SW5230801_Soils/Geotechnical Report_20230804

GeoTechnologies,Inc.
Geotechnical and Construction Materials Testing Services
May 8,2019
Mr.Allen Pipken
Albemarle Properties,LLC
10320 Durant Road
Raleigh,NC 27614
Re: Report of Subsurface Investigation
Mosswood Blvd Development
Youngsville,North Carolina
GeoTechnologies Job No. 1-19-0253-EA
Dear Mr. Pipken:
GeoTechnologies, Inc. has completed the authorized investigation to evaluate subsurface soil conditions for
the proposed warehouse development off of Mosswood Blvd. in Youngsville,North Carolina. Subsurface conditions
at the site were investigated by completing thirteen soil test borings at the approximate locations shown on the attached
Figure 1. Eighteen borings were originally proposed for the subsurface investigation, but upon request from Allen
Pipkin five borings were excluded from the proposed drilling plan (Borings B-2, 4, 5 ,7, and 10). These eliminated
borings are lightly crossed out in the attached Figure 1.
The boring locations were established in the field using a hand held Trimble with State Plane coordinates.
These coordinates were obtained by placing the grading plan in an AutoCAD file and aligning the parcel corners to
scale with coordinates obtained from Franklin County GIS website. Elevations were estimated from the provided
topographic plan.The State Plane coordinates and estimated elevations are presented on the attached Table 1.Although,
it should be noted that the provided topographic plan provided does not include proposed and existing elevation for the
entire site. Consequently,we assumed that the southern office building,parking lot areas and bio-retention ponds will
receive approximately 5 to 15 feet of fill based on the general trend of the proposed and existing elevations. The soil
test borings were extended to depths of about 5 to 15 feet below site grade. The borings were completed utilizing
standard penetration test(SPT)procedures at selected intervals to evaluate the consistency and density of the subsurface
soils. This report presents the findings of our investigation and our recommendations concerning site grading and
foundation support considerations for the proposed office buildings.
SITE AND PROJECT INFORMATION
The property of interest is located off of the south side Mosswood Blvd in Youngsville,North Carolina. The
property is directly west of 30 Weathers Street and directly east of 20 Gatekeeper Drive. The site is currently cleared
and undeveloped. Preliminary site plans for the additions have been provided. Future site development will include
four one story industrial/flex buildings (ranging from 9,000 to 12,000 SF in footprint), asphalt paved parking lots,
bioretention basins, sidewalks and an entrance road.Elevations range from approximately 430 to 472 feet.Anticipated
amounts of cuts and fills are displayed in the attached Table 1.The grading plan provided shows proposed grades close
to existing grades on the north side of the site. However, on the southern side of the site, fills in excess of 13 feet are
proposed. We expect that the buildings will be supported on load bearing walls and isolated columns with a slab on
grade.No detailed structural loading information was provided;however,we expect column and wall loads of less than
140 kips and 12 klf,respectively.
3200 Wellington Ct..Ste. 108•Raleigh, NC 27615• Phone [phone]•Fax [phone]•www.geotechpa.com• License No.C-0894

Albemarle Properties,LLC
Re: Mosswood Blvd.Development
May 8,2019
Page: 2
AREA GEOLOGY
The proposed site is located within the Piedmont Geologic and Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The
Piedmont Province is characterized by gently to steeply sloping topography, rolling hills and ridgelines, dissected by
moderate to well-developed(mature)dendritic type drainage systems and drainages swales,hollows,tributaries,creeks,
streams, and rivers. More specifically, the site is located within the Raleigh Belt which is comprised of metamorphic
and intrusive rock. The specific bedrock materials in the vicinity of the site generally consist of biotite gneiss and
schists with small masses of granitic rock. These materials were deposited during the Cambrian Period approximately
500 to 570 million years ago. The underlying bedrock materials have weathered to form the near surface residual sandy
silts and silty sands which are typically found throughout the area.
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing included standard proctor(ASTM D-4318), soaked CBR analysis (ASTM D-4318), grain
size analysis (ASTM D-1140), and Atterberg limits tests (ASTM D-1883). The results of the laboratory testing are
attached.
For the samples tested, the percent passing the #200 sieve ranged from 66.5 to 71.9. The samples tested
indicated that the predominant soils in the top few feet of existing grade consist of slightly fine sandy clayey high to
low plasticity silts with Unified Soil Classifications of ML and MH. Soaked CBR testing of the near surface soils
indicated a CBR value of 7.3 %at a penetration depth of 0.1"and a CBR value of 7.1 %at a penetration depth of 0.2",
with a swell of 1.0%.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Generalized subsurface profiles prepared from the test boring data are attached to this report as Figures 2A and
2B to graphically illustrate subsurface conditions encountered at this site. More detailed descriptions of the conditions
encountered at the individual test boring locations are then presented on the attached test boring records.
Subsurface conditions on the site were characterized by near surface topsoil that extended to depths of 3 to 9
inches. In approximately 2/3 of the borings performed,the topsoil was underlain by approximately 2 to 4.5 feet of fill
material consisting of stiff sandy to clayey silts. The topsoil and/or near surface fill material was underlain by residual
soils. The residual soils typically consisted of micaceous soft to very stiff low plasticity clayey to sandy silt.
Based on the results of the laboratory testing,some of the near surface soils are highly plastic in nature with a
USCS classifications of MH.However,high plasticity soils in this geology generally have high plasticity characteristics
but behave like low plasticity clays with respect to swell and design CBR values,which is confirmed by the results of
our laboratory CBR testing. Therefore, no special provisions to mitigate highly plastic soils on this site are likely
necessary.
Groundwater was only directly encountered in one of the thirteen borings performed. Groundwater was
encountered in boring B-1 at 7 feet below existing elevation at the time of boring completion. Borings B-3, B-6, and
W-2 had samples that were moist in the final drive which is likely indicative that the groundwater table was very close
to the termination depth of the boring. All other borings were dry at the time of completion. However, it should be
noted that the near surface soils at the site are conducive to the temporary development of perched groundwater
conditions during periods of wet weather,and that groundwater levels will fluctuate during different periods of the year.
6eoTechnologies,Inc
www geotechpa com

