24007_Wrights Exective Sales_II_O_Geotech Rpt_20190923

! rom
ECS Southeast,, LLP
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Geer House Mixed Use Development
620 Foster Street, 723 Rigsbee Ave., 721 Rigsbee Ave., 616 Foster Street
Durham, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 06:24089-A
September 23, 2019

ECS SOUTHEAST,, LLP Setting the Standard for Service°
i Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental ■ Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F NC Registered Geologists Firm C,406-405
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3250
Mr. John Sunter
Four Points LLC
1805 7th Street, NW Suite 800
Washington, District of Columbia 20001
September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
Reference: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Geer House Mixed Use Development
620 Foster Street, 723 Rigsbee Ave., 721 Rigsbee Ave., 616 Foster Street
Durham, Durham County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Sunter:
ECS Southeast, LLP (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and
geotechnical engineering analyses for the above -referenced project. Our services were performed in
general accordance with ECS Proposal No. 06:21482, dated August 12, 2019. This report presents
our understanding of the geotechnical aspects of the project, the results of the field exploration
conducted, and our geotechnical design and construction recommendations for the project.
ECS appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you during this phase of the project. If you or
any members of the project team have any questions or comments after reviewing this report,
please contact us. We welcome the opportunity to assist with the project through its design and
construction phases.
Respectfully submitted,
ECS Southeast, LLP
Parishad Rahbari, PhD
Project Manager
[e-mail]
Tom Schipporeit, P.E.
Principal Engineer
[e-mail]
to, H1g0"
,••' 'NAc..... f,
oF'fa. . "s s i
4 SEAL
y 19331
9001 Glenwood Avenue, Raleigh, NC 27617-7505 • T: 919,861.9910 to F: 919.861.9911 • ecslimited.com
ECS Capitol Services, PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC to ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC to ECS Midwest, LLC 6 ECS Southeast, LLP • ECS Southwest, LLP

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
September 23, 2019
Page 1—i
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.............................................................................................................1
1 PROJECT INFORMATION.....................................................................................................3
1.1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION.............................................................................................3
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION...........................................................................................................3
1.3 SITE CONDITIONS..............................................................................................................3
1.4 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION..............................................................................................4
2 FIELD EXPLORATION...........................................................................................................5
2.1 SOIL TEST BORINGS...........................................................................................................5
2.2 ROCK CORING....................................................................................................................5
3 LABORATORY TESTING.......................................................................................................6
4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.................................................................................................7
4.1 REGIONAL/SITE GEOLOGY.................................................................................................7
4.2 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION....................................................................................7
4.3 GROUNDWATER................................................................................................................8
5 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................9
5.1 BUILDING/STRUCTURE DESIGN.........................................................................................9
5.1.1 Shallow Spread Footing Foundations with Ground Improvement ...........................9
5.1.2 Floor Slabs Below Exterior Grades..........................................................................10
5.1.3 Building Retaining Walls.........................................................................................11
5.1.4 Seismic Design........................................................................................................13
6 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................14
6.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION...............................................................................................14
6.1.1 Previous Site Development....................................................................................14
6.1.2 Demolition..............................................................................................................14
6.1.3 Stripping and Grubbing...........................................................................................14
6.1.4 Proofrolling.............................................................................................................15
6.2 EARTHWORK OPERATIONS..............................................................................................15
6.2.1 Existing Fill..............................................................................................................15
6.2.2 Excavation Considerations......................................................................................16
6.2.3 Structural Fill Materials..........................................................................................18
6.2.4 Compaction.............................................................................................................19
6.3 FOUNDATION AND SLAB OBSERVATIONS.......................................................................20
7 CLOSING..........................................................................................................................22

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Drawings
• Site Location Diagram
• Boring Location Diagram
Appendix B — Field Operations
• Generalized Subsurface Profile
• Boring Logs B-1 through B-10
• Reference Notes for Boring Logs
• Rock Core Photograph
Appendix C — Laboratory Testing
• Laboratory Test Results Summary
• Rock Core Test Results
September 23, 2019
Page 1—ii

