GEOTECHNICAL REPORT W'
logo 1
Nor,,
Alrffl 11 an COMPANY
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
HARBOR FREIGHT
QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK
Dente File No. FDE-17-205
I. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation completed by the Dente
Group for the proposed Harbor Freight Building development in the town of
Queensbury, New York. The evaluation was completed in general accord with Dente
proposal number FDE-17-164, which was accepted by Keith Buff, Architect, of Clifton
Park, New York.
In general, our scope of services for this project consisted of the following:
• Layout and completion of three test borings,
• Reviewing geotechnical reports prepared by our office for nearby project sites,
• Preparation of this report, which summarizes the results of our explorations and
presents recommendations to assist in planning for the geotechnical related
aspects of the project.
This report and the recommendations contained within it were developed for specific
application to the site and construction planned, as we currently understand it.
Corrections in our understanding, changes in the structure locations, their grades,
loads, etc. should be brought to our attention so that we may evaluate their effect upon
the recommendations offered in this report.
It should be understood that this report was prepared, in part, on the basis of a limited
field exploration. The borings were advanced at discrete locations and the overburden
soils sampled at specific depths. Conditions are only known at the locations and
through the depths investigated. Conditions at other locations and depths may be
Dente Group,A Terracon Company 594 Broadway Watervliet, NY 12189
P(518)266-0310 F(518)266-9238 terracon.com
different, and these differences may impact upon the conclusions reached and the
recommendations offered. For this reason, we strongly recommend that we be
retained to provide site observation services during construction.
This report was prepared for informational purposes only and should not be
considered part of the contract documents. It should be made available to interested
parties in its entirety only. Should the data contained in this report not be adequate
for the contractors' bidding purposes, the contractors may make their own
investigations, tests, and analyses for use in bid preparation.
The recommendations offered in this report concerning the control of surface and
subsurface waters, moisture or vapor membranes address conventional Geotechnical
Engineering aspects only and are not to be construed as recommendations for
controlling or providing an environment that would prohibit or control infestations of
the structure or its surroundings with mold or other biological agents.
II. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The roughly two-acre development site is located along the west side of New York
Route 9 north of its intersection with Aviation Road. The site slopes downward to the
east, is wooded and partially occupied with a roughly 5,OOOsf in plan single story retail
use building which has a full basement level.
The new Harbor Freight building is planned to be a single story structure with a plan
area of about 15,OOOsf. We have assumed column loads will be less than 175 kips
and floor loads will be less than 250psf.
III. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated through the completion of
three test borings at the approximate locations shown on the plan. The test borings
were completed using a standard rotary drill rig equipped with hollow stem augers. As
the augers were advanced, the overburden soils were sampled and their relative
density determined using split-spoon sampling techniques in general accord with
ASTM D1586 procedures. Representative portions of the recovered soil samples
were transported to our office for visual classification by a Geotechnical Engineer.
Individual subsurface logs were prepared for the borings on this basis.
The subsurface logs should be reviewed for a description of the conditions
encountered at the specific test locations. It should be understood that conditions are
2
only known at the depths and locations sampled. Conditions at other depths and
locations may be different.
Subsurface Profile
About nil to as much as one foot of fill material was found at the site in some areas
and is composed of relatively loose mixtures of sand and gravel with trace silt.
The native soils were composed of non-cohesive sand, gravel and silt mixtures.
These soils were initially brown, moist, and of a loose to firm relative density through
the depths explored, about 51 feet.
Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater measurements were attempted at completion of drilling and sampling
and the results are noted on the individual subsurface logs. Groundwater in the area
exists at depths between 90 and 125 feet in the general area.
IV. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
A. General Site Evaluation
Based upon our evaluation of the subsurface conditions disclosed through our
investigation, we developed the following general conclusions and recommendations
to assist in planning for design and construction.
1 . All existing fills should be removed and replaced beneath new building areas.
Consideration can be given to leaving the fills in place beneath pavements
provided that the surfaces are proof-rolled and stabilized, and the Owner
accepts some risk that settlement may occur and require maintenance.
2. The new buildings may be supported using ordinary spread foundations
bearing upon the undisturbed native soils or on structural fill placed to establish
design grades.