Albemarle Properties,LLC
Re: Mosswood Blvd.Development
May 8,2019
Page: 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are made based upon a review of the attached test boring data, our
understanding of the proposed construction,and past experience with similar projects and subsurface conditions.Once
fmal site grading and structural plans are available,we would appreciate being provided with that information so that
these recommendations may be confirmed, extended, or modified as necessary. Additionally, should subsurface
conditions adverse to those indicated by this report be encountered during construction, those differences should be
reported to us for review and comment.
Site Grading Considerations. Site grading should initially begin with the removal of all topsoil and vegetation
from within the limits of the proposed construction. Following stripping, GeoTechnologies recommends that all areas
at grade or designated to receive fill be proofrolled with a partially loaded dump truck in the presence of a geotechnical
engineer. Any area which ruts or pumps excessively in the opinion of the engineer should then be undercut to firm
bearing and be backfilled with properly compacted structural fill.
The majority of the borings encountered near surface soils that were relatively stiff. However, a majority of
the near surface soils consisted of fill, which if placed in an unmonitored manner can be variable and inconsistent.
Additionally,the fill and native soils are moisture sensitive,and the consistency of the top several feet is likely to vary
seasonally and following rain events. Therefore, it should be anticipated that some of these soils will rut and pump
beneath a proofroll and require some degree of repair. Based on the borings performed, if the area is graded during a
warm and dry time of the year, repair areas are likely to be isolated and will generally be contained to the top 1 to 2
feet of existing grade. If the site can be graded during a period of warm and dry weather when unstable near surface
soils can be disced, dried, and recompacted, the quantity of undercut due to soft near surface soils can be reduced
significantly. Use of a farming disc can also generally expedite drying of any on-site soils which are above optimum
moisture content. However, during the wetter months of the year,the near surface soils will likely be wet of optimum
moisture and more extensive repairs will be needed for proper grading. It is highly recommended to include fair unit
pricing for removal of unsuitable material in the contact documents.
The on-site soils,excluding topsoil should be suitable for reuse as structural fill provided compaction moisture
is maintained near optimum during placement. Soil moisture contents must be maintained within 2%of optimum with
could require some drying or the addition of moisture.If off-site borrow is required,low plasticity clays,silts,or sands
with Unified Soil Classifications of CL,ML, SM,and SC may be imported for use as structural fill.All new fill should
be compacted to not less than 95% of the standard Proctor maximum dry density except in the final foot where this
requirement should be increased to 98%of the standard Proctor maximum.
Difficult Excavation Considerations. No difficult excavation material was encountered within the borings
performed. Although conditions can vary intermediate of borings performed, based on the borings performed and the
proposed grading plan, it is unlikely to encounter difficult excavation material in general grading for the site.
Foundation Support Considerations.Following repair of any soft near surface soils,the proposed building may
be supported on shallow spread footing foundations designed for a bearing pressure of 3,000 psf subject to the restriction
that column and wall footings have least dimensions of not less than 24 and 16 inches,respectively. These foundations
may bear at nominal depth below finished exterior grade in residual soils or in properly compacted fill except that a
minimum embedment depth of not less than 18 inches for exterior footings is recommended for frost protection.Careful
inspection of the foundation excavations by a geotechnical engineer is recommended.This should include hand augers
and DCP testing in the foundation excavations. Areas which are found to be soft or otherwise unsuitable should be
repaired as directed by the engineer.A typical repair would consist of neat line undercut, followed by backfilling with
washed#57 or#67 stone.
6eoTechndogies,Inc.
F';� www geotechpa com

