SW3181002_Soils/Geotechnical Report_20230918

7
`III f.
:-Iii k
1-y K
ikr. 4 t,
4,4
®� / .�,� 0 ,..:
ECS Southeast, LLP
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision
Indian Trail, Union County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 08:12249
June 23, 2017

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP "Setting the Standard for Service"
l I Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1078
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-406
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3239
June 23, 2017
Mr. Bryant Spencer
Director of Land Development
RHH Land Investors, LLC
2919 Breezewood Avenue,Suite 400
Fayetteville, NC 28303
ECS Project No.08:12249
Reference: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision
Indian Trail, Union County, North Carolina
Dear Mr.Spencer:
ECS Southeast, LLP (ECS) has completed the Environmental Site Assessment and preliminary
subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analyses for the above-
referenced project. Our services were performed in general accordance with our Proposal No.
08:20748P, dated March 28, 2017. This report presents our understanding of the geotechnical
aspects of the project, along with the results of the field exploration and laboratory testing
conducted.
It has been our pleasure to be of service to RHH Land Investors, LLC during the design phase of this
project. We would appreciate the opportunity to remain involved during the continuation of the
design phase, and we would like to provide our services during construction phase operations as well
to verify the assumptions of subsurface conditions made for this report. Should you have any
questions concerning the information contained in this report, or if we can be of further assistance to
you, please contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
ECS Southeast, LLC
Erick J. Echevarria Joshua B. Bradshaw, E.I.
Assistant P f'. 1c er Project Manager
EEche idg.A ,�° JBradshaw(a.'ecslimited.corn
, 6q,S Sio w 9
I a
Lee4. Guil d -. I ! b/41/14-•
• 414
Pt-MVO � er � Q i
LMcG&irrxre ��!, m
4'•a, CG Ub �' ,.�'�
4 Lai I.t1'N�ti�
1812 Center Park Drive, Suite D, Charlotte, NC 28217 • T: 704-525-5152 • F: 704-357-0023 • www.ecslimited.com
ECS Capitol Services,PLLC • ECS Florida,LLC • ECS Mid-Atlantic,LLC • ECS Midwest,LLC • ECS Southeast,LLP • ECS Texas,LLP

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No. 08:12249 Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION 3
1.1 General 3
1.2 Scope of Services 3
1.3 Authorization 3
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 4
2.1 Project Location 4
2.2 Current Site Conditions 4
2.3 Proposed Construction 4
2.3.1 Structural Information/Loads 5
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION 6
3.1 Field Exploration Program 6
3.1.1 Test Borings 6
3.2 Regional/Site Geology 6
3.3 Subsurface Characterization 7
3.4 Groundwater Observations 7
3.5 Seasonal High Water Table 7
4.0 LABORATORY SERVICES 9
4.1 Laboratory Testing 9
5.0 Preliminary SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 10
5.1 Subgrade Preparation 10
5.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing 10
5.1.2 Proofrolling 10
5.1.3 Subgrade Stabilization 10
5.2 Earthwork Considerations 11
5.2.1 Existing Man Placed Fill 11
5.2.2 Organic Laden Soils 11
5.2.3 High Plasticity Soils 12
5.2.4 Below Grade Excavation 12
5.2.5 Structural Fill Materials 13
5.3 General Construction Considerations 14
6.0 CLOSING 15
APPENDICES
Appendix A—Drawings& Reports
• Site Location Diagram
• Boring Location Diagram
• SHWT Report
Appendix B—Field Operations
• Reference Notes for Boring Logs
• Boring Logs B-1 through B-12
Appendix C—Laboratory Testing
• Laboratory Test Results Summary
• Plasticity Chart

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report contains the results of our preliminary subsurface exploration for the proposed single-
family development with two stormwater ponds located along Waxhaw Indian Trail Road in
Indian Trail, North Carolina. ECS has assumed that the maximum column and wall loads for the
structures will not exceed 100 kips and 4 kips per linear foot, respectively. Construction is
expected to include the stripping/grubbing, mass grading, new underground utilities, onsite
stormwater ponds, and paved parking/drive areas.
Organic laden soils approximately 3 to 4 inches thick were encountered at the existing ground
surface at each of the boring locations. Fill soils were encountered in Borings B-2, B-3, B-5, B-6,
and B-7, and extended to depths ranging from approximately 3 to 8 feet below the ground
surface. Residual soils were encountered below the fill soils in boring locations B-2, B-3, B-5, B-6,
and B-7, and beneath the surficial soils at boring locations B-1, B-4, B-8, B-9, B-10, B-11, and B-12,
and extended to depths ranging from approximately 3 to 20 feet below the ground surface. The
fill soils consisted mainly of Sandy Silt (ML) and Elastic Silt (MH). The residual soils typically
consisted of Sandy SILT (ML), Elastic SILT (MH), and Sandy CLAY (CL). Partially Weathered Rock
(PWR)was encountered below the surficial material at boring location B-1, and below the residual
soils at the remaining boring locations at depths ranging from 3 to 12 feet below the ground
surface.
Specific information regarding the preliminary subsurface exploration procedures and the site and
subsurface conditions at the time of our exploration are discussed in detail in the subsequent
sections of this report. Please note this Executive Summary is an important part of this report but
should be considered a "summary" only. The subsequent sections of this report constitute our
findings, conclusions, and recommendations in their entirety. Furthermore, ECS should review
our findings and recommendations in their entirety once the final project criteria have been
established.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The purpose of this study was to provide preliminary subsurface conditions at the site and to
evaluate those conditions with regard to foundation and floor slab support, along with general
site development. The project will include the construction of wood-framed single-family
residences with slab-on-grades and associated surface parking and drive areas. Two stormwater
ponds are also anticipated at the project site.
The preliminary recommendations developed for this report are based on project information
supplied by RHH Land Investors, LLC. This report contains the results of our preliminary
subsurface exploration and laboratory testing programs, site characterization, engineering
analyses, and recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed structures.
1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES
To obtain the necessary geotechnical information required for design of the proposed building,
twelve (12) widely spaced soil test borings were performed at locations selected by ECS. These
borings were located within the proposed building footprints, associated parking/drive areas, and
stormwater pond areas. A laboratory-testing program was also implemented to characterize the
physical and engineering properties of the subsurface soils.
This report discusses our exploratory and testing procedures, presents our findings and
evaluations and includes the following.
• Information on site conditions including geologic information and special site features.
• Description of the field exploration and laboratory tests performed.
• Final logs of the soil borings and records of the field exploration and laboratory tests in
accordance with the standard practice of geotechnical engineers. This includes a boring
location diagram and vicinity map.
• Measurement of the surficial materials at each boring location and notation of this
information on the boring logs and in the text of the report. ECS can provide approximate
grade elevation for the top of borings if a relevant topography survey is provided.
• Preliminary geotechnical recommendations regarding site suitability for proposed
development.
• Evaluation of the on-site soil characteristics encountered in the soil borings. Specifically,
we will discuss the suitability of the on-site materials for reuse as engineered fill to
support ground slabs and pavements. A discussion of groundwater, in-place fill, rock, and
alluvial soils (if discovered) and their potential impact on structures and project
construction will be provided.
1.3 AUTHORIZATION
Our services were provided in accordance with our Proposal No. 08:20748P, dated March 28,
2017, as authorized by Mr. Bryant Spencer with RHH Land Investors, LLC on May 22, 2017, and
includes the Terms and Conditions of Service outlined with our Proposal.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 4
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The site is located along Waxhaw Indian Trail Road in Indian Trail, North Carolina as shown in the
Site Vicinity Map (Figure 2.1.1) below, and included in the Appendix.
r,
y„yti W.e- -L
r
,�" aY
11!
_ , s. 41
mo, i
I 800t • I
Figure 2.1.1. Site Location
2.2 CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS
The site is moderately wooded on the western portion of the site and lightly wooded on the
southern and eastern portions of the site. Based on the historical imagery from Google Earth, it
appears that the site was developed to its current state since before 1993.
Based on the Google Earth topographic data, the ground surface at the site generally ranges from
a high elevation of approximately 713 feet in the eastern portion of the site to a low elevation of
approximately 650 feet on the western portion of the site.
2.3 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
We understand that the project will include the construction of wood-framed single-family
residences with slab on grades and associated surface parking and drive areas. Two stormwater
ponds are also anticipated at the project site. No site retaining walls are anticipated at this time.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 5
2.3.1 Structural Information/Loads
The following information explains our understanding of the structures and their anticipated
loads:
Table 2.3.1.1 Design Values
SUBJECT DESIGN INFORMATION/EXPECTATIONS
#of Stories 1 to 2 stories above grade
Usage Residential
Framing We anticipate that the buildings will be slab on grade with
wood-framing.
Column Loads 100 kips maximum (estimated) _
Wall Loads 4 kips per linear foot(klf) maximum (estimated)

