Geotechnical Engineering Report

Transcription

1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Prepared for: Saint Luke s Health System, Inc. Kansas City, MO Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Lenexa, KS

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROJECT INFORMATION Project Description Site Location and Description SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Typical Profile Water Level Observations RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION Geotechnical Considerations Earthwork Site Preparation Engineered Fill Material Requirements Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements Grading and Drainage Earthwork Construction Considerations Foundations Foundation Design Recommendations Foundation Construction Considerations Lateral Earth Pressures Seismic Considerations Floor Slabs Design Recommendations Floor Slab Construction Considerations Pavements Pavement Subgrades Opinions of Minimum Pavement Thickness Pavement Construction Considerations GENERAL COMMENTS APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Plan Exhibit A-2 Boring Location Diagram Exhibit A-3 to A-22 Boring Logs Exhibit A-23 Field Exploration Description APPENDIX B SUPPORTING INFORMATION Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System Exhibit C-3 Description of Rock Properties Responsive Resourceful Reliable i

4 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ANDERSON COUNTY HOSPITAL 421 S. MAPLE STREET GARNETT, KS Terracon Project No December 14, INTRODUCTION Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the Geotechnical Engineering Services for Anderson County Hospital. Twenty (20) borings were performed to depths ranging from approximately 3. feet to 1. feet below the existing ground surface. A site location plan, boring location diagram and logs of borings are included in Appendix A of this report. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: subsurface soil conditions foundation design and construction groundwater conditions floor slab design and construction earthwork seismic considerations minimum pavement thicknesses 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description Item Site Layout Proposed Structures Finished Floor Elevation (FFE) Maximum Loads (provided) Pavements Site Grading Description See Appendix A, Exhibit A-2: Boring Location Diagram The new hospital will include a 2,000 square-foot main building and a 13,400 square-foot long-term care facility. The buildings will be steel-framed, single-story structures with masonry veneer. The floor slabs will be grade-supported. 108 feet (provided); 98 feet reference elevation Columns: 100 kips Walls: 7 klf Personal vehicle parking lots and medium-duty drive lanes are planned east and west of the proposed hospital building. The site grading plan is not available. Based on the provided FFE, we anticipate maximum fills will be on the order of to 6 feet and cuts will be up to 2 feet to develop design final subgrade elevations. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1

5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Site Location and Description Figure 1. Site Location Figure 2. Aerial of Site Item Location Existing Improvements Current Ground Cover Existing Topography 421 S. Maple Street; Garnett, KS Description The east portion of the project site is developed with the existing hospital and paved areas. An existing metal building is present at the west portion of the project site. Areas west and south of the existing metal building are undeveloped. Grass and pavements Site grades in the vicinity of the existing hospital are relatively level. Site grades at the western portion of the site slope gradually down to the northwest. Based on the provided boring elevations, approximately 7 feet of grade relief is present between borings drilled at the west portion of the site. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Typical Profile Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows: Stratum No. Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum 1 8 to 12 inches Material Description Root zone and pavement materials Comments 2 3 to 12. feet Native fat clay Stiff to hard -- Responsive Resourceful Reliable 2

6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Stratum No. Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Description Comments 3a to 10 feet Completely weathered limestone Soil-like, low density, high moisture (B-1, B-4, B-8, B-9, PB-8) 3b Undetermined Limestone and shale bedrock Based on visual observation of core samples and drilling/sampling characteristics, the limestone was severely to slightly weathered and moderately hard, and the shale was severely to moderately weathered. Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil and rock types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. 3.2 Water Level Observations The borings were observed while drilling and immediately after completion for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was not observed in the borings at either of these times. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater conditions could be different at other times. Groundwater can also be encountered at the soil and bedrock interface. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project, especially where excavations extend to and through the soil/bedrock interface. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations Although not encountered at the borings locations, existing fill materials should be expected at developed portions of the site. We recommend all existing fill materials be evaluated at the time of construction. Unsuitable existing fill materials should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. Based on drilling/sampling characteristics, the degree of limestone bedrock weathering varied from completely weathered to slightly weathered. By our definition, completely weathered limestone bedrock has been reduced to soil and the rock fabric is not discernible or discernible only in isolated areas. In our experience, completely weathered limestone bedrock typically exhibits high moisture contents and low dry unit weights. Samples obtained immediately above the intact limestone from Borings B-1, B-4, B-8, B-9, and PB-8 exhibited these soil-like properties. In our opinion, completely weathered limestone should be removed and replaced at the time of construction where exposed at the footing bearing surface. The soil- Responsive Resourceful Reliable 3

7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No like completely weathered limestone is not suitable for support of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements. Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations, limestone bedrock strata transitioning to clay soils may be encountered in foundation excavations near the southern portion of the proposed building. Foundations bearing on different materials (e.g. bedrock and clay soils) will settle differently and at differing rates. Footings on bedrock strata are not expected to settle appreciably. Footings on relatively thick clay deposits will settle more, but settlement will likely be on the order of 1 inch or less. Differential settlement will occur gradually when the depth to the bedrock surface increases gradually along a continuous footing. If the depth to bedrock increases significantly over a short distance, differential settlement could be abrupt. If abrupt differential settlement cannot be accommodated, a transition zone should be developed under continuous footings. Where an abrupt change of bearing material (clay soils to bedrock) is encountered in continuous foundation excavations, a transition zone between the different bearing materials can help make differential settlement less abrupt. The transition zone would allow differential settlements to occur more gradually. Recommendations concerning the recommended transition zone are provided in section 4.3 Foundations. The fat clay soils present throughout the project site are active and prone to volume change with variations in moisture level. For this reason, we recommend at least a 24-inch thick low volume change (LVC) zone be constructed beneath the floor slabs. The use of a LVC zone, as recommended in this report, will not eliminate all future subgrade volume change and resultant floor slab movements. However, use of an LVC zone should reduce the potential for subgrade volume change. Details regarding this LVC zone are provided in this report in sections Engineered Fill Material Requirements and 4.6 Floor Slabs. This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and expansion. However, even if these procedures are followed, some movement and at least minor cracking in the structure could still occur. The severity of cracking and other cosmetic damage such as floor slab movement will probably increase if any modification of the site results in excessive wetting or drying of the expansive soils. Eliminating the risk of movement and cosmetic distress may not be feasible, but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during construction. We would be pleased to discuss other construction alternatives with you upon request. 4.2 Earthwork Earthwork on this project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. Recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation, and placement of engineered fill for the project are provided in the following sections. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 4

8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Site Preparation In general, site preparation in undeveloped areas should begin with the removal of all topsoil, vegetation, organic materials and any loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable materials. In developed areas, site preparation should begin with complete removal of all above- and belowgrade structures and unsuitable existing fill materials. Existing pavements could initially be left in place to facilitate staging of construction equipment. Existing pavements could be processed and used as engineered fill provided the requirements in Section are achieved. Provided at least 2 feet of new engineered can be placed above the existing concrete floor slab of the former hospital, in our opinion, it can be left in place below the future pavement areas. Where left in place below pavements, we recommend the existing floor slab be cracked and seated to prevent a perched water condition. Slabs and pavements should be completely removed from below the new building areas. The exposed soils following stripping and demolition (where applicable) should be observed and tested by Terracon prior to placing new engineered fill and/or construction of foundations, floor slabs or pavements. Particular attention should be paid to the soils located near the soil/bedrock interface. Terracon s representative should observe proofrolling of the exposed soils. Proofrolling can be accomplished using a loaded tandem-axle dump truck with a gross weight of at least 2 tons, or similarly loaded equipment. Areas that display excessive deflection (pumping) or rutting during proofroll operations should be improved by scarification/compaction or by removal and replacement with engineered fill. Following proofrolling activities, the exposed subgrade should be thoroughly evaluated for moisture and density. If the soil properties are not in compliance with this report, the soils should be scarified a minimum of 9 inches, moisture conditioned and recompacted as outlined in Section Where fill is placed on existing slopes steeper than H:1V, benches should be cut into the existing slopes prior to fill placement. Benches should have a minimum vertical face height of 1 foot and a maximum vertical face height of 3 feet and should be wide enough to accommodate compaction equipment. This benching will help provide a positive bond between the fill and natural soils and reduce the possibility of failure along the fill/natural soil interface. Furthermore, we recommend that fill slopes be over filled and then cut back to develop an adequately compacted slope face Engineered Fill Material Requirements Engineered fill used for this project should meet the following material property requirements: Fill Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement Low Volume Change (LVC) Material 2 CL (LL<4 and PI<23) GM 3 Fly-ash treated onsite clay 4 All locations and elevations, except where free-draining backfill is required. Responsive Resourceful Reliable

9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Fill Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement On-site native clay soils Milled on-site asphalt Crushed/processed onsite concrete CH N/A Well-Graded Passing 2-in sieve = 100% Passing ½-in sieve = 60-90% Passing No.4 sieve = 3-60% Passing No. 30 sieve = 10-3% Passing No. 200 sieve = 0-1% Pavement areas and at depths greater than 24 inches below building finished grade Pavement areas provided the milled asphalt does not exceed 0% when mixed with clay Building areas provided the maximum particle size is 2 inches Final pavement subgrade elevation or deeper provided the maximum particle size is 2 inches 2-feet below final pavement subgrade elevation or deeper provided the maximum particle size is 4 inches Well-graded granular GW All locations and elevations 1. Controlled, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. 2. Low plasticity cohesive soil or granular soil having at least 18% low plasticity fines. 3. Similar to KDOT AB-3 crushed limestone aggregate. 4. The on-site clay soils could be treated with 1% Class C fly ash, thoroughly pulver-mixed, moisture conditioned and properly recompacted to generate LVC material.. Granular materials with less than percent fines (material passing the #200 sieve) Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements Item Fill Lift Thickness Compaction Requirements 1 Moisture Content Clay Soil and Fly-Ash Treated Clay Soil (LL>40) Moisture Content Clay Soil (LL<40) Moisture Content Granular Material (KDOT AB-3, processed concrete, clean gravel) 9-inches or less in loose thickness Depths > 4 feet below finished grade Depths < 4 feet below finished grade Description 98% of the material s maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698) 9% of the material s maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698) Optimum moisture content to 4% above the optimum moisture content value as determined by the standard Proctor test 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum moisture content value as determined by the standard Proctor test. Sufficient to achieve compaction without pumping when proofrolled Responsive Resourceful Reliable 6

10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No We recommend that engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved Grading and Drainage During construction, grades should be developed to direct surface water flow away from or around the site. Exposed subgrades should be sloped to provide positive drainage so that saturation of subgrades is avoided. Surface water should not be permitted to accumulate on the site. Final surrounding grades should promote rapid surface drainage away from the structures. Accumulation of water adjacent to the building could contribute to significant moisture increases in the subgrade soils and subsequent softening/settlement or expansion/heave. Roof drains should discharge into a storm sewer or at least 10 feet away from the building Earthwork Construction Considerations Care should be taken to avoid disturbance of prepared subgrades. Unstable subgrade conditions could develop during general construction operations, particularly if the soils are wetted and/or subjected to repetitive construction traffic. New fill compacted above optimum moisture content or that accumulates water during construction can also become disturbed under construction equipment. Construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be avoided to the extent practical. If the subgrade becomes saturated, desiccated, or disturbed, the affected materials should either be scarified and compacted or be removed and replaced. Subgrades should be observed and tested by Terracon prior to construction of the slab. As a minimum, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, Excavations and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations. The contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, and excavation depth should in no instance exceed those specified by these safety regulations. Flatter slopes than those dictated by these regulations may be required depending upon the soil conditions encountered and other external factors. These regulations are strictly enforced and if they are not followed, the owner, contractor, and/or earthwork and utility subcontractor could be liable and subject to substantial penalties. Under no circumstances should the information provided in this report be interpreted to mean that Terracon is responsible for construction site safety or the contractor s activities. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of the construction operations. 4.3 Foundations In our opinion, the proposed hospital building can be supported by shallow footing foundations bearing on native stiff to very stiff clay soils, newly placed engineered fill or bedrock strata. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 7

11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No If foundation bearing conditions change abruptly from clay to bedrock, differential settlement between a clay soil supported foundation and a bedrock supported foundation may be abrupt. In our opinion, where an abrupt change of bearing material (clay soils to bedrock) is encountered in continuous foundation excavations, a transition zone between the different bearing materials should be developed. The transition zone should be developed by initially overexcavating the bedrock about two (2) feet below design foundation bearing level. The depth of overexcavation of bedrock should then be gradually reduced by 6 inches for every lineal feet of continuous foundation excavation. The transition zone should then be backfilled with engineered fill material placed in lifts of 9 inches or less in loose thickness and compacted to at least 9 percent of the material's maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D698). Design recommendations for shallow foundations for the building are presented in the following sections Foundation Design Recommendations Description Column Wall Net allowable bearing pressure 1 2,00 psf 2,00 psf Minimum dimensions 30 inches 18 inches Minimum embedment below finished grade 2 36 inches 36 inches Approximate total settlement 3 <1 inch <1 inch Estimated differential settlement Allowable passive pressure 4 < ½ inch between columns spaced at 40 feet 1,00 psf Allowable coefficient of sliding friction <¾ inch over 40 feet 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Unsuitable soils, including completely weathered limestone, should be undercut and replaced. 2. The embedment depth is for frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. The embedment depth applies to perimeter footings and footings beneath unheated areas. 3. The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. The above settlement estimates consider that the maximum column footing width is 7 feet and the maximum continuous footing width is 3 feet. The settlement estimates also consider creating the recommended transition zone between clay soils and bedrock is developed for continuous footings. 4. The sides of the excavation for the foundation must be nearly vertical and the concrete should be placed neat against these vertical faces for the passive earth pressure value to be valid. If the loaded side is sloped or benched, and then backfilled, the allowable passive pressure will be significantly reduced. Passive resistance in the upper 3 feet of the soil profile should be neglected. If passive resistance is used to resist lateral loads, the coefficient of sliding friction should be neglected. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 8

12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Foundation Construction Considerations The base of each foundation excavation should be free of water and loose or soft soil prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. If the soils at bearing level become excessively dry, disturbed, saturated, or frozen, the affected soil should be removed prior to placing concrete. Placement of a lean concrete mud-mat over the bearing soils should be considered if the excavations must remain open overnight or for an extended period of time. Footings should bear directly on engineered fill, native soils or native bedrock strata. Footings not requiring over-excavation of bedrock could bear on lean concrete that extends to approved native soils. Lean concrete should not be used as backfill in transition zones. Where engineered fill is required at the foundation locations, footing excavations should be widened 8 inches as shown in the detail below. The over-excavated depth should be backfilled up to the foundation base elevation with an approved engineered fill that is placed in lifts and compacted to at least 9% of the material's standard Proctor maximum dry density. The recommended extent of the overexcavation and backfill procedure is illustrated in the following figure. Figure 3. Overexcavation Detail 4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures Reinforced concrete foundation walls and retaining walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free-standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The at-rest condition assumes no wall movement and is applicable for foundation walls. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 9

13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Earth Pressure Coefficients Earth Pressure Conditions Coefficient for Backfill Type Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf) Surcharge Pressure, p 1 (psf) Earth Pressure, p 2 (psf) Active (Ka) Granular (0.31)S (40)H Clay (0.4)S (4)H At-Rest (Ko) Granular (0.47)S (61)H Clay (0.63)S (76)H Passive (Kp) Granular Clay Applicable conditions to the above include: For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about H to H, where H is wall height For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure Clay soil backfill: unit weight = 120 pcf Granular material backfill: unit weight = 130 pcf Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall No dynamic loading No safety factor included in soil parameters Ignore passive pressure in frost zone For the granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out from the base of the wall at an angle of at least 4 degrees from vertical for the active and at-rest cases, and 60 degrees for the passive case. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.3 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 10

14 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Water is not expected to naturally accumulate in the backfill on the interior side of foundation walls of the building. If there is concern that water may accumulate, which would result in application of hydrostatic loads on these walls, then foundation walls should be backfilled with granular material equivalent to ASTM C33 Size No. 7 stone extending vertically to subgrade level. The free-draining granular material should be encapsulated with suitable filter fabric. Drain tile should be installed at the base of the granular section and should daylight to a suitable outlet. If walls are undrained, equivalent fluid densities should be 100 pcf for clay and 90 pcf for granular soils. 4. Seismic Considerations Code Used Site Classification 2006 and 2009 International Building Code (IBC) C 1 1. IBC Site Class determination is based on average properties of the subsurface profile within 100 feet of the ground surface. Exploratory borings extended to a maximum depth of 1. feet. Terracon s opinion of Site Class is based on boring data and our knowledge of geotechnical and geologic conditions in this locale. 4.6 Floor Slabs Design Recommendations Floor Slab Support 1,2 Item Description 24 inches (minimum) of low volume change (LVC) materials on top of native soils or engineered fill 2 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 100 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) for point loading conditions Granular Leveling Course Layer Thickness 3 Minimum of 4 inches Capillary Break Layer Thickness 4 Minimum of 6 inches 1. Loads on footings which support structural walls and column loads are typically greater than floor slab loads. Consequently, footings should be expected to settle differently than the adjacent floor slab. Differential movement between foundations and the grade-supported floor should be considered by the structural engineer. 2. The clay soil subgrades should be evaluated and if not in compliance, scarified at least 9 inches, moisture conditioned, and re-compacted prior to placement of LVC materials. We recommend LVC subgrades be maintained in a relatively moist condition until the floor slab is constructed. If the subgrade should become desiccated prior to construction of the floor slab, the affected material should be removed or the materials scarified, moistened, and re-compacted. Upon completion of grading operations, care should be taken to maintain the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the floor slab. 3. If the purpose of this layer is solely to create a level base for concrete placement to maintain a more uniform slab thickness, well graded sand, gravel or crushed stone can be used. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 11

15 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No If penetration of moisture vapor through the slab is a concern, in our opinion the floor slab design should include a capillary break layer instead of the granular leveling course layer described above. In our opinion, capillary break layers should be comprised of granular materials that have less than percent fines (material passing the #200 sieve). Other design considerations such as cold temperatures and condensation development could warrant addition design considerations.. These granular materials may be considered part of the LVC zone. Joints should be constructed at regular intervals as recommended by the American Concrete Institute (ACI) to help control the location of cracking. It should be understood that differential settlement between the floor slabs and foundation could occur. The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder Floor Slab Construction Considerations On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, subgrades may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, rainfall, etc. As a result, floor slab subgrades may not be suitable for placement of granular material and/or concrete and corrective action will be required. Terracon should review the condition of the floor slab subgrades immediately prior to placement of the granular leveling course and construction of the slabs. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas containing backfilled trenches. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill. 4.7 Pavements Pavement Subgrades Following site stripping, the pavement subgrades should be carefully evaluated by proof-rolling as recommended in section 4.2 Earthwork. If soft or otherwise unsuitable areas are observed, additional stripping and/or overexcavation and replacement will be needed. Prior to placement of pavements, particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas where the subgrades have rutted or were disturbed during construction. In these areas, the subgrades should be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills as recommended in this report. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 12

16 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No Opinions of Minimum Pavement Thickness Pavement thickness depends upon: applied wheel/axle loads and number of repetitions subgrade and pavement material characteristics climate conditions site and pavement drainage Specific information regarding anticipated vehicle types, axle loads and traffic volumes was not provided. We considered traffic will consist primarily of 4-tire, 2-axle vehicles (cars, vans, pickups and SUVs), ambulances and a limited number of delivery trucks, fire trucks and trash removal trucks. The Parking Stalls pavement section considers 4-tire, 2-axle personal vehicles only. The Drive Lanes pavement section considers occasional fire truck traffic and a maximum of 2 trash trucks and 10 delivery trucks per week. Full Depth Asphalt Pavement on Compacted Soil Subgrade Material Parking Stalls Drive Lanes Asphalt Surface Course 2-inch (minimum) 2-inch (minimum) Asphalt Base Course 4-inch (minimum) 6-inch (minimum) Portland Cement Concrete 1 with Crushed Rock Base on Compacted Soil Subgrade Material Parking Stalls Drive Lanes 1 Portland Cement Concrete 1 -inch (minimum) 6-inch (minimum) Open Graded Rock (ASTM C 33 Size No. 7 aggregate) 4-inch (minimum) 4-inch (minimum) 1. We recommend a 7-inch Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement for trash container pads and in any other areas subjected to routine heavy wheel loads and/or turning traffic. Pavements and subgrades will be subject to freeze-thaw cycles and seasonal fluctuations in moisture content. The pavement sections provided in the table above were developed based on local soil and climate conditions. Construction traffic on the pavements was not considered in developing our opinions of minimum pavement thickness. If the pavements will be subject to construction equipment/vehicles, the pavement sections should be revised to consider the additional loading. The pavement sections provided above consider that the subgrade soils will not experience significant increases in moisture content. Paved areas should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water and to drain water away from the pavement edges. Pavements should be designed so water does not accumulate on or adjacent to the pavement, since this could saturate and soften the subgrade soils and subsequently accelerate pavement deterioration. Periodic Responsive Resourceful Reliable 13

17 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No maintenance of the pavements will be required. Cracks should be sealed, and areas exhibiting distress should be repaired promptly to help prevent further deterioration. Even with periodic maintenance, some movement and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required Pavement Construction Considerations Grading and paving are commonly performed by separate contractors and there is often a time lapse between the end of grading operations and the commencement of paving. Subgrades prepared early in the construction process may become disturbed by construction traffic. Nonuniform subgrades often result in poor pavement performance and local failures relatively soon after pavements are constructed. Depending on the paving equipment used by the contractor, measures may be required to improve subgrade strength to greater depths for support of heavily loaded concrete/asphalt trucks. We recommend the moisture content and density of the top 9 inches of the subgrade be evaluated and the pavement subgrades be proofrolled (minimum gross weight of 2 tons) within 2 days prior to commencement of actual paving operations. Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be scarified 9 inches, moisture conditioned and recompacted. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills. Some areas may be affected to depths greater than 9 inches. The subgrade should be in its finished form at the time of the final review..0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth-related construction phases of the project. The analysis, recommendations and professional opinions presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 14

18 Geotechnical Engineering Report Anderson County Hospital Garnett, KS December 14, 2012 Terracon Project No The scope of geotechnical services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1

19 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION

20 Project Site DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES Project Manager: DAB Drawn By: DAB Checked By: DAB Approved By: DAB Project No Scale: N.T.S. File Name: Date: West 96 th Terrace Lenexa, KS /14/12 PH. (913) FAX. (913) SITE LOCATION PLAN Anderson County Hospital 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS Exhibit A-1

21 PB-6 PB-2 PB-1 B-1 B-2 PB-7 PB-3 PB-4 B-3 B-4 PB-8 PB- B- B-6 B-8 PB-10 PB-9 B-7 B-9 B-10 DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES Project Manager: DAB Drawn by: DAB Checked by: DAB Approved by: DAB Terracon Project No Scale: As shown. File Name: Date: 12/3/ West 96 th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas 6621 PH. (913) FAX. (913) BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM Anderson County Hospital 421 N. Maple Street Garnett, KS Exhibit A-2

22 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-1 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: (Ft.) DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) 12" ROOT ZONE FAT CLAY (CH), brown, light brown, stiff to very stiff ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 6 FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) 000 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 27 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 90 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI trace limestone fragments below 3 ft LIMESTONE, completely weathered, with shale seams, gray brown (soil-like) 107. THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ LIMESTONE, slightly weathered, gray Boring Terminated at 14. Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers and core drilling methods Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: REC: 100% RQD: 78% Boring Started: 11/28/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/28/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-3

23 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-2 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION DEPTH 0.3 3" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 1.0 9" GRAVEL FAT CLAY (CH), brown, gray brown, very stiff S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 LIMESTONE, severely weathered, gray brown, gray Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 11 2 FIELD TEST RESULTS 0/2" N=0/2" LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) 00 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 8 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI.0 Auger refusal at Feet THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/12 Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: Boring Started: 11/28/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/28/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-4

24 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-3 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 DEPTH 12" ROOT ZONE 1.0 FAT CLAY (CH), brown, light brown, hard Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) 1081 ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 23 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 100 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ SHALE, severely to moderately weathered, brown, moderately hard LIMESTONE, moderately weathered, gray Auger refusal at 10.2 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: 0/4" N=0/4" Boring Started: 11/29/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/29/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-

25 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-4 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 DEPTH 0.3 4" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 1.0 8" GRAVEL FAT CLAY (CH), brown, gray brown, very stiff to hard Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 4 FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 20 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 106 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI.0 LIMESTONE, completely weathered, with shale seams, gray brown (soil-like) THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ LIMESTONE, severely weathered, gray LIMESTONE, slightly weathered, gray, moderately hard Boring Terminated at 1. Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers and core drilling methods Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: /3" N=72/9" REC: 100% RQD: 87% Boring Started: 11/29/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/29/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-6

26 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B- Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 DEPTH 12" ROOT ZONE 1.0 FAT CLAY (CH), brown, light brown, hard Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 2 FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 27 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ LIMESTONE, severely to moderately weathered, gray brown, gray Auger refusal at 6. Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered 1076 See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas 12 Notes: Boring Started: 11/29/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/29/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-7

27 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-6 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 DEPTH 12" ROOT ZONE 1.0 FAT CLAY (CH), brown, light brown, very stiff Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) 1083 ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 8 FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) 8000 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 30 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 90 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI 4.0 LIMESTONE, severely to moderately weathered, gray brown, gray THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ Auger refusal at 6.8 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: Boring Started: 11/29/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/29/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-8

28 PROJECT: Anderson County Hospital BORING LOG NO. B-7 Saint Luke's Health System CLIENT: Kansas City, MO Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION 421 S. Maple Street Garnett, KS See Exhibit A-2 DEPTH 12" ROOT ZONE 1.0 FAT CLAY (CH), brown, gray brown, hard Surface Elev.: (Ft.) ELEVATION (Ft.) ARCHITECT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC Leawood, KS DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) 8 FIELD TEST RESULTS LABORATORY TORVANE/HP (psf) UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) WATER CONTENT (%) 24 DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) 101 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI LIMESTONE, severely weathered, gray brown, gray THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. SMART LOG-DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF PAGE GPJ ODOT TEST.GPJ 12/13/ LIMESTONE, slightly weathered, with shale seams, gray Boring Terminated at 13. Feet 107. Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Classification of rock estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Continuous flight augers and core drilling methods Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Groundwater not encountered See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data, (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others West 96th Terrace Lenexa, Kansas Notes: REC: 77% RQD: 73% Boring Started: 11/28/2012 Drill Rig: RC-4 Project No.: Boring Completed: 11/28/2012 Driller: RM Exhibit: A-9