88-071
.
.
.
RESOLUTICN ID. 71-88
A RESOLUTICN APPROVIOO 'lHE FINAL PIAT OF fMYFLOVER RQL\D AIDITICN
IN 'lHE CI'lY OF Sf"I:JRE.WXD
WHEREAS, the final plat of Mayflower Road Addi tion has been
sulxni tted in the manner required for the platting of land under the
Shorewood City Code and under Chapter 462 of Minnesota Statutes, and all
proceedings have been duly had thereunder; and
~~~, said plat is consistent with the Shorewood Comprehensive
Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of
Minnesota and the City Code of the City of Shorewood.
1m, 'lHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Ci ty Council of the City
of Shorewood:
1. That the plat of Mayflower Road Addition is hereby approved.
2. That the approval is specifically conditioned upon the filing
of the Soil Test Report dated 27 June , 1988, prepared by Allied Soil
Testing attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to
execute the Certificate of Approval for the plat on behalf of the City
Counci 1.
4. That this Resolution and attached exhibit, together with the
final plat, shall be filed and recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder
or Registrar of Titles within 30 days of the date of certification of this
Resolution.
BE IT FURlHER RESOLVED, that the execution of the Certificate
upon said plat by the Mayor and City Clerk shall be conclusive, showing a
proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials and shall
eIltitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further
formality, all in compliance with Minnesota Statutes and the Shorewood
Ci ty Code.
AOOPrED BY 'lHE CI'lY axJNCIL of the Ci ty of Shorewood this 11th day of
July, 1988.
Robert Rascop, Mayor
A1TEST:
Sandra L. Kennelly, City Clerk
Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: Rascop, Brancel, Haugen, Stover
.
:'..,
.
Geotechnical Services
ALUED TEST DRlLUNG COMPANY
~
Commercial, Residential
Municipal, DHUD
4000 Beau D'Rue Drive, Eagan, MN 55122
(612) 452-6913
SUBSURFACE SOIL INVESTIGATION
FOR
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Lot 1 of P~oposed Subdivision of Lot 180
Audito~'s Subdivision No 135, Hennepin County
Sho~ewood, Minnesota
27 June 1988
P~oject 88098
INTRODUCTION
This ~epo~t summa~izes the findings of a subsu~face
soil investigation completed by Allied Test D~illing Com-
pany in the City of Sho~ewood, Minnesota. Location of the
wo~k is as pe~ the desc~iption noted in the above title
block. Said wo~k was pe~fo~med fo~ Dale Pete~son, he~eaf-
te~ ~efe~~ed to as the "Owne~".
Th~ee soil bo~ings we~e pe~fo~med on the lot in ques-
tion to establish soil p~ofiles, wate~ table elevations,
inplace soil compaction o~ fi~mness and othe~ info~mation.
F~om this data, ~ecommendations a~e developed fo~ site
co~~ection and foundation and slab design.
The gene~al vicinity is cha~acte~ized by sha~ply
~olling terrain, having steep wooded hillsides and low-
lands and lakes. The actual a~ea tested is a 1.5 ac~ lot
located as noted above, no~theast of and adjacent to Chas-
ka and Mayflower Roads. It contains some land of mode~ate
elevation, but mostly land of lower elevation. The east
and northeast vicinities may actually be wetland.
.
88098
-2-
Vegetation over most of the site consists of weeds
and taller g~asses. On the west and south borders, a
moderate growth of trees and brush is present.
It is assumed that the p~oposed construction is a
single family ~esidence. Design configuration, proposed
elevations, etc, are unknown at the present time. However,
from a p~elmina~y sketch of p~oposed g~ading plans, fin-
ished elevation of the p~oposed building pad (= garage
slab elevation) will be 968 o~ highe~ (see below for
elevation ~efe~ence). This will be a fill of about 10'
over most of the existing te~rain.
BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS
~.
The boring locations were chosen by Allied Test
D~illing Company based upon the proposed building pad area
(as indicated by the Owne~'s p~elimina~y sketch), accessi-
bility, patte~n of soil bo~ing ~esults as the investiga-
tion p~oceeded, and other facto~s. Insofa~ as possible,
bo~ings we~e placed in a wide patte~n th~oughout the pro-
posed building pad a~ea in an attempt to offer the Owner
maXlmum latitude in choosing final building location and
to best assess soil conditions ~epresentative of the site.
Refer to the drawing attached to this report, base
map for which lS an enlarged print of the Owner's prelim-
inary plans, for a sketch of boring locations. In addi-
.
tion, borings were marked in the field with lath.
Ground surface elevation at each of the the borings
was determined and referenced to the top of a wastewater
.