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 6
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM
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.
3.1.1 Test Borings
The subsurface conditions were explored by drilling seven (7) widely spaced soil test borings (B-1
through B-7) within the building pads, two (2) soil test borings in stormwater ponds (B-8 and B-9),
and three (3) soil test borings in pavement areas (B-10 through B-12). A track-mounted Diedrich
D50 drill rig was utilized to drill the soil test borings. Borings were generally advanced to depths
ranging from approximately 10 to 20 feet below the current ground surface.
Boring locations were identified in the field by ECS personnel using handheld GPS techniques and
existing landmarks as reference prior to mobilization of our drilling equipment. The approximate
as-drilled boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Diagram in Appendix A. Ground
surface elevations noted on our boring logs were estimated from the provided topographic plan
and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to obtain
them.
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
3.2 REGIONAL/SITE GEOLOGY
The site is located in the Piedmont Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The native soils in
the Piedmont Province consist mainly of residuum with underlying saprolites weathered from the
parent bedrock, which can be found in both weathered and unweathered states. Although the
surficial materials normally retain the structure of the original parent bedrock, they typically have
a much lower density and exhibit strengths and other engineering properties typical of soil. In a
mature weathering profile of the Piedmont Province, the soils are generally found to be finer
grained at the surface where more extensive weathering has occurred. The particle size of the
soils generally becomes more granular with increasing depth and gradually changes first to
weathered and finally to unweathered parent bedrock. The mineral composition of the parent
rock and the environment in which weathering occurs largely control the resulting soil's
engineering characteristics. The residual soils are the product of the weathering of the parent
bedrock.
In addition, it is apparent that the natural geology across the site has been modified in the past by
grading 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.
Furthermore, there is no specific correlation between N-values from standard penetration tests
performed in soil test borings and the degree of compaction of existing fill soils; however, a

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 7
qualitative assessment of existing fills can sometimes be made based on the N-values obtained
and observations of the materials sampled in the test borings.
3.3 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION
The following sections provide generalized characterizations of the soil and rock strata
encountered during our subsurface exploration. For subsurface information at a specific location,
refer to the Boring Logs in Appendix B.
Table 3.3.1 Subsurface Stratigraphy
Approximate Approximate Stratum Description Ranges of
Depth Range Average SPT(1)N-values
(ft) Elevation(ft) (bpf)
0 to 1 702-665 I Varying amounts of surficial organic laden soil was N/A
(Surface present at the ground surface at each of the boring
Cover) locations.
1 to 5.5 690-673 II FILL—Medium Stiff to Very Stiff, Elastic SILT(MH), 7 to 24
Red, Moist(2)
5.5 to 14 675-660 III RESIDUAL—Stiff to Hard,Sandy SILT(ML),Tan to Red, 14 to 38
Moist
14 to 20 683-653 IV PWR-Partially Weathered Rock samples as Sandy 100+
SILT(ML)131
Notes:(1)Standard Penetration Test
(2)Fill soils encountered at boring locations B-2,B-3,B-5,B-6,and B-7.
(3)Partially Weathered Rock encountered at boring locations B-1,B-2,B-4,B-7,B-8,and B-12
3.4 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS
Groundwater measurements were attempted at the termination of drilling and prior to
demobilization from the site. Each of the boring locations was dry at the time of drilling and to
the depths explored. Cave-in depths were attempted to be measured at each of the boring
locations with cave-in depths ranging from approximately 6.1 to 25.5 feet. Cave-in of a soil test
boring can be caused by groundwater hydrostatic pressure, weak soil layers, and/or drilling
activities (i.e. drilling fluid circulation or advancement of bit).
Fluctuations in the groundwater elevation should be expected depending on precipitation, run-
off, utility leaks, and other factors not evident at the time of our evaluation. Normally, highest
groundwater levels occur in late winter and spring and the lowest levels occur in late summer and
fall. Depending on time of construction, groundwater may be encountered at shallower depths
and locations not explored during this study. If encountered during construction, engineering
personnel from our office should be notified immediately.
3.5 SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE
A licensed soil scientist was onsite during the drilling of the potential stormwater pond borings (B-
8 and B-9) in order to determine the depth of the seasonal high water table (SHWT).The
characteristics of the soil were observed, including texture, depth, slope,the presence in

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 8
accordance with current soil science practices and technology.The results of the SHWT study are
included in the Appendix of this report.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 9
4.0 LABORATORY SERVICES
The laboratory testing performed by ECS for this project consisted of selected tests performed on
samples obtained during our field exploration operations. The following paragraphs briefly
discuss the results of the completed laboratory testing program. 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.
An experienced geotechnical staff 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 staff professional then 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.
4.1 Laboratory Testing
In addition to visual classification, ECS performed five (5) natural moisture content tests and two
(2) Atterberg limits tests on selected soil samples obtained from within the borings. The
laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. The
results of the laboratory testing are presented on the respective Boring Logs included in the
Appendix.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 10
5.0 PRELIMINARY SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION
5.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing
The subgrade preparation should consist of stripping all vegetation, rootmat, topsoil, and any
other soft or unsuitable materials from the 10-foot expanded building and 5-foot expanded
pavement limits and to 5 feet beyond the toe of structural fills. Borings performed in
"undisturbed" areas of the site; that is, areas beyond the limits of man-placed FILL, contained
topsoil. Deeper topsoil or organic laden soils may be present in wet, low-lying, and poorly drained
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.
5.1.2 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. A test pit(s) may be excavated to explore the shallow
subsurface materials in the area of the instability to help in determined the cause of the observed
unstable materials and to assist in the evaluation of the appropriate remedial action to stabilize
the subgrade.
5.1.3 Subgrade Stabilization
Subgrade Benching: Fill should not be placed on ground with a slope steeper than 5H:1V, unless
the fill is confined by an opposing slope, such as in a ravine. Otherwise, where steeper slopes
exist,the ground should be benched so as to allow for fill placement on a horizontal surface.
Subgrade Stabilization: Is some areas, particularly low-lying, wet areas of the site, undercutting of
excessively soft materials may be considered inefficient. In such areas the use of a reinforcing
geotextile or geogrid might be employed, under the advisement of ECS. Suitable stabilization
materials may include medium duty woven geotextile fabrics or geogrids. The suitability and
employment of reinforcing or stabilization products should be determined in the field by ECS
personnel, in accordance with project specifications.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 11
5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS
5.2.1 Existing Man Placed Fill
Existing fill soils were encountered below the surficial materials at Borings B-2, B-3, and B-5, B-6,
and B-7 and extended as deep as 8 feet below the ground surface. Standard penetration
resistances in the existing fill ranged from 5 to 24 blows per foot (bpf). ECS has not been provided
with test records (such as proofrolling, compaction testing, etc.) at the time of this report, thus
the fill should be considered undocumented.
Undocumented fill poses risks associated with undetected deleterious inclusions within the fill
and/or deleterious materials at the virgin ground fill interface that are covered by the fill.
Deleterious materials can consist of significant amount of organics derived from organic rich
strippings, rubbish, construction or demolition debris, stumps and roots, and logs. If these
materials are covered over by or are within undocumented fill, the organic materials tend to
decompose slowly in the anaerobic conditions in or under the fill. Decomposition can occur over
periods ranging from several years to several decades. As the organic materials decompose, a
void is created which can create soft conditions and even subsidence in areas above the organics.
Where these types of conditions exist under or within undocumented fill, they are sometimes in
discreet pockets that can go undetected by normal subsurface exploration techniques, i.e., soil
test borings and test pits.
Based on our review of the existing fill soils we anticipate the risk of supporting the structures and
pavements on the fill soils is relatively low. It appears that a majority of the soils were generally
placed with some compactive effort and are likely suitable for foundation, slab, and pavement
support. However, isolated areas of undercut and replacement or re-densification should be
anticipated. Since we have not been provided documentation of the compaction testing records,
we cannot qualify the fill soils in between our boring locations and cannot be responsible for
potential settlement of the structure if the owner elects to support the building on these soils.
Bearing the structure on the existing fill soils is a business decision that only the owner can make.
5.2.2 Organic Laden Soils
A layer of organic laden soil, approximately 3 to 4 inches thick, was encountered at the ground
surface at each of the boring locations. Please note that the recorded topsoil depths noted on the
boring logs are driller reported and should not be used in cost estimating topsoil removal.
The surficial organic laden soil is typically a dark-colored soil material containing roots, fibrous
matter, and/or other organic components, and is generally unsuitable for support of engineering
fill, foundations, or slabs-on-grade. ECS has not performed laboratory testing to determine the
organic content or other horticultural properties of the observed surficial organic laden soils.
Therefore, the phrase "surficial organic laden soil" is not intended to indicate suitability for
landscaping and/or other purposes. The surficial organic laden soil depths provided in this report
and on the individual Boring Logs are based on driller observations and should be considered
approximate. Please note that the transition from surficial organic laden soils to underlying
materials may be gradual, and therefore the observation and measurement of the surficial
organic laden soil depth is approximate. Actual surficial organic laden soil depths should be
expected to vary and generally increases with the amount of vegetation present over the site.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 12
5.2.3 High Plasticity Soils
Cuts: Moisture sensitive soils were encountered at Borings B-3, B-5, B-6, B-7, and B-8 and
extended to depths of approximately 3-12 feet. High plasticity soils are those soil materials
classified as Elastic SILT (MH) with a Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 30 and Fat CLAY (CH). High
plasticity soils were encountered in some of the borings at variable depths. Where high plasticity
soils are encountered at design subgrade elevations in slab and pavement areas, the subgrade
should be undercut 2 feet and grades restored with approved Structural Fill. Where high plasticity
soils are encountered at foundation bearing elevations, the foundation excavation should be
lowered an additional 2 feet below the design footing subgrade elevation and the design
elevation restored by backfilling the excavation with engineered fill or with Flowable Fill having a
minimum 28-day compressive strength of 200 psi.
Structural Fills: High plasticity soils do not satisfy the specification criteria for satisfactory
materials. Finished grades were unknown at the time of this report, however,given the significant
presence of high plasticity soils on this site, and to reduce the amount of import material to the
site, the Owner can consider allowing soils with a maximum Liquid Limit of 65 and maximum
Plasticity Index of 30 to be used as Structural Fill at depths greater than 4 feet below pavement
subgrades outside the expanded building limits and within non-structural areas.
5.2.4 Below Grade Excavation
Based on the results of the soil test borings, it appears that difficult excavation may be
encountered during site development, particularly in the vicinity of Borings B-1, B-4, and B-12.
PWR materials were encountered beneath the surficial materials at Boring B-1 and within 3 feet
of the existing ground surface at Borings B-4 and B-12. Information regarding the Finished Floor
Elevation, foundation elevations, and depth of the planned utilities was not provided at the time
of this report. Depending on the depth of the FFE, foundation elevations, and planned utilities,
difficult excavation into PWR may be encountered during excavation, particularly in the vicinity of
Boring B-1.
In mass excavation for general site work, dense soils and PWR can usually be removed by ripping
with a single-tooth ripper attached to a large crawler tractor or by breaking it out with large front-
end loader. In confined excavations such as foundations, utility trenches, etc., removal of PWR
may require use of heavy duty backhoes, pneumatic spades, or blasting.
As a general guide, we recommend the following definitions be used to define rock:
General Excavation
Rip Rock: Material that cannot be removed by scrapers, loaders, pans, dozers, or graders;
and requires the use of a single-tooth ripper mounted on a crawler tractor having
a minimum draw bar pull rated at not less than 56,000 pounds.
Blast Rock: Material which cannot be excavated with a single-tooth ripper mounted on a
crawler tractor having a minimum draw bar pull rated at not less than 56,000
pounds (Caterpillar D-8 or equivalent) or by a Caterpillar 977 frontend loader or
equivalent; and occupying an original volume of at least one (1) cubic yard.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 13
Trench Excavation
Blast Rock: Material which cannot be excavated with a backhoe having a bucket curling
force rated at not less than 25,700 pounds (Caterpillar Model 225 or equivalent),
and occupying an original volume of at least one-half(1/2) cubic yard.
As noted in the Geology section of this report, the weathering process in the Piedmont 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. Once a finalized grading/utility plan is available, ECS recommends additional testing (test
pits or seismic refraction testing) to further evaluate the rippability of the subgrade soils within
the deeper cut areas.
5.2.5 Structural Fill Materials
Product Submittals: Prior to placement of Structural Fill, representative bulk samples (about 50
pounds) of on-site and 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, GP, GM and GC, or a combination of
these group symbols, per ASTM D 2487. The materials should be free of organic matter, debris,
and should contain no particle sizes greater than 4 inches in the largest dimension. Open graded
materials, such as Gravels (GW and GP), which contain void space in their mass should not be
used in structural fills unless properly encapsulated with filter fabric. Suitable Structural Fill
material should have the index properties shown in Table 6.2.4.1
Table 6.2.3.1 Structural Fill Index Properties
Location LL PI
Building Areas 50 max 30 max
Pavement Areas 50 max 30 max
Unsatisfactory Materials: Unsatisfactory fill materials include materials which to not satisfy the
requirements for suitable materials, as well as topsoil and organic materials (OH, OL), elastic Silt
(MH), and high plasticity Clay (CH). The owner can consider allowing soils with a maximum Liquid
Limit of 65 and Plasticity Index of 30 to be used as Structural Fill at depths greater than 2 feet
below pavement subgrades outside the expanded building limits and within non-structural areas.
Suitability of Existing Soils for Reuse: In general, the soils encountered in the borings can be
reused as engineered fill. The majority of the soils encountered within the depth of the borings
consisted of ML materials which are considered suitable for use as engineered fill. MH soils with a
plasticity index greater than 30 are not generally considered suitable for reuse as engineered fill.
However, the MH soils may be placed in deeper fill areas (greater than 6 feet in depth), provided

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 14
they are moisture conditioned and compacted in accordance with the project plans and
specifications.
5.3 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
Moisture Conditioning: 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, during the drier times of the year, such as the summer months, moisture may need
to be added to the soil to provide adequate moisture for successful compaction according to the
project requirements. Due to the presence of moisture sensitive soils across the site, earthwork
operations will be impacted if performed during periods of heavy rainfall. Therefore,
consideration should be given to beginning earthwork operations during the dry periods as
described above.
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 a
haul road and construction staging area to limit the areas of disturbance and to prevent
construction traffic from excessively degrading sensitive subgrade soils and existing pavement
areas. Haul roads and construction staging areas could be covered with excess depths of
aggregate to protect those subgrades. The aggregate can later be removed and used in pavement
areas.
Surface Drainage: Surface drainage conditions should be properly maintained. Surface water
should be directed away from the construction area, and the work area should be sloped away
from the construction area at a gradient of 1 percent or greater to reduce the potential of
ponding water and the subsequent saturation of the surface soils. At the end of each work day,
the subgrade soils should be sealed by rolling the surface with a smooth drum roller to minimize
infiltration of surface water.
Excavation Safety: Cuts or excavations associated with utility excavations may require forming or
bracing, slope flattening, or other physical measures to control sloughing and/or prevent slope
failures. Contractors should be familiar with applicable OSHA codes to ensure that adequate
protection of the excavations and trench walls is provided.
Erosion Control: The surface soils may be erodible. Therefore, the Contractor should provide and
maintain good site drainage during earthwork operations to maintain the integrity of the surface
soils. All erosion and sedimentation controls should be in accordance with sound engineering
practices and local requirements.

Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision 06/23/2017
ECS Project No.08:12249 Page 15
6.0 CLOSING
ECS has prepared this report of findings, evaluations, and preliminary 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 by RHH Land
Investors, LLC. 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 & Reports
Site Location Diagram
Boring Location Diagram
SHWT Report

f
e Gree Services Center
Mellon Rd
co
6.5
Fincher Rd 1361 1361
Boatwright Electric CI
co
110081
SITE
A rbOr ity
rlf
��
•
qr- r
LEGEND:
N
N + E
S
Source: I I FIGURE 1 PROJ.MGR. SCALE
JBB N.T.S.
Site Vicinity Map DRAFTSMAN PROJECT NO.
Google Maps Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision EJE
08-12249
REVISIONS FIGURE
Indian Trail, North Carolina
SETTING THE DATE
Si-AN UARO
06-19-17
FOR SERVICE

•
•
,III
!
_ • ,„. ., ,..„:„... :- :.
. ...
.-,r .�ti i
, rh. TI .:, _.,.„,... •••
_.. .
,,,, ......:-.„- --,----. 7-- .. ..
_•,„\,
--,---- k c\r'' ''.',<<\''''\ 1.- -
w, B-6 \
na
`1 .ray 1i i I. I 7
i' f. jr; Yi 5.:X':?.3TM , B-4 •
-!
B-2�- • BYY1 B-5
. :....; _
• -- ,....-1..issLi . . .
- - B-10 4 - _
B-1
r
r
` 3
LEGEND:
N
it =Approximate Location of Boring *
S
Background Image Provided By: 0 FIGURE 2 PROJ.MGR. SCALE
N.T.S.
Client DRAFTSMAN PROJECT NO.
CD Boring Location Diagram EJE os-lzzas
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision REVISIONS FIGURE
1- Indian Trail, North Carolina 2
SETTING THE DATE
NOAR O FOE SE 06-19-17
FOR RVICE

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP "Setting the Standard for Service"
Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1078
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-406
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3239
June 6, 2017
Mr. Bryant Spencer
Director of Land Development
H&H Homes
2919 Breezewood Avenue,Suite 400
Fayetteville, NC 28303
Reference: Report of Seasonal High Water Table(SHWT)
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision
Indian Trail, Union County, North Carolina
ECS Project No:49-4641
Dear Mr. Spencer: .
ECS Southeast, LLP (ECS) is pleased to provide you with our Report of Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT)
Study for the Waxhaw-Indian Trail site in Indian Trail, North Carolina.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The site is located along Waxhaw Indian Trail Road in Indian Trail, North Carolina. According to the
Union County Online GIS Database website, the site is identified as a portion of Union County Parcel
Identification Number 07135022. Based on our review of available aerial photographs, the majority of
the site appears to consist of agricultural land and wooded land. Based on our review of the provided
site plan, we understand the project will include the construction of single family development with two
stormwater ponds.
An aerial photograph was prepared by ECS identifying two SHWT boring locations (Figure 1), which is in
general proximity to the proposed stormwater devices. The soil investigation was conducted with a drill
rig via split spoon,to a depth of approximately 15 feet ground surface (bgs) or auger refusal.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
ECS conducted a study/investigation of the soils to identify the depth of the seasonal high water table, if
present. The properties and characteristics of the soils retrieved from the boring were observed and
recorded in field notes.The properties include texture, depth,the presence of restrictive horizons,depth to
seasonal high water table, coarse fragments, etc. The assessment was conducted in accordance with
current soil science practices and technology.
ECS Capitol Services,PLLC • ECS Florida,LLC • ECS Mid-Atlantic,LLC • ECS Midwest,LLC • ECS Southeast,LLP • ECS Texas,LLP
www.ecslimited.com

SHWT Study
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision
Indian Trail,Union County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49-4641
SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE STUDY
Below is a summary of the soils retrieved from the boring.
SHWT Boring 8—The surface layer to a depth of 50 inches bgs was brown clay to clay loam.The structure
appeared to be moderate, medium, and angular-blocky,with sticky, plastic, and firm consistence. Faint gray
mottles were identified within clay lenses.The sub-surface layer from 50 inches to approximately 90 inches
bgs was yellow and brown channery slate rock and clay loam with moderate,fine, angular blocky structure.
Faint gray mottles were identified within clay lenses. The consistence was sticky, plastic, and firm.The sub-
surface layer from 90 inches to 180 inches bgs was channery slate rock.
SHWT Boring 9 — The surface layer to a depth of 3 inches bgs was brown silty clay loam. The structure
appeared to be weak, fine, and granular, with slightly-sticky, slightly-plastic, and friable consistence. The
sub-surface layer from 3 inches bgs to a depth of 36 inches bgs was yellow and brown clay to clay loam.The
structure appeared to be moderate, medium, and angular-blocky, with sticky, plastic, and firm consistence.
Faint gray mottles were identified within clay lenses.The sub-surface layer from 36 inches to approximately
180 inches bgs was brown channery slate rock and clay loam with moderate,fine, angular blocky structure.
Faint gray mottles were identified within clay lenses.
FINDINGS
SHWT Boring 8 — Evidence of a perched SHWT was observed to a depth of approximately 90 inches bgs.
Expansive clay lenses and channery slate rock appear to limit hydraulic conductivity through the soil profile.
SHWT Boring 9— Evidence of a perched SHWT was observed to a depth of approximately 180 inches bgs.
Expansive clay lenses and channery slate rock appear to limit hydraulic conductivity through the soil profile.
The type of stormwater management facility designed is based on the depth of the SHWT or confining layer.
The information above may be potentially utilized to determine the type of stormwater management
facility best suited for this site according to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Best
Management Practice Manual,dated July,2007.
2

SHWT Study
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision
Indian Trail,Union County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49-4641
CLOSING
ECS is pleased to offer our professional services and look forward to assisting in any of your site analysis
needs in the future. If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact us at 704-525-
5152.
Respectfully,
ECS SOUTHEAST,LLP ''
Vi'.
,(--z -Ft )
David E.Valentine W. Brandon Fulton, LSS, PSC, PWS
Environmental Team Manager Environmental Principal
[e-mail] [e-mail]
704-525-5152 704-525-5152
Attachment: Figure 1—SHWT Boring Location Map
40- ORANoo44 �"
Ki'41471CI
p
131d
qtkelli
01, tif ,

} L
i._ -c- r !J► 1-v .mac.,
-ebb 7` `;L! .,qr3°_ '- _ i r y tl � - .Y • ,, . �y :: ?-1
�., r:t .r '- "' --*t r`_,:fu -Ir -r �ri�[�---1-
4t ^^pa l ! - J'. .k '`, ��.
_
•
i. 1 , r!.
''',4' .:-• ' ••>%,11.'. ''-,-*-..•
ti,.•i
-!� cr5"�T e'er, -}T •t'd� rys •'' �:1 '
tlAt:?.."
T
r Q 'f`' 1 * s• t '�
•
• 7 +
NiTeNs
....A. .• . ., .,
v .tom ...
'':;1 + �•
_ • _ ,v: „:„.,__ __,..ti..4
4.,. •
r T :.yY. 7c s ' r i::
6. . ... .
.-i.,...,,,...,..,..,_.......
0,
.,.
. ;e4--• . lieff-,-''''x•
' ' .. SHWT B-9
L• ,P �`,< .. - Yam'. _ ., :
IJ
{ f �} ..• by.
'z •- . - ' 'i
r r.
. - --' i "J,'' * '4,.., ,,-'0.-' .:- :.f. - --.-,--.`_ Alta ' b alli• AUL ..- .
. .., ',....n.,' ..- 411, IMPIlire
fir;
LEGEND l '
j{
z
= Boring Location - N
FIGURE 1
SOURCE: , SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE BORING MAP
WAXHAW-INDIAN TRAIL SUBDIVISION
GOOGLE EARTH INDIAN TRAIL, NORTH CAROLINA
2016
ECS PROJECT NO. 49:4641
NOT TO SCALE

APPENDIX B — Field Operations
Reference Notes for Boring Logs
Boring Logs B-1 through B-12

REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS
MATERIAL1'2 DRILLING SAMPLING SYMBOLS&ABBREVIATIONS
ASPHALT SS Split Spoon Sampler PM Pressuremeter Test
ST Shelby Tube Sampler RD Rock Bit Drilling
CONCRETE
-' WS Wash Sample RC Rock Core, NX, BX,AX
' •-:"i;s:. BS Bulk Sample of Cuttings REC Rock Sample Recovery%
��0 0 GRAVEL PA Power Auger(no sample) RQD Rock Quality Designation%
HSA Hollow Stem Auger
TOPSOIL
PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
VOID DESIGNATION PARTICLE SIZES
1 1 I I Boulders 12 inches(300 mm)or larger
I 1 I I L1 I BRICK Cobbles 3 inches to 12 inches(75 mm to 300 mm)
V O Gravel: Coarse %inch to 3 inches(19 mm to 75 mm)
0 @D Cb AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
Q - Fine 4.75 mm to 19 mm(No.4 sieve to 3/4 inch)
%m .•Z2 s Sand: Coarse 2.00 mm to 4.75 mm(No. 10 to No.4 sieve)
.•*,® FILL3 SOILS
.-7,t. Medium 0.425 mm to 2.00 mm(No.40 to No. 10 sieve)
A44, GW WELL-GRADED GRAVEL Fine 0.074 mm to 0.425 mm(No.200 to No.40 sieve)
k.4.41i. gravel-sand mixtures,little or no fines
Silt&Clay("Fines") <0.074 mm(smaller than a No.200 sieve)
lb GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL
• • gravel-sand mixtures,little or no fines
1
GM SILTY GRAVEL COHESIVE SILTS&CLAYS COARSE FINE,2E
gravel-sand-silt mixtures UNCONFINED RELATIVE GRAINED GRAINED
5
(%) (/o o )
A,t,
GC CLAYEY GRAVEL COMPRESSIVE SPT CONSISTENCY AMOUNT 7
gravel-sand-clay mixtures STRENGTH,Qp4 (BPF) (COHESIVE)
Trace <5 <5
... SW WELL-GRADED SAND <0.25 <3 Very Soft Dual Symbol 10 10
gravelly sand,little or no fines 0.25-<0.50 3-4 Soft (ex:SW-SM)
• SP POORLY-GRADED SAND 0.50 <1.00 5 8 Medium Stiff
gravelly sand,little or no fines With 15 20 15 25
1.00-<2.00 9-15 Stiff Adjective 25-<50 30-<50
I•I:I I:I:I:I SM SILTY SAND 2.00 <4.00 16 30 Very Stiff (ex:"Silty')
sand-silt mixtures
4.00-8.00 31 -50 Hard
c,e/7,;:yie:7. SC CLAYEY SAND
sand-clay mixtures >8.00 >50 Very Hard WATER LEVELS6
ML SILT V WL Water Level(WS)(WD)
non-plastic to medium plasticity GRAVELS,SANDS&NON-COHESIVE SILTS -
(WS)While Sampling
I I I I r MH ELASTIChighplasticity SILT SPTS DENSITY (WD)While Drilling
I
<5 Very Loose ® SHW Seasonal High WT
�/� toCL LEANCLAY
low to medium plasticity 5 10 Loose • ACR After Casing Removal
CH FAT CLAY 11 -30 Medium Dense V SWT Stabilized Water Table
, � high plasticity 31 -50 Dense DCI Dry Cave-In
>50 VeryDense WCI Wet Cave-In
/ OL ORGANIC SILT or CLAY _
non-plastic to low plasticity
- OH ORGANIC SILT or CLAY
- - - high plasticity
—- PT PEAT
f highly organic soils
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.
7Minor deviation from ASTM D 2488-09.
Reference Notes for Boring Logs(FINAL 08-23-2016).doc ©2016 ECS Corporate Services,LLC. All Rights Reserved

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-1 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
UJ z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
A
O as} 5 > BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC / W O io
W W W W F
a c 1 1 Ov SURFACE ELEVATION 679 W > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
o < < < r W m BLOWS/FT
0 - -\Topsoil Depth[3.01 / :,,,"s,x(
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED ""',4'
S-1 SS 12 9 AS SANDY SILT,tan , .- 50/6 100+ ►e
°J. t,
— v '-
— S-2 SS 12 12 L'C 1- 675 50/6 100+
i.
5— f e„
`••a
'S-3 SS 3 2L f j 50/3 100+ ►'D
— .,,, I.--.
`� 1. 33
— S-4 SS 14 7 670 27 100+ ►�
z ."t,.' 50/2
10-
- A• •.y
,VIY.
4`
\S-5 SS 3 2 -', 50/3 100+ hd
• 665
15— (.
— -,4,
AS-6 SS 1 0 ;y- 660 50/1 100+ ►:�
_
20—
-
END OF BORING @ 20.0' -
— —655
25—
— —650
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 14.6'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-2 1 OF 1 1
t 11
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% — — — REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION�100V Z
/ 1 W O io
W W W W F
a a a p w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 677 i-
o co co co it w coBLOWS/FT
0 To•soil De•th 4.0" Ii(ML FILL)SANDY SILT,contains slight roots, I r 7
S-1 SS 18 17 tan,moist,very stiff ` ,i i's 675 11 2;4 ►'�
py Ill 13
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT,tan,moist, hard s 46
9
S-2 SS 18 12 16 ►:�
5 30
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED
S-3 SS 11 11 AS SANDY SILT,tan 50 5 100+II ►:�
670
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED
S-4 SS 9 9 AS SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 43
503 100+ ee
10
.p
665
i' • .
•
S-5 SS 3 0 50/3 100+ hd
15 s.
' ram
660
S-6 SS 1 1 L 50/1 100+ ►:�
r
20 END OF BORING @ 20.0'
655
25
650
30
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 15.0'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-3 1 OF 1 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 Z X • A
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W F
• a a a p w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 690 1-
w• CO CO COi it w m BLOWS/FT
o — -Topsoil Depth[4.0"] / \� `�_ 690
(MH FILL) ELASTIC SILT,orangish red, moist, `,
S-1 SS 18 16 firm ' _4 3 8o-P ►:�
'� 5
(ML RESIDUAL)SILT,tannish pink,moist,stiff -
_ 4
S-2 SS 18 15 6 14 ►D •
5 S-2, - 18 - —685 8 26.9
(ML) SILT,tannish pink to orangish tan,moist,
5
S-3 SS 18 15 very stiff - 7 16 ►D
9
_ 4
_ S-4 SS 18 16 _ 8 17 ►D
10 —680 9
(ML)SILT,tannish orange to grayish tan, moist,
— hard —
_ 3
_ S-5 SS 18 15 _ 12 36 ►:�
15 —675 24
_ 11
S-6 SS 18 17 17 44
27
20' 670
END OF BORING @ 20.0' -
25— —665
30— —660
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 15.6'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-4 1 OF 1 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 > BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\ 1 Z X • A
�y Z F ❑ OC / W O io
W W W W F
1- a a a p w * ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 673 1-
o CO CO COit w COBLOWS/FT
0 — -\Topsoil Depth[3.01 / \x/n.x.—
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT,tan,moist, hard 7
S-1 SS 18 7 19 48 ►:�
29
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED :q.; 670
30
— S-2 SS 11 5 AS SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,grayish 50/5 100+ ►e
tan {�
S-3 SS 11 5 I.rt 5/5 100+ ►:�
— 'c4 ; -665
— S-4 SS 10 8 50/4 100+ �.�
10— —
• -4—
— "�
— 'e' 660
c.1,
— S-5 SS 7 2 27 100+ ►D
50/1
15— ,4 .,—
r• .
-' L
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED
— AS SANDY SILT,tan L 655
\S-6 SS 3 1 50/3 100+
5
20 END OF BORING @ 20.0'
— 650
25—
— —645
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 15.3'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-5 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% — — — REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z S) E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W cc F
I _1a 1- 1 1 Ov SURFACE ELEVATION 702 w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
o CO CO COit d coBLOWS/FT
o — -\Topsoil Depth[3.0"] / b ,—
(ML FILL)SANDY SILT,brown to red, moist, 3
_ S-1 SS 18 13 firm �� 3 7 �� 18.4� 27 XC — ——�44
S 1 18 a '-�i—700 4
4 4-
F_
-
S2 SS 18 14 32 7 ►:�
5
(MH FILL) ELASTIC SILT, red, moist, very stiff ' 3
— S-3 SS 18 17 t), 695 t8 1• ►D
a9
9\
(MH RESIDUAL) ELASTIC SILT,red to —
orangish red, moist,very stiff 6
—- S-4 SS 18 16 — 8 1• ►D
10 — 11
— (ML)SANDY SILT,tannish orange, moist,hard —690
— to very stiff —
_ 8
_ S-5 SS 18 18 _ 12 34 ►:�
15' 22
— — 685
_ 12
S-6 SS 18 17 13 3$ ►:,
17
20' END OF BORING @ 20.0' —
— —680
25— —
— —675
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 15.3'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-6 1 OF 1 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 Z X • A
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W F
a a a p w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 687 1-
w CO CO COi it w m BLOWS/FT
o -\Topsoil Depth[3.0"] / mw..,
(MH FILL) ELASTIC SILT,red, moist, stiff e=rie 4
_ S-1 SS 18 16 685 6 14
sy 8
—
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT,tannish orange 1 —
— to pinkish tan, moist,stiff 4
S-2 SS 18 16 6 15 ►D
5' — 9
- 4
— S-3 SS 18 14 —680 6 15 ►D
9
_ 4
_ S-4 SS 18 14 _ 6 14 ►D
10 — 8
— —675 1
_ 4
_ S-5 SS 18 16 _ 5 12 ►:�
15
— 670
_ _ 3
S-6 SS 18 17 4 11 ►:�
20' END OF BORING @ 20.0' -
— —665
25— —
— —660
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 15.2'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-7 1 OF 1 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W F
a a a p w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a in-
g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 695 1-
w CO CO COi it w m BLOWS/FT
o -Topsoil Depth[4.0"] / \�C,_ 695
(MH FILL) ELASTIC SILT,red, moist, firm `'4)c
2
_ S-1 SS 18 16 e* -i! 2 5 ►:�
Ay -yl' 3
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT,reddish tan to -
— orangish red,moist,very stiff to hard 4
S-2 SS 18 17 5 17 ►D
5' —690 12
- 7 38
_ S-3 SS 18 14 14 ►:.
24
(ML)SANDY SILT,pinkish tan,moist,very hard
_ 9
_ S-4 SS 18 14 _ 28 69 0
10 —685 41
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED • .' `
— AS SANDY SILT,pinkish tan I.—
— S-5 SS 9 9 \ `-.— 50 3 100+ 91
15— -7 , 680
,
—
_ ,'—
— ;� `.�
— ^�
— S-6 SS 10 10 _ 50 4 100+ �A
:,,
_
20 675
END OF BORING @ 20.0'
25— —670
30— —665
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/02/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 12.6'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/02/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-8 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z S) E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W F
i o-
a 1- 1 1 Ov SURFACE ELEVATION 665 W > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
w CO CO COi it w m BLOWS/FT
0 - -Topsoil Depth[4.01 / \x/A\x, 665
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT,orange to tan, — 6
S-1 SS 18 12 moist,very stiff _ 7 Ci 23.2
S-1 18 13 2'q
—
(MH)ELASTIC SILT,grayish tan,moist, hard 50
_ _ 6
S-2 SS 18 11 15 �d
5 —660 35
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED '''-'1
28
— S-3 SS 12 10 AS SANDY SILT,grayish tan 3s ,�r 5 6 100+ �e
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED s
S 4 SS 5 2 AS SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,grayish °6" •'—
50/5 100+ 0
�_
10- tan —655
—
- •
— �-
- h a
R
S 5 SS 3 2 ..,,2 50/3 100+ �D
YVI i;E�
15—
END OF BORING @ 15.0' 650
20— —645
25— —640
30— —635
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 10.0'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-9 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
UJ z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\ z— X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> / 1 W O io
w w w W F
I _1a 1- 1 1 Ov SURFACE ELEVATION 673 W > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
o CO w m BLOWS/FT
0 -\Topsoil Depth[3.01 / N�
(CL RESIDUAL)SANDY CLAY,orangish gray, 2
' S-1 SS 18 16 moist,very stiff 3 2• ►��
26
— "'-670
(ML)SANDY SILT,tannish brown,moist,very —
hard _ 13
- S-2 SS 18 17 27 ►:�
5' _ 38
' — 13
S-3 SS 18 17 17 45 ►:�
28
— —665
_ 13
_ S-4 SS 18 16 _ 24 57 ►:�
10' — 33
— —660
_ 22
S-5 SS 18 17 _ 27 57 ►.
30
15' END OF BORING @ 15.0' —
— —655
20— —
— —650
25—
— —645
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• wL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 11.2'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-10 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z S) E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\/ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC> W O io
W W W W F
a 1- 1 1 Ov SURFACE ELEVATION 671 W > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
o CO CO COit d coBLOWS/FT
o — -Topsoil Depth[4.0"] / `�'c\-(/
(MH RESIDUAL) ELASTIC SILT,orangish tan, 670 3
S-1 SS 18 16 moist,stiff 4 1 30.7-0 &57
S-1_ 18_ 6 33
(ML)SANDY SILT,orange and white,moist,
- S-2 SS 18 16 very stiff 4
6 15
5 — 9
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED —665 24 100+
S-3 SS 12 5 AS SANDY SILT,tan - 50/6
(ML)SANDY SILT,light brown,moist,very stiff
_ 15
S-4 SS 18 12 15
13 2R
10 END OF BORING @ 10.0'
- —660
15-
- —655
20— -
- —650
25— -
- —645
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 6.2'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-11 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z S) E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
A
O as} 5 > BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100x\ 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC / W O io
W W W W I _1 _1 F
g g g > SURFACE ELEVATION 690 w >
® STANDARD PENETRATION
a
1-
o CO CO COit w m BLOWS/FT
o — -\Topsoil Depth[3.01 / ',.6,\',.'_ 690
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT, reddish orange - 2
— S-1 SS 18 14 to yellowish orange, moist,stiff to very stiff — 3
6 9
6 25
S-2 SS 18 15 11
5- —685 14
(ML)SANDY SILT,orange,moist, hard 12
_ S-3 SS 18 15 13 3
19
_ 7
S-4 SS 18 16 11
20 i1
10 END OF BORING @ 10.0' 680
15— —675
20— —670
25— —665
30— —660
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL GNE WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/05/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 6.2'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/05/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

CLIENT Job#: BORING# SHEET Il
Il
H&H Homes 08:12249 B-12 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision - GEO �TM
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
UJ z C E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
O as} 5 > BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>1��J 1 z X •
�y Z F ❑ OC / W O io
W W W W F
I in-
a a a p w * ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a g g g U SURFACE ELEVATION 698 1-
w CO CO COi it w m BLOWS/FT
0 — -Topsoil Depth[4.01 / \,<7,c\x/
(ML RESIDUAL)SANDY SILT, reddish orange, - 7
_ S-1 SS 18 12 moist, hard — 16 21.4♦ 37
S-1 18 21
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED 1. -695
1— S-2 SS 10 8 AS SANDY SILT,reddish tan to orangish tan 50/4
' 100+
5— —
S-3 SS 8 5 t= •P 50/2 100+
- •‘
— r; 690
,,S-4 SS 4 4 y" 50/4
)-i'— 100+
_ .-4 zj<—
10 END OF BORING @ 10.0'
— —685
15— —
— —680
20— —
— —675
25—
— —670
30— —
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL GNE WS❑ WDEl BORING STARTED 06/02/17 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 7.3'
31 WL(SHW) t WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/02/17 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG Diedrich D50 FOREMAN Brian Boyce DRILLING METHOD 2.25 HSA

Important Information About Your
Geotechnical Engineering Report -.
Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes
The following information is provided to help you manage your risks.
Geotechnical Services Are Performed for • elevation,configuration,location,orientation,or weight of the
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects proposed structure,
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of • composition of the design team,or
their clients.A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer • project ownership.
may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil
engineer.Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique,each geo- As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
technical engineering report is unique,prepared solely for the client.No one changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their impact.
except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it.And no one-not that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they
even you-should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one were not informed.
originally contemplated.
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
Read the Full Report A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering
engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. report whose adequacy may have been affected by:the passage of time; by
Do not read selected elements only. man-made events,such as construction on or adjacent to the site;or by natu-
ral events,such as floods,earthquakes,or groundwater fluctuations.Always
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it
A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors is still reliable.A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent
Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique,project-specific factors major problems.
when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include:the client's
goals,objectives,and risk management preferences;the general nature of the Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure Opinions
on the site;and other planned or existing site improvements,such as access Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where
roads,parking lots,and underground utilities.Unless the geotechnical engi- subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken.Geotechnical engineers
neer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise,do not rely on review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment
a geotechnical engineering report that was: to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site.Actual
• not prepared for you, subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly from those indi-
• not prepared for your project, cated in your report.Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your
• not prepared for the specific site explored,or report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of
• completed before important project changes were made. managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final
engineering report include those that affect: Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your re-
•the function of the proposed structure,as when it's changed from a port.Those recommendations are not final,because geotechnical engineers
parking garage to an office building,or from alight industrial plant develop them principally from judgment and opinion.Geotechnical engineers
to a refrigerated warehouse, can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
J

subsurface conditions revealed during construction.The geotechnical engi- to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such
neer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for outcomes,geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory
the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these
observation. provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin
and end,to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to these provisions closely.Ask questions.Your geotechnical engineer should
Misinterpretation respond fully and frankly.
Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineer-
ing reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron-
after submitting the report.Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical
pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications.Contractors study.For that reason,a geotechnical engineering report does not usually re-
can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by late any geoenvironmental findings,conclusions,or recommendations;e.g.,
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated
conferences,and by providing construction observation. contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous
project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvironmental in-
Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs formation,ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance.
Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else.
their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Diverse strategies can be applied during building design,construction, op-
Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize eration,and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from grow-
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. ing on indoor surfaces.To be effective,all such strategies should be devised
for the express purpose of mold prevention,integrated into a comprehensive
Give Contractors a Complete Report and plan,and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold prevention
Guidance consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make the development of severe mold infestations, a number of mold prevention
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, wa-
they provide for bid preparation.To help prevent costly problems,give con- ter infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report,but preface it with a geotechnical engineering study whose findings are conveyed in-this report,
clearly written letter of transmittal.In that letter,advise contractors that the the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's consultant; none of the services performed in connection with
accuracy is limited;encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer the geotechnical engineer's study were designed or conducted
who prepared the report(a modest fee may be required)and/or to conduct ad- for the purpose of mold prevention.Proper implementation of
ditional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself
A prebid conference can also be valuable.Be sure contractors have sufficient be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the struc-
time to perform additional study.Only then might you be in a position to give ture involved.
contractors the best information available to you,while requiring them to at
least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unantici- Rely on Your ASFE-Member Geotechnical
pated conditions. Engineer For Additional Assistance
Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical engi-
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely neers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine
Some clients,design professionals,and contractors do not recognize that benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with your
geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information.
This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led
ASFE
The Best People on Earth
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106,Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone:'301/565-2733 Facsimile:301/589-2017
e-mail: [e-mail] www.asfe.org
Copyright 2004 by ASFE,Inc.Duplication,reproduction,or copying of this document,in whole or in part,by any means whatsoever,is strictly prohibited,except with ASFE's specific
written permission.Excerpting,quoting,or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE,and only for purposes
of scholarly research or book review.Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report.Any other firm,
individual,or other entity that so uses this document without being anASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional(fraudulent)misrepresentation.
I IGER06045.OM

APPENDIX C— Laboratory Testing
Laboratory Test Results Summary

Laboratory Testing Summary
Page 1 of 1
Atterberg Limits3 Percent Moisture-Density(Corr.)5
Sample Sample Depth MC1 Soil Passing Maximum Optimum CBR Other
Source Number (feet) (%) Type2 LL PL PI No. 200 Density Moisture Value6
Sieve4 (pcf) (%)
B-1
B-2
B-3
S-2 3.50-5.00 26.9
B-4
B-5
S-1 1.00 - 2.50 18.4 ML 44 27 17
B-6
B-7
B-8
S-1 1.00- 2.50 23.2
B-9
B-10
S-1 1.00- 2.50 30.7 MH 57 33 24
B-11
B-12
S-1 1.00- 2.50 21.4
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. 08:12249
Project Name: Waxhaw-Indian Trail Subdivision-GEO ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
1812 Center Park Drive,Suite D
PM: Josh Bradshaw Charlotte,NC 28217
Phone:[phone]
PE: Lee J.McGuinness 0 Fax:[phone]
Printed On: Friday,June 23,2017