Albemarle Properties,LLC
Re: Mosswood Blvd.Development
May 8,2019
Page: 4
Most soils encountered in the borings encountered were firm to stiff.However,because the top several feet of
the site encountered fill soils which were not monitored during placement, the consistency of the fill soils may vary.
Additionally,borings for the proposed office buildings were relatively widely spaced. Therefore, some soft soils may
be encountered which would require repair within the foundations.If a better estimate of the quantity of repair required
within the building pads is desired,GeoTechnolgies would be happy to perform investigations with either hand operated
equipment or excavator test pits in order to further investigate and estimate the presence of any near surface soft soils.
In order to evaluate potential settlement for the assumed loadings, GeoTechnologies utilized the FHA
settlement estimation procedure which correlates soil compressibility to soil type and standard penetration resistances.
The results of our analyses indicates total estimated maximum settlements are anticipated to be less than 1 inch for
column loads of up to 140 kips and wall loads of up to 12 klf. If heavier loads are anticipated undercut and stone
replacement techniques could be used to reduce settlements. Typically, differential settlement will be approximately
one-half of the maximum settlement. Once structural loads and site grading plans are available, GeoTechnologies
should be provided with that information so that settlement estimates can be finalized.
Subgrade Protection. It is important that the contractor protect the subgrade soils to minimize rutting from
heavy rubber tired equipment, sealing off the site with a smooth drum roller in advance of rain events, grading to
promote drainage and prevent ponding, and covering finalized on-grade areas with compacted CABC stone as
appropriate. Consideration could also be given to leaving subgrades a few inches high during construction and cutting
to grade just prior to placement of stone base. Even with the above provisions, it should be recognized that the
contractor's production and ability to limit undercut will in part be a function of weather conditions at the time of site
grading.
Slab-on-Grades. Approved soils or compacted structural fill will provide adequate support for conventional
concrete slab-on-grades, and a subgrade modulus of 100 pci may be used. We recommend capping the subgrade soils
with 4 inches of CABC to protect the subgrade.
Segmental Type Retaining Walls. Our experience has been that the near surface soils on this site are not well
suited for use as backfill in the reinforced zone for segmental unit retaining walls. Consideration can be given to using
the on-site behind low walls (less than 5 foot maximum height) away from structures; however, this should be
determined on a case-by-case basis.If we can be provided with planned wall locations and height,GeoTechnolgies can
help determine which walls (if any) can use on-site soils for backfill. In general, GeoTechnologies recommends that
backfill for segmental walls consist of an approved imported granular quarry material.If an import material is selected,
GeoTechnologies can provide recommended design parameters.
We recommend that all retaining wall designs include an assessment of global stability,to include tiered walls
and walls located in or on slopes. These analyses should be considered part of the wall design package, and designs
which do not explicitly address global stability should not be considered complete.Additionally,all wall designs should
include appropriate drainage provisions both directly behind the face block as well as behind the reinforced zone.
Although true groundwater is not prevalent near surface at this site,it may be encountered in cuts,and the potential for
perched water also exists. As such, adequate provisions should be included in the wall design details, and the
designer/contractor should be prepared to modify drainage provisions should areas of heavier than expected flows be
observed behind walls.
Fill Induced Settlements. In areas where site grades will be raised by more than 6 feet, some settlement of the
underlying residual soils will occur. It is recommended that fill induced settlements be allowed to subside before
construction begins. As such, we recommend that the project surveyors establish monitoring points in deep fill areas
(any area with more than 6 feet)to verify that fill induced settlements have subsided.Based on experience,we anticipate
that the monitoring period will not exceed 30 days following the completion of filling.
— 6eoTechndogies,Inc.
F';� www geotechpa com

