SW3191202_5 - Residence_geotech_report_11.5.18_1/2/2020

Report of
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering
The Residence at Northgate
Old Wilkesboro Road at Bradley Farm Road
Statesville, North Carolina 28625
Prepared For:
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
1109 Davie Avenue
Statesville, North Carolina 28677
November 2, 2018
F&R Project No. 63W-0120

Report of
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering
The Residence at Northgate
Old Wilkesboro Road at Bradley Farm Road
Statesville, North Carolina 28625
Prepared For.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
1109 Davie Avenue
Statesville, North Carolina 28677
By:
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC.
3300 International Airport Drive, Suite 600
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
November 2, 2018
F&R Project No. 63W-0120

f&R
November 2, 2018
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC.
Engineering Stability Since 1881
3300 International Airport Drive, Suite 600
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
T 704.596.2889 1 F 704.596.3784
NC License #F-0266
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
1109 Davie Avenue
Statesville, North Carolina 28677
Attn: Mr. David L. Pressly, Jr.
Re: Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering
The Residence at Northgate
Old Wilkesboro Road at Bradley Farm Road
Statesville, North Carolina 28625
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
Dear Mr. Pressly:
The enclosed report presents the results of the subsurface exploration program and geotechnical
engineering evaluation undertaken by Froehling & Robertson, Inc. (F&R), in connection with The
Residence at Northgate development. Our services were performed in general accordance with
F&R Proposal No. 1963-00214G dated September 20, 2018.
This report presents our understanding of the project, reviews our exploration procedures,
describes the general subsurface conditions at the boring locations, and presents our evaluations,
conclusions, and recommendations. There are important limitations to this and all geotechnical
reports. Some of these limitations are discussed in the information prepared by Geoprofessional
Business Association (GBA), provided in Appendix IV of this report. We ask that you review the
referenced GBA information.
Corporate HQ: 3015 Dumbarton Road Richmond, Virginia 23228 T 804.264.2701 F 804.264.1202 www.fandr.com
VIRGINIA • NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA • MARYLAND • DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
A Minority -Owned Business

f&R
We have enjoyed working with you on this project, and we are prepared to assist you with the
recommended quality assurance monitoring and testing services during construction. Please
contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or if we may be of further service.
Sincerely,
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC.
Nov 2 2018 5:38 PM
Dacu5i —
Marving L. Farmer, P.E.
Engineering Services Manager
Senior Engineer
MLF/ABR
Alex Robinson
Nov 2 2018 5:40 PM
Dacu5�,
Alex B. Robinson, P.E.
Branch Manager
Email Distribution: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
F: Projects 63W�63W-0120 (Residence Housing Associates, LLC - The Residence at Northgate - Geotech Services) � Report� 63W-
0120. GE01 (The Residence at Northgate - Geotechnical Report).docx
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
2

fg�R
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... 1
1.0 PURPOSE & SCOPE OF SERVICE................................................................................... 2
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION............................................................................................. 3
2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION AND PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION....................................................... 3
2.2 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION.................................................................................... 4
3.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES.......................................................................................4
3.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION............................................................................................ 4
3.2 LABORATORY TESTING.................................................................................................. 6
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS......................................................................................... 6
4,1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS............................................................................................. 6
4.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY.................................................................................................... 8
4.3 GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................... 9
4.3.1 Surficial Materials...............................................................................................9
4.3.2 Residual Soils...................................................................................................... 9
4.3.3 Refusal on Bedrock........................................................................................... 10
4.4 GROUNDWATER DATA................................................................................................ 10
5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................. 10
5.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................................10
5.2 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................... 10
5.3 ESTIMATED SETTLEMENTS............................................................................................ 11
5.4 CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE....................................................................................... 11
5.5 EXPANSIVE SOIL EVALUATION....................................................................................... 12
5.6 CUT AND FILL SLOPES................................................................................................. 12
5.7 PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................... 13
5.8 SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA............................................................................................ 14
5.9 SOIL EROSION........................................................................................................... 15
5.10 STORMWATER RUNOFF AND ARCHITECTURAL LANDSCAPING ................................................. 15
6.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................... 15
6.1 GENERAL.................................................................................................................15
6.2 SITE PREPARATION.................................................................................................... 15
6.3 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS.......................................................................................... 16
6.4 STRUCTURAL FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION.............................................................. 17
6.5 SURFACE WATER CONTROL.......................................................................................... 18
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
The Residence at Northgate
November 2, 2018
Page i of ii

f&R
6.6 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS..................................................................................... 19
6.7 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS....................................................................................... 19
6.8 EXCAVATIONS........................................................................................................... 20
7.0 CONTINUATION OF SERVICES................................................................................... 20
8.0 LIMITATIONS............................................................................................................20
OPPFNni FC
APPENDIX I
Site Vicinity Map (Drawing No. 1)
Test Location Plan (Drawing No. 2)
APPENDIX II
Boring Logs (B-1 through B-10)
Subsurface Profile — North to South
Subsurface Profile — East to West
Key to Soil Classification
Soil Classification Chart
APPENDIX III
Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX IV
GBA Publication "Important Information about This Geotechnical Engineering Report"
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
The Residence at Northgate
November 2, 2018
Page ii of ii

f&R
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Executive Summary is provided as a brief overview of our geotechnical engineering evaluation
for the project and is not intended to replace more detailed information contained elsewhere in this
report. As an overview, this summary inherently omits details that could be very important to the
proper application of the provided geotechnical design recommendations. This report should be
read in its entirety prior to implementation into design and construction.
• The subsurface exploration program consisted of ten (10) soil test borings performed on October
18 and 19, 2018. Borings B-01 through B-05 were drilled in the proposed building footprint to a
depth of 20 feet. Boring B-06 was drilled to a depth of 25 feet in the southwest corner of the
proposed building footprint. An additional four (4) borings, B-07 through B-10 were drilled in the
proposed roadway and sediment basin to a depth of 15 feet. Below the surficial soils, the borings
encountered residual soils to the depths explored.
• The residual soils classified as soft to very stiff, high plastic Clay (CH), elastic Silt (MH), soft to
stiff Silt (ML), and loose to very dense Sand (SM). Standard Penetration Test N-values in the
residual soils varied across the site and ranged from 3 to over 47 bpf. Bedrock was not
encountered with the depth of exploration.
• Near surface soils at the site are classified as high plastic Clays (CH) and elastic Silts (MH). High
plastic clays and elastic Silts have high shrink -swell potential and, therefore, foundations should
bear at a depth of at least 3 feet below the below the ground surface to reduce movement
potential.
• Provided the site is prepared as recommended, conventional shallow foundations are suitable
to support the planned multi -family structure. An allowable soil bearing pressure of up to 2,000
pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of the residential foundations bearing on
residual soils or properly placed engineered fill. Based on the results of our settlement analysis,
we estimate total settlement less than 1-inch for the proposed residential structures with
anticipated continuous foundation loads of 10 kips per linear foot and a maximum column load
of 200 kips.
• Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling in the borings. Therefore, we do not
anticipate groundwater to significantly impact construction activities at the project site.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
The Residence at Northgate
November 2, 2018
Page 1 of 21