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 1
:►3:1411111 W :Mll M11I I T_1 WA
The following summarizes the main findings of the exploration, particularly those that may have a
cost impact on the planned development. Further, our principal recommendations are
summarized. Information gleaned from the executive summary should not be utilized in lieu of
reading the entire geotechnical report.
• The geotechnical exploration performed for the planned development included 10 soil
test borings drilled to depths between 23.6 and 66 feet.
• The generalized subsurface profile can be described as 6 to 8 feet of existing fill (in some
areas of the site) underlain by residual soils, which are underlain by partially weathered
rock and auger refusal (rock). The residual soils classified as Silty SAND (SM), SILT (ML),
and Lean CLAY (CL). The partially weathered rock was encountered at depths of 0.7 to 23
feet in all of the borings. Borings B-1, B-6, and B-8 encountered auger refusal to the depth
drilled at depths of 23 to 66 feet.
• Some of the borings encountered existing fill to an approximate depth of 6 to 8 feet. The
existing fill classified as Clayey SAND (SC), Silty SAND (SM), Sandy SILT (ML), and Sandy
Lean CLAY (CL) with variable amounts of organic debris, which included roots, rock
fragments, and inert debris, which included asphalt, and brick fragments. The amount of
debris was significant in many of the soil samples, indicating the potential for existing
debris -laden fill at the site.
• Groundwater was encountered in two of the borings at depths of 17 and 29.5 feet below
the existing ground surface.
• Existing fill with excessive inert debris or organic debris should not be used to support
foundations, floor slabs, or pavements. The existing fill in the proposed building areas
should be evaluated at the time of construction to determine what portions of it should
be undercut and what portions of it may be left in place. Specific details on addressing
the existing fill are contained in the body of the report.
• Based upon the plan grading information, we anticipate that ripping, hammering, and/or
blasting of partially weathered rock and rock will be required to achieve design site,
foundation, and underground utility grades.
• Based on the soil test borings, we anticipate undercutting of very soft to soft or very loose
near -surface soils will be necessary in the areas of Borings B-4 and B-9 during general site
grading.
• If the proposed buildings are supported on shallow spread footing foundations, excessive
settlement is anticipated for column loads of up to 1000 and 2600 kips. Therefore, we
recommend that the proposed structures be supported by shallow foundations bearing
on or above ground improvement elements consisting of aggregate piers or rigid
inclusions. Details of the assumed foundation subgrade elevations and loads are
contained in the body of the report.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 2
• Based on the N-values measured in the borings, a Seismic Site Class C designation is
appropriate for seismic design of the proposed buildings.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
1 PROJECT INFORMATION
The proposed project consists of two mixed use buildings.
1.1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
This report is based on the following sources of project information:
September 23, 2019
Page 3
• Emails and a telephone conversation between John Sunter with Four Points LLC and Tom
Schipporeit with ECS between July 5 and 8, 2019.
• List of subject parcel numbers and addresses provided by Mr. Sunter.
• Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report, 403 W. Geer St. and 721 Rigsbee
Ave, prepared by ECS, prepared for Trinity Trust Partners, LLC, dated December 15, 2006.
• Google Earth aerial photos dated between February 22, 1993 and February 4, 2019.
• Site and topographic information obtained from the Durham County GIS website.
• Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Durham Mixed Use Development, prepared
for Four Points, LLC, prepared by ECS, dated July 23, 2019.
• Existing Conditions plan, prepared by Draw Brooklyn, dated March 15, 2019.
• Figure 2 — Site Plan, Foster Street Property, prepared by Piedmont Geologic, dated
November 2008.
• Emails and telephone conversation between Mr. Sunter and Mr. Schipporeit between
August 6 and 8, 2019.
• Emails between telephone conversation between Mr. Sunter and Parishad Rahbari
between August 23 and September 17, 2019.
• Preliminary floor plans with for both buildings showing planned finish floor elevations.
• Report of Environmental Services Performed during Geotechnical Assessment, Durham
Mixed Use Project, prepared by ECS, prepared for Four Point, LLC, dated September 10,
2019.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
ECS understands the subject site consists of the following four adjoining parcels in Durham, North
Carolina:
1. 620 Foster Street, Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 0822-08-90-2088, 0.887 acres
2. 723 Rigsbee Ave., PIN 0822-20-90-4169, 0.572 acres
3. 721 Rigsbee Ave., PIN 0822-08-90-4036, 0.543 acres
4. 616 Foster Street, PIN 0821-08-99-2971, 0.273 acres
The site is at the approximate location shown on the Site Location Diagram in Appendix A.
1.3 SITE CONDITIONS
The property is currently developed primarily with buildings, concrete pavements, and asphalt
pavements. The buildings and pavements have been present at the site since at least February of
1993. The existing ground surface slopes downward from southeast to northwest, with elevations
between 362 and 345 feet.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 4
1.4 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The project involves construction of two mixed use buildings, as described in the following table:
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Building
Total
Unfactored
Unfactored
Description
Unfactored
No.
Stories
Column
Ground
Wall Load
Load
Floor Load
(kips/foot)
(kips)
(psf)
5 to 6 levels of residential over 1
1
6 to 7
level of concrete -framed
1000
8
150
podium (retail & parking)
9 to 10 levels of
residential/office over 3 levels
2600
35
150
2
12 to 13
of concrete -framed podium
(retail & parking)
The structural engineer should verify these load assumptions and notify ECS if the actual
unfactored foundation design loads exceed or are significantly less than these assumed values.
Based on the floor plans provided to us and the existing site grades , we estimate that fill depths
will be less than 5 feet and cut depths will be less than 5 feet for general site grading.
The 2006 ECS Phase II Environmental Site Assessment report indicates that total petroleum
hydrocarbons, cadmium, and chromium were detected in soil samples above the regulatory
limits. It also states that benzene and naphthalene were detected above the North Carolina 2L
groundwater standards.
The project will also include relocating existing sanitary sewer and stormwater pipes and
structures from the site to some of the adjacent public rights -of -way. A new sanitary sewer line
near the intersection of West Geer Street and Rigsbee Avenue will be up to approximately 20 feet
deep.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 5
2 FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration was planned with the objective of characterizing the project site in general
geotechnical and geological terms and to evaluate subsequent field and laboratory data to assist
in the determination of geotechnical recommendations.
2.1 SOIL TEST BORINGS
Boring locations were identified in the field by ECS personnel using referencing existing site
features and using available drawings. The approximate as -drilled boring locations are shown on
the Boring Location Diagram in Appendix A. Ground surface elevations noted on the borings logs
in Appendix B were interpolated from the topographic site plan provided to us.
The subsurface conditions were explored by drilling 10 soil test borings within the proposed
building areas. Borings were generally advanced to depths of 23 to 66 feet below the current
ground surface. Subsurface explorations were completed under the general supervision of an ECS
geotechnical engineer or geologist.
Standard penetration tests (SPTs) were conducted in the borings at regular intervals in general
accordance with ASTM D 1586. Small representative samples were obtained during these tests
and were used to classify the soils encountered. The standard penetration resistances obtained
provide a general indication of soil shear strength and compressibility.
An experienced geotechnical professional visually classified each soil sample from the test borings
on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS) and ASTM D-2488 (Description and Identification of Soils-Visual/Manual Procedures).
After classification, the geotechnical professional grouped the various soil types into the major
zones noted on the boring logs in Appendix B. The group symbols for each soil type are indicated
in parentheses following the soil descriptions on the boring logs. The stratification lines
designating the interfaces between earth materials on the boring logs are approximate; in situ,
the transitions may be gradual.
2.2 ROCK CORING
Rock coring of the sedimentary rock was performed in one of the borings (B-8) to evaluate the
composition and quality of the rock. The coring was performed in general accordance with ASTM
D2116. The total length of core was 10 feet. ECS's field geologist or engineer determined the
termination depths of core borings based on the core recovery and rock quality designation
(RQD). For each core run, the core recovery and the respective RQD were measured and
recorded. Appendix B contains photographs of the rock cores and boring logs which provide
details of the rock core descriptions, recovery, and RQD.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
LABORATORY TESTING
September 23, 2019
Page 6
The laboratory testing performed by ECS for this project consisted of selected tests performed on
samples obtained during our field exploration operations. Classification and index property tests
were performed on representative soil samples obtained from the test borings in order to aid in
classifying soils according to the Unified Soil Classification System and to quantify and correlate
engineering properties. Unconfined compressive strength of rock core tests and modulus of
elasticity of rock core tests were also performed. The laboratory test results are attached in
Appendix C.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
4.1 REGIONAL/SITE GEOLOGY
September 23, 2019
Page 7
The site is located within one of the Triassic basins within the Piedmont Physiographic Province.
The Triassic basins are a series of depressions, or troughs, in eastern North America that formed
by faulting and subsidence during the Triassic and Jurassic periods. The Newark Supergroup of
exposed Triassic basins extends from North Carolina northeastward into Massachusetts. The
basins were subsequently filled with sediments from surrounding metamorphic and igneous
formations that consolidated into the siltstones, mudstones, shales, sandstones, and
conglomerates common to the region. The occurrences of subsequent Jurassic igneous diabase
intrusions in the sediments have modified the rock type in localized areas. Also, it is not unusual
to find lenses and boulders of hard rock within the soil mantel or weathered rock well above the
general bedrock level.
The consolidated sediments of the Triassic basins have weathered over time into residual silts,
clays and clayey or silty sands. Although the surficial materials normally retain the structure of
the original parent materials, they typically have a much lower density and exhibit strengths and
other engineering properties typical of soil. In a mature weathering profile, the near surface soils
are generally found to be moderately to highly plastic where more extensive weathering has
occurred. With depth the residual soils transition into weathered rock, which transitions with
depth into hard, competent rock.
Groundwater within the Triassic basins tends to flow along inclined bedding fractures in the deep
multi -unit bedrock. The overburden soils and weathered bedrock provide storage and pathways
for groundwater to recharge the deep aquifers. Localized perched water tables are common in
the overburden soils and shallow/intermediate weathered rock. The depth of the seasonal
groundwater table reflects the composite recharge and discharge elevations from the leaky
semiconfined bed -parallel flow zones. USGS well data indicates water depths for wells drilled in
the Triassic sedimentary rock in Durham County, North Carolina, vary from about 10 to 40 feet,
with an average depth of approximately 25 feet. Water well yields are typically low, and many
dry wells have been drilled into the weathered rock and deep bedrock.
According to the 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina, the site is underlain by the Chatham
Group of Newark Supergroup of Triassic Age (TRc). This formation consists of conglomerate,
fanglomerate, sandstone, and mudstone. It includes numerous dikes and sills of intrusive igneous
diabase of Jurassic age.
It is important to note that the natural geology within portions of the site has been modified in
the past that included the placement of fill materials. The quality of man-made fills can vary
significantly, and it is often difficult to assess the engineering properties of existing fills.
4.2 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION
The generalized subsurface conditions indicated by the borings are described below. For soil
stratification at a particular test location, the respective boring log found in Appendix B should be
reviewed.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 8
A surficial layer of organic -laden topsoil, approximately 2 inches in thickness, was encountered at
Boring B-6. The remaining borings were performed within existing parking and drive lane areas.
Asphalt pavement sections encountered consisted of 1 to 3 inches of asphalt underlain by 3 to 7
inches of ABC stone, and concrete pavement sections encountered consisted of 5 inches of
concrete underlain by 0 to 6 inches of ABC stone.
Existing fill consisting of Clayey SAND (SC), Silty SAND (SM), Sandy SILT (ML), and Sandy Lean CLAY
(CL) was encountered below the surficial material or existing pavement section and extended to
approximate depths of 6 to 8 feet below existing grades at Borings B-4, B-6, B-8, and B-9. The SPT
N-values within the fill soils ranged from 3 to 18 bpf. Inclusions consisting of rock fragments,
brick, and asphalt were observed in the recovered fill soils. It is important to note that some of
the N-values obtained in these samples were possibly influenced by these inclusions and are not
an accurate indicator of their density or consistency.
The natural soils encountered below the existing pavement section, fill and/or topsoil generally
consisted of Clayey SAND (SC), SILT (ML), and Lean CLAY (CL). The SPT N-values within these soils
ranged from 3 to 45 bpf, indicating silts and clays with a consistency varying between firm and
hard, and sands with a relative density of very loose to medium dense.
Partially Weathered Rock (PWR), which is classified as material with SPT blow counts greater than
50 blows per 6 inches of penetration, was encountered at all borings at depths ranging from
approximately 0.7 to 23 feet below existing grades. Auger refusal was encountered at depths of
23 to 66 feet below existing grades in Borings B-1, B-6, and B-8. Auger refusal indicates the
presence of material such as rock with sufficient hardness to permit no further advancement of
the drilling. The rock cored in Boring B-8 consisted of slightly weathered sandstone and
mudstone.
4.3 GROUNDWATER
Water levels were measured in our borings as noted on the soil boring logs in Appendix B.
Groundwater depths measured at the time of drilling were 17 and 29.5 feet below ground surface
at Borings B-1 and B-5, respectively, and the rest of the borings were observed to be dry.
Fluctuations in the groundwater elevation should be expected depending on precipitation, run-
off, evapotranspiration, construction activities, nearby surface water sources, utility leaks, and
other factors not evident at the time of our evaluation.
Normally, seasonal high groundwater levels occur in late winter and spring and the seasonal low
levels occur in late summer and fall. Extended monitoring of the groundwater using wells would
be required to determine the fluctuation of the groundwater level over time. Soil science
methods can be used to estimate the seasonal high water level on most undisturbed sites.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
5 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 BUILDING/STRUCTURE DESIGN
5.1.1 Shallow Spread Footing Foundations with Ground Improvement
September 23, 2019
Page 9
We assume that column and load -bearing wall footings will bear approximately 3 to 4 feet below
the design lowest floor elevations. Based on the design grades and soil test borings, the bearing
strata will be highly variable, as shown on the Subsurface Profile in Appendix B. For example,
Building 2 footings are anticipated to bear on partially weathered rock at Boring B-10, 4 feet of
hard silt over weathered rock at Boring B-7, 20 feet of very loose to hard residual soils over
weathered rock at Boring B-5, and 3 feet of existing fill over 15 feet of firm to stiff residual soils
over weathered rock at Boring B-6.
If the proposed buildings are supported on shallow spread footing foundations, excessive total
settlement and differential settlement are estimated for the assumed column loads, primarily due
to the highly variable bearing strata. Therefore, we recommend that the proposed structures be
supported by shallow foundations bearing on or above ground improvement elements consisting
of aggregate piers or rigid inclusions.
The design and installation of aggregate piers or rigid inclusions should be performed by a
specialty contractor to limit footing settlement to 1 inch total and % inch differential. The type,
diameter, depth, and spacing of aggregate piers or rigid inclusions, in addition to the allowable
bearing pressure for design of the shallow foundations, are determined by the specialty
contractor's professional engineer.
For Building 1, a net allowable bearing pressure ranging from 5,000 to 10,000 psf can be used for
sizing of the column and wall footings bearing on aggregate piers or rigid inclusions. This value
needs to be confirmed by, and may possibly be modified by, the specialty subcontractor's design,
prior to sizing of the footings by the structural engineer.
For Building 2, we recommend that drilled, ready -mix concrete rigid inclusions be used to support
the footings in the northern portion of the building footprint, as represented by Borings B-5 and
B-6. The rigid inclusions should be designed to limit the settlements to the previously mentioned
criteria using a footing allowable bearing pressure of 10,000 psf. This will allow for footings in the
southern portion of the building footprint, as represented by Borings B-7 and B-10, to bear
directly on or be undercut to the weathered rock. Where undercut depths of 5 feet or less
encounter the weathered rock, the undercut excavation can be backfilled with concrete and rigid
inclusions will not be needed. Determining which footings will or will not require rigid inclusions
will require predrilling to refusal with the rigid inclusion drill rig at the time of construction at each
of the footing locations.
This report, in addition to preliminary structural drawings and foundation loads, should be
provided to specialty contactors for them to develop a detailed design and construction cost
estimate. We recommend that their preliminary design drawings and calculations be submitted
to ECS for review and comment prior to acceptance.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
5.1.2 Floor Slabs Below Exterior Grades
September 23, 2019
Page 10
Dampproofing: Floors below finish exterior grade, such as basement or partial basement levels,
should be dampproofed (or waterproofed, if necessary) in accordance with Section 1805 of the
2018 North Carolina Building Code. Based on the design lowest floor elevations provided, a
groundwater control system under the slabs (i.e., underdrain) is not recommended for this
project.
The slabs should be dampproofed in accordance with the Building Code. Dampproofing materials
should be installed between the floor and base course. The dampproofing should consist of not
less than 6-mil polyethylene with joints lapped not less than 6 inches or other methods/materials
determined by the structural engineer and/or architect.
The design of the dampproofing material (i.e., vapor retarder or vapor barrier) for moisture
control is outside our scope of services and should be determined by the project
architect/structural engineer based on the planned floor coverings and the corresponding design
constraints, as outlined in ACI 302.1R-04 Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction. Further,
health and environmental considerations with respect to any potentially harmful vapor
transmission are also outside of our scope of services for this project.
Slab Bearing: The on -site materials are likely suitable for the support of a slab -on -grade,
however, there may be areas of soft or yielding soils, or existing fill with debris, that should be
removed and replaced with compacted structural fill in accordance with the recommendations
included in this report.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
September 23, 2019
Page 11
Slab Section: The following graphic depicts our soil -supported slab recommendations:
_ _ _ _ Dampproofing Material
Concrete Slab
o 00
0° Base Course
oo°o o4D o0
0000000000000
° o
000°0000
00 °
0
Compacted Subgrade
Floor Slab Section
1. Base Course Thickness: 4 inches minimum
2. Base Course: Gravel or crushed stone containing not more than 10 percent of material that passes
through a No. 4 sieve, such as NCDOT No. 57 or 67 stone.
3. Upper 1 foot of subgrade compacted to at least 98% maximum dry density per ASTM D698
4. Damproofing Material — Refer to ACI 302.1R96 Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction and
ASTM E 1643 Standard Practice for Installation of Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Earth
or Granular Fill under Concrete Slabs for recommendations on this issue. Also, refer to Section 1805
of the 2018 North Carolina Building Code for waterproof ing/dampproofing requirements for floors
below grade. Additionally, any environmental vapor intrusions considerations should be taken into
account by the floor slab/vapor barrier/waterproofing material selection and design.
Subgrade Modulus: Provided the placement of structural fill and base course per the
recommendations discussed herein, the slabs may be designed assuming a modulus of subgrade
reaction, ki of 120 pci (lbs/cu. inch). The modulus of subgrade reaction value is based on a 1 ft by
1 ft plate load test basis.
Slab Isolation: Ground -supported slabs should be isolated from the foundations and foundation -
supported elements of the structure so that differential movement between the foundations and
slab will not induce excessive shear and bending stresses in the floor slab. Where the structural
configuration prevents the use of a free-floating slab, the slab should be designed with suitable
reinforcement and load transfer devices to preclude overstressing of the slab. Maximum
differential settlement of soils supporting interior slabs is anticipated to be less than % inch in 40
feet.
5.1.3 Building Retaining Walls
The proposed buildings will include partial below -grade levels. The basement walls should be
designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations.
Building retaining walls are often constructed from the "bottom -up" and therefore the type of soil
used to backfill the wall is chosen or specified by contract. The lateral earth pressures developed
behind retaining walls is a function of the backfill soil type within an approximate 45-degree angle
from the base of the wall upward.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 12
Lateral Earth Pressures: Retaining walls should be designed to withstand the lateral earth
pressures exerted by the backfill. The pressure diagram is triangular. It is anticipated that
retaining walls associated with the building structure, such as for basement walls, will be rigid
walls restrained from rotation by the floor slab. For rigid walls, the "At Rest" (Ko) soil condition
should be used in the wall design and evaluation. For walls that are free to deflect at their tops,
the "Active" (Ka) soil condition should be used in the wall design and evaluation. In the design of
these retaining wall structures, the following soil parameters can be utilized. The critical zone is
defined as the area between the back of the retaining wall structure and an imaginary line
projected upward and rearward from the bottom back edge of the wall footing at a 45-degree
angle.
The structural engineer should select and soil type to be used for retaining wall backfill, use the
following recommended soil properties for that soil type, and provide notes indicating retaining
wall backfill materials and properties selected/specified on the design drawings.
Retaining Wall Backfill in the Critical Zone
Soil Parameter
Retaining Wall Backfill
Sandy Clay/Silt
(CL, ML)
Processed Fill
Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest (Ko)
0.61
0.50
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure (Ka)
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
0.44
0.33
Retained Soil Moist Unit Weight (y)
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
115 pcf
120 pcf
Cohesion (C)
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
100 psf
0 psf
Angle of Internal Friction (f)
23'
30°
Foundation Soils
Soil Parameter
Estimated value
10,000 psf for Building 2.
Allowable Net Soil Bearing Pressure
To be determined by ground
improvement specialty
contractor for Building 1.
Minimum Wall Embedment Below Grade
18 inches
Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure (Kp)
2.3
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Soil Moist Unit Weight (y)
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
115 pcf
Cohesion (C)
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
100 psf
Internal Friction Angle (f)
23°
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Sliding Friction Coefficient [Concrete on Soil] (µ)
0.30
We recommend that all permanent below grade walls be designed to also withstand lateral earth
pressures from surcharge loads due to adjacent pavements, buildings, structures, equipment, or
materials.
Retaining Wall Backfill: All soils used as backfill within the critical zone behind retaining walls
should have the USCS classification/material type, minimum angle of internal friction angle, and