88098
-3-
collection system manhole located on the cente~line of
Chaska Road, no~thwest of the lot in question. This tempo-
~a~y bench ma~k has a ~efe~ence elevation, appa~ently mean
sea level datum, of 963.93. These elevations a~e given on
bo~ing logs and on the sketch.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The bo~ings we~e accomplished using the Split-Ba~rel
Sample~ (SBS) method of investigation. Refe~ to the at-
tachment (colo~-coded g~een) fo~ a desc~iption of this
p~ocedure.
Also contained on that attachment a~e methods of soil
..
classification and g~oundwate~ measu~ement. Note that
soils a~e classified acco~ding to the Mn/ DOT t~i-axial
cha~t, which p~ovides soil desc~iption in g~eate~ detail,
as well as the Unified soil classification (lette~s in
pa~entheses) which is mo~e widely used fo~ building
pu~poses.
The uppe~ po~tion of some of the bo~ings and a con-
fi~mation Bo~ing 3A (not fo~mally documented) we~e accomp-
lished using the Powe~ Flight Auge~ (FA) method of inves-
tigation. Refe~ to the attachment (colo~-coded blue) fo~ a
desc~iption of this p~ocedu~e.
SOIL BORING RESULTS
Attached a~e logs fo~ each of the SBS penet~ation
.
bo~ings togethe~ with a key explaining te~ms and ent~ies.
The depth of individual laye~s of soil may va~y somewhat
88098
-4-
.
from those indicated on the logs due to the inexact nature
of auger sampling, unsampled intervals between split-bar-
rel sampler 'tests and, most importantly, the occurence of
transition between soil layers.
The borings indicate an extremely thick deposit of
organic soil in the area tested. At first, the material ~s
normal topsoil, black and highly organic, rather soft and
loose. With depth, the material becomes a true peat, dens-
er but still soft, and saturated. This layer terminates at
depths below surface ranging from 14.5'+ in the vicinity
of Bor-ing
"7
"~ ,
nearer
the roadway,
to 20'~ in the vicinity
of E ~ing 2, nearer the lowland. The soil profile in Bor-
.
ing
is somewhat compounded by at least one band of min-
eral soil, apparently inorganic, at an intermediate depth.
This could be the result of slopewash action in the geo-
logic past, from higher lands to the west.
Basal soil on the site is generally a gray clay. This
material is generally very plastic, sometimes gritty, wet
at first, then moist. Most of it is rather firm, but the
upper few feet of the stratum may be somewhat soft. Boring
2 indicates an intermediate layer of lower plasticity clay
loam, very gritty, very soft and unstable. Gravel contents
are rather low to negligible.
Penetration "N" values are very low ~n the organlc
soil layers and in the first test of mineral soil in Bor-
.
ing 2. With depth into basal soil, values become moderate
to high. Generally, a few feet into mineral soil results
.
88098
-5-
in bearing values that are adequate to support the weight
of anticipated fill and building construction.
Groundwater is not directly evidenced in the borings
as evidenced by a standing water level in the bore holes
correlated with recovered soil samples of high moisture
contents. Depth is 3 to 4.5' below existing surface, ele-
vation 955 to 956. However, this groundwater level can be
expected to fluctuate as a direct function of water level,
if any, in the nearby lowland. The Owner should check with
local agencies (City zoning dept, Mn/DNR, etc) to deter-
mine if any estimate has been made of the 100-year maximum
water level in this lowland. Maximum groundwater in the
.
building pad area can be expected to reflect this level.
In any event, it is again emphasized, as noted in the
attachment, that groundwater may vary as a function of
many other variables, especially development patterns,
undeterminable within the time frame, scope and budget
allowed for in this investigation.
Refer to each individual boring log for a more com-
plete description of soils encountered.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are
based upon interpreted results of the boring logs. Because
the borings represent a small portion of the site in rela-
.
tion to the proposed area of work, ongoing review of con-
struction should be carried out. If actual excavations re-
veal subsurface soils of a different nature than those ob-
.
88098
-6-
served 1n the borings, the Soils Engineer should be con-
tacted for possibly revised recommendations (see #6 below
and the folI'owing "Limitations of Investigation">.
1. General Site Suitability:
Based upon interpreted results of the borings, and
other data, it appears that the proposed building pad
area has, in its present uncorrected condition, consid-
erable limitations regarding suitability for construc-
tion. These consist of the presence of a very thick
deposit of organic soil (unsuitable as support material
in any event>, high groundwater with the potential for
yet higher levels during snowmelt or prolonged periods
..tt
of above normal precipitation, and the need to adapt
the site considerably to conform to the proposed con-
struction. However, these limitations are correctable
through adequate site engineering and foundation de-
sign.