f&R
1.0 PURPOSE & SCOPE OF SERVICE
Our proposed scope of services is based on the information provided to us, our understanding of the
proposed project, our knowledge of the site and our previous experience with similar projects. The
scope of services performed include the following:
Task 1— Site Reconnaissance, Boring Layout and Utility Clearance
An F&R staff scientist visited the project site and marked the boring locations using a hand-held GPS
unit. F&R coordinated with North Carolina 811 for marking of underground utilities in the vicinity of
the planned boring locations. Clearing of trees and brush to the boring locations was provided by
Residence Housing Associates, LLC.
Task 2 — Soil Borings
Based on the Conceptual Site Plan provided for the building, roads and parking area, F&R performed a
subsurface boring exploration across the planned areas for development to obtain information on
subsurface conditions for site development. The evaluation included the suitability of the site for
building support using a shallow foundation system. Five (5) borings were drilled in the proposed
building footprint to a depth of 20 feet. One (1) boring located in the southwest corner of the building
footprint was extended to a depth of 25 feet. An additional four (4) borings were drilled in the proposed
roadway and sediment basin and advanced to a depth of 15 feet. Borings were advanced to the
proposed depth or auger refusal, whichever occurred first.
The borings were advanced using hollow stem auger drilling procedures in general accordance with
ASTM D1586 performed with a CME drill rig. Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were performed almost
continuously from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 10 feet, and at 5-foot depth intervals
thereafter to the boring termination depth. The borings were logged by a member of the F&R
engineering staff using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
Task 3 — Laboratory Testing
F&R performed five (5) laboratory soil classification tests including water content determinations
(ASTM D2216), No. 200 Sieve Wash (ASTM D1140) and Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318).
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 2 of 21

f&R
Task 4—Geotechnical Evaluations and Report
F&R performed geotechnical engineering evaluations in order to provide the following
recommendations:
• Allowable bearing capacity and minimum bearing depth for shallow foundations,
• Estimated potential total and differential settlement of shallow foundations,
• Potential shrink -swell conditions for existing subgrade soils, based on correlations with
laboratory classification tests,
• Seismic soil site classification based on the data obtained from depths explored by the borings,
• Estimated soil parameters for slab -on -grade design,
• Subgrade preparation, and placement and compaction of new fill materials required during
construction.
• An asphalt pavement section for an assumed traffic volume and type for the developed
property.
This geotechnical report includes the results of the evaluations and copies of the boring logs,
generalized subsurface profile, and laboratory test results.
By the nature of the work performed, our field exploration activities resulted in disturbances to the
site. Reasonable efforts were made to lessen potential impacts. Completed boreholes were backfilled
with auger cuttings (soil), but may subside at some time following our work. F&R assumes no
responsibility for borehole subsidence after demobilizing from the site and recommends that others
occasionally observe the boring locations and provide any additional infill that may be needed.
F&R's geotechnical services did not include topographic or field surveying, development of quantity
estimates, preparation of plans and specifications, or the identification and evaluation of wetlands or
other environmental aspects of the project site.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Information and Proposed Construction
It is F&R's understanding that the Property consists of a polygonal -shaped, wooded parcel of land
identified as Iredell County Parcel Identification No. 473524817. The Property is approximately 7.5 acres
in area and consists of undeveloped wooded land. It is F&R's understanding that the Property is planned
to be developed with a 3-story multi -family residential structure. A preliminary site plan was provided
showing the proposed building location and design grades.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 3 of 21

f&R
The Property required clearing to our planned boring locations in order to access with our ATV -mounted
drill rig.
The type of construction and structural loads have not been specified. F&R assumed a 3-story, wood
framed structure having a maximum column load of 200 kips and a typical continuous foundation load of
10 kips per linear foot. These structural loads have be used for our
Traffic type and volume have not been specified for the development. F&R has assumed typical multi-
familyvehicular traffic and volume for our evaluations.
If the actual loads and provided information differs from that presented within this report, F&R should
be notified to determine if modifications to our recommendations are warranted.
2.2 Site Location and Description
The project site is located at the corner of Bradley Farm Road and Old Wilkesboro Road in Statesville,
Iredell County, North Carolina. At the time of our fieldwork, the project site was accessed from the old
residence driveway from Old Wilkesboro Road. The site is ±7.5 acres, has two old abandoned
residential structures, and is mostly wooded with younger pine trees, older hardwoods, and their
undergrowth.
The site is bordered on the north by Old Wilkesboro Road, to the south and east by undeveloped
wooded property, and to the west by open fields and two residential structures. The area surrounding
the site consists of residential and commercial properties.
The proposed grading plan was provided; however, the topographical information is not legible. Based
on our visual observation and the provided information, the topography at the site generally slopes
down from the northeast to the south and southwest. Ground surface elevations (EL) for use in our
subsurface profile preparation were estimated at about EL 910 feet to EL 930 from published
topographic documents.
Project surroundings are shown on the attached Site Vicinity Map in Appendix I, Drawing No. 1.
3.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
3.1 Subsurface Exploration
The subsurface exploration program consisted of ten (10) SPT borings designated as Borings
B-01 through B-10. We drilled borings B-01 through B-06 near the proposed building pad, borings B-
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 4 of 21

f&R
07 through B-09 were drilled within the proposed drive lanes and parking stalls. Boring B-10 was drilled
near the location for a planned sediment basin.
Subsurface exploration was performed on October 18 through 19, 2018. SPT tests at boring locations
were performed almost continuously from the existing ground surface to a depth of 10 feet in general
accordance with ASTM D1586. Thereafter, boreholes were advanced and SPT performed at
approximate 5-foot intervals to their termination depths of 15 and 20 feet below the existing ground
surface. Approximate boring locations are identified on Drawing No. 2 —Test Location Plan, which is
included in Appendix I of this report. Boring locations were marked at the site by F&R personnel using
a hand -help GPS unit to identify their locations. As such, the boring locations should be considered
approximate.
Soil samples were obtained with a standard 2-inch O.D. and 30-inch long split -spoon sampler with each
SPT being driven with a 140-lb automatic hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to
drive the sampler each 6-inch increment of penetration was recorded and are shown on the boring
logs. The first six-inch increment is used to seat the sampler with the sum of the second and third
penetration increments being termed the SPT value, "N-value." A representative portion of each
disturbed split -spoon sample was collected with each SPT, placed in a sealed container, and returned
to our laboratory for review.
The recovered split -spoon samples were visually classified by F&R engineers in general accordance
with ASTM D2488. The boring logs provided in Appendix II show the subsurface conditions
encountered on the dates and at the approximate locations indicated.
The drill rig used for this project was an ATV -mounted, CME 550X equipped with an automatic
hammer. Research has shown that the Standard Penetration Resistance (N-value) determined by the
automatic hammer is different from the N-value determined by the safety hammer method. Most
correlations that are published in technical literature are based on the N-value determined by the
safety hammer method. This is commonly termed N6o as the rope and cathead with a safety hammer
delivers roughly 60 percent of the theoretical energy delivered by a 140-pound hammer falling 30
inches.
Because an automatic hammer was used to perform the SPT tests, the sample blows recorded during
drilling (Nfield) were corrected to equivalent N60 safety hammer values for our evaluations. The N60
values reported on the boring logs included in this report were corrected for our evaluations using a
correction factor of 1.43 based on F&R's most recent automatic hammer calibration.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 5 of 21