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 13
minimum cohesion as selected by the structural engineer. These minimum soil properties are for
material compacted to a minimum of 95% of its maximum dry density per ASTM D 698. Any soils
not meeting these criteria should not be placed as retaining wall backfill. The use of proper
retaining wall backfill material, placement, and compaction, should be observed and tested and
by ECS at the time of construction.
Foundation Drains: Retaining walls should be provided with a foundation drainage system to
relieve hydrostatic pressures which may develop in the wall backfill. This system should consist of
a 4-inch perforated, closed joint drain line located along the backside of the walls above the top
of the footing. The drain line should be surrounded by a minimum of 6 inches of AASHTO Size No.
57 Stone wrapped with an approved non -woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140-N or equivalent.
Wall Drains: All below -grade building retaining walls should be drained so that hydrostatic
pressures do not build up behind the walls. Wall drains can consist of a 12-inch wide zone of free
draining gravel, such as No. 57 Stone, employed directly behind the wall and separated from the
soils beyond with a non -woven filter fabric. Alternatively, the wall drain can consist of a suitable
geocomposite drainage board material. The wall drain should be hydraulically connected to the
foundation drain.
5.1.4 Seismic Design
The 2018 North Carolina Building Code requires site classification for seismic design based on the
upper 100 feet of a soil profile. Three methods are utilized in classifying sites, namely the shear
wave velocity (vs) method; the unconfined compressive strength (s") method; and the Standard
Penetration Resistance (N-value) method. The N-value method was used for this project.
The seismic site class definitions for the weighted average of shear wave velocity or SPT N-value in
the upper 100 feet of the soil profile are shown in the following table:
Seismic Site Classification
Site
Class
Soil Profile Name
Shear Wave Velocity, Vs,
(ft./s)
N value (bpf)
A
Hard Rock
Vs > 5,000 fps
N/A
B
Rock
2,500 < Vs <_ 5,000 fps
N/A
C
Very dense soil and soft rock
1,200 < Vs <_ 2,500 fps
>50
D
Stiff Soil Profile
600 <_ Vs <_ 1,200 fps
15 to 50
E
Soft Soil Profile
Vs < 600 fps
<15
The 2018 North Carolina Building requires that a Site Class be assigned for the seismic design of
new structures. The Site Class for the site was determined by calculating a weighted average SPT
N-value for the top 100 feet of the subsurface profile. Based on the conditions encountered in
the borings, we recommend that a Site Class "C", as defined in the NCSBC 2018, be used for the
proposed buildings.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 14
6 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION
6.1.1 Previous Site Development
When reviewing our recommendations, please note that there are existing buildings and
pavements on this site, and that previous grading activities have occurred on this site. Our
experience with previously graded sites indicates that unexpected conditions can exist that were
not encountered by the soil test borings. Unexpected conditions could include areas of soft or
loose fill, debris -laden fill, and other obstructions or conditions. These conditions should be
addressed by on -site engineering evaluation by ECS during construction.
6.1.2 Demolition
Site demolition should include the removal of existing asphalt, concrete pavement, concrete
slabs, concrete curb and gutter, underground utilities, underground stormwater structures and
pipes, buried structures, and foundations from the proposed construction areas. Any
underground utilities that may exist within the proposed building areas should be relocated, and
any within proposed pavement areas should be evaluated by the design team and relocated or
filled with grout, if necessary. The crushed stone on the ground surface in the existing pavement
areas should be left in place in areas to be filled, or can be excavated and re -used as compacted
structural fill. Excavations or cavities resulting from demolition should be backfilled with
compacted structural backfill.
The existing concrete pavements, slabs, and foundations at the site could be re -used as
compacted structural fill, provided the concrete is first crushed to less than 1-1/2 inch in
maximum particle size and is well -graded. Reinforcing steel should be removed from the crushed
concrete. Properly crushed concrete may also be used as a subgrade stabilization material in
building and pavement areas and as backfill where foundation undercut is required to remove
unsuitable materials. It may also be used as new aggregate base course (ABC) in private pavement
areas, provided it meets the NCDOT standard specifications for ABC gradation.
The existing asphalt at the site could be re -used as new aggregate base course (ABC) in private
low -traffic -volume pavement areas such as parking lots, provided it meets the NCDOT standard
specifications for ABC gradation or Class II Fine Aggregate. It is ECS' understanding that the reuse
of demolished asphalt pavements as structural fill is not expressly forbidden by state
environmental regulations. However, because asphalt is a petroleum based product, the potential
exists for leaching of petroleum into the surrounding soil matrix and possibly into groundwater.
Therefore, ECS recommends the demolished asphalt pavements that cannot be incorporated as
new aggregate base course (ABC) as stated above should be transported to an approved off -site
disposal location or asphalt plant for possible recycling.
6.1.3 Stripping and Grubbing
The subgrade preparation should consist of stripping all vegetation, rootmat, topsoil, existing fill,
and any other soft or unsuitable materials from the proposed construction areas. One of the

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 15
borings encountered 2 inches of topsoil. The topsoil encountered in the boring was not analyzed
for its suitability for reuse in landscaping areas. ECS should be called on to verify that topsoil and
unsuitable surficial materials have been completely removed prior to the placement of structural
fill or construction of structures and pavements.
6.1.4 Proofrolling
After removing all unsuitable surface materials, cutting to the proposed grade, and prior to the
placement of any structural fill or other construction materials, the exposed subgrade should be
examined by the geotechnical engineer or authorized representative. The exposed subgrade
should be thoroughly proofrolled with previously approved construction equipment having a
minimum axle load of 10 tons (e.g. fully loaded tandem -axle dump truck). The areas subject to
proofrolling should be traversed by the equipment in two perpendicular (orthogonal) directions
with overlapping passes of the vehicle under the observation of the geotechnical engineer or
authorized representative. This procedure is intended to assist in identifying any localized
yielding materials.
In the event that unstable or "pumping" subgrade is identified by the proofrolling, those areas
should be marked for repair prior to the placement of any subsequent structural fill or other
construction materials. Methods of repair of unstable subgrade, such as undercutting or moisture
conditioning or chemical stabilization, should be discussed with the geotechnical engineer to
determine the appropriate procedure with regard to the existing conditions causing the
instability. Test pits and/or hand auger borings may be excavated to explore the shallow
subsurface materials in the area of the instability to help in determining the cause of the observed
unstable materials and to assist in the evaluation of the appropriate remedial action to stabilize
the subgrade.
Based on the soil test borings, we anticipate undercutting of very soft to soft or very loose near -
surface soils will be necessary in the areas of Borings B-4, B-5, B-6, B-8, and B-9 during general site
grading. Additionally, undercutting may be required in other localized areas between or away
from the borings. Undercut excavations should be backfilled with properly placed and compacted
structural fill. Use of geotextiles and select granular fill may be recommended by ECS during
construction to reduce the required undercut depths and/or aid in stabilization of subgrades.
6.2 EARTHWORK OPERATIONS
6.2.1 Existing Fill
Based on the relative strength and stiffness of the existing fill/possible fill soils indicated by the
SPT N-values from the soil test borings, in addition to the organics and construction debris
encountered in Borings B-4, B-6, B-8, and B-9, it appears that some of the existing fill was placed
in an uncontrolled manner without consistent compaction and removal of organics and debris. As
we have not been provided fill placement construction field testing reports, we interpret the
existing fill to also be undocumented.
Uncontrolled and/or undocumented fill poses risks associated with under -compacted soil,
undetected deleterious inclusions within the fill, and/or deleterious materials at the virgin ground
fill interface that are covered by the fill. ECS does not recommend supporting building