2. Initial Site Preparation:
As a first and general recommendation, the proposed,
building pad area should be cleared of all vegetation,
organic, loose or otherwise unsuitable soil, debris and
boulders (3"+) prior to structure or fill placement.
Based upon boring evidence, this will involve excava-
tions as follows:
Boring 1 16'
,- Boring 2 23'
Boring 3 15'
Note that, in at least one instance, the bottom of the'
.
88098
-7-
o~ganic soil level is not necessa~ily the bottom of ~e-
qui~ed excavation. The base should be examined to de-
te~mine that all o~ganics and loose o~ soft mine~al
soil have been ~emoved (See # 6 below).
Exact definition of excavation ~equi~ements is dif-
ficult to obtain as va~iations may occu~ at othe~ loca-
tions in the building pad not in the vicinity of the
bo~ing.
The base of excavation should be kept from being
flooded by seeping groundwate~ th~ough at least a sump-
ing system.
Fill, should be placed to desi~ed levels (bottoms of
..
foundations and slabs), compacted, and tested as pe~
the "Fill Placement" (#5) section below, paying special
attention to the "1:1+1" ove~sizing ~equi~ement.
It is anticipated that the base of excavation, while
being of adequate density to suppo~t weight of fill and
st~uctu~e, and capable of ~esisting failu~e due to ap-
p~eciable consolidation o~ shea~ failu~e, may be satu-
~ated and unstable due to the depth below wate~ table.
The contractor chosen fo~ the wo~k should be expe~i-
enced in this type of wo~k having adequate equipment
available fo~ the task. He should be p~epa~ed to use
additional const~uction techniques, such as dewatering,
additional excavation, applying stabilizing agg~egate,
.
laying geotextile fabric, etc, as necessa~y, to achieve
a stable base upon which to place compacted fill.
.
88098
-8-
Excavated o~ganic material should be disposed of
offsite, or in landscaping areas, where the bearing
of weight will not be required. There does not appear
to be any opportunity to obtain material onsite for
re-use as fill.
Refer to subsequent sections for more detailed and
specific recommendations for site preparation recommen-
dations of each structural component.
3. Foundations:
For purposes of proposed construction, foundations
and fill to support foundations must rest upon and over
mineral (non-organic) soils of adequate bearing value.
.
An allowable foundation bearing pressure of 1800 pounds
per square foot (psf) is desirable. If this cannot be
achieved, alternatives include extending footings deep-
e~, using lower pressure footings, or over-excavating
and placing compacted (engineered) fill.
This analysis of soil for foundation purposes is
based upon the garage slab being set as noted earlier,
and assumes that the site is prepared and filled as
noted above. If such occurs, footings should be de-
signed allowing no more than 1800 pounds pe~ square
foot foundation bea~ing capacity (normal spread foot-
ings) when resting upon adequately compacted fill which
in tu~n rests upon mineral soil.
.. There should be no excavation outside of the build-
ing pad area which intrudes into the "1:1+1" zone below
.
88098
-9-
footings.
The alternative of us~ng footings of any bearing
value over existing soil, as-is, (ie, organic soil not
removed) is not recommended. The alternative of extend-
ing footings deeper does not appear to be feasible. The
structure could be placed upon piling, but this will
require additional deeper soil testing together with
structural design of slabs and grade beam foundations.
4. Slabs:
Slabs should similarly rest upon and over mineral
soil of adequate (500 psf) bearing strength. The slab
should be located at least 4 feet above maximum antici-
.
pated groundwater level (not a building code require-
ment, but advisable; mandatory if the residence is to
be DHUD-approved for FHA or VA financing>.
From evidence of true groundwater at the time of
testing, meeting the clearance advisory is easy at the
present time. With higher grounddwater levels in the
future, as determined by the 100-year maximum surface
water level in the nearby lowland, this advisory mayor
may not be met. If no DHUD approval is sought, it is up
to the volition of the Owner as to how much to "crowd"
this advisory.
If the building pad area ~s corrected as noted in #2
above, then the base soil and fill thereon is capable
..
of adequate slab support.
Immediately beneath the slabs, clean granular
.
88098
-10-
(free-draining> material with drain tiles should be
placed and thoroughly compacted.
5. Fill Placement:
Fill material, as required, should be granular, free
of debris, boulders and organic material. Non-granular
material may be used, but its workability is somewhat
limited, especially in cold or wet weather. Fill should
be placed and compacted in a manner that will allow
complete compaction of the total fill layer to 951. of
standard maximum- density according to ASTM D 698 in
the building pad area. Required compaction should be
increased to 981. for fill levels 5 feet and deeper be-
:.
low grade.
A soil compaction test should be conducted for every
two feet of fill in appropriate segments of area.