f&R
By the nature of the work performed, the drilling activities result in disturbances to the site. The
completed boreholes performed were backfilled upon completion. The borehole backfill may subside
at some time following our work. F&R assumes no responsibility for borehole subsidence after
completion of the field exploration and departing the site. For continued safety, the boreholes should
be occasionally observed by others with any needed additional backfilling then being performed.
3.2 Laboratory Testing
For geotechnical considerations, select split -spoon samples from five of the soil test borings were
subjected to laboratory classification testing. This testing included water content determinations (ASTM
D2216), No. 200 Sieve Wash (ASTM D1140), and Atterberg limits tests (ASTM D4318). Based on the
results of these tests, the soil samples were then classified in general accordance with Unified Soil
Classification System (ASTM D2487).
The results of the laboratory test are summarized in Table 3.2.1 with complete results presented in
Appendix III of this report.
Table 3.2.1- Soil Classification Test Summary
BoringSample
No.
Depth
(ft)
Water
Content
M
%
Finer than
No. 200 Sieve
Atterberg Limits
USCS Classification
L.L.
P.L.
P.I.
B-01
1.5
38.5
74.9
73
32
40
CH
B-02
3.5
15.0
41.2
49
37
12
SM
B-03
1.5
23.9
69.1
54
20
26
M H
B-05
8.0
20.1
43.5
28
23
5
SM
B-08
5.0
17.6
34.1
37
1 24
13
1 SM
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
4.1 Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface conditions discussed in the following paragraphs and those shown on the attached boring
logs represent an estimate of the subsurface conditions based on interpretation of the field and laboratory
data using normally accepted geotechnical engineering judgments. Subsurface profiles for the project
stratigraphy have been prepared for convenience only. Given the spacing between boring locations,
it is anticipated that subsurface conditions may vary between each boring location.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 6 of 21

Strata breaks designated on the boring logs represent approximate boundaries between soil types.
The transitions between different soil strata are usually less distinct than those shown on the boring logs.
Although individual soil test borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at the boring
locations on the dates shown, they are not necessarily indicative of subsurface conditions at other
locations or at other times. Subsurface data obtained by the soil borings are presented on the following
Composite Subsurface Profiles and in Appendix II.
Figure 4.1.1— Composite Subsurface Profile — North to South
Composite Profile Notes
• Surficial: ±3 inches.
• Stratum I: Residuum, Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, High Plastic Clay (CH)
or Elastic Silt (MH), moist.
• Stratum II: Firm to Hard, Reddish Brown and Tan, Sandy Silt (ML), moist.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
The Residence at Northgate
November 2, 2018
Page 7 of 21

0
2
4
6
s
10
r
'K 12
a
14
16
1s
20
22
24
26
6 07
Figure 4.1.2 — Composite Subsurface Profile — East to West
6-05
B-06 "2
suRflaAL - -
-
...... ......
13........................... .............. ............ l.............. .............. ............. .....
13'k........:............................._....................
1�... i.........
,�...........
14
10
11
17
STRATUM I
. .. ..
......... ... .......... .
5
. .....
14
R
12
...........
...........
............................ .............................................. ...........
7
... ............ .......... :.... ........... .......... :............. ........... .......... ..i'::.......
:...........................................................
...;..... .............. .
....... ..., ...........,.,
....... ........
s
.........
.......
R
........
3
. 5
6
STRATUM 11
47
5
5
...........:...............................:.................. ............ :.............. .............. ...:............................
Subsurface Profile Notes: _ ...
.......... .............. ...
....... :................. ...
....16.......
......:.......................
_,..
-Standard Penetra[ion Resistance
i Gro tdd ter level at time of drilling
See the Boring Lags In Appendix 11 for a description of the graphic symbols and soil class-dication
• Surficial:
• Stratum I
• Stratum II:
4.2 Regional Geology
Composite Profile Notes
±3 inches.
Residuum, Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, High Plastic Clay (CH)
or Elastic Silt (MH), moist.
Firm to Hard, Reddish Brown and Tan, Sandy Silt (ML) moist.
The project site is located within the Inner Piedmont Belt Geologic Province according to the Geologic
Map of North Carolina (1985). The Inner Piedmont Belt was formed about 500-700 million years ago.
This is the most metamorphosed belt of the Piedmont where the rocks are mostly gneiss and schist
with some granitic intrusions.
The topography of the Inner Piedmont Plateau consists of well-rounded hills and long -rolling ridges
with a northeast -southwest trend. This rolling topography is the result of streams flowing across and
acting on rocks of unequal hardness.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC
F&R Project No. 63W-0120
The Residence at Northgate
November 2, 2018
Page 8 of 21

f&R
The typical residual soil profile consists of fine-grained soil (silts and clays) near the surface, where soil
weathering is more advanced, underlain by sandier silts and clays with depth. The boundary between soil
and rock is not sharply defined. This transitional zone, termed "Weathered Rock," is normally found
overlying the parent bedrock. The degree of weathering is facilitated by fractures, joints, and by the
presence of less resistant rock types. Consequently, the profile of the "Weathered Rock" and hard rock is
quite irregular and erratic, even over short horizontal distances. Lenses and boulders of hard rock and
zones of "Weathered Rock" are often encountered within the soil mantle, well above the general bedrock
level.
4.3 Generalized Subsurface Conditions
Subsurface data obtained from the soil borings are presented in the following paragraphs. The
complete boring logs are presented in Appendix II.
4.3.1 Surficial Materials
As identified by the boring data from this study, a surficial soil layer was encountered at multiple boring
locations. Surficial soil is typically dark -colored soil material containing roots, fibrous matter, and or
other organic components, and is generally unsuitable for engineering purposes. F&R has not
performed any laboratory testing to determine the organic content or other horticultural properties
of the observed surficial soil materials. Therefore, the term surficial soil is not intended to indicate
suitability for landscaping and or other purposes.
The surficial soil depth provided in this report is based on visual observations and should be considered
approximate. We note that the transition from surficial soil to underlying materials may be gradual
and, therefore, the observation and measurement of surficial soil is subjective. Actual surficial soil
depths should be expected to vary across the site.
4.3.2 Residual Soils
Residual soils were encountered beneath the surficial materials in each of the borings. In general, the
residual soil consists of soft to very stiff high plastic Clay (CH) or elastic Silt (MH), soft to stiff Silt (ML),
and loose to very dense Sand (SM). N-Values in the residual soils varied across the site and ranged
from 3 to 47 bpf. The borings were each terminated in residual soils at depths of 15 and 25 feet below
existing grades.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 9 of 21

f&R
4.3.3 Refusal on Bedrock
Auger refusal on bedrock was not encountered within the depths of our subsurface exploration. It is
possible that bedrock is present at other unexplored locations on -site.
4.4 Groundwater Data
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling. Boring B-01 was allowed to remain open
during the field exploration and was dry 8 hours after completion of drilling and prior to being
backfilled. Groundwater levels fluctuate with seasonal changes, periods of heavy rainfall, drought and
other factors. Therefore, our evaluations of the groundwater level do not reveal the actual year-round
groundwater conditions.
5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 General
The following findings and recommendations are based on our observations at the site, interpretation
of the field and laboratory data obtained during our subsurface exploration, and our experience with
similar subsurface conditions and projects. Soil penetration data has been used to evaluate the
subsurface conditions based on established correlations. Subsurface conditions in unexplored
locations may vary from those encountered.
Determination of an appropriate foundation system for a given structure is dependent on the
proposed structural loads, soil conditions, settlement, and construction constraints such as proximity
to other structures, etc. The subsurface exploration aids the geotechnical engineer in determining the
soil stratum appropriate for structural support. This determination includes considerations with
regard to both allowable bearing capacity and compressibility of the soil strata. In addition, since the
method of construction greatly affects the soils intended for structural support, consideration must be
given to the implementation of suitable methods of site preparation, fill compaction, and other aspects
of construction. Please refer to the Construction Recommendations included in Section 6 of this
report.
5.2 Foundation Design Recommendations
Based on the available project information and our evaluations, structures may be supported on a
conventional shallow foundation system bearing in approved Stratum I or II soils, or compacted
structural fill placed in accordance with requirements in Section 6.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 10 of 21