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 16
foundations and pavements on under -compacted existing fill or existing fill with excessive
organics or excessive inert debris. Therefore, we recommend that these conditions be addressed
by on -site engineering evaluation by ECS during construction, including proofrolling and test pits.
Under -compacted fill and fill with excessive organics/debris indicated by the above -mentioned
Borings, and potentially in other localized areas, should be over -excavated and replaced with
compacted structural fill. Undercutting and replacement of existing fill should be anticipated for
this project and could be addressed contractually through allowances and unit prices.
6.2.2 Excavation Considerations
Environmental Considerations: We understand that environmental sampling and testing of the
soil and groundwater at the site has been performed. The results of that sampling and testing
should be used prior to construction to further evaluate the potential impacts of contamination
on the proposed construction and long-term project risks to health and safety. Any contaminated
soils excavated during the construction of the project should be handled on -site as required by
environmental regulations or should be disposed of off -site in a permitted facility. Temporary
stockpiling and testing of excavated soil may be required to determine contaminant type,
concentrations, and disposal options. Any contaminated groundwater removed by construction
dewatering should be disposed of off -site, perhaps in a wastewater treatment facility. Temporary
containerization and testing of pumped groundwater may be required to determine the
contaminant types, concentrations, and disposal/treatment options.
Excavation Safety: All excavations and slopes should be made and maintained in accordance with
OSHA excavation safety standards. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and
constructing stable, temporary excavations and slopes and should shore, slope, or bench the sides
of the excavations and slopes as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and
bottom. The contractor's responsible person, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the
soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should
slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth,
exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations.
We anticipate that temporary shoring of the construction excavations will be required, especially
near the existing Motorco Building. The contractor should retain a professional engineer to
design the excavation support system. The system should be designed and constructed to
prevent undermining and settlement of the adjacent buildings, pavements, utilities, or other
structures. Additional evaluation of the foundations of the buildings on the adjacent property to
the east should be performed to aid in design of the excavation support system. Underpinning of
the existing building foundations could be necessary. Also, settlement monitoring of the existing
building foundations and deflection monitoring of the shoring system during construction should
be performed.
ECS is providing this information solely as a service to our client. ECS is not assuming responsibility
for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied
and should not be inferred.
Construction Dewatering: Based on the borings, our experience with groundwater fluctuations
on similar sites, and anticipated design grades, most of the temporary excavations are unlikely to
encounter groundwater. However, the contractor should be prepared to remove any

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 17
precipitation or groundwater that may seep into temporary construction excavations using open
pumping. Open pumping utilizes submersible sump pumps in pits or trenches dug below the
bottom of the excavation and backfilled with No. 57 stone.
Excavatibility: Based on the design grades, we anticipate that the existing fill and natural soils can
be removed with conventional earth excavation equipment such as track -mounted backhoes,
loaders, or bulldozers. However, difficult excavation should be anticipated where the finished
grades, foundation bearing elevations, or utility installations are at or below the surface of PWR
or auger refusal material. Based on the design grades, we anticipate that difficult excavation of
PWR and/or rock will be necessary in the areas represented by Borings B-2 and B-10, in addition
to other localized areas of the site.
As noted in the Regional/Site Geology section of this report, the weathering process in the Triassic
Basin can be erratic and significant variations of the depths of the more dense materials can occur
in relatively short distances. In some cases, isolated boulders or thin rock seams may be present
in the soil matrix.
Typically, ripping should be performed with a CAT D8 or equivalent dozer with a single ripping
tooth for mass excavation (areas greater than 10 feet wide and 30 feet long) and with a CAT 330
or equivalent excavator equipped with rock teeth for smaller trench/footing excavations. These
types of heavy equipment are needed to effectively rip the partially weathered rock and to
demonstrate rippability for rock allowance quantification purposes.
The rippability of rock will be greatly controlled by in -situ weathering, jointing, and bedding and
may vary significantly from location to location. Equipment tooth penetration is often the key to
ripping success, regardless of SPT N-value, RQD, or compression wave seismic velocity.
Typically, up to approximately 5 to 10 feet of PWR can be ripped by a CAT D8 or equivalent dozer
with a single ripping tooth for mass excavation (areas greater than 10 feet wide and 30 feet long).
A CAT 330 or equivalent excavator equipped with rock teeth for smaller trench/footing
excavations will typically refuse on or few feet into PWR. Auger refusal material typically requires
blasting to excavate for general open site grading. For trench/footing excavations, most of the
PWR and auger refusal materials typically require hammering or blasting to excavate.
If the construction contract incorporates classified rock excavation clauses, then ripping of
residual materials should be performed prior to blasting to determine the top of blast rock for pay
quantity purposes. Typically, ripping should be performed with a CAT D8 or equivalent dozer with
a single ripping tooth for mass excavation (areas greater than 10 feet wide and 30 feet long) and
with a CAT 330 or equivalent excavator equipped with rock teeth for smaller trench/footing
excavations. ECS can assist the design team estimate allowance quantities of rippable rock, mass
blast rock, and trench blast rock upon receipt and review of project grading, foundation, and
utility plans.
If the contractor is allowed to blast rippable rock, mass rock, and/or trench rock prior to the
removal of overburden soil, then we recommend that rock excavation be "unclassified" in the
construction contract. For unclassified excavation, the contractor should include all rock
excavation in the lump sum earthwork bid.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 18
The quantities of rip rock, blast rock, and trench rock can have a significant impact on
construction cost. Due to the highly variable weathering profile for this geology, as indicated by
the variable depth to PWR and auger refusal encountered in the soil test borings, linearly
interpolating PWR and rock elevations between the borings can be very inaccurate. Seismic
refraction testing could be performed at the site to develop two-dimensional subsurface profiles
showing the variability in PWR and rock elevations based on compression wave velocity. These
can be used to more accurately estimate PWR and rock elevations between and away from the
borings. Seismic refraction data, in conjunction with the soil test borings, can lead to more
accurate estimates of PWR and rock excavation quantity estimates. ECS would be pleased to
provide a proposal for seismic refraction testing for this site upon request.
If blasting is used for this project, we recommend performing pre -blast and post -blast condition
surveys of nearby structures, in addition to vibration/noise monitoring during blasting.
Also, if blasting is performed, the contractor should limit over -blasting of partially weathered rock
and rock below the design footing and mat foundation bearing elevations. Fractured, loosened
over -blasted rock should be excavated with a Caterpillar 325 trackhoe with a bucket with rock
teeth below the foundation bearing locations until hard, competent rock is encountered. The
additional excavation should be backfilled to the design foundation bearing elevation using
flowable fill, lean concrete, or structural concrete.
6.2.3 Structural Fill Materials
Product Submittals: At least one week prior to placement of structural fill, representative bulk
samples (about 50 pounds) of on -site and/or off -site borrow should be submitted to ECS for
laboratory testing, which will include Atterberg limits, natural moisture content, grain -size
distribution, and moisture -density relationships for compaction. Import materials should be
tested prior to being hauled to the site to determine if they meet project specifications.
Satisfactory Structural Fill Materials: Materials satisfactory for use as structural fill should consist
of inorganic soils classified as CL, ML, SM, SC, SW, SP, GW, GM and GC, or a combination of these
group symbols, per ASTM D 2487. The materials should be free of organic matter and debris. The
fill should exhibit a maximum dry density of at least 90 pounds per cubic foot, as determined by a
Standard Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 698).
To facilitate compaction and subsequent excavation, any rock fragments within the structural fill
materials should be properly blended with soil to avoid the formation of voids within the fill. Rock
fragments should be limited to 3 inches in the upper 5 feet of finish subgrade elevations.
For sites with ripped or blasted rock, these materials can be included in compacted structural fills
in accordance with the following table:

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
Loose Lifts and Rock Fragment Sizes
September 23, 2019
Page 19
Structural Fill Depth
Below Finish Subgrade
Elevation
Maximum Loose
Lift
(in.)
Maximum Particle (Rock
Fragment) Size
(in.)
Oto5ft
8
3
5to10ft
12
6
>10 ft
24
18
Unsatisfactory Materials: Unsatisfactory fill materials include materials which do not satisfy the
requirements for satisfactory materials, such as topsoil, organic materials, debris, and debris -
laden fill.
On -Site Borrow Suitability: The on -site soils meeting the classifications for recommended
satisfactory structural fill, plus meeting the restrictions on separation distances, organic content,
and debris, may be used as structural fill. We anticipate that the majority of soils encountered in
the borings within the anticipated excavation depths will be satisfactory for use as compacted
structural fill.
The gradation of partially weathered rock and rock removed by ripping or blasting will probably
be quite varied. Crushing of boulder -sized rock fragments may be required to meet the maximum
particle sizes given in the previous table if ripped or blasted rock is to be used as structural fill.
Based on the borings and experience with other previously developed urban sites, we anticipate
that the some of the existing fill will be unsatisfactory for use as compacted structural backfill due
to larger pieces of debris or organic content (wood). Screening of the excavated material to
remove excessively large and organic debris could be performed to increase the potential volume
of re -usable onsite soils.
6.2.4 Compaction
Fill Compaction: Structural fill should be placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts. In confined areas
such as utility trenches, portable compaction equipment and thin lifts of 4 inches to 6 inches may
be required to achieve specified degrees of compaction.
Structural fill should be moisture conditioned as necessary to within -3 and +3 % of the soil's
optimum moisture content. Moisture conditioning options include spraying and mixing in water
to excessively dry soils, scarifying and drying of excessively wet soils, and adding lime to
excessively wet soils.
Structural fill should be compacted with suitable equipment to a dry density of at least 95% of the
Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698) more than 12 inches below the finish
subgrade elevation and to a least 98% in the upper 12 inches.
Fill Testing: ECS should be retained to observe and test the placement and compaction of
structural fill. Field density testing of fills should be performed at the frequencies shown in the
following table, but not less than 1 test per lift.