Top of fill should extend at least one foot horizon-
tally beyond the structure pad or footing limits. The
fill surface may then extend downward and outward on a
1:1 slope to competent soil. Also, no unremedied ex-
cavations should be carried out within the area delin-
eated by the "1:1+1" rule.
The fill should not be placed upon frozen surfaces,
and no part of the fill should be allowed to freeze
prior to compaction.
6. Inspections:
.. The Owner should retain a qualified geotechnical en-
gineering firm to inspect excavations prior to place-
.
88098
-11-
ment of any construction material, conduct inplace den-
sity tests, possibly recommend a testing schedule for
other material, etc. This firm should bear full respon-
sibility for being familiar with and interpreting the
contents of this report.
7. Final Site Topoqraphy:
The final soil surface should be graded to provide
adequate drainage from structures and hard surfaces so
that as little water as possible infiltrates into soils
adjacent to the structure. The areas adjacent to foot-
ing walls should be adequately compacted, not loosely
placed, to avoid this zone acting as a "sump" and cre-
.
ating nuisance water conditions below the slab.
Attention is drawn to the nature of subsurface soils
at the site. These clay soils are subject to at least
small amounts of volume change with changes in moisture
content. It is possible that, if extreme dewatering oc-
curs on the site, the soils could swell with an in-
crease in moisture content, and shrink with a decrease.
Unless controlled, this condition could possibly lead
to differential settlement of the structure.
Some of the precautions that should be taken include
special care concerning finished site drainage (see #3
below) so that water does not pond upon the site. After
excavations have been made, additional standing water
..
should not be allowed to pond in the excavations or on
the site. In addition, the excavations should not be
.
88098
-12-
allowed to overly dry out.
LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION
The Soils Engineer has prepared this report in ac-
cordance with generally accepted soil and foundation en-
gineering practices. Because the borings represent only a
small portion of the total site and for other reasons, AI-
lied Test Drilling Company does not warrant that the bor-
ings are necessarily representative of the entire site but
only of the boring locations at the time of investigation.
Because of the influence of various construction pro-
cedures on site suitability, methods presented in this re-
port may lead to a successful installation of the founda-
.
tion and slabs only if appropriate review of construction
is carried out by the Soils Engineer or his representa-
tive. Construction review should be considered an integral
part of the design.
The scope of this report covers only the suitability
of soil for foundation and slab support and does not war-
rant or certify the site as buildable regarding compliance
with any other requirements such as building codes, local
or state ordinances, federal rules and regulations, etc,
which mayor may not be applicable.
This report including all supporting information is
provided to the Owner and his clients only for their own
..
use for the designated purpose. No representations are
made to other parties or for other uses.
Allied Test Drilling Company has backfilled and com-
.
88098
-13-
pacted all boring holes as well as possible under then
existing conditions. However, some continuing settlement
may occur if construction does not take place in the near
future. The Owner should check boring holes (frequently at
first, then after each change of season) for signs of
settlement. Any settling that does occur should be back-
filled with additional material, preferably a free-flowing
granular material. This monitoring should continue for at
least one season until no additional settlement is evi-
denced.
Samples of soil from the borings will be retained in
the office of Allied Test Drilling Company for a period of
.
90 days from the date of testing. After 90 days, the sam-
pIes may be discarded unless a request is received to re-
tain them for a longer period.
ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or re-
port was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and
that I am a duly registered Professional Engineer under
the Laws of the State of Minnesota.
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
~~
L( 1--.'fr
..
Patrick J Hines, PE
Registration No 12086
Date
ALLIeD TEST ORILLING COMPANY
Attechment to Soils Report
.
METHOO OF INVESTIGATION
SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER PENETRATION
..
The split-barrel sampler penetration method of testing
inplace soil compaction is widely used by soils engineers.
In this method, soil borings a....e first drilled with a 6" hol-
low stem auger (HSA) to various increments of depths. At these
increments, soil is tested by use of this split-barrel sampler(sss)
driven into the soil by a free-falling weight. This testing is
performed in accordance with procedures outlined in ASTM 0 1586,
"Penetration "Eest and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils".
Ih this procedure, a.140pound hammer drops 30 inches in
free-fall '.onto an above-ground impact collar. This collar rests
atop a ~igid rod, the o~he"" end of which is connected to the
split-barrel sampler, located at the bottom of the increment
that has been d.....illed. The number of blows (drops of the ham-
mer) required to drive the sampler one foot, after being driven
6" for "set", is recorded as the "N" value. This value is used
as a relative meas.ure of. inplaoe oompaction of the soil and
also is used, together with soil classification and other data,
to determine allowable foundation pressure (a function of this
inplace compaction).
Soil profiles are established by retrieving samples from
the sampler afte.... each test and by observing material recovered
from the hollow stem auger. Samples are collected, sealed in
jars, and stored for future reference or testing, if necessary.