3. Groundwater should not be encountered in the site excavations planned.
4. The on-site soils are suitable for use as backfill beneath the building and
pavement grades.
The following report sections provide detailed recommendations to assist in planning
for design and construction. We should review plans and specifications prior to their
release for bidding to allow us to refine our recommendations, if required, and confirm
that our recommendations were properly interpreted and applied.
3
B. Seismic Design Considerations
For seismic design purposes, we evaluated the site conditions in accord with Section
1613 of the International Building Code (2015) adopted by New York State. On this
basis, it was determined that Seismic Site Class "D - Stiff Profile" is applicable to this
project. Based upon the composition of the site soils, liquefaction should not occur in
response to earthquake motions. The site classification and liquefaction analyses is
based, in part, upon shear wave velocity testing conducted in similar subsurface
profiles in the general project area.
C. Site Preparation and Earthwork
Site preparation in the proposed building pad and pavement areas should commence
with the clearing and stripping of topsoil and surficial organics along with the
installation of perimeter swales to intercept and divert runoff away from the work
areas. The existing building should be removed entirely from the new building and
pavement areas.
All existing fills should be removed from beneath new building pads and extending at
least five (5) feet beyond its perimeter. The fills may be left in place beneath
pavements provided that the surfaces are proof-rolled and stabilized as recommended
below and the Owner accepts some risk that settlement may occur.
The subgrades must be shaped, crowned, and sloped to promote their drainage at all
times and that of the granular structural fills which will overlie them. Prior to placing
fills, the building and pavement subgrades should be proof-rolled by completing at
least three (3) passes using a steel drum roller with a static weight of at least ten (10)
tons. The roller should operate in the static mode unless directed otherwise by a
Geotechnical Engineer observing the work. Any subgrade soils that are or become
soft and wet should be undercut and stabilized accordingly.
Both suitable site soils and Imported Structural Fill may be used as fill and backfill in
building and pavement areas and they should consist of well graded bank-run sand
and gravel with no particles larger than three (3) inches, between 30 and 70 percent
passing the No. 4 sieve, and less than 15 percent, by weight, of material finer than a
No. 200 mesh sieve. The fill should not contain recycled asphalt, bricks, glass, pyritic
shale, or recycled concrete, unless the recycled concrete is from a NYSDOT approved
stockpile, and even then only with the owner's specific consent.
4
The Structural Fill should be placed in uniform loose layers no more than about one
(1) foot in thickness where heavy vibratory compaction equipment is used. Smaller
lifts should be used where hand operated equipment is required for compaction. Each
lift should be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density for
the soil which is established by the Modified Proctor Compaction Test, ASTM D1557.
In landscape areas, the compaction may be reduced to 90 percent of maximum dry
density.
D. Foundations
New building foundations may be seated on the undisturbed native soils or imported
Structural Fill placed to increase site grades.
The foundations may be proportioned for a maximum net allowable bearing pressure
equal to 3,000 psf. Continuous wall and isolated column foundations should have
minimum widths of 18 and 36 inches, respectively, even if this results in a bearing
pressure which is less than the maximum allowable. Exterior foundations should bear
at least four (4) feet beneath final adjacent exterior grades to afford frost penetration
protection. Interior foundations may be seated at a nominal two (2) foot depth below
the floor slab if allowed by local codes.
Assuming standard care is used in preparing the bearing grades, we estimate that
total foundation settlement should be less than one (1) inch. The settlements should
occur within a few days after construction is completed and each load increment is
applied.
All foundation and retaining walls should be designed to support lateral earth
pressures together with all applicable temporary and permanent surcharge loads. If
the walls are free to deflect as the backfill is placed or surcharge loads applied, "Active"
earth pressures may be assumed. If the walls are braced prior to backfilling or
applying surcharge loads, "At-Rest" conditions should be assumed. The following
design parameters are provided to assist in determining the lateral wall loads,
whichever apply:
• Coefficient of"At-Rest" Lateral Earth Pressure Ko = 0.50
• Coefficient of"Active" Lateral Earth Pressure Ka = 0.33
• Coefficient of"Passive" Earth Pressure KP = 2.0
• Total Unit Weight of Soil and Compacted Backfill YT= 120 pcf
• Coefficient of Sliding Friction (On Native or Fill Soil) bf = 0.30
The installation of a perimeter foundation drain is not recommended.