f&R
We recommend that any shallow wall and column foundations be designed for a maximum net allowable
bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf), for foundations bearing in approved subgrade
soils. Continuous wall foundations should have a minimum width of 24 inches and column foundations
should have a minimum width of 24 inches to reduce the possibility of a "punching" shear failure. The
structural elements should be centered on the foundations to provide uniform load transfer, unless the
foundations are proportioned for eccentric loads.
Shallow, lightly loaded foundations should bear at a depth of at least 36 inches belowthe finish exterior
site grades to lessen the potential for damage from shrink -swell of the soil due to moisture
fluctuations, frost penetration, and for bearing capacity considerations.
5.3 Estimated Settlements
Based on the boring data, assumed structural loading, and provided the site is prepared as
recommended, we estimate total foundation settlements would be less than 1-inch, with differential
settlement of % of the estimated total settlement. The magnitude of differential settlements will be
influenced by the variability of underlying soils across the footprint of the structures and the variation of
foundation loads.
Our settlement analysis was performed on the basis of our assumed structural loading conditions and
grading assumption discussed in the project information section of this report. Actual settlements
experienced by the structure and the time required for these soils to settle will be influenced by
undetected variations in subsurface conditions, final structural loads, final ground surface grades, and the
quality of fill placement and foundation construction.
5.4 Concrete Slabs -On -Grade
Concrete slabs not structurally supported as part of the building may be placed on properly compacted
controlled structural fill over an approved soil subgrade following subgrade preparation as discussed
in Section 6. A standard modulus of subgrade reaction ("k") of 100 pounds per square inch per inch
(psi/in) may be used for the design of the slabs -on -grade. Slabs should be structurally isolated (float
freely) from the foundations to allow for differential movement between the slabs and the structure.
A six-inch thick layer of North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Open Graded Coarse
Aggregate No. 57 or No. 67 should be placed beneath the floor slab. This granular base would function
as a leveling and load distributing material as well as a capillary break beneath the slab.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 11 of 21

f&R
A vapor retarder should be used beneath slabs that will be covered by tile, wood, carpet, impermeable
coatings, or if other moisture -sensitive equipment or materials will be in contact with the slab.
However, the use of vapor retarders may result in excessive curling of concrete slabs during curing.
We refer the concrete slab designer to ACI 302.1R-04, Sections 4.1.5 and 11.11, for further discussion
on vapor retarders, curling, and the means to lessen potential concrete shrinkage and curling.
Proper jointing of the concrete slabs -on -grade is also essential to reduce cracking. ACI suggests that
unreinforced, plain concrete slabs may be jointed at spacing of 24 to 36 times the slab thickness, up to
a maximum spacing of 15 feet. Slab construction should incorporate isolation joints along walls and
column locations to allow minor movements to occur without damage. Utility or other construction
excavations in the prepared subgrade should be backfilled to a controlled fill criterion to provide
uniform support.
5.5 Expansive Soil Evaluation
The existing subgrade soils encountered by the soil test boring were evaluated for shrink -swell
(expansion) potential within the active zone, which typically extends to a depth of approximately three
to four feet below the ground surface in the region of the proposed site.
The existing soils within the active zone were found to be elastic Silt (MH) and high plastic Clay (CH) in
accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Based on correlations provided in geotechnical
literature, the soil within the active zone is judged to have a high potential for shrink -swell activity.
Therefore, foundations should bear at elevations that are near the bottom or below the active zone
depth.
5.6 Cut and Fill Slopes
F&R recommends designing the permanent project slopes at 3H:1V or flatter. The tops of slopes
should be located a minimum of 10 feet from structural limits. If steeper slopes are planned, F&R
should be contacted during early grading plan development to perform slope stability analyses prior
to finalizing the grading plans. It is F&R's opinion that 3H:1V slopes will be stable from a slope stability
standpoint provided the fill slopes are constructed of properly compacted and tested structural fill.
Based on the provided site plan the embankment slopes will not exceed 8 to 10 feet in height.
However, seepage and surface runoff may cause the slopes to slough and erode resulting in shallow
surface failures.
The slopes should be vegetated as soon as possible to minimize surface sloughing and erosion. A swale
or shallow ditch should be constructed near the tops of slopes to prevent surface water from flowing
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 12 of 21

f&R
onto the slopes. We recommend that all cut and fill slopes be observed by a geotechnical engineer or
his representative during construction. Additional slope drainage and protection measures may be
required in certain areas depending upon conditions observed at the time of slope construction.
5.7 Pavement Section Recommendations
Considering the anticipated finished grade elevations, soils that are stable at the time of site
development and pavement construction may remain.
Stripped and excavated pavement areas should extend at least 2 feet beyond the pavement limits. The
excavated area should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer who may recommend additional
subgrade preparation, that may include undercutting or stabilizing unsuitable soils. A properly
prepared, uniform subgrade is critical to long-term pavement life.
A light and medium duty pavement section has been considered due to expected traffic consisting of
occasional heavy service vehicles with car traffic.
CBR testing was not part of our scope of services for this project. Pavement designs are normally based
on a Design CBR (DCBR) value. A DCBR value of 4 has been estimated for this site.
For this analysis, F&R was not provided with traffic data. For our evaluations, the estimated average
daily traffic consists of 400 passenger cars per day, 15 light trucks per day and 2 tractor -trailers per
day. If this traffic information and assumptions are incorrect, F&R should be contacted to revise the
pavement design based on actually traffic types and volumes. The flexible pavements were designed
based on a 20-year design life.
Using the assumed traffic type and the DCBR value, the following pavement sections are recommended
for the project:
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 13 of 21

f&R
Table 5.7.1: Pavement Section Design
Light Duty Pavement
Medium Duty Pavement
Mix Design
Section
Section
(inches)
(inches)
S9.513 Bituminous Concrete
2
1
Surface Mix
119.00 Bituminous Concrete
-
1.5
Intermediate Mix
NCDOT ABC Stone Subbase
6
8
Construction of the pavements should be performed in accordance with the latest edition of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures.
It is recommended that any dumpsters be supported on a minimum 6-inch thick concrete pad on a
minimum 6-inch thick NCDOT ABC stone subbase. The pad should project horizontally in front of the
dumpster such that the front wheels of any service truck are supported by the concrete pad during
loading and unloading of the dumpster.
5.8 Seismic Design Criteria
The seismic soil site class evaluations presented herein reference American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) 7-10 as specified by Section 1613.3.2 of the International Building Code (IBC) 2015. Chapter
20.1 of ASCE 7-10 entails an evaluation of the top 100 feet of the subsurface soil profile in order to
determine the seismic site class; however, the deepest soil boring for this project was terminated at a
depth of 25 feet for foundation design considerations.
Based on the average SPT N-values obtained and extrapolated to a depth of 100 feet, the subsurface
conditions at the project site correspond most closely with those of a soil Site Classification "D."
F&R notes that the recommended Site Class is based on information available at the time this report
was written. If this classification should be so onerous to the project cost that further study is
warranted, we can perform a site -specific geo-physical survey to attain sufficient detail to further
define the project's seismic Site Class definition. This additional testing would be beyond the currently
authorized scope of services for this project.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 14 of 21