Albemarle Properties,LLC
Re: Mosswood Blvd.Development
May 8,2019
Page: 5
Below Grade Walls and Retaining Walls. Below grade walls may be designed using the soil parameters
indicated in the table below for on-site soils. The design values assume level grade behind or in front of the wall and
should be modified for sloping grades.A buoyant unit weight should be used below the water table.
At-rest EP Active EP Passive EP Friction Base Friction Unit Weight
Coeff. Coeff. Coeff. Angle (pcf)
0.5 0.33 3.0 30° 0.35 120
Hydrostatic conditions should be considered for any walls extending below the water table (not expected).
Below grade walls must include an effective drainage medium which intercepts water moving towards the wall such
that hydrostatic conditions do not develop above the static water level. Appropriate safety factors should be used in
conjunction with these design values.
Any fill material placed adjacent to below grade walls should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the
standard Proctor maximum dry density,except where 98%is required at subgrade.Additionally,any soils placed within
3 to 4 feet of below grade walls should be compacted with light hand held equipment to prevent overstressing of the
walls. This will necessitate that backfill be placed in 4 to 6 inch lifts.
Dewatering Considerations. Our borings generally indicate that cuts of at least 7 feet can be made without
encountering significant groundwater.We anticipate that any water encountered in general grading will be minor such
that it can be handled with a sump pump operation. If deeper utility installations (bearing more than 7 feet below
existing grade) are anticipated, these excavation may encounter heavier flows and may require more extensive
dewatering measures such as well points. Ultimately, dewatering is the responsibility of the contractor performing the
work.
Temporary Excavations. Trench excavation methods are the responsibility of the contractor. Temporary
excavations into residual soils should be designed in accordance with OSHA guidelines assuming that the on-site soils
can be classified as Type "B" soils. Excavations exceeding 20 feet in depth must be designed by an engineer. Once
open,all excavations should be observed on a daily basis by qualified personnel.
Storm Water Pond Considerations: The provided drawing shows that ponds are proposed on the south side of
the site. In recent years we have seen wet ponds which appear to meet plan infiltration criteria(typically 0.01 in/hr),
but which do not perform as expected. This is due to the fact that the boundary conditions of the field infiltration test
typically do not match those of the pond under normal pool conditions. Essentially,the hydraulic head(and therefore
gradient) of the pond under normal operating conditions is higher(often significantly higher) than the head from the
standard double ring infiltrometer test. Common problems we have seen associated with this issue include water levels
which cannot support the required vegetation and unacceptably low water levels for a project amenity such as a fountain.
Our experience has been that,when required,a soil liner constructed from a properly tested(lab and field)and
placed low permeability soil can be used to maintain water levels reasonably close to the intent of the infiltration
specification, even when accounting for the hydraulic head/liner thickness at normal pool levels. However,the higher
the head and/or thinner the liner, the more impervious the liner material should be. As such, a soil liner material may
be acceptable for one combination of hydraulic head/liner thickness, but not for another. If a wet pond will be
incorporated as an architectural amenity, it is recommended that a manufactured synthetic liner be used in conjunction
with a soil liner or as a replacement. In this case, if a synthetic liner is not used, consideration should be given to
installing a make-up well to maintain pond water levels.
Permanent Slopes. In this geology,dry and well compacted unreinforced fill slopes built at 2.5H:1 V are stable
without exception. Steeper fill slopes can be used with properly designed and installed geosynthetic reinforcement.Cut
6eoTechndogies,Inc.
F';� www geotechpa com

Albemarle Properties,LLC
Re: Mosswood Blvd.Development
May 8,2019
Page: 6
slopes should also be about 2.5H:1V or flatter. Any water encountered on the face of slopes should be brought to the
attention of the geotechnical engineer so that necessary provisions can be made.
Pavement Design. Following proper completion of grading, the site should be suitable for support of
conventional pavement structures. Based on the results of the CBR testing performed we recommend using a design
CBR of 6%for the design of flexible pavements and a subgrade modulus of 100 pci for rigid pavements. This design
CBR value is based upon samples that were typical in the top several feet of existing grade on the site.Any areas which
receive fill should be resampled at design subgrade elevation for laboratory CBR testing to verify that the soils at
subgrade elevation can provide the design CBR values. Soils which do not provide the design CBR value may
necessitate thickening of the stone base section. Some of the underlying soils contain a significant amount of mica and
will likely be unstable during a proof roll. If these micaceous soils are used to support pavements, a thickened stone
section may be necessary.
Any new pavement subgrades should be moisture conditioned and recompacted to not less than 98% of the
standard Proctor maximum dry density immediately prior to placement of base course stone.The subgrades should also
be proofrolled for stability. Site grades should be detailed to promote drainage away from the pavement areas, and
underdrains or ditches should be provided along the high side of all pavements. If irrigated planter islands will be
utilized,French drains should be installed around the edge of the curbing to intercept and divert perched water during
the wetter winter months of the year.
The design CBR value may generate pavement sections which are unsuitably thin. Therefore, for drive areas
we typically recommend a minimum pavement section consisting of 8 inches of CABC and 3 inches of asphalt. For
parking areas we typically recommend a minimum pavement section consisting of 8 inches of CABC and 2 inches of
asphalt.Pavement sections(rigid and flexible)can be provided once traffic loading and volume details are known
Seismic Design. This site is a seismic site class"D"under the building code based on the test boring data and
past experience in the area of the site.
CLOSING
GeoTechnologies, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to have provided you with our services on this project.
Please contact us if you should have questions regarding this report or if we may be of any further assistance.
0,%11111,,Sincerely, '��N CAROB/,,
GeoTechnologies,Inc., OQOFESS�p/V%-7
g?/:. SEAL
\.1C�'�� 1046382
Sean A.Corcoran,P.E. y� GlNE�epQ�P=
NC License No.46382 ', CO "
SAC/pr-mrp
6eoTechndogies,Inc.
ram` www geotechpa com