Testing by. this method is performed every 2~ feet for the
first 15 feet of depth and eve....y 5 feet thereafter. Testing may
be increased if si~e condition~ or loadings require.
:.
(over, please)
..
".
.
.ATUO 6ul+sa+ dO aWl+ a4+ ~od a~e 'Aue dl 'sTaAaT pa+eo
-lpur .uol+e61+saAul e4+ ~od paMoTTe awe~d aWl+ a4+ ul paU1W
-~a+ap aq +ou PTnoo ~a+eMpuno~6 Tenuue +sa4614 dO +uawa~nseaw
a+e~nooe ue 'a+ls a4+ +oadde ueo 4014M pue ueds aWl+ pue ea~e
a6~eT e ~aAO ~nooo 4014M saouanTdul Teo16oToa6 pue Teol60To~
-oa+aw snol~eA pue TloS dO a~n+eu a4+ dO asneoaq '~aAaMoH
.uol+e~n+es pue (TaAaT ~a+eM dO uOl+en+onTd 0+ anp s~ea~+s ul
uOl+e~oTTooS1P) 6U1T++oW ~od pa~oa4o a~aM saTdwes TloS 'U01+1P
~pe uI .6U1TTld~oeq 0+ ~ol~d ul-aAeo ~o ~a+eM 6ulPue+s ~od
pa~oa4~ ua4+ pue 'pa~a+unooua sTloS dO a~n+eu 6ulule~p-aa~d
a4+ uodn 6ulpuadap pOl~ad +e4+ 'aWl+ dO pOl~ad e ~od pue+s
0+ paMoTTe a~aM sal04 6ul~oq a~ow ~o auo '6ul+sa+ dO uOl6a~
a4+ ul ~a+eMpuno~6 dO aoue~nooo alqlssod 4s1Tqe+sa o~
~a+eMpuno~8
.+~oda~ 514+ 0+ pa4oe++e
51 sadA+ sseTo 1105 dO A~swwns V ...(a~npaoo~d Tenue~-TenSl^)
sTloS dO U01+dl~Osaau 'eev2 a ~~SV 4+1M aouep~oooe ul p04+a~
uOl+eold~sseT~ 110S paldlun a4+ 0+ 6UIP~oooe ~aaul6u3 SIlOS a4+
Aq paldl~aA pus Tauuos~ad PlaId Aq paldlsseyo a~aM sTloS
uOI+eoldlsssy~ lloS
ALLI~D TEST DRILLING COMPANY
At~achment to Soils Repo~t
M~THDD OF INV~STIGATION
.
AUG~R BORINGS
Allied Tast D~illing Company uses a numbe~ or va~ia-
tions of methods or investigation by auge~ bo~ings to de-
ta~mine soil p~ofile. Most commonly, the powe~ flight auge~
(FA) method is employed. Sometimes a hand operated auge~
(HA) is used. Rere~ to the main body or the ~eport and to
the bo~ing logs fo~ an indication or the method chosen.
Requi~ements fo~ these investigations a~e outlined in
ASTM 0 1452, "Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Bor-
ings". In the powe~ rlight auge~ p~ocedu~e, a 6" diamete~
solid stem helical rlight auge~ is advanced into the ground
by mechanical/hyd~eulic means end withd~awn at app~opriate
:\.
intervals. Natu~e or subsurrace soil is dete~mined ry ob-
se~ving end sempling distu~bed mete~ial round on the rlight
euge~~ Rep~esentetive semples e~e~etained, sealed, and
sto~ed fo~ rutu~e testing o~ reference,
ir necessary. After
,-
cleaning the auge~, it is inserted into the bore hole egain
end thep~ocess is ~epeated until the desi~ed testing depth
is accomplished o~ until refusal (rei lure to advance the
auge~ due to bedrock, detached.boulder, ha~dpan, ate,) oc-
curs. A log of each boring is kept hoting date, depth or
changes in st~ata, dasc~iptlon of soil In each major strat-
um, groundwater conditions, and othe~ data.
The hand operated auger p~ocedure~sthe same as
above, except that the 1" to 3" euger is advanced into the
.
g~ound by hand means. This type of boring is usually re-
.e~ved fo~ investigations to a shallow depth in en area
fairly inacceseible by ..chinery.
.. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 958.9
IN
FEET V DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATION
Gray Clay (CH)
22- w/tr fine gravel
v firm
23- gr i tty
moist
.
26
30
AlliED TEST DRilliNG COMPANY
PROJ Eel:
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180, Auditor's
88098 - Subdivision No 135, Hennepin County (Shorewood), Minn
LOG OF BORING NO:
1
.. (continued)
GEOLOGY
SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
N WB
# TYPE R W DEN L.L.
P.L.
20 Y
SBS
24
25
16 SBS
End of Boring - No Refusal
27
28-
29
Bore hole backfilled w/cuttinss
31- 6-26-88
-- .' 32-
33-
34
35-
36-
37-
38
39
40-
41-
42
43
44
45-
46
47-
Attachment to
Soil Investigation Report
.
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
CLAY
100%
..
o~
Plastic:
SANDY LOAM
SILT LOAM
slightly plastic:
Olo
e..:..
..
o
~
of..,
o.
g
8'
~
~
~
....
cf I'~
d'f'l
TEXTURAL CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS
from: Mn/DOT Grading S Base Manual
Figure B 5-692.603
Note: The term "Loam" refers to a particular
mixture of sand, silt, and less than 20%
clay. Adjectives describe the predominating
material(s) in a loam.
AASHTO Gradation specifications:
.
Gravel
2.0mm+
Sand
Silt
Clay
0.074 - 2.0 mm
0.005 - 0.074 mm
less than 0.005 mm
r ;,. 4-1
Z 0 0)
< .c
~ +J+J
( C
:E lJ.J 0) >-
't 0 > e..o
f
J.~ C2N M 0)
ClN rl 0''0
~ 0'1 ~ 0)
LLJ U) \0 11l.c
I Z ::>U) rl UJ
t. - I C ..-;
I ~ ~Z N 0) C
, ~ O:E trl ~
j - qo
, a: C :J
-1 ::>-
1 Q <(Z 11l4-1
.
4 lJ.J<( :'I UJ C
I- c.aCJ rl
i (I) 0<( \0 ..-; I1l
rl
UJ 0lJ.J 0.0.
... 0 I1l
Q qo e 0)
+J ~
UJ 0) ..-; 0)
- UJ UJ C
~ I1l ~
co 1110
r~."" 0)
+J
0
l_~ z
"
- -
~
1 ,--..
t i
I
j
1
,
/ ,
"
d.
--
~
-~--=-:-..--
""'
'----..,..
-
1. .- ,"l ..
, , -
. J ~
.~
-':'.'---,
-",
-~
:........~
-=.-....,...
. ",
'I
'.~
'.
,'-.J
'f\
\
\
/
j
I
I
I
I
/
I
I '.
I .
!
I
,
l" I
.~o
;:J
("J
'1
J
I
I
!
!
.i,..\
0)'0
rl I1l
o 0
.co::
C
I1l I1l
:E:.::.t.
UJ
1 4-1 ril
I. o.c
/." U
I: ~ .~ 61
, o<C ~
I :E: C
! 4-1 0 II
l ::c 0
. UN:>
Zo.lO)
WOlf'lrl
r:08riW
~
l.r'
~'~
fJ.-
."
C~ 'J
(jl~
:;! ~~~ 'V~"
~/i; -i ~ I;
'J . 0>
r:: :::.
.""( (])
~p
.
.
t
I
l'\
"-
-~--
,
1;
/
/
l.r)
,..., .
0,
~~
0> II
r::
.""( :::.
I..t (])
o r'::!
t:l:)/"'-I
i !
! I
i j
.
t
.
: l
,
,
....
,~
~~
I
I~
Ii
'; !
1-;
\ .
.... r
. ~ .
~ j
it:
JJ
IJ
fJ
H
n
n
\
;
I
j
I
J j
-'-, .
"'
~ '
"
i'
.
t !
1
)
!
I
I
n
. .;;
. .1
~I
JI. .JI '.
.'
~ '
i'. ,
q
~1
UtA "~{/~'
t ~ i . '0.;
I ~ 1.-3 '--J/
I
I
i
J
F
!
I
I
----=-.
f
j I
f
j
i
I
!
"7
...
\.
'1
1
..'~'
!. .~.
- ;g-
/ :11
! -:~. f
rj
-; f
" ~ I
"I j
_r_ 7, j
-...;/ {
4 .
.:: L /
"L~ ..:....,.
}ol I
,
('.C I
C't'I /
I
'1 r'\J I
"
)
t) !
~ I
] /
I
/ U)
z
0
H
! .8
o<C
U
I 0 0::
,-J 0
ex...
t?
Z
H
0::
0
a:l
--
-
---
-
" ;: I
!
I
I
i
,
I
I
I
.\
/
+1
....'{"
If'l
('f')
..
~ II
f5 =
U)rl
I
Z Z
I
..:
>-
o+J
coC
ri:J
o
+JU
0) 0
U ,-J s::
C ..-;
0) 4-1 a.
'0 00)
..-1 C
UJ C C 10
0) OO)+J
0:: '.-1::C 0
UJ UJ co
:>....-1 '0) 0'1
rl :>If'l C 0
..-1 '.-1M C co
E '0 ri'.-1 co
11l..o :E:
ex... :J 0 +J
U)Z ' U
0) '0 0)
ri '0 C 0 '1"""'\
0'\0)000
C UJ..-1 ~ ~
..-1 0 UJ 0) 0..
U) 0...-1 ~
0:> 0
'0 ~'.-1.c
0) 0.. '0 U)
UJ ..0
o 4-I:J
a. 0U)
o
~ ri UJ
0..
+J~
00
..J+-'
..-1
'0
:J
o<C
e
ALLIED TEST DRILLING
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
(ASTM D-2487)
MAJOR DIVISION SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONS
GW WELL-GRADED GRAVELS AND GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES
WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES
--
GRAVELS
~ GP POOR-GRADED GRAVELS AND GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES
:> LESS THAN WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES
~ 50%
H
U) PASSING
GM SILTY GRAVEL, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES
0 #4 SIEVE
0
N
~
GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES
t:J
U)2
...JH
Hu)
OU) SW WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR
U)~
0- SANDS NO FINES
Cl
~~ GREATER
20 POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR
HLf) THAN SP NO FINES
~ 50%
0::2
t:J~ PASSING
:I:
E-l #4 SIEVE SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES
0::u)
~U)
O~ SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES
U...J
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR,
SILTS ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH
AND SLIGHT PLASTICITY
t:J CLAYS INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY,
2
H LIQUID CL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,
U)
U) LIMIT LEAN CLAYS
~ LESS THAt'
u)o- ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW
...J 50% OL
H~ PLASTICITY
00
U)Lf) SILTS
Cl2 AND MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS
~~ CLAYS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS
2:I:~
H E-l:> LIQUID
~ ~
0:: 0:: H LIMIT CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS
t:J ~ U)
E-l GREATER
~ ~o THAN
2 ~o CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY,
HO::N 50% OH ORGANIC
~ t:J~ ORGANIC SILTS
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC
PT CONTENTS
.
DUAL SYMBOLS USED FOR BORDERLINE CASES
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJ ECT:
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180 Auditor's
88098 - ~ubdivision No 135. Hennepin County (Shorewood). Minn
LOG OF BORING NO:
EPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 958.9
IN
FEET 1/ DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATlON
Slack Peaty Silt Loam (OL8~t)
1- w/vegetation
moist, soft, light
1
GEOLOGY
N WB
SAMPLE
H TYPE R
LAB & OTHER TESTS
W DEN LL.
P.l.
SSS
:?
2- --.,-----
w/gray sand inclusions
3- v m 0 i s t
more dense, less peaty w/deptr
4-
2 1.Y2.E,
O~le" 956:!:)
5-
6-
7-
I 8-
9-
10-
11-
12
Gray-black
13- w/small shells
soft
14-
15-
16
3
3
3
4
8
Gray Clay (CH)
17- w/tr fine gravel
18 \rather firm, gritty
wet
19- firm
8
20-
10
'II
21-
(Continued on next ~heet)
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
DRILLING DATA
DATE
TIME
SAMPL.ED CASING .....VE.IN DRILl..ING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH MUD LEVEL LEVEL
Crew Chief:
CO
II
12:00
2:45
25'
13'7"
3'3"
Method 7~ II Holl Ow-S t em Auqer
(3~-4"ID) 6. Split-BClrn.'l
Sampler
Commenced: 6-23-88
Bonng Completed 6 - 24 - 88
1:::-::>1:::
12'
;:>' 10"
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180, Auditor's
PROJECT: 88098 - Subdivision No 13'3. Henneoin Countv (Shorewood). Minn
. LOG OF BORING NO: 2
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 959.4 SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
IN / GEOLOGY N WB Ll.
FEET DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION H TYPE R W DEN P.L.
Slack Organic to Peaty Silt
1- Loam (OL E; Pt) FA
wI veoetation moist
2- Srown Peat (Pt) _.
w/ some undecomposed vegetati n FA
3- soft, light
\v moist y
4- saturated
5-
Secomes Gray-grown, more de-
6- composed, sl firmer, with de th
7-
I 8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
I 13- 3~ SSS
I 14-
I
15-
2~
16-
17-
18 3
19-
20
Gray Clay Loam (CL) 3
21- w/ tr fine gravel saturated y
gritty 50ft, unstable r [i l"lll""rl nn It c: et1
cont !no h""
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
TIME SAMPLED CASING .....VE.IN DRILLING WATER
TE DE PTH DEPTH OEPTH MUD l.EVEL LEVEL Crew Chief- pH
26 June 22~' Method 7~" Hollow-Stem Auqer
(3~"ID) & Split-Barrel
'';'7 June + l7!.,; I Sampler
Commenced: 26 June 1988
Boring Completed ';'7 IllnFO 1q~~
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJ Eel:
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180, Auditor's
88098 - Subdivision No 135, Hennepin County (Shorewood). Minn
.
LOG OF BORING NO:
';'
(continued)
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 959 . 4
IN
FEET !/ DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Gray Clay (CH)
22- rather smooth, very plastic
v moist
GEOLOGY
SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
N WB
# TYPE R W DEN l.L.
P.L.
23-
7
SBS
24-
25-
8
26-
27
28-
6
29
30
7
31-
32-
33
9
34-
35-
9
36-
37-
38-
17
39
40
,I
20
41
End of Boring - No Refusal
42
43 Bore hole backfilled with
44 cuttings on 27 Juen 1988
45
46-
47-
1-
2
3-
4-
5-
6
7-
I 8-
J 9
1 10-
j .11-
12-
13-
I 14-
15-
18-
17
18
19-
20-
21-
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJEeT:
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180, Auditor's
88098 - Subdivision No 135, Hennepin County (Shorewood), Minn
GEOLOGY
Gray-black Organic Silt Loam
(OL)
v moist to saturated
Ok Gray Clay Loam (CL)
saturated, unstable
very soft
grown -Peat (Pt)
~ighly decomposed
wi small shells
soft, saturated
Gray Clay (CH)
gritty
wltr gravel
rather firm
wet
firm
moist
stiff, resistive
(Continued on next sheet)
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
. TIME &,AM PI..E C CASING i......VE.IN DRILLING WATER
DE PTH DEPTH DEPTH MUD LEVEL LEVEL
4 4: 12 27x 11'1" 6'0"
6-26 1: 4S 1?'4" 4'6"
LOG OF BORING NO: 3
DE1:rH SURFACE ELEVATION: 959.5
FEET 1/ DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATION
Black. Organic to Peaty Silt
Loam (OL 1; Pt)
wi undeco~posed vegetation
damp soft, loose
N WB
SAM PLE
N- TYPE R
LAB & OTHER TESTS
W DEN L.L.
P.L.
-FA
FA
y~~,
(el v 955f)
2 SBS
FA
S
SBS
S
7
1 1
6~0
,
DRILLING DATA
Crew Chief
Method
CO
7~" Hollow-Stem Auger
(3!a"ID) & Split-Barrel
Sampler
6-24-88
Boring Completed
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT:
Lot 1 of Proposed Subdivision of Lot 180 Auditor's
88098 ... ,--,0 0 0 .., . '
- """nn1 V1 c:" n., ,,,0 '1"':)5, Hitnnit~ln CSloIn'ty (S!;sreweeel), ~1inn
LOG OF BORING NO: 3 (continued)
.
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 95905
IN
FEET 1/ DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATION
GEOLOGY
SAMPLE LAB & OTHER TESTS
N WB
# TYPE R W DEN ~:t:
Gray Clay (CH)
22- wltr gravel
moist
23- stiFF, resistive
24-
25-
26-
27-
28-
29 End of Soring - No ReFusal
30
.
31
. Sore hole backFilled with
32- cuttings on 26 June 1988
33-
34-
35- Note: Portions of the upper
12~' of this boring were
36- veriFied by the 6" Power
Flight Auger method (Soring
37- 3A)
38
39
40-
41-
42
43
.
44-
45-
46
47-
16 Y SSS
30
40
I
ALLIED TEST DRilliNG COMPANY
PROJECT: Boring Log Key
LOG OF BORING NO:
DEPTH
IN
FEET
1
7
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
I
SURFACE ELEVATION:
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
..L
Visual Classi fication 0 f Soil
According to Unified Soil
Classification Symbol Shown
in Parentheses
GEOLOGY
N WB
i
Origin
o f So i 1
Number 0 f
Hammer Blows
to Drive
Split Spoon
One Foot
(dual values indicate
each 6" increment)
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
Indicates By
Y = Yes
N = No
if Soil is
Water Bearing
~ Water Level
TlME
5AMPLED CASING CAVE.IN
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH
WATER
LEVEL
SAMPLE
;; TYPE R
LAB & OTHER TESTS
W DEN L.L.
P.L.
t
lLiqUi~ Limit
Plastic Limit
Dry Densi ty 0 f
Soil in Pounds
Per Cubic Foot
Moisture Content
of Soil as a
Percent 0 f Dry
Soil Weight
Length 0 f Soil
(in Inc::hes)
Recovered in Split
Spoon Sample
Indicates 1ype of Sample:
SS = Split Spoon
FA = Flight Auger
N = None
ORILLlNG DATA
Crew Chief:
Method:
Boring Completed: _ __.__