f&R
5.9 Soil Erosion
The soils at this site are fine-grained and highly erodible. Once design finish grade elevations are
established for green areas and areas to remain undeveloped for an extended period, finish grades
should be protected from erosion.
Sloped areas with increased stormwater runoff rates should be protected from erosion using
temporary erosion prevention practices methods such as erosion blankets or temporary vegetative
growth, until permanent erosion prevention can be established.
5.10 Stormwater Runoff and Architectural Landscaping
Due to the moisture sensitivity of the subgrade soils, roof drainage and downspouts should be
designed to discharge at least 10 feet away from the building footprint or onto nearby concrete or
asphalt surfaces.
Irrigation systems should be designed to discharge no closer than 10 feet to the buildings. Architectural
landscaping plantings requiring irrigation should be no closer than 10 feet to the buildings.
6.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 General
The principal purpose of this section is to comment in general on the items related to earthwork and
associated geotechnical engineering aspects of construction that should be expected for this project.
It is recommended that F&R's geotechnical engineer be retained to provide soil -engineering services
during the construction phases of the project and perform appropriate evaluations to help assure that
conditions encountered during construction are similar to conditions encountered in the borings. The
geotechnical engineer can also assist in interpretation of differing subsurface conditions that may be
encountered and recommend remedial work, if needed.
6.2 Site Preparation
The entire construction area should be stripped of grass, trees, stumps, vegetation, organic -laden soils,
debris or any other deleterious materials to a minimum of 5 feet outside the structural limits for
buildings and 2 feet for paved areas. Depressions or low areas resulting from stripping and or clearing
operations should be backfilled with approved structural fill and compacted in accordance with the
recommendations presented in this report.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 15 of 21

f&R
During grading operations hidden features in the substratum such as organic laden soils, stumps, root
balls, or other deleterious materials, may be encountered within the proposed construction area.
Generally, such features will require removal. Details regarding the removal of deleterious materials
should be determined on a case -by -case basis; therefore, contract documents should include a
contingency cost for the removal of such subsurface features.
We recommend site preparation be monitored by the geotechnical engineer or his representative to
verify that the recommendations presented herein are implemented. After stripping surficial soils, we
recommend the areas to receive fill, foundations and pavements, including the area of the proposed
structures, be proofrolled. Proofrolling should be performed with a fully loaded tandem -axle dump
truck or similar piece of rubber -tired equipment with a minimum loaded weight of 20 tons. The
purpose of the proofrolling is to detect any localized or isolated weak soil zones in building and
pavement areas prior to backfilling.
If soft or weak zones are identified during proofrolling, such areas should be undercut and replaced
with properly compacted engineered fill prior to the foundation construction. We suggest that
contingency funds be allotted within the project budget for over -excavating and replacing weak,
deleterious soils within the proposed building and pavement areas.
6.3 Moisture Sensitive Soils
Based on the results of ourvisual/manual classification and laboratory testing, moisture sensitive soils,
elastic Silt (MH) and high plastic Clay (CH), were encountered in the Stratum I soils.
In general, elastic silt and high plastic clay are highly moisture sensitive, have low strength properties,
can undergo significant changes in volume (shrink and swell) with changes in their moisture content,
and are generally considered unsuitable for direct structural or pavement support. Evaluation of
subgrades bythe geotechnical engineer or his representative should be performed during construction
to help reduce the potential for soil movement from such materials directly underlying structures.
Pending a successful proofroll and if Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing indicates suitable
bearing conditions, these soils may be left in place. If the soils evaluated are considered unstable, they
should be undercut to suitable, stable soils. Due to the nature of these moisture sensitive soils, we
recommend positive drainage be provided away from the building pads and roadway areas during and
after construction.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 16 of 21

f&R
Please be aware that there is the possibility that problems may arise when using elastic silts and high
plastic clays as structural fill. If elastic silts and high plastic clays are to be used as structural fill, we
recommend using these soils in the deeper fill areas.
For elastic silts, and if laboratory testing indicates dry unit weights above 90 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf), these materials may potentially be used in structural fill areas with approval from the
Geotechnical Engineer. If the elastic silts are tested and are lightweight (less than 90 pcf), they may
be used in landscaped areas.
Elastic silts or high plastic clays should not be used as structural fill within the upper 1.5 feet of the
building pad subgrade elevations.
6.4 Structural Fill Placement and Compaction
Prior to fill placement, representative samples of each structural fill material should be collected and
tested by F&R to determine the material's moisture -density characteristics (including the maximum
dry density, optimum water content, gradation and Atterberg limits). These tests are needed for
quality control of the structural fill and to determine if the fill material meets project specification
requirements.
Fill in structural areas should be free of organics, roots, or other deleterious materials; should not
contain more than five percent (by weight) organic material; should not have a plasticity index (PI)
greater than 25, and; should not have a maximum dry density less than 90 pounds per cubic foot. Soils
not meeting these criteria may be used in landscaped or non-structural areas. Compacted structural
fill should consist of material classified as CL, ML, SC or SM per ASTM D2487, or others as approved by
the geotechnical engineer. CH and MH materials are generally not recommended for use as structural
fill due to their low strength characteristics and moisture sensitivity, but may be approved on a case -
by -case basis.
Soils imported from off -site sources should also meet similar classification requirements and be
approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to use. Successful reuse of the excavated, on -site soils as
compacted structural fill will depend on the water content and the plasticity of the soils encountered
during excavation. Soils imported from off -site sources should also meet similar classification
requirements and be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to use. Successful reuse of the
excavated, on -site soils as compacted structural fill will depend on the water content and the plasticity
of the soils encountered during excavation.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 17 of 21

f&R
Once fill placement begins, a qualified soils technician should perform field density tests to document
the degree of compaction being obtained in the field. Structural fills should be placed in thin (8- to
10-inch) loose lifts and compacted to the following recommendations:
• Upper 18 inches below the final subgrade elevation:
■ 100% of the soil's standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method
D698) at or near optimum water content: maximum deviation of ±3 percent.
• Depths below 18 inches:
■ 95% of the soil's standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method
D698) at or near optimum water content: maximum deviation of ±3 percent.
Some manipulation of the water content (such as wetting or drying) may be required during the filling
operation to obtain the required degree of compaction. The manipulation of the water content is
highly dependent on weather conditions and site drainage conditions. Therefore, the grading
contractor should be prepared to both dry and wet the fill materials to obtain the specified compaction
during grading. Regular one -point Proctor tests should be conducted in an attempt to verify that the
most representative Proctor curve is being selected. Sufficient density tests should be performed to
confirm the required compaction of the fill material.
The contractor should exercise care after these soils have been compacted. If water is allowed to stand
on the surface, these soils may become saturated. Movement of construction traffic on saturated
subgrades can cause rutting that may destroy the fill's integrity. Once the integrity of the subgrade is
destroyed, mobility of construction traffic becomes difficult or impossible. Therefore, the fill surface
should be sloped to achieve positive drainage and to minimize water from ponding on the surface.
If the surface becomes excessively wet, fill operations should be halted and our geotechnical engineer
consulted for guidance. Testing of the fill material and compaction monitoring by our engineering
technician is recommended during fill placement operations.
6.5 Surface Water Control
If free water is allowed to stand on stable subgrade soils, particularly the elastic silts and high plastic
clays, these soils can absorb water, swell, and experience a reduction in their support capability. As a
result, we recommend that the subgrade surface be graded to provide positive drainage away from
the construction areas and towards suitable drainage handling areas, such as a perimeter ditch, French
drain, culvert, or retention pond.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 18 of 21

f&R
Due to the presence of moisture -sensitive soils, trapped or perched water conditions could develop
during periods of inclement weather and during seasonally wet periods. Such conditions could cause
seepage into excavations and deeper cuts. Therefore, grading of the project should be performed in
such a manner to prevent ponding of water and promote runoff away from construction areas. In
addition, if site grading is performed during the seasonally wet months or after extended periods of
inclement weather, wet and water softened near surface soil conditions should be expected.
6.6 Excavation Characteristics
We anticipate a majority of the near -surface subgrade soils at the site can be excavated with backhoes,
front-end loaders or other similar equipment using conventional means and methods. However, if
weathered rock is encountered at shallow depths, increased effort such as jack hammering or ripping will
likely be necessary to excavate the weathered rock. Typically, material with an N-value of 50 blows per 3
to 6 inches of penetration can be excavated with moderate to heavy effort using appropriately sized
equipment, such as a large track -hoe (e.g., Caterpillar 330 with rock teeth). Material that exhibits less
than 3 inches of penetration per 50 blows and material causing auger refusal will likely require jack
hammering, blasting or drilling to facilitate removal. Since the site is relatively close to neighboring
structures, we do not recommend blasting be performed.
6.7 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater for the purposes of this report is defined as water encountered below the existing
ground surface. Based on the data obtained during our exploration program, groundwater was not
encountered to the depths explored.
The contractor should be prepared to dewater locations where excavations are advanced below the
groundwater level. The contractor should be responsible for the design and installation of any
dewatering systems required for this project.
Groundwater levels tend to fluctuate with seasonal and climatic variations as well as with some types
of construction operations. Generally, the highest groundwater levels occur in late winter and early
spring and the lowest levels occur in late summer and early fall. Depending on time of construction,
groundwater may be encountered at shallower depths and locations not explored during this study.
If encountered during construction, engineering personnel from our office should be notified
immediately.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 19 of 21

f&R
6.8 Excavations
Mass excavations and other excavations required for construction of this project must be performed
in accordance with the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) guidelines (29 CFR 1926, Subpart P, Excavations) or other applicable
jurisdictional codes for permissible temporary side -slope ratios and or shoring requirements. The
OSHA guidelines require daily inspections of excavations, adjacent areas and protective systems by a
"competent person" for evidence of situations that could result in cave-ins, indications of failure of a
protective system, or other hazardous conditions.
Excavated soils, equipment, building supplies, etc., should be placed away from the edges of the
excavation at a distance equaling or exceeding the depth of the excavation. F&R cautions that the
actual excavation slopes will need to be evaluated frequently each day by the "competent person" and
flatter slopes or the use of shoring may be required to maintain a safe excavation depending upon
excavation specific circumstances. The contractor is responsible for providing the "competent person"
and all aspects of site excavation safety.
7.0 CONTINUATION OF SERVICES
F&R recommends that we be retained for professional and construction materials testing services
during construction of the project. Our continued involvement on the project helps provide continuity
for proper implementation of the recommendations discussed herein. Additionally, we request the
opportunity to review the foundation plans and project specifications when these construction
documents approach completion. This review evaluates whether the recommendations and
comments provided herein have been understood and properly implemented. The above listed
services are not part of the currently authorized scope of services.
8.0 LIMITATIONS
There are important limitations to this and all geotechnical studies. Some of these limitations are
discussed in the information prepared by the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA), which is
included in Appendix IV. We recommend that you review the GBA information.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Residence Housing Associates, LLC, for specific
application to the Residence at Northgate project in Statesville, North Carolina, in accordance with
generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, express or implied,
is made. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on design information furnished to us at
the time the work was performed; the data obtained from the previously described subsurface
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 20 of 21

f&R
exploration program, and generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. The findings and
recommendations do not reflect variations in subsurface conditions, which could exist in unexplored
areas of the site. In areas where variations from the available subsurface data become apparent during
construction, it will be necessary to re-evaluate our conclusions and recommendations based upon on -
site observations of the conditions.
Regardless of the thoroughness of a subsurface exploration, there is the possibility that conditions in
other areas will differ from those at the boring locations, that conditions are not as anticipated by the
designers, or that the construction process has altered the soil conditions. Therefore, our experienced
geotechnical engineers should evaluate foundation construction to verify that the conditions
anticipated in design actually exist. Otherwise, we assume no responsibility for construction
compliance with the design concepts, specifications, or recommendations. In the event that changes
are made in the design or location of the proposed buildings, or paved areas, the recommendations
presented in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed by our firm and
conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing. If this report is copied or transmitted to a
third party, it must be copied or transmitted in its entirety, including text, attachments, and enclosures.
Interpretations based on only a part of this report may not be valid.
Residence Housing Associates, LLC The Residence at Northgate
F&R Project No. 63W-0120 November 2, 2018
Page 21 of 21

f&R
APPENDIX I
Site Vicinity Map (Drawing No. 1)
Test Location Plan (Drawing No. 2)

SINCE
F& FPOEHLING & R0BEPTS0N7 INC.
R
188I�
Project No: 63W-0120
Client: Pressly Residential Group, LLC
Project: The Residence at Northgate
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
L
SITE VICINITY MAP
Drawing No. 1
Source: Iredell County GIS (2017 Aerial Photography)
Scale: As Shown
Date: October 2018
.-A rIt
Oo
r
I4A
jr
The Residence at
Northgate Site Location

SINCE
F& FPOEHLING & R0BEPTS0N7 INC.
R
Tess `
Project No: 63W-0120
Client: Pressly Residential Group, LLC
Project: The Residence at Northgate
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
�iP 1. J ©a:-rmlo'rxEEaroHeHtwN� �' ��•
B
� � I
I „ "+
l
fill
a
B-7
LZ
a4 ' • f
I !I,
f B-1 r
` rwar"'ir-
° B-4
r
I II I
-k
1
1 111 1 B-8
I I
I I ExIyl Tl NEMNN J
I I
c11�
Test Location Plan
Conceptual Site Plan (Sht. SP-1)
Source: Urban Design Partners
Scale: As Shown
Date: October 2018
t
\ 0 Approximate Boring Location
a � \
Q
GRAPHIC SCnLE

f&R
APPENDIX II
Boring Logs (B-01 through B-10)
Subsurface Profile — North to South
Subsurface Profile — East to West
Key to Soil Classification
Soil Classification Chart