Geer House Mixed Used Development
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A
Frequency of Compaction Tests in Fill Areas
September 23, 2019
Page 20
Location
Frequency of Tests
Building Areas
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1 test per 2,500 sq. ft. per lift
Pavement Areas
1 test per 5,000 sq. ft. per lift
............................ ......... ......... ......... ......... .........
Fill Slopes
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
......... ......... .............
1 test per 5,000 sq. ft. per lift
Utility Trenches (in pavement or
1 test per 100 linear feet per
building areas)
lift
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Stormwater Control Measures
1 test per 50 linear feet of
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
embankment per lift
Retaining Wall Backfill
1 test per 100 linear feet of
wall per lift
Fill Placement Considerations: Proper drainage should be maintained during the earthwork
phases of construction to prevent ponding of water which will degrade the subgrade soils.
Exposed soil subgrades should be protected at the end of each working day by sloping to drain
and sealing with a smooth -drum roller to limit infiltration of precipitation and surface water.
Where fill materials will be placed to widen existing embankment fills, or placed up against
sloping ground, the soil subgrade should be scarified and the new fill benched or keyed into the
existing material. Fill material should be placed in horizontal lifts.
Moisture Conditioning: The on -site soils are moisture sensitive and can be difficult to work.
Problems include softening of exposed subgrade soils, excessive rutting or deflection under
construction traffic, and the inability to adequately dry and compact wet soil.
Drying and compaction of wet soils is typically difficult during typically cooler, wetter months of
the year (typically November through March). During the cooler and wetter periods of the year,
delays and additional costs should be anticipated. At these times, reduction of soil moisture may
need to be accomplished by a combination of mechanical manipulation and the use of chemical
additives, such as lime or cement, in order to lower moisture contents to levels appropriate for
compaction. Alternatively, removal and replacement with drier, off -site materials may be
necessary.
Subgrade Protection: Measures should also be taken to limit site disturbance, especially from
rubber -tired heavy construction equipment, and to control and remove surface water from
development areas, including structural and pavement areas. It would be advisable to designate
and cover haul roads and construction staging areas to limit the areas of disturbance and to
prevent construction traffic from excessively degrading subgrade soils. Haul roads and
construction staging areas should be covered with ABC to protect those subgrades.
6.3 FOUNDATION AND SLAB OBSERVATIONS
Ground Improvement: Installation of the ground improvement elements should be monitored by
ECS for compliance with the specialty contractor's design and the project requirements.
Protection of Foundation Excavations: Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the
footing bearing level if the foundation excavations remain open for too long a time. Therefore,

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 21
foundation concrete should be placed the same day that excavations are made or shortly
thereafter. If the bearing soils are softened by surface water intrusion or exposure, the softened
soils must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to placement of
concrete. If the excavation must remain open overnight, or if rainfall becomes imminent while the
bearing soils are exposed, a 1 to 3-inch thick "mud mat" of "lean" concrete should be placed on
the bearing soils before the placement of reinforcing steel.
Footing Subgrade Observations: It will be important to have the geotechnical engineer of record
observe the foundation subgrade prior to placing foundation concrete to confirm the bearing soils
are what as anticipated.
If very loose sand, very soft to soft silt/clay, or otherwise unsuitable or unstable soils are observed
at the footing bearing elevations, they should be undercut and removed. Any undercut
excavation should be backfilled with compacted structural fill, No. 57 stone wrapped in woven
geotextile, flowable fill, or lean concrete (f', >_ 1,000 psi at 28 days) up to the original design
bottom of footing elevation. The footing should be constructed on top of the compacted
structural fill, No. 57 stone wrapped in woven geotextile, hardened flowable fill, or hardened lean
concrete.
Based on the borings and design grades, we anticipate undercutting of very soft to soft
foundation bearing soils will be necessary in the areas represented by Borings B-4 and B-9, in
addition to other localized areas.
Slab Subgrade Verification: A representative of ECS should be called on to observe exposed
subgrades within the expanded building limits prior to structural fill placement to assure that
adequate subgrade preparation has been achieved. Proofrolling using a drum roller or loaded
dump truck should be performed in their presence at that time. Once subgrades have been
determined to be firm and stable, structural fill can be placed.
If there will be a significant time lag between the site grading work and final grading of concrete
slab areas prior to the placement of the design floor slab section materials, a representative of
ECS should be called on to verify the condition of the prepared soil subgrade. Prior to final floor
slab section construction, the soil subgrade may require scarification, moisture conditioning, and
re -compaction to restore stable conditions.

Geer House Mixed Used Development September 23, 2019
ECS Project No. 06:24089-A Page 22
7 CLOSING
ECS has prepared this report of findings, evaluations, and recommendations to guide
geotechnical-related design and construction aspects of the project.
The description of the proposed project is based on information provided to ECS. If any of this
information is inaccurate, either due to our interpretation of the documents provided or site or
design changes that may occur later, ECS should be contacted immediately in order that we can
review the report in light of the changes and provide additional or alternate recommendations as
may be required to reflect the proposed construction.
We recommend that ECS be allowed to review the project's plans and specifications pertaining to
our work so that we may ascertain consistency of those plans/specifications with the intent of the
geotechnical report.
Field observations, monitoring, and quality assurance testing during earthwork and foundation
installation are an extension of and integral to the geotechnical design recommendation. We
recommend that the owner retain these quality assurance services and that ECS be allowed to
continue our involvement throughout these critical phases of construction to provide general
consultation as issues arise. ECS is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions, or
recommendations of others based on the data in this report.

APPENDIX A — Drawings
Site Location Diagram
Boring Location Diagram

b m�
TR
W~Markharn Avek
+.W Ma khan Ave f X .- 1 }� 1 r. it a •}L•. f. "-.:r'! c .�M150� L, h
b ., s- . y ti �.• Ly I •r .F :• �� r WfT1�N00�oo
{i� I�t Maco t5'••.�..r, '' �ti ti-: f � �-.. .y h`
�: `'. "'r .� urban yt -, 1 iurb A`c':J/ �•' r L 7�
4 _ .k. ; 3s ar%� �I w v. Be+rnett. • +i11 ' , K z•
ticc
r
a - Da —in Ave
LYnd1 5t 'i 1Zt E;EY , St—
T Monmhuth Hdfpe� MUrInl-th Ave / •y �3 K •r}
55 x , �'6 rklirS u oc v Q,W rSeama sr a E`seem`an g�€: r
Egli L8 ye'
vd
€Cir^ F�(n yak• - .F �! 11 vrrr i 'r p< a ��'�� 4 .. L.` �. ��
;F = W Trlr�iry rin-
dY Ave' t mod, - C7 VJ TnnitY Ave m'E lnnity.`ve'' t ' s` °� yy�y4i
r ow�ll • k'7I 1 i. - RSnrlrl�r To
'' in 1 '* •vr 9+ 01,e
' t
erprove
AveSt O C
9�. � Iy '� -' .. - - 5 '�1¢ ' � nrn lam a� di .. 3N . �. � � �' 'r�L k• •�.
Q d � - [7 ` W North«aad.•Cir /' ,g��l/'
Si '0 �'�►, �' o.rn.m { Ai'o3" r ii r C �t Prk
z - ..
w Garpordtldn Amietic v
_ l.- mcrdAve Park '- ��. ,'�1 � r t� "-' - t.
gy O1 WCdrPoretiun-SIa, - Eee!St
IL
ti- A h.rn� E(Corporatkon 9t ,�
F4'f- gY.• Pa'rk € c Hro adw�arj'Sl / 2 W® kl r.. �•3 j- ,r Z��OrtlM St -. -
Aid
'' r � f .ay � 'tib ��4� =�1 - '�'-.Hunt51 i h i, m -;t �'� �•�. s�_� ~'
�i Wllk��p AV '�•'F. Y_ ,S/ ''. � ':. 'U - -. „ ,� y.. 1- •., 2 yy,,�/� ..�! �._.... _}, _
q� � e 4 � Gray A e`!►ir ��
'� .F � 1" h' '�. �- 4 .S'qi 3Z � j0''t '� �i�� si .. _..ti ■� j ��Y sr� ! c7 ar�� „v �-_ �
h tea..
� v _ � ~ I gay: � ,. " irr '� •t � ��iPdr
on��� , W Morgan St x n M-*•Ils •n _ _
�Bu oh Ave � 451. _ c° e �� - ,
�)a4�e r �•
u
m 5 Eeal
` I _r� . Amtrak- a • r �
lFN1 a Carham G y��una-
_ ®7f1T m W C el Nill St Ourhrm -E Chapeh HIII St
�Y. all
rm ,f ackson 5t ackson _St
Li
�Prlmdive�3t' �' rbr
■■ � rw �
a Carlson A4 "f►., r'I : L- {
0
ovtl M.- J 14

I
Ef
4}1.
ay s: Esri, HE in, (c) OpenStreetM
r
N
it W E
4i
N;'
Wi _
MCI
� h
—off*-
L60
Boring Location Diagram
GEER HOUSE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
620 FOSTER STREET, DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA
FOUR POINTS, LLC
ENGINEER
P R/TM S
SCALE
1 "=60'
PROJECT NO.
06:24089-A
SHEET
2OF2
DATE
9/20/2019

APPENDIX B — Field Operations
Generalized Subsurface Profile
Boring Logs B-1 through B-10
Reference Notes for Boring Logs
Rock Core Photograph

SOIL 01-ASSIFICATION LEGEND
SURFACE MATERIALS
ROCK TYPES
-
SYMBOL LE6ENb
—
.C-.Ore,poE oM-vPE55WEMErE4 uOiF: uu11.E.5INNEPLai[cr iO rLEt'[oE mExmOEPi niE S.r-N rµOES
L! WA�i.EYH.-dAiiG MA11u6/S3HPLINi
-�.,�_. p]S7i�-519Wr4YE
2�'x•J sw.wF �6vwrfa swti8 ®s[-¢wvEr sxn'M1i r//Jl ¢.�mvRwit[nr
¢wxsP.vcuuv SnwEosnw
�OH-W4tRAfTICtTn Lk6nN[C6Q.TSuvQWY.a'FR-YFwT�aEPx
�'
...—-r.-� �ciEfAeEc:.
.L
I WATd LFYH-SEn3CYlni.HicH WnTEN
``---Ynnn.Rfff {� rLlL1 LLLJJJ
aenra '.'.'."F 3�:.--_ Sw-wELL6RnQEQSVIA ®YH-Hlik MsrlRT'sur S�-�I.nvEr S4ro
�a-WW %.ti5Tr4Ty �RfMPR[S>tiTS WOMr
v -A—w[ni�x[oxoa �-pn. �c rpy
■---LT I IY9IQ
�NEr�Mps:;i.
T w.Feo�vel nrm�cnsmn c�warnr
L®-7
LLJJ
� wh�I,EVEL-6F�s/1�.Rs
l .ss-roQlnvsnnnEo wnuEL i'L-LOW RRSRCI�Y sub vn-err snK!
®w-wG�M1lsrrn'r�¢wr
SPr-lfnr
�_
Q-A-
�sEPi�rwr
�bm�nsP � aErE
SEWER (20 FT
BLDG. 1
JBLDG
1 & BLDG. 2
370
ASSUMED)
BLDG. 1 & BLDG. 2 JBLDG. 2
IBLDG. 1
BLDG.2
370
BLDG. 1
BLDG. 1
BLDG. 1
B-2
B-4
B 8
360
8
360
51
11
FILL
B-6
13
�18
76/9
741
8rMML
CL Fill
WR
50/3
q •
B-7
16
8-10
LL
13
35o
B-�
50/5
WR MW
B-5
6
Q.
50/2
350
.....
B-3 50/2
7
8
5011
B-9 -
CL
WR
41
�
7
ML
5014
SC FILL
WILL
_
..5.. ...... 5014
.g.. .�
�••
.C.H .34. .....�
• • • •
A.. WR...
50iL .WR...
fF0
$Ol1
340
=
50/1
17
5
WR
340
f
' _
50/5
END OF BORING
50/3
`tl
3
SC
12
RQD=55 16 :: SC
C
7
C
@ 23.6'
841 END OF BORING
SC 50/1
SANDSTONE 50/1
85/
_
10 @
23.75'
RQD=30 10
3
50/4
$0/3
19
50/1
50/1
UJ 330
330
5013
MH
WR
45
5011
....
$0/1
50/1
50/1
END OF BORING 50/2 WR END OF BORING
5013
AUGER REFUSAL END OF BORING
@ 33' @ 23.6'
50/4
@ 30'
@ 23.6'
320
50/1
320
5011
WR
50
50/1
END OF BORING
50/1
5012
@ 28.8'
END OF BORING
50/1
@ 28.6'
310
END OF BORING
310
@ 33.6'
50/1
design grade
........... • bottom of footing,
assumed 3 to
4 ft below
design grade
Subsurface Soil
Profile
NOTES:
kcs
Geer House Mixed Use Development
Four Points LLC
1 SEE INDIVIDUAL BORING LOG AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
2 PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER
FOOT (ASTM D1586).
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Coun NC
PRO CT NO : 24089-A AT 9/19/2019 V RTICAL SCAL 1"=10'

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-1
1 OF 3
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
LL
z
w
a
z
�
o
z
�.
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
J w
ID
X
SURFACE ELEVATION 347
a
o
w
0-
w
0-
w
0-
uai
w
OU
aw[
w >
w
3
Co
® STANDARD PENETRATION
BLOWS/FT
As halt Thickness 1.00"
ABC Stone Thickness 3.00"
345
s
13
15
28-:
S-1
SS
18
14
(CL) LEAN CLAY, contains slight mica,
orangish brown and tan, moist, very stiff to hard
13
19
41
S-2
SS
18
12
5
22
16 3
13
S-3
SS
18
14
340
19
23
42:
50/5
50/5
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SANDY SILT, contains slight mica, tan, gray,
S 4
SS
5
5
10
and reddish brown
335
50/4
50/4
S 5
SS
4
4
15
— 330
50/3
50/3
S-6
SS
3
3
20
325
50/3
50/3
S-7
SS
3
3
25
320
50/1
50/1
8
1
1
30
ON NEXT PAGE.
CONTINUED
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL 17 WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 09/27/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 63
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 09/27/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-1
2 OF 3
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi J w
X
LL
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 347 w >
a
w
0-
w
0
w
w
OU
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
w
m
BLOWS/FT
uai
aw[
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SANDY SILT, contains slight mica, tan, gray,
and reddish brown 315
50/2
50/2
S 9
SS
2
2
35
310
50/1
50/1
-10
SS
1
1
40
305
50/1
50/1
11
ss
1
1
45
300
50/3
50/3
12
3
3
50
295
50/3
50/3
13
3
3
55
290
50/1
50/1
14
SS
1
1
60
CONTINUED
ON NEXT PAGE.
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL 17 WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 09/27/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 63
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 09/27/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-1
3 OF 3
c
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% - — - REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� � n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
w
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 347
a
w
0-
w
0
w
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
w
m
BLOWS/FT
uai
aw[
285
50/1
50/1�
15
SS
1
1
65
AUGER REFUSAL @ 66'
280
70
275
75
270
80
265
85
260
90
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL 17 WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 09/27/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 63
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 09/27/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-2
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi
w
X
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 363
a
w
0-
w
0
w
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
uai
aw[
w
Co
BLOWS/FT
Concrete Thickness 5.00"
(CL) LEAN CLAY, reddish brown and gray,
3
2I�5.2
S-1
SS
18
7
moist, firm to very hard
3
5
8
360
5
51
S-2
SS
18
16
18
5
33
29
40
90/
S 3
SS
15
12
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
LEAN CLAY, reddish brown and gray
50/3
355
18
S-4
SS
15
10
26
76/9
50/3
10
350
50/5
50/5
S-5
SS
5
1 5
15
345
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S 6
SS
5
5
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, tan
50/5
50/5
20
340
50/1
S-7
SS
1
1
END OF BORING @ 23.6'
25
335
30
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/29/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 18.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/29/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-3
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
n
LL
z
w
a
z
o
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi
w
J ZO
SURFACE ELEVATION 345
a
o
w
w
w
uai
w
0
aw[
F
w > LU
w
m
®STANDARD PENETRATION
BLOWS/FT
Concrete Thickness 5.00"
345
(CL) SANDY LEAN CLAY, contains slight mica,
gray and reddish brown, moist, firm to very stiff
4
4
8 16 —31
S-1
SS
18
10
4
18.6
2
S-2
SS
18
12
3
5
5
340
2
3
S-3
SS
18
14
7
10
17
30
44
84 10
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SANDY SILT, reddish brown
S-4
SS
16
12
10
335
40/4
50/3
50/3
S-5
SS
3
3
15
330
50/1
50/1
S-6
SS
1
1
20
325
50/1
50/1
S-7
SS
1
1
25
320
50/1
8
1
1
END OF BORING @ 28.6'
30
315
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/28/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 24.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/28/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-4
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
w
X
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 361
a
w
0-
w
0
w
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
LU
o
uai
aw[
w
Co
BLOWS/FT
Concrete Thickness 5.00"
360
3
ABC Stone Thickness 4.001
(CL FILL) FILL, SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace
S-1
SS
18
14
4
11
organics, contains brick, red and black, moist,
7
stiff to soft
1
S-2
SS
18
10
2
5
�
1
355
13
74110
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S 3
SS
16
16
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, orangish
24
50/4
brown, tan, and reddish gray
50/3
50/3
S-4
SS
3
3
10
350
8
50/
S-5
SS
8
8
5 0/2
15
345
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S 6
SS
4
4
SANDY SILT, contains slight mica, tan and
50/4
50/4
reddish browN
20
340
50/3
S-7
SS
3
3
END OF BORING @ 23.75'
25
335
30
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/30/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 19.6
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/30/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-5
1 OF 2
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi
w
X
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 346
a
w
0-
w
0
w
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
uai
aw[
� w
m
BLOWS/FT
As halt Thickness 3.00"
�•..
ABC Stone Thickness [6.00"l
345
3
S-1
SS
18
7
(CL) SANDY LEAN CLAY, orangish brown and
3
7
gray, moist, firm
4
3
S-2
SS
18
10
3
6
5
3
340
rN,(SC)
2
CLAYEY SAND, orangish brown, moist to
S 3
SS
18
12
wet, very loose to loose
5
2
1
S-4
SS
18
16
2
3
10
1
335
(MH) SANDY ELASTIC SILT, contains slight
S-5
SS
18
18
mica, reddish brown and gray, moist, very stiff
5
1
to hard
11
15
330
8
S-6
SS
18
16
15
45
20
30
325
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S 7
SS
4
4
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, gray and
50/4
50/4
reddish brown
25
320
50/1
50/1
8
1
1
30
ON NEXT PAGE.
CONTINUED
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL 29.5 WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 08/28/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 31.3
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/28/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-5
2 OF 2
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% - — - REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
w
X
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 346
a
w
0-
w
0-
w
0-
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
w
m
BLOWS/FT
uai
aw[
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
315
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, gray and
reddish brown
50/1
S 9
SS
1
1
END OF BORING Ca 33.6'
35
310
40
305
45
300
50
295
55
290
60
285
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL 29.5 WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 08/28/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 31.3
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/28/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Four Points LLC
Job #:
06:24089-A
BORING #
B-6
SHEET
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
Geer House Mixed Use Development
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
SITE LOCATION
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
n
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
LL
a
o
z
w
w
a
w
z
o
w
uai
z
w
0
aw[
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
w
J ZO
F
w > 1
du
m
®STANDARD PENETRATION
BLOWS/FT
SURFACE ELEVATION 356
5
10
15
20
25
30
To soil Thickness 2.00"
355
350
345
340
335
330
5
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
a
5
4
5
Son
50/1
NP
8 0-12.8
NP
6
6
7
12
50/1
50/1
(SM FILL) FILL, SILTY SAND, orangish brown,
moist, loose
S-1
SS
18
7
(ML FILL) FILL, SANDY SILT, trace organics,
contains slight rock fragments and mica,
reddish brown, moist, firm
S 2
SS
i8
5
S 3
SS
18
9
(CL) SANDY LEAN CLAY, orangish brown and
gray, moist, firm
S-4
SS
18
12
(CH) SANDY FAT CLAY, orangish brown and
gray, moist, stiff
/0
S 5
SS
18
13
(SC) CLAYEY SAND, tan, moist, medium dense
S-6
SS
18
18
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, gray
S 7
SS
1
1
8
1
1
AUGER REFUSAL @ 30'
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/29/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 24.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/29/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-7
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
z
a
�
o
�.
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
w
X
LL
J
ID
SURFACE ELEVATION 349
a
w
0-
w
0-
w
0-
w
OU
w >
9
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
uai
aw[
w
Co
BLOWS/FT
As halt Thickness 2.00"
ABC Stone Thickness 3.00"
3
S-1
SS
18
8
(CL) LEAN CLAY, contains slight mica, reddish
2
18.9-o 37
brown, moist, firm
6
8 25
38
(ML) SANDY SILT, contains slight mica, tan and
S-2
SS
18
10
reddish brown, moist, hard
345
10
8
5
20
8
S-3
SS
18
18
16
3
23
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S-4
SS
9
9
SANDY SILT, contains slight mica, tan and
340
5023
50/3
reddish brown
10
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, gray
50/1
50/1
S 5
SS
1
1
335
15
50/1
50/1
S-6
SS
1
1
330
20
325
so/1
S 7
SS
1
1
END OF BORING @ 23.6'
25
320
30
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/29/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 21.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/29/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Four Points LLC
Job #:
06:24089-A
BORING #
B-8
SHEET
1 OF 2
C
PROJECT NAME
Geer House Mixed Use Development
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
SITE LOCATION
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
� n
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
LL
a
o
z
w
0-
w
a
w
0
z
�
o
w
uai
z
�.
w
OU
aw[
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION
J w
w >
w
ID
9
m
X
® STANDARD PENETRATION
BLOWS/FT
SURFACE ELEVATION 360
5
10
15
20
25
30
Concrete Thickness 5.00"360
355
350
345
340
335
330
6
s
11
3
10
6
5
8
50/1
50/1
CONTINUED
1 :
i8
16
1
50/1
50/1
ABC Stone Thickness 6.00"
S-1
SS
18
0
(NO RECOVERY)
(CL FILL) FILL, SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace
organics, contains slight brick and asphalt, gray
and black, moist, stiff to very stiff
S 2
SS
18
10
S-3
SS
18
12
(WR) PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK
SAMPLED AS SILTY SAND, contains slight
mica, gray and reddish brown, moist, very
dense [Weathered ROCK]
S-4
SS
18
18
S-5
SS
1
1
S-6
SS
1
1
SANDSTONE, [REC=95%,RQD=55%I, Slightly
Weathered, Moderately Hard, Highly
Fractured/Jointed, Gray
55
.
- 0
— 6 1
-
SANDSTONE TO MUDSTONE, [REC=90%,
RQD=30%], Slightly Weathered, Moderately
Hard, Highly Fractured/Jointed, Gray to Reddish
Brown
MUDSTONE, [REC=100%,RQD=69%], Slightl
Weathered, Moderately Hard, Highly Fractured
Jointed, Reddish Brown
ON NEXT PAGE.
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL WS ❑ WD ®
BORING STARTED 09/03/19
CAVE IN DEPTH
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 10/03/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN
DRILLING METHOD