Table 1
Mosswood Blvd. Development Borings
Job # 1-19-0253EA
Boring Northing (ft) Easting (ft) Depth (ft) Proposed Depth (ft) Existing Depth (ft) Fill (-) / Cut (+) (ft)
B-1 2,147,435 830,790 15 ? ? ?
B-2 2,147,508 830,762 15 ? ? ?
B-3 2,147,506 830,970 15 459 446 -13
B-4 2,147,581 830,942 15 459 446 -13
B-5 2,147,560 831,110 15 459 454 -5
B-6 2,147,634 831,078 15 459 455.5 -3.5
B-7 2,147,628 831,284 15 463 462 -1
B-8 2,147,703 831,254 10 463 462.5 -0.5
B-9 2,147,647 831,335 15 467.6 465 -2.6
B-10 2,147,649 831,393 15 467.6 467.5 -0.1
B-11 2,147,798 831,335 15 467.6 466 -1.6
B-12 2,147,798 831,393 15 467.6 467.5 -0.1
P-1 2,147,601 830,739 5 ? ? ?
P-2 2,147,671 830,929 5 457 449 -8
P-3 2,147,769 831,135 5 460 459.5 -0.5
P-4 2,147,678 831,480 5 470 472 2
W-1 2,147,392 830,719 15 ? ? ?
W-2 2,147,691 830,770 15 ? ? ?

ADOPTED FROM(.TAP BOO(109)-3)1
• ��� lb
Figure 1 Boring Location Map
sR 114) ; ' i— i — —Ll a
3j. =»� Job 9 0 53
4.,...,
N h
N c
LEGEND: I - o
OP-EXISTING IRON PIPE I CDy I
EPK-EXISTING PK NAIL 1
NIP-NEW IRON PIPE SET .�J
R/W-RIGHT OF WAY I r
CAN-CABLE TV BOX 1�1 V
PP EIP;, �, OT G E
1.Mls RAT SUB.ECT TO ALL9.
EASEIAFNTS.AGTF3AIETATS AND 1 a '
RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD ^/ \'
PRIOR ER THE DATE OF ES PUT. �- 27. 3 ,, T/1 (n r�
s.No UNDERGROUND UTILISES 33.2 �N l/1
HAVE BEEN MARKED CR LOCATED
FOR TITS PLAT. w
3.ALL BOUNDARIES ARE PREUMWARY \ ^ n
UBJECT TO CHANGE.
4. M BEA NL AND
GROUND MEASUREMENTS
ARE
339 e3� .\ \ S \ 11�` 1� ~ 7
• , \ ` TIBIA EPR N
1 \ ` us HWr 1 „
I g I I FLAK..•
I \ 4 B
BIORETENTION BASI • , I 1 \ IX / / W Q
$- /1 �--I--I ' / ; x ID
) j /� / IJI % F i y I a ci 1i ` ) U
N y�� // �e wAlt , 'it/
( rouNG$Huc colAIAERCE cENTEN - , 7
/ /�� �� /Oaf �j 2 G H AM BOOK 199)-3 / J
/ r' = 2ay 1 1 i ,I I
B. �► u
' b /� t 1 I I / /
I � ,i , I /3627 // � (
/ / / , - , . J �I \rr, 1 I , P i 1 / /
1 1 1 , 1 1
05 / it �/ / / / i /� I I/
/
Li EIP n • /C-4%/ � ' ����art ���'
Illi
a /w W A / �,r�l / '` Qz•3, I z� Dl,.IT).1 I
__ YOUNGSYiLIE CGAAIERCE CENTA / d kW / / / ` A' I I > R• /
O IAAP BOOK 199)-3)I / / / / $-6/ // /' /� �� \I AA. I - I e.: ,,� I I�
a 20.0' PUBLIC �1 ° s / A ASy �/ ,,/'/ Fr i` 1,061..„5tifi�� P Ii I
3,I/ �-f III , I
rnUTILITY EASEMENT P IU, P-2 / "''''-. 9'4o w / / ss �sr3_ 3.000 'C.) �' �. / / ' / 1 /o
BIORETENTION BASIN ;4 / / / /
p, 1 • W-2 / p i I I / // / / '+t $-: © :�� A4S ( ril,rilf4,,.„.
�`' �M� / / I /j U
r, —,Ib'£LZ •__ � r / / / l1 / A V Z
v _ a � � / I , Si ( / - / 1
Mslso.z0N I I I � / / 09. . / � p /I I /
I n
N I E I P ; i I —i �� ` 44, , I°F �¢4�RG act IJ //1
i I /m Na 1 I I I "I-- ` / // / . so.o�• Ix I / Z
o I C. I 1 I 3 IDDG- — �, 1z I I I Ir I j I 4, P- /// % s Le.ro• i3,,, ,,
I /
J _ I ,A /
i I i _ . I 14t75 I \ a o
I I Ti i „ 149-uot _ 96z ` ,, _- I I I i/Wa 1 j I I , 7 I I / / �.11 �� I \I III/oI I I I I I : I li
1 I �2a4-f-7�y 7d: I m ///y�� oI I ' 1 I g / �_. �� F1 /0 4�'1
CO
n I ? _ r _ �_ 1 /� z
CirOo
41;) itier /I 1 ig
/
6/ � / / / 9Z °° w I l rr4 LJ co 4- ♦
/�� // I III �\ 1 111 (n
E : 0/ ( / '
n I DATE FEB.14,19
o TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY FOR I F%f SCALE 1"=40'
g SHELTER BUILDING CORPORATION I ,I/, ,,, A III
< DRAWN BTB
y OWNER: SHELTER BUILDING CORPORATION YOUNGSNUE C311ERCE CENTER I I
m LOT 2, YOUNGSVILLE COMMERCE CENTER 1AAP eooK 199)sr I JOB NO.
`o REF: MAP BOOK 1997-371 I I REVISIONS
a YOUNGSVILLE TOWNSHIP
FRANKLIN COUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA
40 20 0 40 80
C
SCALE 1"=40'
MAY 12, 1998
SHEET
ZONED HIGHWAY BUISNESS AND LIGHT INDUSTRY C 'I o O
E
0
6

Elevation (Feet) GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE LEGEND
■ Topsoil
475 Low Plasticity Silt
P-4 • Silty Sand
470 liii �•� 0 Low Plasticity Clay
B_11 B-12 liii 17 High Plasticity Silt
B - 9E. r,//
465 INK11 / 9
B -8 12
14 Fill
460 7 13 15 P-3 18 --= Standard Penetration Resistance
B - 6 9 15 7 V Groundwater at Time of Boring
455 17 15 i // ' Auger Refusal
10
13 I 14 =Proposed Elev.
450 11 .. .. [45 13 P-2
.' Am
B - 3 ' 20
445 12 I�5 13
440 .... 16 6
435 22
430 8
PROJECT: SCALE: As Shown
JOB No:1-19-0253-EA
Mosswood Blvd Development Ir//////4•••••••• GeoTechnologies, Inc
Youngsville, North Carolina FIGURE No:2A

Elevation (Feet) GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE LEGEND
■ Topsoil
448 W-2 Low Plasticity Silt
446
14
444 p_1
--•••• Fill
442 13
11 Standard Penetration Resistance
440
Groundwater at Time of Boring
438 .11 7 Auger Refusal
B - 1 9
436 •
W-1 No Proposed Elevations Were
434 119
AIR Provided For These Borings
432 .. .IQ .4
8
430
V
6
428 •••
426 6 •••
424 •••
422 •••
7
420 •••
6
418
PROJECT: SCALE: As Shown
JOB No:1-19-0253-EA
Mosswood Blvd Development I........ GeoTechnologies, Inc.
Youngsville, North Carolina FIGURE No:2B

Borings Logs

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 436.00 10 20 40 60 100
0.5 Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Red Clayey SILT ML
•
3-4-5
3.0
Firm Micaceous Red,Orange,and Black Clayey 1ML
SILT
431
3-4-4
a
426 � .
2-3-3
a,
m
H
O
H
C7
•
3-3-4 a
15.0 421_ w
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
z
I I
Groundwater Encountered At 7 Feet Below Exisitng Elevation
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B- 1
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 446.00 10 20 40 60 100
0.4 Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Red Clayey SILT ML
4-5-7
3.0
Very Stiff Red and Brown Clayey SILT ML
441 •
5-7-9
8.0
Very Stiff to Firm Micaceous Red,Brown,and ML
Yellow Fine Sandy SILT
436 . . . . . .
8-12-10
a,
m
H
O
H
C7
3-4-4 `?a
15.0 431
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing N
Elevation
z
(-
Moist at Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-3
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 455.50 10 20 40 60 100
0.3 Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Red Clayey SILT ML
6-4-6
3.5
Firm Micaceous Red,Orange,and Yellow Clayey ML
SILT
451
5-5-6
446 •
2-3-3
a,
m
H
O
H
C7
2-3-3 c?
15.0 441
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
z
Moist at Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-6
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 4625 0 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.8
Stiff Red Clayey SILT MH
•
5-6-7
3.0
Stiff Micaceous Red and Orange Fine Sandy SILT ML
458
4-4-5
453 •
5-6-7
a,
13.5 _ o
Very Stiff Micaceous Red and Orange Silty Fine to SM (D.
Coarse SAND with Quartz Fragments
8-12-8 C'
15.0 • 448_ w
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing N
Elevation
z
cal
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-8
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 465.00 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.7 -71
Stiff Red and Orange Clayey SILT ML
5-5-7
3.5
Very Stiff Micaceous Red,Orange,and Black Fine ML
Sandy SILT
460
7-8-10
455
6-8-9
a,
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
5-7-8 c?
15.0 450 w
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing N
Elevation
z
cal
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-9
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 466.00 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.7 -71
Stiff Red and Orange Clayey SILT ML
•
7-6-5
3.5
Stiff Micaceous Orange,Red,and Yellow Fine ML
Sandy SILT
461 •
7-8-7
456 •.
5-7-8
a,
m
H
O
H
C7
5-6-7 c?
15.0 451
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing N
Elevation
z
(79
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-11
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 467.50 10 20 40 60 100
0.5 Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Red Silty CLAY CL/
//
6-4-5
4.5
Stiff Red Clayey SILT ML 463
4-6-8
7.0
Stiff Micaceous Red,Yellow,Orange Clayey SILT ML�
458 •.
4-7-8
a,
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
6-6-8 `?
15.0 453
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
z
(79
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER B-12
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 443.00 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.3 71111
FILL-Stiff Micaceous Red and Orange Clayey ML
SILT
•
4-5-6
2.5
Stiff Micaceous Red and Orange Clayey SILT ML
• 3-5-6
5.0 438 . . . . . . .
Boring Terminated At 5 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
a
C7
w
m
N
O
m
Z
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER P-1
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 449.00 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.7
FILL-Firm Red Fine Sandy SILT ML
3.0
Stiff Micaceous Red Clayey SILT ML
• 5-6-7
5.0 444 . . . . . . .
Boring Terminated At 5 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
a
C7
w
m
N
O
m
Z
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER P-2
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 459.50 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.8
FILL-Firm Red and Brown Fine Sandy SILT ML
•
5-3-4
2.5
Stiff Micaceous Red and Orange Fine Sandy SILT •
ML
5-6-7
5.0 455 . . . . . . .
Boring Terminated At 5 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
io
H
O
C7
H
C7
a
C7
w
m
N
O
m
Z
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER P-3
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 472.00 10 20 40 60 100
Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
0.7
Stiff Red Clayey SILT ML
• 5-6-5
2.5
Very Stiff Micaceous Red Clayey SILT ML
• 6-7-10
5.0 467 . . . . . . .
Boring Terminated At 5 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
C7a
w
m
N
O
m
Z
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER P-4
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 434.00 10 20 40 60 100
0.5 Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Orange and Red Clayey SILT ML
2-4-6
3.0
Firm to Soft Micaceous Orange,Tan,and Red Fine ML
Sandy SILT
429 • .
2-3-3
424 •
2-1-2
a,
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
• a
2-3-3 c?
15.0 419
Boring Terminated At 15 Feet Below Existing
Elevation
z
(79
Dry At Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER W-1
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

/ TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOWS/FT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 447.00 10 20 40 60 100
0.3 _ Topsoil and Occasional Rocks
FILL-Stiff Orange and Brown Fine Sandy SILT ML
•
5-6-8
3.5
Stiff to Soft Orange and Yellow Fine Sandy SILT ML
442
4-5-8
437
3-4-5
a,
m
H
O
C7
H
C7
2-2-2 `?
15.0 432 w
Boring Terminated At 5 Feet Below Existing N
Elevation
z
Moist at Time of Boring
JOB NUMBER 1-19-0253-EA
BORING NUMBER W-2
DATE 5-1-19 J GeoTechnologies, Inc.
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

Laboratory Data

GeoTechnologies, Inc. CBR DATA SHEET ASTM D-1883
JOB#: 1-19-0253-EA JOB NAME: Mosswood Blvd. Development
DATE: 5/7/2019 SAMPLE I.D.: S-1 Depth: 0.0-3.0'
NOTES: PROCTOR DATA: TEST PROCEDURE: ASTM D-698
Opt. Moisture= 26.8% Max.Dry Density = 94.5 PCF
SOIL DESCRIPTION: Red Brown Micaceous Sandy Silt
CBR SPECIMEN DATA Swell Data
MOISTURE CONTENT 25.5% Initial Reading 0.485
WET DENSITY 116.4 Ibs./cu.ft. Final Reading 0.530
DRY DENSITY 92.7 lbs./cu.ft. Mold Height 4.594
%COMPACTION 98.1% % Swell 0.98
LOAD CELL 5000 LB. RATE OF DEFORMATION .05 in./min.
SURCHARGE USED 10 lbs.
180.00
I
160.00 -
1 .
140.00
120.00
.
o. 100.00 -
d Q 80.00
60.00
40.00 -
20.00 -
0.00 1
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Penetration (in.)
CBR @ 0.1" 7.3
CBR @ 0.2" 7.1
%SWELL 1.0

1
ASTM D-4318
80
01CH
70 •
P 60 . •
A
S
T 50 •
1
C
T 40 .
Y
I 30 - •
N
D .
X 20 .
10 •
CL-ML , CD CD
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT(LL)
Specimen Identification LL PL PI Fines Classification
•B-8 S-1 0.5-2.0' 54 32 22 66.5 Red Brown Micaceous Medium to Fine Sandy Clayey Silt
I P-4 S-1 0.5-2.0' 39 25 14 71.9 Red Brown Micaceous Medium to Fine Sandy Clayey Silt
PROJECT Mosswood Blvd Development-Youngsville, NC JOB NO. 1-19-0253-EA
DATE 5/7/19
Date Recieved• ATTERBERG LIMITS' RESULTS
Dates Tested: 3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC 27615

135 GcoTechnologies, Inc.
Job No: 1-19-0253-EA Date: 5/7/19
130 Job Name: Mosswood Blvd Development
Job Location: Youngsville, NC
Boring No:
Sample No: S-1
125 Depth: 0.0-3.0'
TEST RESULTS
Method of Test: ASTM D 698
120 Maximum Dry Density: 94.5 PCF
Optimum Moisture Content: 26.8%
\ Natural Moisture Content:
0 115 Atterberg Limits: LL PI
Soil Description: Red Brown Micaceous
Sandy Silt
N110
0
a Date Recieved• 5/2/2019
Dates Tested: 5/2-5/7/2019
2 105
>-
❑
re
100
CURVES OF 100%SATURATION
95 FOR SPECIFIC GRAVITY EQUAL TO:
2.80
90 2.70
\ 2.60
85
80
75
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WATER CONTENT(Percent Dry Weight)
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC 27615

U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
Cr N CO
1" " #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
100
60
m
c
m
2
40
0
100 8 6 4 2 10 8 6 4 2 1 8 6 4 2 0.1 8 6 4 2 0.01 8 6 4 2 0.0018 6
Grain Size In Millimeters
GRAVEL SAND FINES
COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT SIZES CLAY SIZES
Boring No. Elev./Depth Nat.W.C. L.L. P.L. P.I. Soil Description or Classification
B-$ GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
0.5-2.0' 54.0 32.0 22.0 Red Brown Micaceous Medium to Fine Sandy
S-1 Clayey Silt % GeoTechnologies, Inc.
Project: Job No.: 1-19-0253-EA
Mosswood Blvd Development Date Recieved• 3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Youngsville, NC Date: 5/7/19 Dates Tested: Raleigh, NC 27615

U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
V N CO
1" " #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
100
60
m
c
m
2
40
0
100 8 6 4 2 10 8 6 4 2 1 8 6 4 2 0.1 8 6 4 2 0.01 8 6 4 2 0.0018 6
Grain Size In Millimeters
GRAVEL SAND FINES
COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT SIZES CLAY SIZES
Boring No. Elev./Depth Nat.W.C. L.L. P.L. P.I. Soil Description or Classification
P_4 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
0.5-2.0' 39.0 25.0 14.0 Red Brown Micaceous Medium to Fine Sandy
S-1 Clayey Silt % GeoTechnologies, Inc.
Project: Job No.: 1-19-0253-EA
Mosswood Blvd Development Date Recieved• 3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Youngsville, NC Date: 5/7/19 Dates Tested: Raleigh, NC 27615