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 20.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-01 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
2-3-4
U.
7
RESIDUUM: Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, Sandy
CLAY with some mica (CH)
1.5
2.0
2-4-5
9
3.5
2-4-7
11
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Firm, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Sandy Micacious
6.5
3-4-3
SILT (ML)
7
8.0
8.5
3-4-4
8
10.0
13.5
2-4-4
8
15.0
18.5
Loose, Tan and Dark Brown, Micacious Silty, Fine
18.5
2-2-3
to Coarse SAND (SM)
5
20.0
Boring terminated at 20 feet below ground
20.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 20.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-02 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
3-6-8
U.
14
RESIDUUM: Stiff, Reddish -Brown, CLAY (CH)
1.5
2.0
Medium Dense to Very Loose, Reddish -Brown,
2.0
4-6-7
Black, and Tan, Silty, Fine to Coarse SAND with
13
some mica (SM)
3.5
4-4-5
9
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
2-2-2
4
8.0
8.5
2-2-2
4
10.0
13.5
Medium Dense, Dark Tan and White, Silty, Fine
13.5
4-6-6
SAND (SM) with some mica
12
15.0
18.5
Stiff, Reddish -Brown and Black, Sandy, Micacious
18.5
3-5-5
-
F SILT (ML)
10
20.0
Boring terminated at 20 feet below ground
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 20.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-03 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
0.2
SURFICIAL
2-2-4
0.0
6
RESIDUUM: Firm to Very Stiff, Reddish -Brown,
Sandy SILT (MH)
1.5
2.0
4-7-11
18
3.5
5-8-9
17
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Stiff to Firm, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Sandy SILT
6.5
4-7-7
(ML)
14
8.0
8.5
3-3-5
8
10.0
13.5
Loose, Dark Brown and Black, Micacious Silty
13.5
2-3-3
SAND (SM)
6
15.0
18.5
------------------------
Firm, Orange and Tan, SILT (ML)
18.5
2-2-3
5
20.0
Boring terminated at 20 feet below ground
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 20.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-04 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
2-3-5
U.
8
RESIDUUM: Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown CLAY
(CH)
1.5
2.0
3-4-7
11
3.5
3-4-4
g
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Loose, Reddish -Brown and Black, Silty, Fine to
6.5
2-4-4
Coarse SAND (SM) with some mica
8
8.0
8.5
3-3-2
5
10.0
13.5
Loose, Tan and Dark Brown, Micacious Silty, Fine
13.5
3-4-4
to Coarse SAND (SM)
8
15.0
18.5
Firm, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy Micacious
18.5
3-3-4
SILT (ML)
7
20.0
Boring terminated at 20 feet below ground
20.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 20.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-05 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
0.2
SURFICIAL
2-3-4
0.0
7
RESIDUUM: Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, SILT
(MH)
1.5
2.0
3-5-8
13
3.5
4-4-6
10
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Medium Dense to Loose, Reddish -Brown and
6.5
2-4-8
Tan, Micacious Silty, Fine to Coarse SAND (SM)
12
8.0
8.5
4-3-3
6
10.0
13.5
Soft, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy, Micacious
13.5
2-1-2
SILT (ML)
3
15.0
18.5
Very Dense, Dark Tan and White, Silty, Fine to
18.5
41-27-20
Coarse SAND (SM)
47
20.0
Boring terminated at 20 feet below ground
20.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 25.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Building Pad
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-06 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
0.2
SURFICIAL
2-3-4
0.0
7
RESIDUUM: Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, SILT
(MH)
1.5
2.0
3-4-6
10
3.5
3-5-6
11
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Firm, Reddish -Brown and Black, Sandy Micacious
6.5
1-2-3
SILT (ML)
5
8.0
8.5
2-2-3
5
10.0
13.5
Loose, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Micacious Silty
13.5
2-2-3
Fine to Coarse SAND (SM)
5
15.0
18.5
Firm to Very Stiff, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy
18.5
2-2-3
Micacious SILT (ML)
5
20.0
23.5
5-6-10
16
25.0
Boring terminated at 25 feet below ground
25.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 15.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Driveway
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-07 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
1-1-3
4
RESIDUUM: Soft to Stiff, Reddish -Brown CLAY
(CH)
1.5
2.0
3-5-8
13
3.5
4-6-8
14
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Firm, Reddish -Brown and Black, Sandy,
6.5
3-3-5
Micacious SILT (ML)
8
8.0
8.5
2-3-4
7
10.0
13.5
Loose to Medium Dense, Dark Brown and Black,
13.5
2-3-5
Silty, Fine to Coarse SAND (SM)
8
15.0
Boring terminated at 15 feet below ground
15.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 15.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Driveway
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-08 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/18/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
Det
eeth
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
1-3-3
6
RESIDUUM: Firm to Stiff, Reddish -Brown, CLAY
(CH)
1.5
2.0
4-6-7
13
3.5
Medium Dense, Reddish -Brown and Tan,
Micacious Silty, Fine to Coarse SAND (SM)
3.5
5.0
16
Boring was dry at the time
of drilling.
3-8-8
6.5
Stiff, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Sandy, Micacious
6.5
3-5-9
SILT (ML)
14
8.0
8.5
Soft, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy Micacious SILT
8.5
3-1-2
(ML)
3
10.0
13.5
1-2-1
3
15.0
Boring terminated at 15 feet below ground
15.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 15.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Driveway
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-09 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/19/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
0.2
SURFICIAL
2-2-2
0.0
4
RESIDUUM: Soft to Very Stiff, Reddish -Brown
SILT (MH)
1.5
2.0
4-7-10
17
3.5
7-10-10
20
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Stiff, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Sandy, Micacious
6.5
4-5-6
SILT (ML)
11
8.0
8.5
Medium Dense, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Silty,
8.5
5-5-6
Fine to Coarse SAND (SM)
11
10.0
13.5
Firm, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy, Micacious
13.5
2-2-3
SILT (ML)
5
15.0
Boring terminated at 15 feet below ground
15.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrkob Froehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
BORING LOG
1881
Project No: 63W-0120 Elevation:
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC Total Depth: 15.0'
Project: The Residence at Northgate Boring Location: Sediment Basin
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
Boring: B-10 (1 of 1)
Drilling Method: HSA
Hammer Type: Automatic
Date Drilled: 10/18/18
Driller: G. Skoglund
Elevation
Depth
Description of Materials
(Classification)
* Sample
Blows
Sample
(feet)
N-Value
(blows/ft)
Remarks
SURFICIAL
1-3-6
9
RESIDUUM: Stiff to Very Stiff, Reddish -Brown
CLAY (CH)
1.5
2.0
4-8-11
19
3.5
5-8-12
20
Boring was dry at the time
5.0
of drilling.
6.5
Very Stiff, Reddish -Brown and Tan, Sandy,
6.5
6-8-9
Micacious SILT (ML)
17
8.0
8.5
Firm, Dark Brown and Black, Sandy, Micacious
8.5
5-5-4
SILT (ML)
9
10.0
13.5
1-3-3
6
15.0
Boring terminated at 15 feet below ground
15.0
surface.
,ivumber oT blows required Tor a 14u ib nammer dropping 3u- to drive z- u.u., i.u. sampier a total oT Its Incnes In tnree b" Increments.
The sum of the second and third increments of penetration is termed the standard penetration resistance, N-Value.

SINCE
nrp.DFr oeh I ing & Robertson, Inc.
1881
Project No: 63W-0120
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC
Project: The Residence at Northgate
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
Plot Based on Depth
Profile Name: Building North - South

SINCE
nrpQ Fr oehl ing & Robertson, Inc.
1881
Project No: 63W-0120
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC
Project: The Residence at Northgate
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
Plot Based on Depth
Profile Name: Building East - West
B-07
B-05
B-06
B-03
0
5u14
LOA,
SURFICIAL
2
-:50A113'
.............. ......
'' ' — ' '' '
.... ....
.
13* .......................................
.....
.
......
10. . .....
18............
:VA14
W
10
11
17
4
.. . .. .. .. .. .............................................................
......... ...
.
............. ...................
........ ........ .....
.
.......
.........
STRATUM I
6
A
V
.......................... ..............................................................
......... ...
.
..................................
.................... .....
.
.... ..........
.... .......
8*
.12
5
14
8
...... ...... .............. ......
................ .....................
..............
...... ...........
...................
7
6
5
8
10
...... ...... .............. ......
.........
.. ...... ......................
...........
...................
CL12
.............. ........... ...............................................................
............
..
............. .....................................................
..........
..
...................
5
b
14
............. . ...
.... .... .... .... ..............
............... ...................
....................
...........
.........
STRATUM 11
16
........... ...... .............. ......
...... I ......... .....................
....................
...... ...........
..
...............
18
... .. .... . .............. ......
...... ......... .....................
....................
.
...... ...........
.....................
7-FT-47
5
5
20
... .. .... . ............. . ... ..
.... .... .... .... ...... ............ ............. ...................
....................
...........
.........
22
... .. .... . .. .............. .............................................................
......... ...................................
....... .....
..........
........... .........
24
Subsurface Profile Notes: .............. ......
.. ................ .....................
.......
16
. .... ...............................
Standard Penetration Resistance
Groundwater level at time of drilling
26
See the Boring Logs in Appenclixil for a description of the
graphic symbols and soil classification

SINCE
FAR
KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Correlation of Penetration Resistance with
Relative Density and Consistency
Sands and Gravels Silts and Clays
No. of
Relative
No. of
Relative
Blows, N
Densily
Blows, N
Densily
0 - 4
Very loose
0 - 2
Very soft
5 - 10
Loose
3- 4
Soft
11 - 30
Medium dense
5 - 8
Firm
31 -50
Dense
9 - 15
Stiff
Over 50
Very dense
16 - 30
Very stiff
31 - 50
Hard
Over 50
Very hard
Particle Size Identification
(Unified Classification System)
Boulders: Diameter exceeds 8 inches
Cobbles: 3 to 8 inches diameter
Gravel: Coarse - 3/4 to 3 inches diameter
Fine - 4.76 mm to 3/4 inch diameter
Sand: Coarse - 2.0 mm to 4.76 mm diameter
Medium - 0.42 mm to 2.0 mm diameter
Fine - 0.074 mm to 0.42 mm diameter
Silt and Clay: Less than 0.07 mm (particles cannot be seen with naked eye)
Modifiers
The modifiers provide our estimate of the amount of silt, clay or sand size particles in the soil
sample.
Approximate
Content Modifiers
<_ 5%: Trace
5% to 12%: Slightly silty, slightly clayey,
slightly sandy
12% to 30%: Silty, clayey, sandy
30% to 50%: Very silty, very clayey, very
Field Moisture
Description
Saturated: Usually liquid; very wet, usually
from below the groundwater table
Wet: Semisolid; requires drying to attain
optimum moisture
Moist: Solid; at or near optimum moisture
Dry: Requires additional water to attain
optimum moisture

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
MAJOR DIVISIONS
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
I LETTER
GRAVEL
AND
CLEAN
GRAVELS
•
r:e fir` r
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
GRAVELLY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
•
16� . IL�
�
��
S •� •
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
OR NO FINES
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE
GRAVELS WITH
FINES
•
•
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
SILT MIXTURES
FRACTION
'
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
CLAY MIXTURES
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SAND
AND
CLEAN SANDS
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
LARGER THAN
SANDY
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
Sp
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
SANDS WITH
FINES
-
-
-
-
SM
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT
MIXTURES
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
-
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
_ -
-
SC
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
MIXTURES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML
SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
SILTS
LIQUID LIMIT
AND LESS THAN 50
CLAYS
CL
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SMALLER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SILTY SOILS
SIZE
SILTS
LIQUID LIMIT
AND GREATER THAN 50
CLAYS
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
PLASTICITY
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
'/ 0" / \" / 0" /
PT
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

f&R
APPENDIX III
Laboratory Test Results

SINCE
F& FPOEHLING & ROBEPTSON7 INC.
R
188I
Project No: 63W-0120
Client: Residence Housing Associates, LLC
Project: The Residence at Northgate
City/State: Statesville, North Carolina
LABORATORY SUMMARY
Boring No.
Depth (ft)
LL
PL
PI
Water
Content
N
% Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
USCS Class
B-01
1.5
73
32
40
38.5
-
25.1
74.9
CH
B-02
3.5
49
37
12
15.0
-
58.8
41.2
SM
B-03
1.5
54
20
26
23.9
-
30.9
69.1
MH
B-05
8.0
28
23
5
20.1
-
56.5
43.5
SM
B-08
5.0
37
24
13
17.6
-
65.9
34.1
SM

f&R
APPENDIX IV
GBA Publication
"Important Information about This
Geotechnical Engineering Report"

r- Geotechnical-Engineering Report --)
The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA)
has prepared this advisory to help you — assumedly
a client representative — interpret and apply this
geotechnical-engineering report as effectively
as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from
a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems
that, for decades, have been a principal cause of
construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and
disputes. If you have questions or want more
information about any of the issues discussed below,
contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.
Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business
Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a
wide array of risk -confrontation techniques that can
be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a
construction project.
Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific
needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted
for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil -
works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each
geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-
engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Those who
rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client
can be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives
should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
- not even you - should apply this report for any purpose or project except
the one originally contemplated.
Read this Report in Full
Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-
engineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an
executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. Read this report
in full.
You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer
about Change
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors
when designing the study behind this report and developing the
confirmation -dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few
typical factors include:
• the clients goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and
risk -management preferences;
• the general nature of the structure involved, its size,
configuration, and performance criteria;
the structures location and orientation on the site; and
other planned or existing site improvements, such as
retaining walls, access roads, parking lots, and
underground utilities.
Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include
those that affect:
• the sites size or shape;
• the function of the proposed structure, as when it's
changed from a parking garage to an office building, or
from a light -industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;
• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or
weight of the proposed structure;
• the composition of the design team; or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their
impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
would have considered.
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
• for a different client;
• for a different project;
• for a different site (that may or may not include all or a
portion of the original site); or
• before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or
environmental remediation, or natural events like floods,
droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations.
Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified
codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. If your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an `apply -by" date on the report,
ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain
about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical
engineer before applying it. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis - if any is required at all - could prevent major problems.
Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are
Professional Opinions
Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a sites
subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The
data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to
form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual
sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly - from
those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your
geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to
project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
whenever needed.

This Report's Recommendations Are
Confirmation -Dependent
The recommendations included in this report - including any options
or alternatives - are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are
not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your
geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist
actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming
no other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation -
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform
construction observation.
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted
Other design professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical-
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk
by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the
design team, to:
confer with other design -team members,
help develop specifications,
review pertinent elements of other design professionals'
plans and specifications, and
be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering
guidance is needed.
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction
observation.
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift
unanticipated -subsurface -conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent
the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the
complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note
conspicuously that you've included the material for informational
purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note
that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely
on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in
the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific
times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements,
including options selected from the report, only from the design
drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may
perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough
time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position
to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring
them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction
conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do
not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured
unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays,
cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical
engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled "limitations, many of these provisions indicate
where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help
others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these
provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should
respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an
environmental study - e.g., a "phase -one' or "phase -two" environmental
site assessment - differ significantly from those used to perform
a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-
engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of
encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management
guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report
prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six
months old.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
Infiltration and Mold
While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer's
services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled
migration of moisture - including water vapor - from the soil through
building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can
cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly,
proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations
will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront
the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold
specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building -
envelope or mold specialists.
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
&EPA ASSOCIATION
Telephone: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail] www.geoprofessional.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly
prohibited, except with GBAs specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any
kind. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent

SINCE
Im
HQ: 3015 DUMBARTON ROAD RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23228 T 804.264.2701 F 804.264.1202 www.fandr.com
VIRGINIA • NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA • MARYLAND • DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA