Geotechnical Engineering Report

Transcription

1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Prepared for: Oden Hughes Austin, Texas Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. San Antonio, Texas

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROJECT INFORMATION Project Description Site Location and Description SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Site Geology Typical Profile Groundwater RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION Geotechnical Considerations General Expansive Soil Considerations Existing Fill Considerations Borrow Pit area Earthwork Site Preparation Building Pad Preparation Material Requirements Compaction Requirements Grading and Drainage Earthwork Construction Considerations Foundations Slab-on-Grade Foundation Design Recommendations Shallow Foundation Construction Considerations Drilled Piers Foundation Drilled Pier Construction Considerations Foundation Construction Monitoring Seismic Considerations Swimming Pool Pavements Subgrade Preparation Design Considerations Pavement Section Materials Pavement Joints and Reinforcement GENERAL COMMENTS Reliable Resourceful Responsive

4 TABLE LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONTINUED APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Boring and Test Pits Location Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibit A-4 to A-23 Boring Logs Exhibit A-24 to A-26 Test Pits Logs (reference Terracon Project No ) APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System Reliable Resourceful Responsive

5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A geotechnical investigation has been performed for the proposed Amara Apartments at the Rim to be constructed off of Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road in San Antonio, Texas. Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the advancement of 20 borings at the project site to depths ranging from about 15 to 25 feet below the existing site grades. Pertinent findings and recommendations generated from this study include those summarized below: The subsurface conditions at the boring locations are highly variable and consist of variable fill materials with boulders and native Fat Clay, Lean Clay, Clayey Gravel underlain by highly weathered Limestone. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings during field activities. The results of our laboratory tests indicate that the clayey soils encountered at the site are low to highly plastic and will shrink and swell with changes in moisture content. The existing Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) at the site is about 1 to 3 inches in its present condition and depends on the encountered soil at each location. Detailed recommendations for building pad preparation are included in the report. The recommendation should be reviewed and possibly revised once the grading and finished floor elevations are available. The proposed structures may be supported on a slab-on-grade foundation system provided the building pads are prepared as recommended in this report. We understand the client has selected a design PVR of 1½ inches. Both flexible and rigid pavements may be considered for this project. The International Building Code, Table IBC seismic site classification for this site is C. This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Reliable Resourceful Responsive i

6 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT AMARA APARTMENTS AT THE RIM TALAVERA RIDGE AND OLD CAMP BULLIS ROAD SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS TERRACON PROJECT NO JUNE 27, INTRODUCTION Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) is pleased to submit our Geotechnical Engineering Report for the proposed Amara Apartments at the Rim off of Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road in San Antonio, Texas. The project was authorized by Mr. Tim Shaughnessy on April 7, 2016 through signature of Terracon Proposal No. P R2 dated April 7, This project was completed in general accordance with the referenced proposal. The project was delayed due to significant rainfall and access difficulties. The purposes of this report are to describe the subsurface conditions observed at the borings drilled for this study, analyze and evaluate the test data, and provide recommendations with respect to: subsurface soil conditions groundwater conditions earthwork foundation design and construction seismic considerations floor slab design and construction pavements swimming pool Preliminary information and a reconnaissance study were previously conducted by drilling borings and test pits, Terracon Project No The report was provided to the client via dated January 29, This report supersedes all preliminary recommendations. 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description Item Description Site layout See Appendix A, Exhibits A-1 and A-2: Site Location Plan and Boring Location Plan, respectively. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 1

7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Item Structures Building Construction Maximum loads Grading Finished floor elevation Pavements Traffic loads Description The project will include the construction of: 8 four to five-story apartment buildings with club house and swimming pool. Two of the buildings will be interconnected with the club house. Two parking decks. Associated pavements consisting of parking lots and drive lanes The buildings are anticipated to be wood-framed or steel framed structure; supported on a shallow slab-on-grade foundation system. We understand the design PVR is 1½ inches. The proposed parking decks are anticipated to be supported by either slab on grade or drilled piers foundation system. Column loads were not available at the time of this report. We anticipate that loads will be light for this type of construction. Grading plans were not provided at the time of this report. At or near existing grades within ±2 feet (assumed). New parking and drive lanes. Both asphalt and concrete pavements will be considered. No specific traffic volumes have been provided. Therefore, Terracon anticipates that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional trash removal trucks. 2.2 Site Location and Description Item Location Existing improvements Current ground cover Description This project site is located off of Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road in San Antonio, Texas. Undeveloped land. Grass, weeds, stock piles, rocks boulders and fill materials in the upper 5 feet. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Site Geology The San Antonio Sheet (1983) of the Geologic Atlas of Texas published by the Bureau of Economic Geology of the University of Texas at Austin has mapped the Glen Rose Formation (Kgru and Kgrl) of Lower Cretaceous Geologic Age at this site. The Glen Rose Formation is Reliable Resourceful Responsive 2

8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No further divided into the Upper Member, with the geologic symbol Kgru, and the Lower Member, with the geologic symbol Kgrl. The Glen Rose Formation consists of limestone, dolomite, and marl as alternating resistant and recessive beds which forms a stairstep topography. The limestone is aphanitic (individual grains are too fine to see with the naked eye) to fine grained, hard to soft and marly. The dolomite is fine-grained and porous. 3.2 Typical Profile Site soils consist of uncontrolled fill and natural soil over weathered Limestone. The fill material is highly variable, including fat clay, lean clay and clayey gravel. The native soil is also variable and consists of similar materials. Limestone was generally encountered below about 6 to 16 feet in most of the borings. The following table presents general information on the nature of the various soil types encountered at this site. Material Encountered The FAT CLAY (CH); dark brown and brown, gravelly and with sand. These materials could undergo high to very high volumetric changes (shrink/swell) should they experience changes in their in-place moisture content. The LEAN CLAY, SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL); dark brown, brown, and reddish brown, gravelly, sand. These materials could undergo low to moderate volumetric changes (shrink/swell) should they experience changes in their inplace moisture content. The CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC); dark brown, brown and reddish brown, with clay seams. This material is primarily granular in nature and could undergo low volumetric changes (shrink/swell) should it experience changes in its in-place moisture content. This stratum could be water bearing. The WEATHERED LIMESTONE; tan, materials are expected to be volumetrically stable Consistency/Density Soft to Hard Medium Stiff to Hard Medium Dense to Very Dense Hard 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 types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can be found on the boring logs in Appendix A of this report. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater generally appears as either a permanent or temporary water source. Permanent groundwater is generally present year round, which may or may not be influenced by seasonal and climatic changes. Temporary groundwater water is also referred to as a perched water source, which generally develops as a result of seasonal and climatic conditions. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 3

9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No The borings were dry-augered to their full depths in an attempt to observe for the presence of subsurface water. Subsurface water was not observed in the borings. Groundwater levels are influenced by seasonal and climatic conditions which generally result in fluctuations in the elevation of the groundwater level over time. The clayey gravel can easily transmit water. Therefore, the foundation contractor should check the groundwater conditions just before foundation excavation activities. The borings were backfilled with soil cuttings after the drilling operations and groundwater observations were completed. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations General We anticipate that the proposed apartment buildings will be supported by shallow foundation systems and pier foundations will be used for the proposed parking decks. The desired foundation system may be used at this site provided the building pads and foundations are designed and constructed as recommended in this report. Terracon would be pleased to discuss other foundation alternatives with you upon request. The foundations being considered must satisfy two independent engineering criteria with respect to the subsurface conditions encountered at this site. One criterion is the foundation system must be designed with an appropriate factor of safety to reduce the possibility of a bearing capacity failure of the soils underlying the foundation when subjected to axial and lateral load conditions. The other criterion is movement of the foundation system due to compression (consolidation or shrinkage) or expansion (swell) of the underlying soils must be within tolerable limits for the structures. Based on our findings, the subsurface soil/fill at this site exhibits a variable expansion potential. Based on the information developed from our field and laboratory programs and on method TEX- 124-E in the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Manual of Testing Procedures, we estimate that the subgrade soils in the building area exhibit a Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) of about 1 to 3 inches in its present condition. The actual movements could be greater than the values presented in this report if inadequate drainage, ponded water, and/or other sources of moisture are allowed to infiltrate beneath the structure after construction Expansive Soil Considerations Low to highly expansive soils are present on this site. This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and expansion. However, even if these procedures are followed, some movement and cracking in the structure should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and other damage such as uneven floor slabs will probably increase if any modification of the site results in excessive wetting or drying of the expansive soils. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 4

10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Site grades should provide effective drainage away from the structures during and after construction. Water permitted to pond next to these structures can result in greater soil movements than those discussed in this report. These greater movements can result in unacceptable differential floor slab movements, cracked slabs and walls, and roof leaks. Estimated movements described in this report are based on effective drainage for the life of the structures and cannot be relied upon if effective drainage is not maintained. Recommendations for preparing the building pad to reduce soil movements are provided in the Building Pad Preparation section of this report. Proper water management is important. Recommendations regarding this issue are included in the Grading and Drainage section of this report Existing Fill Considerations Onsite Fill Material FILL thickness ranging between 2 to 7 feet was encountered in the borings and test pits. The fill material consists of Lean Clay / Fat Clay with Gravel (CL-CH) and Clayey Gravel (GC). Records for the fill placement were not available for our review. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) results and the blow count N-values indicate that the fill was placed under some compaction effort, but not necessarily with controlled moisture and density. The borings and test pits performed at the site cannot solely be relied on to evaluate the potential variability of the FILL. It is possible that different conditions could exist between the boring locations than those encountered at each bore location. Test Pits were performed at the site which revealed some debris (boulders, concrete rubble, trash, rebars and metal pipes) in the fill. The contractor should be aware of such situations. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill, but can be reduced by preparing the subgrade as recommended in this report. Existing Stock Piles Test pits were conducted to collect samples from the existing stock piles at the site. Based on the laboratory results, the stockpiles soil material has plasticity indices ranged between 30 and 38. Since the materials have high plasticity index, they are not suitable and should not be considered for use as select fill. Reuse of Existing Fill Materials The debris (concrete, boulders, trash, rebars, etc.) varied between depths of about 2 and 7 feet. Based on our review of the materials, the fill should be excavated and sorted to remove the debris (boulders, concrete, rebars etc.). As discussed later a portion of the excavated soil may be reused provided it is free of debris and properly processed. The excavated soil after removal of debris should be blended to achieve a relatively uniform mix. The maximum particle size of the prepared material should be 3 inches, or less. The blended soil can be used to raise grades in pavements and other areas where there are no structures. If used, the fill should then be placed in compacted lifts of about 6 inches. Each lift should be moisture conditioned between 0 and +4 percentage points of optimum moisture content and compacted to 98 percent of ASTM D Borrow Pit Area Based on the provided information, the general area of boring B-19 is proposed to be mined as a borrow pit area to be used as a select fill for the building pad areas. The boring log designation Reliable Resourceful Responsive 5

11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No and laboratory results indicate 3 feet of clayey gravel fill over 9 feet of native clayey gravel over weathered limestone. Clayey gravel soils are suitable for use in the building pad as moisture conditioned and compacted onsite fill material provided they meet the select fill requirements. 4.2 Earthwork The following presents recommendations for general site preparation, pad preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendation should be reviewed and possibly revised once the grading and finished floor elevations are available. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations and slabs are contingent upon following the recommendations outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project Site Preparation Construction operations may encounter difficulties due to the wet or soft surface soils becoming a general hindrance to equipment due to rutting and pumping of the soil surface, especially during and soon after periods of wet weather. If the subgrade cannot be adequately compacted to minimum densities as described in the Compaction Requirements section of this report, one of the following measures may be required: 1) removal and replacement with select fill, 2) chemical treatment of the soil to dry and increase the stability of the subgrade, or 3) drying by natural means if the schedule allows. It is the responsibility of the contractor to choose the method required to access the site. Prior to placing any fill, all vegetation and any otherwise unsuitable materials should be removed from the building area. The building area includes the limits of the proposed building and any abutting flatwork plus a 5-foot (horizontal) overbuild beyond proposed perimeter of the structure and flatwork. The stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from the site, or used to revegetate landscaped areas after completion of grading operations. After stripping, the subgrade should be proof-rolled to aid in locating loose or soft areas. Proofrolling can be performed with a 15-ton roller or fully loaded dump truck. Soft, dry, wet, and lowdensity soil should be removed or compacted in place prior to placing fill as described in the Compaction Requirements section of this report Building Pad Preparation As previously stated, the existing PVRs within the building areas are about 1 to 3 inches in its present condition. Based on the client request, we have provided a separate subgrade preparation recommendations for each structure which are intended to reduce the magnitude of soil movements within each building pad to about 1½ inch. The recommendations below are based on the FFE at or near the existing grades. The finished building pad elevation FBPE is assumed to be 0.5 ft below FFE. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 6

12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Based on the PVR calculation for the existing condition of the on-site soil, the buildings/structures are divided into three groups based on the amount of removal and replace with select fill as following; - Group A (Building 1, 2, 4, Club House, PD-1 and PD-2) - Group B (Building 3, 5, 7 and 8) - Group C (Building 6) Complete stripping operations as discussed in the Site Preparation section. Excavate and remove completely the existing fill material from each building area and expose the native soil. The building area is defined as the area extending at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the structure, including any flatwork that abuts the structure such as sidewalks. The exposed subgrade in the building areas should be proofrolled with at least a 15-ton roller, or equivalent equipment, to evidence any weak yielding zones. Overexcavate any confirmed weak yielding zones, both vertically and horizontally, to expose competent soil. The excavated soil can be used to restore grade provided that the material is relatively free and clean of deleterious material or materials exceeding 3 inches in maximum dimension. A Terracon geotechnical engineer or their representative should be present to observe proofrolling operations. After proofrolling and the replacement of weak yielding zones, scarify, moisture condition, and compact the upper 6 inches of the newly exposed subgrade as described in the Compaction Requirements section. Place select fill material and on-site moisture conditioned soil to achieve the FBPE of each building. Moisture condition and compact the select fill as described in the Compaction Requirements section. Recommendations for select fill are included in the Material Requirements section. Recommendations for moisture conditioning and compaction of select fill materials are presented in the Compaction Requirements section. On-site soil that meets the select fill requirements may be used. This will result in variable thicknesses of select fill over moisture conditioned and compacted on-site soil beneath the various building pads as presented in following table: Group Existing PVR (inch) To Achieve 1½ inch PVR 1 1 A 2 to 3 1½ select Fill B 1 to 1½ 1½ select Fill C 2½ 3 Select Fill The amount of removal and replacement presented for each group is based on removing the entire fill material zone from the building/structure pad area. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 7

13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No To provide a more uniform slab support and create a more all-weather working surface, consideration should be given to constructing the final 6 inches of the pad with granular select fill. Recommendations for granular select fill are included in the Material Requirements section of this report Material Requirements Subsequent to proofrolling, and just prior to placement of all structural fill, the exposed subgrade within the construction area should be evaluated for moisture and density. If the moisture, density, and/or the requirements do not meet the criteria described in the table below, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches; moisture adjusted and compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard Effort (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Select fill and on-site soils should meet the following criteria. Fill Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement Granular Select Fill 2 Varies Building pad (at least the upper 6 inches) Onsite Soils meeting the criteria for Select Fill or Imported Select Fill 3 On-Site Soil CL, GC, SC (PI 7 to 20) CH, CL, GC Suitable for onsite grade changes both inside and outside of the building pad. CH, soils are suitable for use in general grading and pavement areas. These soils should not be used in the building pad. CL, GC, These onsite soils are suitable for use in the building pad as moisture conditioned and compacted onsite fill material provided they meet the select fill requirements. 1 Prior to any filling operations, samples of the proposed borrow and on-site materials should be obtained for laboratory moisture-density testing. The tests will provide a basis for evaluation of fill compaction by in-place density testing. A qualified soil technician should perform sufficient in-place density tests during the filling operations to evaluate that proper levels of compaction, including dry unit weight and moisture content, are being attained. Controlled, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris or materials exceeding 3 inches in maximum dimension. 2 Granular select fill should consist of cohesive crushed limestone material with a maximum aggregate size of 3 inches and PI between 5 and Select fill for the building pad should consist of a low plasticity lean clay, gravelly soils, or sandy soils with a PI between 5 and 20 percent. This material is locally called pit-run material and may need to be imported for this site. Some of the onsite soils may meet the criteria for select fill materials and should be tested prior to use for this purpose Compaction Requirements Fill Lift Thickness Item Description All fill should be placed in thin, loose lifts of about 8 inches, with compacted thickness not exceeding 6 inches. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 8

14 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Item Compaction of Onsite Soil, or Select Fill; (CH, CL, SC, GC) Moisture Content of Onsite Granular Soil or Select Fill; (CL, SC, GC) Description 95 percent of the material s Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The materials should be moisture conditioned between -2 and +3 percentage points of the optimum moisture content. Moisture Content of Onsite Clayey Soil The materials should be moisture conditioned between 0 and +4 percentage points of the optimum moisture content. 1 Unless otherwise noted within this report all compaction requirements are provided above Grading and Drainage Effective drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development. After building construction and landscaping, we recommend verifying final grades to document that effective drainage has been achieved. Grades around the structure should also be periodically inspected and adjusted as necessary, as part of the structure s maintenance program. Water permitted to pond next to the structure can result in distress in the structure including unacceptable differential floor slab movements, cracked slabs and walls, and roof leaks. Building slab and foundation performances described in this report are based on effective drainage for the life of the structure and cannot be relied upon if effective drainage is not maintained. Flatwork and pavements will be subject to post-construction movement. Maximum grades practical should be used for paving and flatwork to prevent water from ponding. Allowances in final grades should also consider post-construction movement of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the structure, effectively seal and maintain joints to prevent surface water infiltration. In areas where sidewalks or paving do not immediately adjoin the structure, we recommend that protective slopes be provided with a grade of at least three to five percent for at least 10 feet from perimeter walls (Except in areas where ADA ramps are required; these should comply with state and local regulations). Backfill against grade beams, exterior walls, and in utility and sprinkler line trenches should be well compacted and free of construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. Planters and other surface features which could retain water in areas adjacent to the structures should be properly drained, designed, sealed or eliminated. Landscaped irrigation adjacent to the foundation systems should be properly designed and controlled to help maintain a relatively constant moisture content within 5 feet of the structure. Collect roof runoff in drains or gutters. Discharge roof drains and downspouts onto pavements and/or flatwork which slope away from the structure or extend downspouts a minimum of 5 feet away from building. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 9

15 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Earthwork Construction Considerations It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Based upon the subsurface conditions determined from the geotechnical exploration, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively stable. However, the stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. Over excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Lightweight excavation equipment may be required to reduce subgrade pumping. The use of remotely operated equipment, such as a backhoe, would be beneficial to perform cuts and reduce subgrade disturbance. All temporary excavations should be sloped or braced as required by Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading operations. The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. 4.3 Foundations The building may be supported on a shallow slab-on-grade foundation system. Parking decks may be supported by slab on-grade foundations or drilled pier foundation. Recommendations for shallow foundation system are provided in the following sections Slab-on-Grade Foundation Design Recommendations Based upon the subsurface conditions observed during our investigation, a shallow foundation system would be appropriate to support the structural loads of the proposed buildings provided the subgrade is prepared as discussed in the Building Pad Preparation section of this report. Parameters commonly used to design this type of foundation are provided on the table below. The slab foundation design parameters presented on the table below are based on the criteria published by the Building Research Advisory Board (BRAB) and the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) 3 rd Edition. These are essentially empirical design methods and the recommended design parameters are based on our understanding of the proposed project, our interpretation of the information and data collected as a part of this study, our area experience, and the criteria published in the BRAB and PTI design manuals. Conventional Method Prepared Subgrade 1 Net Allowable Bearing Pressures 2 2,000 psf Subgrade Modulus (k) 70 pci Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) 1½ inch Reliable Resourceful Responsive 10

16 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No BRAB Methods Design Plasticity Index (PI) 3 34 Climatic Rating (Cw) 17 Unconfined Compressive Strength 1.0 tsf Soil Support Index (C) 0.80 PTI Method 3 rd Edition Thornthwaite Moisture Index (Im) -14 Depth of Constant Soil Suction 9 feet Constant Soil Suction 3.6 pf Edge Moisture Variation Distance (em): Center Lift 8.5 feet Edge Lift 4.2 feet Differential Soil Movement (ym): Center Lift 1.5 inches Edge Lift 1.1 inches Coefficient of Slab-Subgrade Friction ( ): 0.75 to Based on preparing the building pad as discussed in this report. 2 The net allowable bearing pressure provided above includes a Factor of Safety (FS) of at least 3. We recommend that all grade beams be at least 24 inches below the Finished Building Pad Elevation (FBPE) which corresponds to 30 inches below the FFE. These recommendations are for proper development of bearing capacity for the continuous beam sections of the foundation system and to reduce the potential for water to migrate beneath the slab foundation. These recommendations are not based on structural considerations. Grade beam depths may need to be greater than recommended herein for structural considerations and should be properly evaluated and designed by the Structural Engineer. For a slab foundation system designed and constructed as recommended in this report, post construction settlements should be less than 1 inch. Settlement response of a select fill supported slab is influenced more by the quality of construction than by soil-structure interaction. Therefore, it is essential that the recommendations for foundation construction be strictly followed during the construction phases of the building pad and foundation. 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, or when the slabs will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 for procedures and cautions about the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 11

17 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Shallow Foundation Construction Considerations The shallow foundations should preferably be neat excavated. Excavation should be accomplished with a smooth-mouthed bucket. If a toothed bucket is used, excavation with this bucket should be stopped 6 inches above the final bearing surface and the excavation completed with a smooth-mouthed bucket or by hand labor. If neat excavation is not possible then the foundation should be overexcavated and formed. All loose materials should be removed from the overexcavated areas and filled with lean concrete or compacted cement stabilized sand (two sacks cement to one cubic yard of sand) or flowable fill. Steel should be placed and the foundation poured within 36 hours of excavation. If not, a seal slab consisting of lean concrete should be poured to protect the exposed foundation soils. The bearing surface should be excavated with a slight slope to create an internal sump for runoff water collection and removal. If surface runoff water in excess of 1 inch accumulates at the bottom of the excavation, it should be pumped out prior to concrete placement. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to adversely affect the quality of the bearing surface. Backfill soils above the foundation should consist of select fill. Backfill soils should be placed in loose 8-inch lifts; moisture conditioned and compacted. Recommendations for select fill are included in the Material Requirements section of this report Drilled Piers Foundation The parking decks may be supported on drilled piers bearing at a depth no shallower than 15 feet below existing grade or at least 5 feet into weathered limestone Stratum. Due to the presence of clayey gravel and limestone, underreamed piers are not recommended. Drilled piers may be designed for net allowable bearing pressure of 12,000 psf. This bearing pressure include factor of safety against a bearing capacity failure of approximately 3. An allowable side shear value of 400 psf, with an assumed factor of safety of at least 2, may be used to aid in resisting axial compressive loads on the piers. The side shear should be neglected for the upper 4 feet of soil in contact with the pier shaft. Piers should not extend deeper than 20 feet below the existing grades at the time of our geotechnical field activities without contacting our office. Piers should be designed with a shaft diameter at least 18 inches to facilitate inspection. The allowable end bearing and skin friction values presented in this report are based on centerto-center spacing of the pier foundations no closer than a horizontal distance of three shaft diameters (using the larger bearing diameter). A closer spacing may be considered but may effect (reduce) the axial capacity of the foundation depending on the spacing pattern of the foundations. Terracon can assist in evaluating the possibility of a closer spacing once a foundation layout has been determined. In addition to the axial compressive loads on the piers, these piers will also be subjected to axial tension loads due to the expansive soil conditions and possibly due to other induced structural loading conditions. To compute the axial tension force due to the swelling soils along the pier shaft, the following equation may be used. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 12

18 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Q u = 35 d Where: Q u = Uplift force due to expansive soil conditions in kips (k) d = Diameter of pier shaft in feet (ft) This calculated force may be used to compute the longitudinal reinforcing steel required in the pier to resist the uplift force induced by the swelling clays. However, the cross-sectional area of the reinforcing steel should not be less than 1 percent of the gross cross-sectional area of the drilled pier shaft. The reinforcing steel should extend from the top to the bottom of the shaft to resist this potential uplift force. The allowable uplift resistance of the straight sided drilled piers can be evaluated using the following equation: Q ar = 3.0 d D p W p + P DL Where: Q ar = Allowable uplift resistance of pier in kips (k) d = Diameter of pier shaft in feet (ft) D p = Founding depth of pier in natural soils minus the upper 4 feet of shaft in contact with the soil in feet (ft) W p = Weight of the drilled pier in kips (k) = Dead Load acting on the drilled pier in kips (k) P DL The structural engineer may want to factor the dead load value based on their degree of certainty. For adjacent piers, we recommend a minimum center-to-center spacing of at least 3 pier diameter based on the larger diameter of the two adjacent piers. In locations where this minimum spacing criterion cannot be accomplished, Terracon should be contacted to evaluate the locations on a case-by-case basis. Total settlements, based on the indicated bearing pressures, should be about 1 inch for properly designed and constructed drilled piers. Settlement beneath individual piers will be primarily elastic with most of the settlement occurring during construction. Differential settlement may also occur between adjacent piers. The amount of differential settlement could approach 50 to 75 percent of the total pier settlement. For properly designed and constructed piers, differential settlement between adjacent piers is estimated to be less than ¾ of an inch. Settlement response of drilled piers is impacted more by the quality of construction than by soil-structure interaction. Improper pier installation could result in differential settlements significantly greater than we have estimated. In addition, larger magnitudes of settlement should be expected if the soil is subjected to bearing pressures higher than the allowable values presented in this report. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 13

19 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Lateral Loading - The piers supporting the light poles may be subjected to lateral loading. The criteria for lateral load analysis is presented in Table 1 are for use with the computer program LPILE. A number of methods, including hand solutions and computer programs, are available for calculating the lateral behavior of piles and drilled piers. The majority of these methods rely on key soil parameters such as soil elastic properties (E and ks), strain at 50 percent of the principal stress difference ( 50), undrained shear strength (c), and load-deflection (p-y) criteria. The p-y criteria, which are commonly used to model soil reaction, were developed from instrumented load tests and are generally considered to provide the best model of soil behavior under short-term lateral loading. It should be noted that the initial elastic moduli for soil and rock are referred to as soil modulus (k) and as initial rock modulus (E ri) on Table 1, and in the LPILE program. The E ri values refer to the Young s modulus, in pounds per square inch (psi), as described in the notes of the table. In the same fashion, the equivalent strain factor for rock materials is referred to as k rm. Factors of safety are not generally applied to the lateral load analysis. A performance criteria, or limit state, are usually considered. For most foundations subjected to lateral loads, the pier foundation is designed with a limit of 1 inch of deflection at the top of the pier and 1 degree of rotation as measured from the vertical axis of the pier. The analysis is generally conducted using the working loads and the limit state values. The applied loads are then doubled to evaluate the deflection and rotation at the top of the pier to determine if the foundation will topple over under extreme overload. This overload condition may indicate that the foundation would deflect or rotate such that the tower will tilt but the foundation will not experience failure. Structural limits, such as moment capacity and shear, may control the design and should be evaluated by the Structural Engineer Drilled Pier Construction Considerations The pier excavations should be augered and constructed in a continuous manner. Steel and concrete should be placed in the pier excavations immediately following drilling and evaluation for proper bearing stratum, embedment, and cleanliness. Under no circumstances should the pier excavations remain open overnight. Due to the presence of limestone; high torque, high powered (rock) drilling equipment will be required. During the time of our drilling operations, subsurface water was not encountered. Subsurface water levels are influenced by seasonal and climatic conditions which result in fluctuations in subsurface water elevations. Clayey Gravel were also encountered during drilling. Therefore caving of the pier walls during excavation should be anticipated. Therefore, the contractor should be prepared to use temporary casing should water be encountered and/or sloughing of the excavation sidewalls occur. It is the responsibility of the foundation contractor to choose the casing, type, depth and method of installation. The casing method is discussed in the following paragraphs. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 14

20 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Casing Method- Casing should provide stability of the excavation walls and should reduce water influx; however, casing may not completely eliminate subsurface water influx potential. In order for the casing to be effective, a water tight seal must be achieved between the casing and surrounding soils. The drilling subcontractor should determine casing depths and casing procedures. Water that accumulates in excess of 3 inches in the bottom of the pier excavation should be pumped out prior to steel and concrete placement. If the water is not pumped out, a closed-end tremie should be used to place the concrete completely to the bottom of the pier excavation in a controlled manner to effectively displace the water during concrete placement. If water is not a factor, concrete may be placed with a short tremie so the concrete is directed to the bottom of the pier excavation. The concrete should not be allowed to ricochet off the walls of the pier excavation nor off the reinforcing steel. If this operation is not successful or to the satisfaction of the foundation contractor, the pier excavation should be flooded with fresh water to offset the differential water pressure caused by the unbalanced water levels inside and outside of the casing. The concrete should be tremied completely to the bottom of the excavation with a closedend tremie. Removal of casing should be performed with extreme care and under proper supervision to reduce mixing of the surrounding soil and water with the fresh concrete. Rapid withdrawal of casing or the auger may develop suction that could cause the soil to intrude into the excavation. An insufficient head of concrete in the casing during its withdrawal could also allow the soils to intrude into the wet concrete. Both of these conditions may induce necking, a section of reduced diameter, in the pier. All aspects of concrete design and placement should comply with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) 318 Code Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, ACI Standard Specification for the Construction of Drilled Piers, and ACI 336.3R entitled Suggested Design and Construction Procedures for Pier Foundations. Concrete should be designed to achieve the specified minimum 28-day compressive strength when placed at a 7 inch slump with a 1 inch tolerance. Adding water to a mix designed for a lower slump does not meet the intent of this recommendation. If a high range water reducer is used to achieve this slump, the span of slump retention for the specific admixture under consideration should be thoroughly investigated. Compatibility with other concrete admixtures should also be considered. A technical representative of the admixture supplier should be consulted on these matters. Successful installation of drilled piers is a coordinated effort involving the general contractor, design consultants, subcontractors and suppliers. Each must be properly equipped and prepared to provide their services in a timely fashion. Several key items are: Proper drilling rig with proper equipment (including high torque, high powered rock drilling equipment). Reliable Resourceful Responsive 15

21 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Reinforcing steel cages tied to meet project specifications; Proper scheduling and ordering of concrete for the piers; and Monitoring of installation by design professionals. Pier construction should be carefully monitored to assure compliance of construction activities with the appropriate specifications. A number of items recommended for monitoring during pier installation include those listed below. Pier locations Concrete properties and placement Vertical alignment Casing removal (if required) Competent bearing Proper casing seal for subsurface water control Steel placement If the contractor has to deviate from the recommended foundations, Terracon should be notified immediately so additional engineering recommendations can be provided for an appropriate foundation type Foundation Construction Monitoring The performance of the foundation system for the proposed structure will be highly dependent upon the quality of construction. Thus, we recommend that fill pad compaction and foundation installation be monitored by an experienced Terracon soil technician under the direction of our Geotechnical Engineer. We would be pleased to develop a plan for compaction and foundation installation monitoring to be incorporated in the overall quality control program. 4.4 Seismic Considerations Description 2012 International Building Code Site Classification (IBC) 1 C 2 Site Latitude (Degrees) Site Longitude (Degrees) Value N W Mapped Spectral Acceleration for Short Periods (0.2-Second): (SS) g Mapped Spectral Acceleration for a 1-Second Period: (S1) g 1 The site class definition was determined using SPT N-values in conjunction with section in the 2012 IBC and Table in the 2010 ASCE-7. 2 Borings extended to a maximum depth of 25 feet, and this seismic site class definition considers that Hard soil continues below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. 3 The Spectral Acceleration values were determined using publicly available information provided on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) website. The spectral acceleration values can be used to determine the site coefficients using Tables (1) and (2) in the 2012 IBC. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 16

22 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Swimming Pool The proposed swimming pool walls will be subject to lateral earth pressures induced by the soil retained by those walls, and should consider the drainage conditions behind the wall. Swimming pool walls should be designed to resist at rest earth pressures due to their generally non-yielding nature. If the pool is constructed using a gunite technique, then the equivalent fluid density will be dictated by the natural soil. With the gunite method, installation of drainage material is not practical. Therefore, the design pressures should consider full hydrostatic conditions behind the wall. If the soils are mass excavated and the swimming pool is formed and placed, then the backfill can consist of select materials such as clean, free-draining sand or gravel, which will allow the equivalent fluid density exerted on the pool walls to be controlled to some extent. The select granular fill should extend behind the heel of the wall and extend upward to the ground surface at an angle of 45 degrees or flatter. If the pool walls are backfilled with select granular fill, then a drainage system comprised of slotted or perforated PVC pipe encased by clean sand or gravel that is completely wrapped in filter fabric should be considered for behind-wall construction to further control the equivalent fluid density. However, if this drainage system fails to perform as intended, then full hydrostatic pressures may occur. The following equivalent fluid densities may be used for the design of the swimming pool walls at this site depending upon whether or not reliable drainage is provided behind the wall. The following equivalent fluid densities do not account for any surcharge loads. Retained Material Type With Hydrostatic Forces Drainage Condition Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf) Without Hydrostatic Forces Clayey Gravel Lean Clay Soil Free-Draining Sand/Gravel We recommend that the walls of the pool be designed assuming no pressure from the water in the pool; i.e. an empty pool. 4.6 Pavements Both flexible and rigid pavement systems may be considered for the project. Based on our knowledge of the project, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional delivery and trash removal trucks. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 17

23 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Subgrade Preparation Prior to placing any fill, vegetation and any otherwise unsuitable materials should be removed from the new pavement areas. After stripping, the subgrade should be proof-rolled to aid in locating loose or soft areas. Proof-rolling can be performed with a 15-ton roller or fully loaded dump truck. Wet, soft, low-density or dry material should either be removed or moisture conditioned and recompacted to the moisture contents and densities described in the Compaction Requirements section prior to placing fill Design Considerations For this project Light and Heavy pavement section alternatives have been provided. A light section is for areas expected to receive only car traffic. A heavy section assumes areas with heavy traffic, such as trash pickup areas and main access drive areas. The flexible pavement section was designed in general accordance with the National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) Information Series (IS-109) method (Class 1 for Light and Class 2 for Heavy). The rigid pavement section was designed using the American Concrete Institute (ACI 330R-01) method (Traffic Category A (ADTT=0) for Light and A-1 (ADTT=10) for Heavy). If heavier traffic loading is expected, Terracon should be provided with the information and allowed to review these pavement sections. Light Duty FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SYSTEM (inches) Raw Subgrade Modified Subgrade Heavy Duty Dumpster Location Light Duty Heavy Duty Dumpster Location Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete NR NR 2 Base Material NR NR 2 Modified Subgrade NR NR 2 Moisture Conditioned Subgrade NR NR 2 1 Asphaltic base material may be used in place of crushed limestone base material. Every 2.5 inches of crushed limestone base material may be replaced with 1 inch of asphaltic base material. However, the minimum thickness of the asphaltic base material is 4 inches. 2 NR = Not Recommended 3 As an alternative to a lime treated subgrade beneath the flexible pavements, a geogrid such as Tensar BX-1100 or Tensar TX-140 may be used at the interface between the subgrade soils and the base material. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 18

24 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Light Duty RIGID PAVEMENT SYSTEM (inches) Raw Subgrade Modified Subgrade Heavy Duty Dumpster Location Light Duty Heavy Duty Dumpster Location Reinforced Concrete Modified Subgrade Moisture Conditioned Subgrade The pavement subgrade is expected to consist of natural undisturbed soils or fill material in cut areas, and fill utilizing soils taken from the cut to raise grades where required. Proper perimeter drainage is very important and should be provided so infiltration of surface water from unpaved areas surrounding the pavement is minimized. We do not recommend installation of landscape beds or islands in the pavement areas. Such features provide an avenue for water to enter into the pavement section and underlying soil subgrade. Water penetration usually results in degradation of the pavement section with time as vehicular traffic traverses the affected area. Therefore, positive drainage should be established and maintained throughout the life of the pavement. Curbs should extend through the base and at least 3 inches into the soil subgrade below the base course. This will help reduce migration of subsurface water into the pavement base course from adjacent areas. A crack sealant compatible to both asphalt and concrete should be provided at all concrete-asphalt interfaces. Pavement areas that will be subjected to heavy wheel and traffic volumes, such as waste bin or "dumpster" areas, entrance/exit ramps, and delivery areas, should be a rigid pavement section constructed of reinforced concrete. The concrete pavement areas should be large enough to properly accommodate the vehicular traffic and loads. For example: The dumpster pad should be large enough so that the wheels of the collection truck are entirely supported on the concrete pavement during lifting of the waste bin; and The concrete pavement should extend beyond any areas that require extensive turning, stopping, and maneuvering. The pavement design engineer should consider these and other similar situations when planning and designing pavement areas. Waste bin and other areas that are not designed to accommodate these situations often result in localized pavement failures. The pavement section has been designed using generally recognized structural coefficients for the pavement materials. These structural coefficients reflect the relative strength of the pavement materials and their contribution to the structural integrity of the pavement. If the pavement does not drain properly, it is likely that ponded water will infiltrate the pavement materials resulting in a Reliable Resourceful Responsive 19

25 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No weakening of the materials. As a result, the structural coefficients of the pavement materials will be reduced and the life and performance of the pavement will be shortened. The Asphalt Institute recommends a minimum of 2 percent slope for asphalt pavements. The importance of proper drainage cannot be overemphasized and should be thoroughly considered by the project team Pavement Section Materials Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course - The asphaltic concrete surface course should be plant mixed, hot laid Type C or D Surface. The asphaltic concrete base course should also be plant mixed, hot laid Type A or B. Each mix should meet the master specifications requirements of 2004 TXDOT Standard Specifications Item 341, Item SS 3224 (2011) and specific criteria for the job mix formula. The mix should be compacted between 91 and 95 percent of the maximum theoretical density as measured by TEX-227-F. The asphalt cement content by percent of total mixture weight should fall within a tolerance of ±0.3 percent asphalt cement from the specific mix. In addition, the mix should be designed so 75 to 85 percent of the voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) are filled with asphalt cement. The grade of the asphalt cement should be PG or higher performance grade. Aggregates known to be prone to stripping should not be used in the hot mix. If such aggregates are used measures should be taken to mitigate this concern. The mix should have at least 70 percent strength retention when tested in accordance with TEX-531-C. Pavement specimens, which shall be either cores or sections of asphaltic pavement, will be tested according to Test Method TEX-207-F. The nucleardensity gauge or other methods which correlate satisfactorily with results obtained from project pavement specimens may be used when approved by the Engineer. Unless otherwise shown on the plans, the Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the required pavement specimens at their expense and in a manner and at locations selected by the Engineer. Concrete - Concrete should have a minimum 28-day design compressive strength of 4,000 psi. Granular Base Material Base material may be composed of crushed limestone base/ crushed concrete meeting all of the requirements of 2004 TxDOT Item 247, Type A or D, Grade 1 or 2; including triaxial strength. Asphaltic Base Course - The asphaltic base material should meet the specification requirements of 2004 TxDOT Standard Specification Item 340, Type A or B. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 20

26 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Modified Subgrade - Due to the presence of clay at this site, the subgrade may be treated with hydrated lime in accordance with TxDOT Item 260 in order to improve its strength and improve its load carrying capacity. If granular soils are exposed in the subgrade, cement may be used. If a modified subgrade is chosen, the subgrade soils should be tested for sulfates due to the possibility of a reaction between the calcium-based modifiers and sulfates in the soil. We anticipate that approximately 6 percent hydrated lime will be required. This is equivalent to about 27 pounds of hydrated lime per square yard for a 6 inch treatment depth. However, the actual percentage should be determined by laboratory tests on samples of the clayey subgrade prior to construction. The optimum lime content should result in a soil-lime mixture with a ph of at least 12.4 when tested in accordance with ASTM C 977, Appendix XI and should reduce the Plasticity Index to 20 or less. For lime-treated subgrade, the lime should initially be blended with a mixing device such as a Pulvermixer, sufficient water added, and be allowed to cure for at least 48 hours. After curing, the lime-soil should be remixed to meet the in-place gradation requirements of Item 260 and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D 698 at moisture contents ranging from optimum and 4 percentage points above the optimum moisture content. Moisture Conditioned Subgrade - The subgrade should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches and then moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended in the Compaction Requirements section of this report. Details regarding subgrade preparation, fill materials, placement and compaction are presented in the Earthwork section under the Material Requirements and Compaction Requirements subsections Pavement Joints and Reinforcement The following is recommended for all concrete pavement sections in this report. Refer to ACI 330 Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots for additional information. Contraction Joint Spacing: Contraction Joint Depth: Contraction Joint Width: 12½ feet each way for pavement thickness of 5 or 5½ inches; 15 feet each way for pavement thickness of 6 or greater. At least ¼ of pavement thickness. One-fourth inch or as required by joint sealant manufacturer. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 21

27 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Construction Joint Spacing: Construction Joint Depth/Width: Isolation Joint Spacing: Isolation Joint Depth: Isolation Joint Width: Expansion Joint: To attempt to limit the quantity of joints in the pavement, consideration can be given to installing construction joints at contraction joint locations, where it is applicable. Full depth of pavement thickness. Construct sealant reservoir along one edge of the joint. Width of reservoir to be ¼ inch or as required by joint sealant manufacturer. Depth of reservoir to be at least ¼ of pavement thickness. As required to isolate pavement from structures, etc. Full depth of pavement thickness. One-half to 1 inch or as required by the joint sealant manufacturer. None (see note below) Note: Long, linear pavements may require expansion joints. However, in this locale, drying shrinkage of concrete typically significantly exceeds anticipated expansion due to thermal affects. As a result, the need for expansion joints is eliminated provided all joints (including saw cuts) are sealed. Construction of an unnecessary joint may be also become a maintenance problem. All joints should be sealed. If all joints, including sawcuts, are not sealed then expansion joints should be installed. Distributed Steel: Steel reinforcement may consist of steel bars described as follows: N o 3 reinforcing steel bars at 18 inches on-center-each-way, Grade 60. N o 4 reinforcing steel bars at 24 inches on-center-each-way, Grade 60. Note: It is imperative that the distributed steel be positioned accurately in the pavement cross section, namely 2 inches from the top of the pavement. All construction joints have dowels. Dowel information varies with pavement thickness as presented as follows: Pavement Thickness: 5, 5½ inches 6, 6½ inches 7 inches Dowels: ⅝ inch diameter ¾ inch diameter ⅞ inch diameter Dowel Spacing: 12 inches on center 12 inches on center 12 inches on center Dowel Length: 12 inches long 14 inches long 14 inches long Dowel Embedment: 5 inches 6 inches 6 inches Reliable Resourceful Responsive 22

28 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No 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 and recommendations 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. Prospective contractors should familiarize themselves with the conditions at the site and retain their own experts to interpret the data in this report and perform additional testing and/or inspection as they deem necessary prior to bidding. The scope of 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. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to 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. Reliable Resourceful Responsive 23

29 TABLE

30 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No TABLE 1 LATERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS AMARA APARTMENTS AT THE RIM TALAVERA RIDGE AND OLD CAMP BULLIS ROAD SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS TERRACON PROJECT NO Layer Depth to Bottom of Layer (feet) Total Unit Weight (pcf) Effective Unit Weight (pcf) Undrained Shear Strength (psf) Soil Strain Factor Friction Angle (degrees) RQD (%) 5 Subgrade Modulus, k 6 ( 50) LPILE Soil Types , Stiff Clay without Water Sand psi Weak Rock ,000 1 Design depth to subsurface water is below 25 feet. 2 Stratigraphy shown above is based on our interpretation of soil strength and may not correspond with the descriptive classifications shown on the boring logs. 3 The lateral load criteria shown above are for use in the computer programs LPILE. 4 Uniaxial compressive strength of rock is in psi. 5 RQD value is assumed. 6 K-value given for Weak Rock is Eri in psi. (pci) Reliable Resourceful Responsive Table 1

31 APPENDIX A

32 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY GOOGLE EARTH Project Manager: AW Drawn by: TA Checked by: AW Approved by: GPS Project No Scale: As Shown File Name: Exhibits Date: 6/17/ Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX SITE LOCATION PLAN Amara Apartments at the Rim Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas Exhibit A-1

33 B-1 B-16 B-19 1 B-15 PD-1 B-17 B-14 B-2 TP-3 B-4 3 B-20 TP-2 4 B-5 PD-2 TP-1 8 B-13 B-6 B-3 B-18 2 B-7 5 B-8 B-9 B B-11 B-12 - Approximate Boring Location Surface Condition - Approximate Test Pit Location Terracon Project No Surface Condition - Building Number Surface Condition DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES Project Manager: AW Drawn by: TA Checked by: AW Approved by: GPS Project No Scale: NTS File Name: Exhibits Date: 6/17/ Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX BORING LOCATION PLAN Amara Apartments at the Rim Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas Exhibit A-2

34 Geotechnical Engineering Report Amara Apartments at the Rim San Antonio, Texas June 27, 2016 Terracon Project No Field Exploration Description Terracon personnel used the site plan provided by the client, to establish the bore locations in the field. The bore locations were located in the field using a hand-held GPS device. A copy of the Bore Location Plan indicating the approximate boring locations is included in Appendix A. The location of the boring should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. A truck-mounted, rotary drill rig equipped with continuous flight augers was used to advance the boreholes. Soil samples were obtained by both thin-walled tube and split-barrel sampling procedures. In the thin-walled tube sampling procedure, a thin-walled, seamless tube with a sharp cutting edge is pushed hydraulically into the ground to obtain relatively undisturbed samples of cohesive or moderately cohesive soils. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a standard 2- inch O.D. split-barrel sampling spoon is driven into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18-inch penetration is recorded as the standard penetration resistance value. These values are indicated on the borings logs at the depths of occurrence. The samples were sealed and transported to the laboratory for testing and classification. Also test pits were conducted at the site to a certain depth to observe the depth of the fill material using a backhoe with an operator provided by the client. The test pits were backfilled upon completion using the excavated material. Our field representative prepared the field logs as part of the drilling operations. The field logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling and our field representative interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Each boring log included with this report represents the engineer s/geologist s interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on visual observations and testing of the samples in the laboratory. Reliable Resourceful Responsive Exhibit A-3

35 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-1 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, stiff to hard with coarse gravel DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=8 WATER CONTENT (%) 26 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES - turns to brown below 3 feet 19-50/4" N=50/4" CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) brown to reddish brown, very dense N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard /4" N=50/4" 28-50/1" N=50/1" 2 2 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/26/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/26/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-4

36 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-2 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) brown, stiff to hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=17 WATER CONTENT (%) 15 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES /3" N=50/3" CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, dense WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard N= N=45 50/2" N=Ref/2" THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ - turns to gray below 17 feet 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-5

37 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-3 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) brown, stiff to hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=19 WATER CONTENT (%) 11 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard N= THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/1" N=Ref/1" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-6

38 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-4 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) dark brown, medium stiff to very stiff, sandy DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=14 WATER CONTENT (%) 18 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES - with gravel layer between 2 and 4 feet - turns to brown below 4 feet N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, medium dense N= N= N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/2" N=Ref/2" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 5/6/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 5/6/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-7

39 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-5 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, stiff to very stiff DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=9 WATER CONTENT (%) 23 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, medium dense to dense N= N= layer of marly clay below 8 feet WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard N=48 9 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/3" N=Ref/3" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/3" sampler could only be driven 3 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 5/6/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 5/6/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-8

40 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-6 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, medium stiff to very stiff, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=6 WATER CONTENT (%) 21 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, very stiff to hard N= /5" N=50/5" CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, medium dense N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/5" N=Ref/5" 50/2" N=Ref/2" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 5/6/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 5/6/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-9

41 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-7 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CH) brown, hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=35 WATER CONTENT (%) 5 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense N= /3" N=82/9" WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 7-50/3" N=50/3" 50/5" N=Ref/5" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Driller: Ramco Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Exhibit: A-10

42 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-8 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) brown, stiff to hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=23 WATER CONTENT (%) 8 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard /5" N=71/11" 38-50/5" N=50/5" /2" N=Ref/2" 7 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: N=38 50/3" N=Ref/3" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-11

43 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-9 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CH) brown, hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=24 WATER CONTENT (%) 11 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES 4.0 FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, soft to hard N= N= N= turns to brown below 8 feet HP= LEAN CLAY (CL) reddish brown, hard HP= THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 13 N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-12

44 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-10 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) brown, very stiff, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=15 WATER CONTENT (%) 20 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES 4.0 FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, very stiff N= N= N= LEAN CLAY (CL) brown to reddish brown, very stiff to hard N=27 26 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ gravelly below 13 feet WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard, marly 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: N=39 50/5" N=Ref/5" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-13 16

45 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-11 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CH) brown, medium stiff to very stiff DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=18 WATER CONTENT (%) 11 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES clayey gravel between 2 to 4 feet FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, very stiff LEAN CLAY (CL) reddish brown, hard with gravel N= N= N= /2" N=50/2" WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/1" N=Ref/1" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-14

46 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-12 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CH) brown, stiff to hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=21 WATER CONTENT (%) 13 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, very stiff - turns to brown below 8 feet N= N= N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: Boring Started: 4/26/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: N= N= Boring Completed: 4/26/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-15 29

47 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-13 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CH) brown to light brown, hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=48 WATER CONTENT (%) 4 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) brown to reddish brown, medium dense to very dense N= N= /3" N=Ref/3" 12 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 13.0 WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/3" N=Ref/3" 50/1" N=Ref/1" N=Ref/3" sampler could only be driven 3 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/26/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/26/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-16

48 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-14 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) dark brown, medium stiff to very stiff, sandy with gravel DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=34 WATER CONTENT (%) 9 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, medium dense to dense - layer of lean clay between 8 and 11 feet N= N= N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/3" N=Ref/3" 50/3" N=Ref/3" N=Ref/3" sampler could only be driven 3 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 5/6/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 5/6/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-17

49 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-15 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, medium stiff to hard with rock DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=14 WATER CONTENT (%) 16 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES 4.0 CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense N= /6" N=50/6" WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard 50/5" N=Ref/5" /6" N=Ref/6" 4 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 25.0 Boring Terminated at 25 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 25' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/3" N=Ref/3" 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/0" N=Ref/0" N=Ref/5" sampler could only be driven 5 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 4/25/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 4/25/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-18

50 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-16 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) dark brown, stiff, sandy with gravel DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=11 WATER CONTENT (%) 16 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense 25-50/5" N=50/5" /2" N=Ref/2" N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard /5" N=50/5" 4 16 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ - turns to gray below 18 feet 25.0 Boring Terminated at 25 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 25' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/0" N=Ref/0" 50/0" N=Ref/0" 50/0" N=Ref/0" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inch of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 6/10/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 6/10/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-19

51 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-17 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, stiff to very stiff, gravelly at the surface DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=17 WATER CONTENT (%) 9 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, medium dense to dense N= N= NP N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 25.0 Boring Terminated at 25 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 25' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 19-50/2" N=50/2" 50/3" N=Ref/3" N=Ref/3" sampler could only be driven 3 inch of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 6/10/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 6/10/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-20

52 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-18 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) dark brown, medium stiff to very stiff, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=7 WATER CONTENT (%) 13 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES N= FAT CLAY (CH) brown, very stiff CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, very dense N= N= /1" N=50/1" THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 13.0 WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard 25.0 Boring Terminated at 25 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 25' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/2" N=Ref/2" 50/0" N=Ref/0" N=Ref/2" sampler could only be driven 2 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 5/6/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 5/6/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-21

53 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-19 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) dark brown, loose DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=9 WATER CONTENT (%) 20 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) reddish brown, dense to very dense N= N= /5" N=50/5" N= WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 15.0 Boring Terminated at 15 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 15' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX 15 Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 50/4" N=Ref/4" N=Ref/4" sampler could only be driven 4 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 6/10/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 6/10/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-22

54 PROJECT: Amara Apartment at the Rim BORING LOG NO. B-20 Oden Hughes LLC CLIENT: Austin Texas Page 1 of 1 SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge and Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL: LEAN CLAY (CL) dark brown, very stiff to hard, gravelly DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS N=32 WATER CONTENT (%) 10 ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES 4.0 CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) brown, medium dense to very dense N= N= N= N=66 7 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ 16.0 WEATHERED LIMESTONE tan, hard 20.0 Boring Terminated at 20 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Auger 0 to 10' Air Rotary 10 to 20' Abandonment Method: Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS No free water observed 6911 Blanco Rd San Antonio, TX Hammer Type: Automatic Notes: 9-50/2" N=50/2" 50/4" N=Ref/4" N=Ref/4" sampler could only be driven 4 inches of the 6 inch seating penetration before the 50 blow limit was reached Boring Started: 6/10/2016 Drill Rig: CME 45C Project No.: Boring Completed: 6/10/2016 Driller: Ramco Exhibit: A-23

55 PROJECT: Amara Apartments TEST PIT LOG NO. TP-1 Page 1 of 1 Oden Hughes Multifamily Development & CLIENT: Construction SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge & Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL - CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) light brown and brown, with boulders Austin, Texas DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES FILL - FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown, with gravel CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) reddish brown Test Pit Terminated at 6 Feet 5 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Abandonment Method: Backfilled with on-site soil WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 6911 Blanco Road San Antonio, Texas Notes: Test Pit Started: 12/9/2016 Excavator: backhoe Project No.: Test Pit Completed: 12/9/2016 Operator: Exhibit: A-24

56 PROJECT: Amara Apartments TEST PIT LOG NO. TP-2 Page 1 of 1 Oden Hughes Multifamily Development & CLIENT: Construction SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge & Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL -FAT CLAY (CH) dark brown brown and brown, with cobbles, boulders, wood, and metal debris Austin, Texas DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) reddish brown Test Pit Terminated at 6 Feet 5 THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Abandonment Method: Backfilled with on-site soil WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 6911 Blanco Road San Antonio, Texas Notes: Test Pit Started: 12/9/2016 Excavator: backhoe Project No.: Test Pit Completed: 12/9/2016 Operator: Exhibit: A-25

57 PROJECT: Amara Apartments TEST PIT LOG NO. TP-3 Page 1 of 1 Oden Hughes Multifamily Development & CLIENT: Construction SITE: GRAPHIC LOG Talavera Ridge & Old Camp Bullis Road San Antonio, Texas LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: Longitude: DEPTH FILL - CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) light brown, with boulders Austin, Texas DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) ATTERBERG LIMITS LL-PL-PI PERCENT FINES CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) reddish brown Test Pit Terminated at 7 Feet THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL GPJ Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Advancement Method: Abandonment Method: Backfilled with on-site soil WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 6911 Blanco Road San Antonio, Texas Notes: Test Pit Started: 12/9/2016 Excavator: backhoe Project No.: Test Pit Completed: 12/9/2016 Operator: Exhibit: A-26