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-8
2 OF 2
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
—
z
rn F
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
n
z
o
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION goo
w LL
J
LL
O
SURFACE ELEVATION 360
IL
w
g
w
g
w
w
Ov
F
w >LLI
® STANDARD PENETRATION
o
I
BLOWS/FT
c¢n
can
U)
w
m
MUDSTONE, [REC=100%,RQD=69%1, Slightly
Weathered, Moderately Hard, Highly Fractured/
Jointed, Reddish Brown
1�7
END OF BORING @ 33'
35
325
40
320
45
315
50
310
55
305
60
300
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
V WL WS❑ WD❑
BORING STARTED 09/03/19
CAVE IN DEPTH
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 10/03/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN
DRILLING METHOD

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-9
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
w
z
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
n
z
a
o
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi
w
ZO
LL
J
SURFACE ELEVATION 344
a
w
w
w
w
0
F
w >
®STANDARD PENETRATION
o
uai
aw[
W
w
Co
BLOWS/FT
As halt Thickness 1.00"
"•••
ABC Stone Thickness 7.00"
3
(SC FILL) FILL, CLAYEY SAND, contains slight
S-1
SS
18
7
2
4 18-1111111�.L — —33
brick and as mica, reddish brown, moist,
2
17.7
very loose to loose
340
1
2
5
S-2
SS
18
2
5
3
3
(SC) CLAYEY SAND, contains slight mica, gray
S 3
SS
18
15
and orangish brown, moist, medium dense
10
is
8510
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
S-4
SS
16
15
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, white and
335
21
35
brown
50/4
10
330
50/4
50/4
S-5
SS
4
4
15
325
50/2
50/
S-6
SS
2
2
20
50/1
50/1
S-7
SS
1
1
320
25
315
50/1
8
1
1
END OF BORING @ 28.6'
30
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/29/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 23.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/29/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT
Job #:
BORING #
SHEET
Four Points LLC
06:24089-A
B-10
1 OF 1
C
PROJECT NAME
ARCHITECT -ENGINEER
Geer House Mixed Use Development
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
620 Foster Street Durham Durham Countv, NC
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY
NORTHING
EASTING
STATION
RQD% — — — REC%
PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
n
LL
z
w
a
z
o
z
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS
BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION 1bi
w
J ZO
SURFACE ELEVATION 350
a
o
w
w
w
uai
w
0
aw[
F
w > LU
w
m
®STANDARD PENETRATION
BLOWS/FT
As halt Thickness 1.00" "•••350
ABC Stone Thickness 7.00"
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
2s
50/2
50/2
S 1
SS
3
7
SILTY SAND, contains slight mica, tan
50/4
50/4
S 2
SS
4
4
5
345
50/4
50/4
S 3
SS
4
4
50/0
50/
S-4
SS
0
0
10
340
50/1
50/1
S 5
SS
1
1
15
335
(WR) WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
SANDY SILT, reddish brown
50/1
50/1
S-6
SS
1
1
20
330
so/1
S 7
SS
1
1
END OF BORING @ 23.6'
25
325
30
320
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN -SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL DRY WS❑ WD®
BORING STARTED 08/29/19
CAVE IN DEPTH 16.5
WL(SHW) t WL(ACR)
BORING COMPLETED 08/29/19
HAMMER TYPE Manual
WL
RIG CME 75 FOREMAN Mario
DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

EN
REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS
MATERIALt'2
ASPHALT
CONCRETE
GRAVEL
`7 o'
TOPSOIL
VOID
BRICK
p D
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
FILL
MAN -PLACED SOILS
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVEL
gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
gravel -sand -silt mixtures
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
V-3
gravel -sand -clay mixtures
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND
gravelly sand, little or no fines
SP
POORLY -GRADED SAND
•
gravelly sand, little or no fines
SM
SILTY SAND
sand -silt mixtures
?
SC
CLAYEY SAND
'
sand -clay mixtures
ML
SILT
non -plastic to medium plasticity
MH
ELASTIC SILT
I I
high plasticity
�
CL
LEAN CLAY
M°
low to medium plasticity
CH
FAT CLAY
high plasticity
OL
ORGANIC SILT or CLAY
non -plastic to low plasticity
OH
ORGANIC SILT or CLAY
high plasticity
PT
PEAT
highly organic soils
DRILLING SAMPLING SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS
SS
Split Spoon Sampler
PM
Pressuremeter Test
ST
Shelby Tube Sampler
RD
Rock Bit Drilling
WS
Wash Sample
RC
Rock Core, NX, BX, AX
BS
Bulk Sample of Cuttings
REC
Rock Sample Recovery %
PA
Power Auger (no sample)
RQD
Rock Quality Designation %
HSA
Hollow Stem Auger
PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
DESIGNATION
PARTICLE SIZES
Boulders
12 inches (300 mm) or larger
Cobbles
3 inches to 12 inches (75 mm to 300 mm)
Gravel: Coarse
3/4 inch to 3 inches (19 mm to 75 mm)
Fine
4.75 mm to 19 mm (No. 4 sieve to 3/4 inch)
Sand: Coarse
2.00 mm to 4.75 mm (No. 10 to No. 4 sieve)
Medium
0.425 mm to 2.00 mm (No. 40 to No. 10 sieve)
Fine
0.074 mm to 0.425 mm (No. 200 to No. 40 sieve)
Silt & Clay ("Fines")
<0.074 mm (smaller than a No. 200 sieve)
COHESIVE SILTS & CLAYS
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
SPT5
CONSISTENCY
STRENGTH, Qp4
(BPF)
(COHESIVE)
<0.25
<3
Very Soft
0.25 - <0.50
3-4
Soft
0.50 - <1.00
5-8
Firm
1.00 - <2.00
9 - 15
Stiff
2.00 - <4.00
16 - 30
Very Stiff
4.00 - 8.00
31 - 50
Hard
>8.00
>50
Very Hard
GRAVELS, SANDS & NON -COHESIVE SILTS
SPT5
DENSITY
<5
Very Loose
5-10
Loose
11 - 30
Medium Dense
31 - 50
Dense
>50
Very Dense
RELATIVE
AMOUNT
COARSE
GRAINED
(%)a
FINE
GRAINED
(%)a
Trace
<5
<5
Dual Symbol
10
10
(ex: SIN-SM)
With
15-20
15-25
Adjective
>25
>30
(ex: "Silty')
WATER LEVELS
WL
Water Level (WS)(WD)
(WS) While Sampling
(WD) While Drilling
SHW
Seasonal High WT
ACR
After Casing Removal
v
SWT
Stabilized Water Table
DCI
Dry Cave -In
WCI
Wet Cave -In
Classifications and symbols per ASTM D 2488-09 (Visual -Manual Procedure) unless noted otherwise.
2To be consistent with general practice, "POORLY GRADED" has been removed from GP, GP -GM, GP -GC, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC soil types on the boring logs.
3Non-ASTM designations are included in soil descriptions and symbols along with ASTM symbol (Ex: (SM-FILL)].
4Typically estimated via pocket penetrometer or Torvane shear test and expressed in tons per square foot (tsf).
5Standard Penetration Test (SPT) refers to the number of hammer blows (blow count) of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD split spoon sampler
required to drive the sampler 12 inches (ASTM D 1586). "N-value" is another term for 'blow count" and is expressed in blows per foot (bpf).
6The water levels are those levels actually measured in the borehole at the times indicated by the symbol. The measurements are relatively reliable
when augering, without adding fluids, in granular soils. In clay and cohesive silts, the determination of water levels may require several days for the
water level to stabilize. In such cases, additional methods of measurement are generally employed.
Minor deviation from ASTM D 2488-09 Note 16.
8Percentages are estimated to the nearest 5% per ASTM D 2488-09.
Reference Notes for Boring Logs (03-22-2017) © 2017 ECS Corporate Services, LLC- All Rights Reserved

Geer House Mixed Use Development
ROCK CORE PHOTOGRAPH Durham, NC
ECS Project No. 24089-A

APPENDIX C — Laboratory Testing
Laboratory Test Results Summary
Rock Core Tests Results

Laboratory Testing Summary
Pacle1 of
Boring
Number
Sample
Number
Depth
(feet)
MC1
N
Soil
Type2
Atterberg Limits3
Percent
Passing
No.200
Sieve4
Moisture - Density (Corr.)5
CBR
Value6
Other
ILL
PL
PI
Maximum
Density
(pcf)
Optimum
Moisture
(%)
B-1
S-2
3.50 - 5.00
12.6
CL
31
16
15
91.5
B-2
S-1
1.00 - 2.50
25.2
CL
39
23
16
90.6
B-3
S-1
1.00 - 2.50
18.6
CL
31
16
15
51.4
B-6
S-1
1.00 - 2.50
12.8
SM
NP
NP
NP
40.0
B-7
S-1
1.00 - 2.50
18.9
CL
37
25
12
93.4
B-9
S-1
1.00 - 2.50
17.7
SC
33
18
15
41.4
Notes: 1. ASTM D 2216, 2. ASTM D 2487, 3. ASTM D 4318, 4. ASTM D 1140, 5. See test reports for test method, 6. See test reports for test method
Definitions: MC: Moisture Content, Soil Type: USCS (Unified Soil Classification System), LL: Liquid Limit, PL: Plastic Limit, PI: Plasticity Index, CBR: California Bearing Ratio, OC: Organic Content (ASTM D 2974)
Project No. 06:24089-A
Project Name: Geer House Mixed Use Development
Client: Four Points, LLC
Printed On: Thursday, September 19, 2019
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
9001 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27617
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

EE
Tested By
Reviewed By
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ECS Project No.:
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D Project Name:
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Boring:
Run No.:
Depth (ft.):
Sample No.:
Rock Type:
J.Frazier
Date
Date
9/18/2019
9/19/2019
.�Z:1wiY1~>L
Geer House
B-8
1
23.9-24.5
RS-1
Sandstone
Equipment
Model
Identification No.
Calipers
Westward
61113339
Scale
Ohaus
129113925
Data Logger
Humboldt
171223
Length/Diameter Ratio (ASTM D4543-08, Sections 5.2 and 6.6):
(Check that LAvc / DAvc = 2.0 to 2.5 as per ASTM)
Mass (g): 1 517.4 End 1
L, (in):
4.390
L2 (in):
4.390
L3 (in):
4.391
LAvc (in):
4.390
Dl (in):
1.932
DZ (in):
1.945
D3 (in):
1.941
DAVG (in):
1.939
Area (in`):
2.954
Volume (in'):
12.969
LAvc/DAvc:
2.3
Within Tolerance:
YES
Unit Weight (pcf):
152.0 End 2
Test Run Time (min): 1 2.7
Comments:
L2

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ECS Project No.:
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D Project Name:
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Boring:
Run No.:
Depth (ft.):
SES Sample No.:
TM Rock Type:
Tested By: J.Frazier Date:
Reviewed By: XXXXX Date:
TEST RESULTS
Specimen Diameter (in):
Specimen Length (in):
LengthAvc / DiameterAvc:
Dimensional Requirements in Tolerance?:
Unit Weight (pcf):
Loading Rate (lb/sec)
Test Duration (min):
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (psi):
Young's Modulus (psi):
Young's Modulus (GPa):
3500
3000
2500
N
a
N
2000
L
y.i
co
1500
1000
500
0
O00 OO'y OO'L OO'3 OOR OOh O00
O• O• O• O• O• O• O•
Axial Strain (in/in)
Remarks: No lateral strain aDDlied to sample
1.939
4.390
2.3
YES
152.0
45
2.7
3175
396299
2.73
Stress -Strain Curve
06:24089-A
Geer House
B-8
1
23.9-24.5
RS-1
Sandstone
9/18/2019
9/19/2019
OOP OOP OOP ON
O O O O•

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
ECS Project No.:
06:24089-A
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D
Project Name:
Geer House
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Boring:
B-8
gEi
Run No.:
1
Depth (ft.):
23.9-24.5
Sample No.:
RS-1
MMF-
Rock Type:
Sandstone
Tested By: J.Frazier
Date:
9/18/2019
Reviewed By: XXXXX
Date:
9/19/2019
Reading
No.
Dial Gauge
Reading (in)
Axial Load
(lbs)
Axial Strain
(in/in)
Corrected
Area (in2)
Axial Stress
(psi)
1
0.000
235
0.000
2.9539
80
2
0.001
546
0.000
2.9546
185
3
0.002
956
0.000
2.9552
323
4
0.003
1687
0.001
2.9559
571
5
0.004
1822
0.001
2.9566
616
6
0.005
1964
0.001
2.9573
664
7
0.006
2105
0.001
2.9579
712
8
0.007
2264
0.002
2.9586
765
9
0.008
2420
0.002
2.9593
818
10
0.009
2588
0.002
2.9600
874
11
0.010
2758
0.002
2.9606
932
12
0.011
2940
0.003
2.9613
993
13
0.012
3116
0.003
2.9620
1052
14
0.013
3321
0.003
2.9627
1121
15
0.014
3521
0.003
2.9633
1188
16
0.015
3734
0.003
2.9640
1260
17
0.016
3957
0.004
2.9647
1335
18
0.017
4176
0.004
2.9654
1408
19
0.018
4409
0.004
2.9661
1486
20
0.019
4645
0.004
2.9667
1566
21
0.020
4879
0.005
2.9674
1644
22
0.021
5127
0.005
2.9681
1727
23
0.022
5388
0.005
2.9688
1815
24
0.023
5655
0.005
2.9694
1904
25
0.024
5912
0.005
2.9701
1990
26
0.025
6197
0.006
2.9708
2086
27
0.026
6476
0.006
2.9715
2179
28
0.027
6758
0.006
2.9722
2274
29
0.028
7033
0.006
2.9729
2366
30
0.029
7297
0.007
2.9735
2454
Remarks: No lateral strain applied to sample

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
ECS Project No.:
06:24089-A
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D
Project Name:
Geer House
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Boring:
B-8
gEi
Run No.:
1
Depth (ft.):
23.9-24.5
Sample No.:
RS-1
MMF-
Rock Type:
Sandstone
Tested By: J.Frazier
Date:
9/18/2019
Reviewed By: XXXXX
Date:
9/19/2019
Reading
No.
Dial Gauge
Reading (in)
Axial Load
(lbs)
Axial Strain
(in/in)
Corrected
Area (in2)
Axial Stress
(psi)
31
0.030
7515
0.007
2.9742
2527
32
0.031
7812
0.007
2.9749
2626
33
0.032
8148
0.007
2.9756
2738
34
0.033
8455
0.008
2.9763
2841
35
0.034
8718
0.008
2.9769
2929
36
0.035
8906
0.008
2.9776
2991
37
0.036
9118
0.008
2.9783
3061
38
0.037
9339
0.008
2.9790
3135
39
0.038
9461
0.009
2.9797
3175
Remarks: No lateral strain applied to sample

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ECS Project No.:
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D Project Name:
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Boring:
Run No.:
Depth (ft.):
Sample No.:
Rock Type:
Tested By: J.Frazier Date:
Reviewed By: XXXXX Date:
Rock Core Break Photo
Remarks:
06:24089-A
Geer House
B-8
1
23.9-24.5
RS-1
Sandstone
9/18/2019
9/19/2019

EE
Tested By
Reviewed By
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ECS Project No.:
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D Project Name:
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Boring:
Run No.:
Depth (ft.):
Sample No.:
Rock Type:
J.Frazier
Date
Date
9/18/2019
9/19/2019
.�Z:1wiY)~b
Geer House
B-8
3
30.9-31.4
RS-2
Mudstone
Equipment
Model
Identification No.
Calipers
Westward
61113339
Scale
Ohaus
129113925
Data Logger
Humboldt
171223
Length/Diameter Ratio (ASTM D4543-08, Sections 5.2 and 6.6):
(Check that LAVG / DAVG = 2.0 to 2.5 as per ASTM)
Mass (g): 1 543.1 End 1
L, (in):
4.203
L2 (in):
4.205
L3 (in):
4.203
LAVG (in):
4.204
Dl (in):
1.958
DZ (in):
1.963
D3 (in):
1.965
DAVG (in):
1.962
Area (in`):
3.023
Volume (in'):
12.709
LAVG/DAVG:
2.1
Within Tolerance:
YES
Unit Weight (pcf):
162.8 End 2
Test Run Time (min): 1 4.2
Comments:
L2

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D
SE Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
ES
TM
ECS Project No.:
Project Name:
Boring:
Run No.:
Depth (ft.):
Sample No.:
Rock Type:
Tested By: J.Frazier Date
Reviewed By: XXXXX Date
TEST RESULTS
Specimen Diameter (in):
Specimen Length (in):
LengthAvc / DiameterAvc:
Dimensional Requirements in Tolerance?:
Unit Weight (pcf):
Loading Rate (lb/sec)
Test Duration (min):
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (psi):
Young's Modulus (psi):
Young's Modulus (GPa):
5000
CO 3000
�a
2000
1000
r
1.962
4.204
2.1
YES
162.8
39
4.2
5653
774384
5.34
Stress -Strain Curve
06:24089-A
Geer House
B-8
3
30.9-31.4
RS-2
Mudstone
9/18/2019
9/19/2019
000 00'L 00� 000 00� OHO O,L CoN
O O O O O O O
Axial Strain (in/in)
Remarks: No lateral strain aDDlied to sample

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
ECS Project No.:
06:24089-A
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D
Project Name:
Geer House
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Boring:
B-8
gEi
Run No.:
3
Depth (ft.):
30.9-31.4
Sample No.:
RS-2
Rock Type:
Mudstone
Tested By: J.Frazier
Date:
9/18/2019
Reviewed By: XXXXX
Date:
9/19/2019
Reading
No.
Dial Gauge
Reading (in)
Axial Load
(lbs)
Axial Strain
(in/in)
Corrected
Area (in2)
Axial Stress
(psi)
1
0.000
52
0.000
3.0233
17
2
0.001
168
0.000
3.0241
56
3
0.002
237
0.000
3.0248
78
4
0.003
277
0.001
3.0255
92
5
0.004
347
0.001
3.0262
115
6
0.005
543
0.001
3.0269
179
7
0.006
751
0.001
3.0277
248
8
0.007
965
0.002
3.0284
319
9
0.008
1210
0.002
3.0291
399
10
0.009
1456
0.002
3.0298
481
11
0.010
1744
0.002
3.0306
575
12
0.011
2019
0.003
3.0313
666
13
0.012
2273
0.003
3.0320
750
14
0.013
2556
0.003
3.0327
843
15
0.014
2917
0.003
3.0334
962
16
0.015
3281
0.004
3.0342
1081
17
0.016
3682
0.004
3.0349
1213
18
0.017
4094
0.004
3.0356
1349
19
0.018
4497
0.004
3.0363
1481
20
0.019
4964
0.005
3.0371
1634
21
0.020
5433
0.005
3.0378
1788
22
0.021
5848
0.005
3.0385
1925
23
0.022
6294
0.005
3.0393
2071
24
0.023
6730
0.005
3.0400
2214
25
0.024
7233
0.006
3.0407
2379
26
0.025
7773
0.006
3.0414
2556
27
0.026
8300
0.006
3.0422
2728
28
0.027
8800
0.006
3.0429
2892
29
0.028
9324
0.007
3.0436
3063
30
0.029
9909
0.007
3.0443
3255
Remarks: No lateral strain applied to sample

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
ECS Project No.:
06:24089-A
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D
Project Name:
Geer House
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Boring:
B-8
gEi
Run No.:
3
Depth (ft.):
30.9-31.4
Sample No.:
RS-2
Rock Type:
Mudstone
Tested By: J.Frazier
Date:
9/18/2019
Reviewed By: XXXXX
Date:
9/19/2019
Reading
No.
Dial Gauge
Reading (in)
Axial Load
(lbs)
Axial Strain
(in/in)
Corrected
Area (in2)
Axial Stress
(psi)
31
0.030
10524
0.007
3.0451
3456
32
0.031
11106
0.007
3.0458
3646
33
0.032
11712
0.008
3.0465
3844
34
0.033
12152
0.008
3.0473
3988
35
0.034
12727
0.008
3.0480
4176
36
0.035
13285
0.008
3.0487
4358
37
0.036
13721
0.009
3.0495
4499
38
0.037
14673
0.009
3.0502
4811
39
0.038
14479
0.009
3.0509
4746
40
0.039
14873
0.009
3.0517
4874
41
0.040
15386
0.010
3.0524
5041
42
0.041
15693
0.010
3.0531
5140
43
0.042
15989
0.010
3.0539
5236
44
0.043
15178
0.010
3.0546
4969
45
0.044
14715
0.010
3.0553
4816
46
0.045
14785
0.011
3.0561
4838
47
0.046
15151
0.011
3.0568
4956
48
0.047
15627
0.011
3.0575
5111
49
0.048
16109
0.011
3.0583
5267
50
0.049
16510
0.012
3.0590
5397
51
0.050
16215
0.012
3.0597
5299
52
0.051
16293
0.012
3.0605
5324
53
0.052
16477
0.012
3.0612
5383
54
0.053
16534
0.013
3.0620
5400
55
0.054
16706
0.013
3.0627
5455
56
0.055
16989
0.013
3.0634
5546
57
0.056
17321
0.013
3.0642
5653
Remarks: No lateral strain applied to sample

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ECS Project No.: 06:24089-A
1812 Center Park Drive, STE D Project Name: Geer House
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Boring: B-8
Run No.: 3
Depth (ft.): 30.9-31.4
Sample No.: RS-2
Rock Ty
pe: Mudstone
Tested By: J.Frazier Date: 9/18/2019
Reviewed By: XXXXX Date: 9/19/2019
Rock Core Break Photo
Remarks: