading conditions will depend not only on the subsurface conditions, but also on loading conditions, the pier size, and the engineering properties of the pier. We recommend the designer use a performance based design methodology using non-linear soil support springs ( p-y curves ) to model the soil behavior. Several computer programs are commercially available for this purpose; we recommend LPILE (Ensoft, Inc.) since the software is relatively current and actively supported. The graphical relationship between the soil resistance (p) and pile deflection (y) is commonly referred to as a p-y curve. Along the depth of the shaft, soil resistance (p) is expressed as a non-linear function of lateral shaft deflection (y). Various researchers developed p-y criteria for different kinds of soils. The p-y curves can be automatically generated by LPILE. Recommended design soil properties needed for generating p-y curves are provided in the table below. Description Approximate Depth (ft) Effective Unit Weight (pcf) Allowable Passive Pressure (psf) Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (degree) Clay (Reese) 0 to Disregard Capacities Clay (Reese) 5 to Sand (Reese) 10 to Clay (Reese) 16 to ,600 1, E 50 K s (pci) Slab on Grade Upon addressing the existing fill and limiting the potential vertical movement (PVM) to a tolerable limit, the floor slab can be supported on engineered fill soils as recommended in Subgrade

14 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 10 Improvement section of the geotechnical report. We recommend that the upper six-inches of subgrade soils in the floor slab areas be compacted to at least 95% standard Proctor density (AM D-698) at a moisture content between optimum and +3% of the optimum value. A soil modulus of subgrade reaction (k s ) of 125 pci can be used in the design of floor slab. We recommend that any floor slabs be isolated from the foundation footings so differential settlement of the structure will not induce shear stresses in the floor slab. In order to minimize the crack width of any shrinkage cracks that may develop near the surface of the slab, we recommend mesh reinforcement be included in the design of the floor slab. The mesh should be in the top half of the slab to be effective. A bedding layer of leveling sand, one to two inch in thickness, may be placed beneath the floor slab. If floor treatments that are sensitive to moisture will be used, a 10-mil vapor barrier of polyethylene sheeting or similar material should be placed beneath the slab to minimize moisture migration through the slab. If a vapor barrier is considered to provide moisture protection, special attention should be given to the surface curing of the slabs to minimize uneven drying of the slabs and associated cracking and/or slab curling. The use of a blotter or cushion layer above the vapor barrier can also be considered for project specific reasons. Please refer to ACI 302.1R96 Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction and AM E 1643 Standard Practice for Installation of Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Earth or Granular Fill Under Concrete Slabs for additional guidance on this issue. Monolithic Slab As an alternative, the proposed structure can be supported by a monolithic slab-on-grade/grade beam structural foundation system upon addressing the subgrade improvement to limit the potential vertical movement to 1 inch or less. The slab should be designed in accordance with WRI/CRSI Design Slab-On-Ground Foundations. The following design parameters are recommended for the WRI/CRSI Design Slab-On-Ground Foundations (August, 1981) : BRAB/WRI Slab Parameters Design Parameter Option I PVM = 1.0 (Inch) Option II PVM = 1.0 (Inch) Allowable Bearing Capacity 2,000 psf 2,000 psf Design PI Climatic Rating (Cw) Unconfined Compressive Strength 0.5 tsf 0.5 tsf Soil-Climate Support Index (1-C) A net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf can be used to design grade beams founded on the reworked existing soils or compacted non-expansive fill, as described above in the section titled Earthwork Operations. Grade beams should have a minimum width of 12 inches to reduce the possibility of foundation bearing failure and excessive settlement due to local shear or "punching" failures. Additionally, the exterior and interior grade beams should extend at least

15 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 11 inches below final adjacent grade to utilize this bearing pressure. Positive drainage should be developed and maintained to drain the water away from the foundation pad area. Greater potential movements could occur with extreme wetting or drying of the soils due to ponding of water, plumbing leaks or lack of irrigation. In the event that sprinkler systems are used, we recommend that the sprinkler system be placed all around the structure to provide a uniform moisture condition throughout the year. This will reduce fluctuations in subsoil moisture and corresponding movement. Final site grading plan was not available. However, we anticipate that additional fill soils may be required to raise the west portion of the project site, in order to match with the overall contours across the proposed development. In the event that fill is placed on the site, specifications should require placement in accordance with our recommendations provided in the "Construction Considerations" section of the report. Grade Beams and Perimeter Conditions Soils placed along the exterior of any grade beams should be on-site clay soils or lime stabilized clay placed and compacted in accordance with this report. The purpose of this backfill is to reduce the opportunity for surface or subsurface water infiltration beneath the structure. The overbuild zone of select granular soils should be removed outside of the perimeter grade beams and backfilled with on site clay or lime stabilized soils. If lime stabilized material is used as select, this overbuild removal is not required. We recommend paving/sidewalks be placed adjacent to the structures to reduce seasonal drying of the moisture conditioned soils near the perimeter of the structures. Irrigation of lawn and landscaped areas should be moderate, with no excessive wetting or drying of soils around the perimeter of the structures allowed. Positive drainage away from the structures should also be provided. Trees and bushes/shrubs planted near the perimeter of the structures can withdraw large amounts of water from the soils. We recommend trees not be planted or left in place (existing trees) closer than half the canopy diameter of mature trees from the grade beams, typically a minimum of 20-ft. If vegetation is planted closer than the anticipated mature height away from the buildings then a root barrier should be installed to a depth of at least 5 feet below finished grade. Retaining Wall/Below Grade Wall Considerations (if required) Retaining walls should be placed on a slope no steeper than 3H:1V, as defined from the exterior lower footing edge, down to the limit of the slope upon which the retaining wall is built. This requirement is intended to prevent retaining walls from being constructed on excessively steep slopes, threatening both the integrity of the retaining wall, and also the slope to be retained. The values tabulated on the following page under Active Conditions pertain to retaining walls free to tilt outward as a result of lateral earth pressures. For rigid, non-yielding walls (such as

16 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 12 below grade walls) which are not allowed to rotate, the values under At-Rest Conditions should be used. Backfill Type (Level Backfill) Estimated Total Unit Weight (pcf) Active Condition Earth Pressure Coefficient, k a Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf) At Rest Condition Earth Pressure Coefficient, k o Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf) Washed Gravel Crushed Limestone Clayey/Silty SAND (SC/SM); PI < Pit Run Clayey Gravels or Sands Clays Retaining walls, and all below grade walls, should also account for surcharge loads within a 45 slope from the base of the backside of the wall. In addition, the design pressure outlined above should be modified if a sloping backfill is required. The passive resistance should be neglected in the stability calculations if there is a possibility that the soil in front of the wall footing will be excavated at any time in the future. The retaining wall should have a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 or greater against sliding and overturning. The recommendations contained above assume that the backfill behind the wall is properly drained. Drainage of the backfill may be accomplished through the use of 3 inch diameter weep holes at 10 foot spacing, through the wall, immediately above the proposed grade in front of the wall. Alternatively, a longitudinal drain line may be placed behind the retaining wall, sloped to discharge by gravity or to a storm sewer. Passive lateral pressures at the face of the footing, for resistance purposes, can be 250 psf per foot of soil height. The passive resistance should be ignored if the material in front of the wall will be excavated at anytime in the future. A zero psf cohesion factor is recommended for the design, and a friction angle of 30 is also recommended. The frictional resistance against sliding (N tan Ø) is 0.3N on natural or compacted soil. Compaction of the materials placed for the wall, should be conducted in accordance with this report and depends on the type of material used. If retaining walls are required as part of this development, we recommend that ECS be consulted during the design phase in order to evaluate that our recommendations are appropriately applied as well as to determine if a global stability analysis is required.

17 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 13 Pavement Subgrade Based on the presence of existing onsite fill soils, these areas need to be reworked in accordance to the Subgrade Improvements section, previously discussed. This evaluation should be performed during construction. All proposed paved areas should be proofrolled with heavy compaction equipment with load of at least 25 tons to attempt to locate any soft or undesirable soils so they can be removed and replaced with properly placed and compacted soils. Any pumping or rutting identified during proofroll should be conducted in accordance with TxDOT Standard Specification Item 216. The proofrolling operations should be observed by an experienced geotechnician. If lime is used, we recommend a minimum of 5%-hydrated lime (by dry weight of soil) be used to modify and stabilize the clay subgrade soils. The application rate corresponding to this additive amount would be approximately 23 pounds per square yard for each six-inch of compacted thickness. The hydrated lime should meet the requirements of Item 264 (Type A) in the TxDOT Standard Specifications for Construction of Highways, Streets and Bridges, and should be thoroughly mixed and blended with the upper 6 inches of the clay subgrade (TxDOT Item 260). This mixture should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 95% of its maximum Standard Proctor dry density (AM D-698) at a moisture content of optimum and +3% of optimum values as determined by that test. Lime treatment should extend at least 1 foot beyond exposed pavement edges to reduce the effects of shrinkage and associated loss of subgrade support. Density tests should be performed at a frequency of 1 test per 5,000 square feet of pavement. The actual amount of lime required should be confirmed by additional laboratory tests (lime series) during the construction phase in addition to on site natural soil sulfate content testing, which should be less than 3,000 ppm. Pavement Sections Specific traffic loading information was not provided; however, light duty (automobile parking) pavements are expected to receive passenger vehicles. Based on our experience with local soils, we assumed CBR of the onsite subsoil should be ranging 3 to 5. Our pavement section recommendations for heavy duty (drives) pavements should accommodate occasional heavier loadings due to fire trucks, delivery vehicles and light truck traffic and may be considered for main drives. Typical pavement sections are presented below. Actual pavements sections and joint spacing, if applicable, should be designed based on traffic loads. Asphaltic Concrete Portland Cement Concrete Material Designation Light Duty Heavy Duty Light Duty Heavy Duty Asphalt Surface Course 2 inches 2 inches - - Asphalt Binder Course 1 3 inches 4.5 inches - - Portland Cement Concrete inches 6 inches Lime Stabilized Subgrade 2 6 inches 6 inches 6 inches 6 inches

18 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 14 1 Flexible base material may be substituted for the asphalt binder using a substitute ratio of three inches of flexible base for each inch of asphalt binder. 2 In lieu of lime stabilized subgrade, the PCC pavement thickness may be increased by 1 inch. An important consideration with the design and construction of pavements is surface and subsurface drainage. Where standing water develops, either on the pavement surface or within the base course layer, softening of the subgrade and other problems related to the deterioration of the pavement can be expected. Furthermore, good drainage should reduce the possibility of the subgrade materials becoming saturated during the normal service period of the pavement. Please note, the recommended pavement sections provided above are considered the minimum necessary to provide satisfactory performance based on the provided traffic loading. In some cases, jurisdictional minimum standards for pavement section construction may exceed those provided above. Front-loading trash dumpsters frequently impose concentrated front-wheel loads on pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of bituminous pavements and ultimately pavement failures and costly repairs. Therefore, we suggest that the pavements in trash pickup areas utilize an 8 inch thick Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement section. Appropriate jointing should also be incorporated into the design of the PCC pavement. Pavement should be specified, constructed and tested to meet the following requirements: 1. Reinforcing steel may consist of #3 reinforcing steel bars placed at 18 inches on center each direction. Saw cuts contraction joints should be spaced 15 feet in any directions. Expansion joints should be maintained 60 feet apart through the entire depth of pavement. 2. Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete: Item 340 of the TxDOT Standard Specifications, Type A or B Base Course (binder), Type D Surface Course. The coarse aggregate in the surface course should be crushed limestone rather than gravel. 3. Portland Cement Concrete: Minimum compressive strength of 3,500 lbs per sq inch at 28 days. Concrete should be designed with 3 to 6 percent entrained air. 4. Crushed Limestone Base Material: Item 7 of the TxDOT Standard Specifications, Type A or B, Grade 2 or better. The material should be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (AM D 698) and within three percentage points of the material's optimum moisture content.

19 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 15 CONRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS In a dry and undisturbed state, the upper 1-foot of the majority of the soil at the site will provide good subgrade support for fill placement and construction operations. However, when wet, this soil will degrade quickly with disturbance from contractor operations. Therefore, good site drainage should be maintained during earthwork operations, which would help maintain the integrity of the soil. The surface of the site should be kept properly graded in order to enhance drainage of the surface water away from the proposed building areas during the construction phase. We recommend that an attempt be made to enhance the natural drainage without interrupting its pattern. The soils at the site are moisture and disturbance sensitive, and contain fines which are considered moderately erodible. Therefore, the contractor should carefully plan his operation to minimize exposure of the subgrade to weather and construction equipment traffic, and provide and maintain good site drainage during earthwork operations to help maintain the integrity of the surficial soils. All erosion and sedimentation shall be controlled in accordance with sound engineering practice and current jurisdictional requirements. Earthwork Operations The onsite cohesive soil may result in difficulties during access and workability from poor site drainage, wet season, or site geohydrology. Should this condition develop, drying of the soils for support of pavement and floor slabs may be improved by the addition of 5% lime by dry weight. The application rate corresponding to this additive amount would be approximately 23 pounds per square yard for each six-inch of compacted thickness. Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Specifications, Items 260 and 263, shall be used as procedural guides for placing, mixing, and compacting lime stabilizer and the soils. In preparing the site for construction, all loose, poorly compacted existing soils, vegetation, organic soil, existing pavements, foundations or utilities, existing fill material (as defined in this report), or other unsuitable materials should be removed from all proposed building and paving areas, and any areas receiving new fill. After stripping the site and prior to placing any fill, we recommend proofrolling the area with heavy construction equipment such as a fully loaded scraper or tandem axle dump truck with a minimum axle load of 25 tons. The purpose of the proofrolling is to attempt to locate any soft or compressible soils prior to placing new fill. Unsuitable materials located during proofrolling should be removed to firm ground and replaced with properly compacted fill. Prior to placement of any new fill, all subgrades should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches; moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 95% of Maximum Dry Density as obtained by the Standard Proctor Method (AM D-698) moisture conditioned above the optimum value. All fills should be benched into the existing soils. Soil moisture levels should be preserved (by various methods that can include covering with plastic, watering, etc.) until new fill, pavements or slabs are placed. All fill soils should be placed

20 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 16 in 8 inch loose lifts for mass grading operations and 4 inches for trench type excavations where walk behind or jumping jack compaction equipment is used. Upon completion of the filling operations, care should be taken to maintain the soil moisture content prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements. If the soil becomes desiccated, the affected material should be removed and replaced, or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned and recompacted. Utility cuts should not be left open for extended periods of time and should be properly backfilled. Backfilling should be accomplished with properly compacted on-site soils, rather than granular materials. If granular materials are used, a utility trench cut-off at the building line is recommended to help prevent water from migrating through the utility trench backfill to beneath the proposed structure. Field density and moisture tests should be performed on each lift as necessary to verify that adequate compaction is achieved. As a guide, one test per 2,500 square feet per lift is recommended in the building and paving areas (two tests minimum per lift). Utility trench backfill should be tested at a rate of one test per lift per each 250 linear feet of trench (two tests minimum per lift). Certain jurisdictional requirements may require testing in addition to that noted previously. Therefore, these specifications should be reviewed and the more stringent specifications should be followed. Material Specifications The Subgrade Preparation Options provided in the Analysis and Recommendations portion of this report outline the required subgrade improvements in order to achieve the desired future movements. This section is intended to outline the material requirements of those recommendations. Select Fill For the purposes of this report, select fill soil may consist of imported material that is free of debris and organic matter and have a Plasticity Index (PI) of ranging 8 to 20. Crushed limestone may be used for this purpose. The crushed limestone used for this process should have a minimum Dry Density of 115 pcf. The PI of this material should be evaluated by ECS at the time of construction and will largely be based on the gradation, rather than the PI. The crushed limestone should have a maximum dimension 4 inches. This material should be placed and compacted at workable moisture contents within the optimum and above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the Maximum Dry Density as obtain using the Standard Proctor Method (AM D-698). Lime Stabilized on site CLAY In lieu of importing granular fill, as defined above, the on-site clay soils may be lime stabilized. The advantage to lime stabilization over untreated granular fill is the nearly weatherproof nature

21 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 17 of the soil and once placed and compacted the material essentially retains the virtually impermeable nature of the parent clay, minimizing water infiltration beneath the building. A preliminary lime application rate of 5% hydrated lime by dry weight of clay should be used for budgeting purposes. The application rate corresponding to this additive amount would be approximately 23 pounds per square yard for each six-inch of compacted thickness. The actual amount of lime required should be confirmed by additional laboratory tests (lime series) during the construction phase in addition to on site natural soil sulfate content testing, which should be less than 3,000 ppm. The lime stabilized clay should be thoroughly mixed and appropriately mellowed for at least 48 hours and tested for gradation and lime solubility (ph) prior to final placement and compaction. Once appropriately mixed and mellowed, this material may then be placed and compacted at workable moisture contents above the optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the Maximum Dry Density as obtain using the Standard Proctor Method (AM D-698). Clay Fill Within the planned building pads, and flatwork sensitive to movements, moisture conditioning should be performed as outlined in this report. Reworking of the existing clays, and all new clayey fill, is performed to increase the moisture of the clays to a level that reduces their ability to absorb additional water that could result in post-construction heave in these soils. The moisture conditioning should consist of undercutting, scarifying and/or reworking, as required to achieve the required subgrade improvement. During this process, the clay should receive adequate amounts of water to ensure a uniform moisture content of at least 4% or higher above the optimum moisture content. During the addition of water, the soils should be adequately mixed, and re-mixed, to ensure a uniform distribution of the moisture throughout the soil mass. Once appropriately mixed, the material should be compacted to at least 95% of the Maximum Dry Density as obtained using the Standard Proctor Method (AM D-698). Outside of the moisture conditioned zone and where clay is used to establish site grades, we recommend that this material may be placed and compacted to at least 95% of the Maximum Dry Density as obtained using the Standard Proctor Method (AM D-698). These soils should be free of deleterious materials, and be reworked to ensure a uniform distribution of water in order to achieve a uniform moisture content distribution, above the optimum value. Care should be taken to verify and preserve the specified moisture levels in the reworked clays prior to placement of non-expansive fill. Construction Groundwater Control Groundwater was encountered during field exploration. These conditions should be anticipated and can be handled through the use of trenching and pumping. One of the more cost effective techniques that can be utilized is through the prudent utilization of spot drains, and in planning utility installations. For example, any utility installation that requires a gravity feed can be

22 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 18 effectively converted into a drainage line to help assist in groundwater control during construction. As a minimum, the gravel bedding of utility lines can be converted into French Drains by encapsulating the gravel bedding stone in an appropriate filter fabric. In this manner, the blasting and/or trenching operations required to install the utility help intercept near surface perched water, and canalize the flow. Naturally, these changes in the utility installation should be coordinated with the appropriate jurisdictional authorities. Furthermore, it is important that final outlet conditions for these drainage systems be considered in design. That is, if the entire utility installation is converted to a French Drain, for example, the end of run can have severe wetness and water problems. Therefore, intercepting French Drains may be required to "bleed off" the water flow and redirect it into stormwater drain lines, or surface impoundments. If groundwater is encountered during construction of footings or buried utilities, an ECS geotechnical engineer should be consulted to determine if additional permanent drainage provisions are necessary in the design and construction. Groundwater levels should be maintained at least 3 feet below subgrade levels to provide dry working condition and firm bedding. Sump pumping and surface runoff ditches may be adequate for temporary control of surface runoff and groundwater during construction. The surface of the site should be kept property graded to enhance drainage of surface water away from the proposed construction area during construction. ECS recommends that an attempt be made to enhance the natural drainage without interrupting its pattern. Foundation Excavation Based on soils strength data, temporary (less than hours), open trenched, non-surcharged and unsupported excavations can be built on a slope flatter than 1.5(h) : 1(v) provided this will not impact the stability of the existing/nearby structures. Flatter slopes may be required in the areas where soft soils or a large amount of sands are encountered. Vertical cuts can be constructed, provided shoring and bracing is used for excavation wall stability. Benched excavation can also be used with average slopes of about 1(h):1(v) and steps should not be higher than five-ft. In all cases, excavation construction should conform to OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) guidelines. Excavations should be performed with equipment capable of providing a relatively clean bearing area. Excavation equipment should not disturb the soil beneath the design excavation bottom and should not leave large amounts of loose soil in the excavation. Foundation excavations should be protected against any significant change in soil moisture content and disturbance by construction activity. Specification should require that water not be allowed to pond in excavations. OSHA Soil Classification The subsoils can be classified in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards, dated October 31, 1989 of the Federal Register. OSHA

23 ECS Project No. 43:1190 August 10, 2016 Page 19 classification system categorizes the soil and rock in four types based on shear strength and stability. Based on the field exploration and laboratory test results, the subsoils at the project site can be classified as Type C soils in accordance with the OSHA Soil Classification System. Closing We recommend that the construction activities be monitored by ECS to provide the necessary overview and to check the suitability of the subgrade soils for supporting the foundations and pavements. 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. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty is expressed or implied. The scope is limited to the specific project and locations described herein and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects relative to soil and foundation characteristics. In the event that any change in the nature or location of the proposed construction outlined in this report are planned, we should be informed so that the changes can be reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or approved in writing by the geotechnical engineer. It is recommended that all construction operations dealing with earthwork and foundations be reviewed by an experienced geotechnical engineer to provide information on which to base a decision as to whether the design requirements are fulfilled in the actual construction. If you wish, we would welcome the opportunity to provide field construction services for you during construction. The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings and tests performed at the locations as indicated on the Boring Location Diagram and other information referenced in this report. This report does not reflect any variations, which may occur between the borings. In the performance of the subsurface exploration, specific information is obtained at specific locations at specific times. However, it is a well-known fact that variations in subsurface conditions exist on most sites between boring locations and also such situations as groundwater levels vary from time to time. The nature and extent of variations may not become evident until the course of construction. If variations then appear evident, after performing on-site observations during the construction period and noting characteristics and variations, a reevaluation of the recommendations for this report will be necessary. The assessment of site environmental conditions for the presence of pollutants was beyond the scope of this report.

24 APPENDIX Reference Notes for Boring Logs Boring Location Diagram Borings Logs: B-1 through B-5 Laboratory Testing Summary Regional Geology Map Aerial Photograph 2015 Aerial Photograph 2011 Aerial Photograph 2009 Topographic Map Site Location Map

25 REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS MATERIALS 1,2 ASPHALT CONCRETE GRAVEL TOPSOIL VOID BRICK ABC ONE FILL 3 GW GP GM GC SW SP SM Man-placed or disturbed soils WELL-GRADED GRAVEL gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines SILTY GRAVEL gravel-sand-silt mixtures CLAYEY GRAVEL gravel-sand-clay mixtures WELL-GRADED SAND gravelly sand, little or no fines POORLY-GRADED SAND gravelly sand, little or no fines SILTY SAND sand-silt mixtures WL SHW ACR WL DCI WCI WATER LEVELS 4 DRILLING SAMPLING SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS SS Split Spoon Sampler PM Pressuremeter Test Shelby Tube Sampler RD Rock Bit Drilling WS Wash Sample RC Rock Core, NX, BX, AX BS Bulk Sample of Cuttings REC Rock Sample Recovery % PA Power Auger (no sample) RQD Rock Quality Designation % HSA Hollow Stem Auger DESIGNATION Water Level (WS)(WD) (WS) While Sampling (WD) While Drilling Seasonal High WL After Casing Removal Water Level as stated Dry Cave-In Wet Cave-In PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION PARTICLE SIZES Boulders 12 inches (300 mm) or larger Cobbles 3 inches to 12 inches (75 mm to 300 mm) Gravel: Coarse ¾ inch to 3 inches (19 mm to 75 mm) Fine 4.75 mm to 19 mm (No. 4 sieve to ¾ inch) Sand: Coarse 2.00 mm to 4.75 mm (No. 10 to No. 4 sieve) Medium mm to 2.00 mm (No. 40 to No. 10 sieve) Fine mm to mm (No. 200 to No. 40 sieve) Silt & Clay ( Fines ) <0.074 mm (smaller than a No. 200 sieve) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS COARSE GRAINED FINE GRAINED Trace <5% <5% Dual Symbol (ex: SW-SM) 10% With 15% - 20% 15%-25% Adjective (ex: Silty ) 25% - <50% 30% - <50% SC ML MH CL CH OL CLAYEY SAND sand-clay mixtures SILT non-plastic to medium plasticity ELAIC SILT high plasticity LEAN CLAY low to medium plasticity FAT CLAY high plasticity ORGANIC SILT or CLAY non-plastic to low plasticity UNCONFINED COMP. RENGTH, Q P 5 (TSF) COHESIVE SILTS & CLAYS SPT 6 (BPF) CONSIENCY (COHESIVE <0.25 <3 Very Soft < Soft < Medium Stiff < Stiff < Very Stiff Hard >8.00 >50 Very Hard OH PT ORGANIC SILT or CLAY high plasticity PEAT highly organic soils IGNEOUS ROCK METAMORPHIC ROCK SEDIMENTARY ROCK GRAVELS, SANDS & NON-COHESIVE SILTS SPT 6 DENSITY <5 Very Loose 5-10 Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense 100+ Partially Weathered Rock to Intact Rock 1 Classifications and symbols per AM D (Visual-Manual Procedure) unless noted otherwise. 2 To be consistent with general practice, POORLY GRADED has been removed from GP, GP-GM, GP-GC, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC soil types. 3 Non-AM designations are included in soil descriptions and symbols along with AM symbol [Ex: (SM-FILL)]. 4 The water levels are those levels actually measured in the borehole at the times indicated by the symbol. The measurements are relatively reliable when augering, without adding fluids, in granular soils. In clay and cohesive silts, the determination of water levels may require several days for the water level to stabilize. In such cases, additional methods of measurement are generally taken. 5 Typically estimated via pocket penetrometer or Torvane shear test and expressed in tons per square foot (tsf). 6 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) refers to the number of hammer blows (blow count) of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD split spoon sampler required to drive the sampler 12 inches (AM D 1586). N-value is another term for blow count and is expressed in blows per foot (bpf). Reference Notes for Boring Logs_ Final.doc 2016 ECS Corporate Services, LLC. All Rights Reserved

26 BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM I-45 S & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS-TEXAS, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No.: 1190 FIGURE: SRM B-5 B-3 B-2 B-1 B-4 Approximate Boring Locations Geotechnical Borings; 20 deep Geotechnical Borings; 5 deep

27 CLIENT JOB # BORING # SHEET SLI Group, Inc. PROJECT NAME 43:1190 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-1 1 OF 1 SITE LOCATION Near I-45 & FM 1764, La Marque, Texas NORTHING EAING ATION DEPTH (FT) 0 SAMPLE NO. S-1 SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE DI. (IN) RECOVERY (IN) DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL BOTTOM OF CASING SURFACE ELEVATION SLI Group, Inc. (CL) LEAN CLAY, Light Gray to Tan, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff, with Root Fibers to 4', Ferrous Nodules, Sands ENGLISH UNITS LOSS OF CIRCULATION 21 FEET MSL (APPROX.) WATER LEVELS 20 ELEVATION (FT) BLOWS/6" CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY RQD% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PLAIC LIMIT % 2.0 REC.% WATER CONTENT % ANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT LIQUID LIMIT % S S-3 - Dry Unit Weight = pcf & Su = 0.41 tsf S-4 - Dark Brown to Reddish Brown 6' to 10' S (SM) SILTY SAND, Light Gray and Tan, Medium Dense, with Clay Pockets S-6 SS (CH) FAT CLAY, Dark Brown to Reddish Brown and Mottled Gray, Very Stiff, with Ferrous Nodules S-7 END OF 20' THE RATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WL 10' WS WD BORING ARTED 08/01/16 CAVE IN DEPTH WL(SHW) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 08/01/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual WL 6.5' 15 Mins. RIG Truck FOREMAN HDC DRILLING METHOD AM D-1587 & AM D-1587

28 CLIENT JOB # BORING # SHEET SLI Group, Inc. PROJECT NAME 43:1190 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-2 1 OF 1 SITE LOCATION Near I-45 & FM 1764, La Marque, Texas NORTHING EAING ATION DEPTH (FT) 0 SAMPLE NO. S-1 SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE DI. (IN) RECOVERY (IN) DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL BOTTOM OF CASING SURFACE ELEVATION SLI Group, Inc. (CL) LEAN CLAY, Light Gray to Tan, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff, with Root Fibers to 4', Ferrous Nodules, Sands ENGLISH UNITS LOSS OF CIRCULATION 22 FEET MSL (APPROX.) WATER LEVELS 20 ELEVATION (FT) BLOWS/6" CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY RQD% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PLAIC LIMIT % REC.% WATER CONTENT % ANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT LIQUID LIMIT % 50 S S-3 - Dry Unit Weight = pcf & Su = 0.88 tsf S-4 S-5 - Dark Brown to Reddish Brown 6' to 8' (CL-ML) SILTY LOW PLAICITY CLAY, Dark Brown and Light Gray, Stiff, with Sands (ML) SANDY SILT, Reddish Brown and Light Gray, with Clay Pockets S-6 (CH) FAT CLAY, Dark Brown to Reddish Brown and Mottled Gray, Very Stiff, with Ferrous Nodules S-7 - Dry Unit Weight = pcf & Su = 0.88 tsf END OF 20' THE RATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WL 10' WS WD BORING ARTED 08/01/16 CAVE IN DEPTH WL(SHW) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 08/01/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual WL 6' 15 Mins. RIG Truck FOREMAN HDC DRILLING METHOD AM D-1587

29 CLIENT JOB # BORING # SHEET SLI Group, Inc. PROJECT NAME 43:1190 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-3 1 OF 1 SITE LOCATION Near I-45 & FM 1764, La Marque, Texas NORTHING EAING ATION DEPTH (FT) 0 SAMPLE NO. S-1 SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE DI. (IN) RECOVERY (IN) DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL BOTTOM OF CASING SURFACE ELEVATION SLI Group, Inc. (CL) LEAN CLAY, Light Gray to Tan, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff, with Root Fibers to 4', Ferrous Nodules, Sands ENGLISH UNITS LOSS OF CIRCULATION 21 FEET MSL (APPROX.) WATER LEVELS 20 ELEVATION (FT) BLOWS/6" CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY RQD% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PLAIC LIMIT % 2.25 REC.% WATER CONTENT % ANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT LIQUID LIMIT % S S S-4 S-5 (CL-ML) SILTY LOW PLAICITY CLAY, Dark Brown and Light Gray, Medium Stiff, with Sands (SM) SILTY SAND, Light Brown and Tan, Medium Dense, with Clay Pockets 15 S-6 SS (CH) FAT CLAY, Dark Brown to Reddish Brown and Mottled Gray, Stiff, with Ferrous Nodules 5 20 S-7 END OF 20' THE RATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WL 8' WS WD BORING ARTED 08/01/16 CAVE IN DEPTH WL(SHW) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 08/01/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual WL 5' 15 Mins. RIG CME 55 FOREMAN HDC DRILLING METHOD AM D-1587 & AM D-1587

30 CLIENT JOB # BORING # SHEET SLI Group, Inc. PROJECT NAME 43:1190 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-4 1 OF 1 SITE LOCATION Near I-45 & FM 1764, La Marque, Texas NORTHING EAING ATION DEPTH (FT) 0 5 SAMPLE NO. S-1 S-2 S-3 SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE DI. (IN) 12 RECOVERY (IN) 12 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL BOTTOM OF CASING SURFACE ELEVATION (CL) LEAN CLAY, Light Gray to Tan, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff, with Root Fibers to 2', Ferrous Nodules, Sands END OF 5' SLI Group, Inc. ENGLISH UNITS LOSS OF CIRCULATION 21 FEET MSL (APPROX.) WATER LEVELS ELEVATION (FT) BLOWS/6" 0.75 CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY RQD% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PLAIC LIMIT % REC.% WATER CONTENT % ANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT LIQUID LIMIT % THE RATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WL Dry WS WD BORING ARTED 08/01/16 CAVE IN DEPTH WL(SHW) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 08/01/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual WL RIG CME 55 FOREMAN HDC DRILLING METHOD AM D-1587

31 CLIENT JOB # BORING # SHEET SLI Group, Inc. PROJECT NAME 43:1190 ARCHITECT-ENGINEER B-5 1 OF 1 SITE LOCATION Near I-45 & FM 1764, La Marque, Texas NORTHING EAING ATION DEPTH (FT) 0 5 SAMPLE NO. S-1 S-2 S-3 SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE DI. (IN) 12 RECOVERY (IN) 12 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL BOTTOM OF CASING SURFACE ELEVATION (CL FILL) LEAN CLAY FILL, Light Gray to Tan, Very Stiff, with Root Fibers to 2', Ferrous Nodules, Sands (CL) LEAN CLAY, Light Gray to Tan, Very Stiff to Hard, with Ferrous Nodules, Sands END OF 5' SLI Group, Inc. ENGLISH UNITS LOSS OF CIRCULATION 23 FEET MSL (APPROX.) WATER LEVELS 20 ELEVATION (FT) BLOWS/6" 15 CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY RQD% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PLAIC LIMIT % REC.% WATER CONTENT % ANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT LIQUID LIMIT % THE RATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WL Dry WS WD BORING ARTED 08/01/16 CAVE IN DEPTH WL(SHW) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 08/01/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual WL RIG CME 55 FOREMAN HDC DRILLING METHOD AM D-1587

32 Sample Source Sample Number Depth (feet) MC1 (%) Laboratory Testing Summary Soil Type2 Atterberg Limits3 LL PL PI Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve4 Moisture - Density (Corr.)5 Maximum Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture (%) Su6 (tsf) Page 1 of 1 Dry Unit Weight (pcf) B-1 S CL S CL S SM B-2 S CL S CL S CL S CH B-3 S CL B-4 S CL B-5 S CL FILL Notes: 1. AM D 2216, 2. AM D 87, 3. AM D 4318, 4. AM D 1140, 5. See test reports for test method, 6. See test reports for test method Definitions: MC: Moisture Content, Soil Type: USCS (Unified Soil Classification System), LL: Liquid Limit, PL: Plastic Limit, PI: Plasticity Index, CBR: California Bearing Ratio, OC: Organic Content (AM D 2974) Project No. 43:1190 Project Name: ECS Texas, LLP PM: DRB PE: SRM Printed On: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 Houston, TX

33 REGIONAL GEOLOGY I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS Texas, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC Site Qb Beaumont Formation Geologic Atlas of Texas, Houston Sheet, 1982

34 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 2015 I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS-TEXAS, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC

35 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 2011 I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS-TEXAS, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC

36 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 2009 I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS-TEXAS, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC

37 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS-TEXAS, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC Site

38 SITE LOCATION MAP I-45 & FM 1764 La Marque, Texas PM: SRM ECS Texas, LLP 1050 North Post Oak Road, Suite 130 Houston, Texas SCALE: NTS DATE: 08/10/2016 PROJECT No. 43:1190 FIGURE: NFC Site City of Houston, Geographic Information Management System (GIMS) Santa Fe, August 2016