5
E. Floor Slabs
Floor slabs should be constructed upon a minimum eight (8) inch thick subbase of
Imported Structural Fill and four (4) inch thick base of crushed stone (ASTM Blend 57
material). A vapor retarder (Stego Wrap 15 mil Class A or equivalent) should be
installed if floor coverings or moisture sensitive coatings are to be placed on the slab.
The vapor retarder should be positioned above or below the stone base in accord with
the American Concrete Institute Manual of Concrete Practice Manual Section 302.1 R.
A modulus of subgrade reaction equal to 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) at the top of
the stone base layer may be assumed for the slab design purposes.
F. Pavements
All base course layers and their subgrades should be drained through sloping and
crowning of subgrades to the peripheral swales and/or french drains recommended
previously, or to underdrains where appropriate to the final grading plan to assure
satisfactory performance. Peripheral and intermediate under drains should also be
incorporated, as well as gravel backfilled utilities with sloped subgrades to assure that
drained base courses are provided. All base course materials should be compacted
to 95 percent of the material's maximum dry density as established through the
Modified Proctor Test, ASTM D-1557.
Two flexible pavement sections are provided for consideration at the site dependent
upon anticipated traffic types. A Heavy Section should be used for entrance drives
and areas subject to repeated truck traffic, and a Light Section employed for areas
subject to automobile parking and occasional delivery and/or service trucks. We
should review final grading plans to determine if modifications to the pavement design
are needed.
THICKNESS (inches)
NYSDOT
MATERIAL SECTION Light Section Heavy Section SPECIFICATION
Wearing Course 1 1 403 Type 6
Binder Course 2 3 403 Type 3
Base Course 8 12 304 Type 2
Fabric— Mirafi 50OX or Eq. Yes Yes -
Rigid Portland concrete pavement may be designed to bear upon twelve (12) inches
of NYSDOT Type 2 material and the synthetic fabric recommended above, and
6
designed in accord with the recommended procedures of the American Concrete
Institute or Portland Cement Association using a composite modulus of subgrade
reaction equal to 150 pounds per cubic inch when constructed upon the subgrades
prepared as recommended previously.
It should be understood that sidewalks and pavements constructed upon the site's
soils will heave as frost seasonally penetrates the subgrades. The magnitude of the
seasonal heave will vary with many factors, and result in differential movements. As
the frost leaves the ground, the sidewalks and pavements will settle back, but not
entirely in all areas, and this may accentuate the differential movements across the
pavement areas. Where curbs, walks, and storm drains meet these pavements, these
differential heave and settlements may result in undesirable movements, and create
trip hazards. To limit the magnitude of heave and the creation of these uneven joints
to generally tolerable magnitudes for most winters, a sixteen (16) inch thick crushed
stone base course composed of Blend 57 aggregate may be placed beneath the
sensitive sidewalk, drive, etc. areas. The stone layer must have an underdrain placed
within it.
It should also be understood that the recommended pavement sections were not
designed to support heavy construction equipment loads which would require an
augmented section. The contractor should construct temporary haul and construction
roadways and routes about the site as appropriate for the specific weather conditions
and construction equipment he intends to employ, and the overburden soil conditions
encountered in the specific areas. Construction period traffic should not be routed
across the recommended pavement sections unless augmented.
Finally, all pavements require routine maintenance and occasional repairs. Failure to
provide maintenance and complete the required repairs in a timely manner will result
in a shortened pavement service life.
G. Plan Review and Construction Monitoring
The Dente Group should be retained to review plans and specifications related to site
grading, foundations, and earthwork prior to their release for bidding to confirm that
the recommendations contained herein were properly interpreted and applied.
It should be understood that the actual subsurface conditions that exist across this site
will only be known when the site is excavated. For this reason, we should be retained
to monitor earthwork and bearing grade preparations for foundations, floor slabs, and
pavements. The presence of the Geotechnical Engineer during the earthwork and
7
foundation construction phases will allow validation of the subsurface conditions
assumed to exist for this study and the design recommended in this report. We believe
this construction sequence observation and testing should be provided by us as a
consultant to the Owner, Architect, or Construction Manager.
V. CLOSURE
This report was prepared for specific application to the project site and the
construction planned using methods and practices common to Geotechnical
Engineering in the area and at the time of its preparation. No other warranty, either
expressed or implied, is made. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. Should
questions arise or if we may be of any other service, please contact us at your
convenience.
Prepared by
Dente Group
3j843
Fred A. Dente, P.E.
Principal
s
Impoplont I AN
GeolechnicalmEngineeping
■
Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, . .
While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help.
The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include
has prepared this advisory to help you—assumedly those that affect:
a client representative—interpret and apply this • the site's size or shape;
geotechnical-engineering report as effectively • the function of the proposed structure,as when it's
as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from changed from a parking garage to an office building,or
a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems from alight-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;
the elevation,configuration,location,orientation,or
that,for decades, have been a principal cause of weight of the proposed structure;
construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and the composition of the design team;or
disputes. If you have questions or want more . project ownership.
information about any of the issues discussed below,
contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer. As a general rule,always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their
Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a impact.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
be Of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
construction project. would have considered.
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects . for a different client;
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific for a different project;
needs of their clients.A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a different site(that may or may not include all or a
for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil- portion of the original site);or
works constructor or even a different civil engineer.Because each before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
geotechnical-engineering study is unique,each geotechnical- to it;e.g.,man-made events like construction or
engineering report is unique,prepared solely for the client.Those who environmental remediation,or natural events like floods,
rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client droughts,earthquakes,or groundwater fluctuations.
can be seriously misled.No one except authorized client representatives
should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first Note,too,that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it.And no one report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
-not even you-should apply this report for any purpose or project except because of factors like changed subsurface conditions;new or modified
the one originally contemplated. codes,standards,or regulations;or new techniques or tools.If your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an`apply-by"date on the report,
Read this Report in Full ask what it should be,and,in general,if you are the least bit uncertain
Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical- about the continued reliability of this report,contact your geotechnical
engineering report did not read it in its entirety.Do not rely on an engineer before applying it.A minor amount of additional testing or
executive summary.Do not read selected elements only.Read this report analysis-if any is required at all-could prevent major problems.
in full.
Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are
You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer Professional Opinions
about Change Before construction begins,geotechnical engineers explore a sites
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique,project-specific factors subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
when designing the study behind this report and developing the Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys.A few those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed.The
typical factors include: data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
. the clients goals,objectives,budget,schedule,and geotechnical engineer,who then applied professional judgment to
risk-management preferences; form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site.Actual
. the general nature of the structure involved,its size, sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ-maybe significantly-from
configuration,and performance criteria; those indicated in this report.Confront that risk by retaining your
the structures location and orientation on the site;and geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to
other planned or existing site improvements,such as project finish,so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
retaining walls,access roads,parking lots,and whenever needed.
underground utilities.
This Report's Recommendations Are perform their own studies if they want to,and be sure to allow enough
Confirmation-Dependent time to permit them to do so.only then might you be in a position
The recommendations included in this report-including any options to give constructors the information available to you,while requiring
or alternatives-are confirmation-dependent.In other words,they are them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
not final,because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied from unanticipated conditions.Conducting prebid and preconstruction
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so.Your geotechnical engineer conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction.If through observation your Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist Some client representatives,design professionals,and constructors do
actually do exist,the recommendations can be relied upon,assuming not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
no other changes have occurred.The geotechnical engineer who prepared engineering disciplines.That lack of understanding has nurtured
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation- unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments,delays,
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform cost overruns,claims,and disputes.To confront that risk,geotechnical
construction observation. engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled"limitations,many of these provisions indicate
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted where geotechnical engineers'responsibilities begin and end,to help
Other design professionals'misinterpretation of geotechnical- others recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read these
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems.Confront that risk provisions closely.Ask questions.Your geotechnical engineer should
by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the respond fully and frankly.
design team,to:
confer with other design-team members, Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
help develop specifications, The personnel,equipment,and techniques used to perform an
review pertinent elements of other design professionals' environmental study-e.g.,a"phase-one'or`phase-two"environmental
plans and specifications,and site assessment-differ significantly from those used to perform
be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering a geotechnical-engineering study.For that reason,a geotechnical-
guidance is needed. engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions,or recommendations;e.g.,about the likelihood of
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
report.Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction failures.If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
observation. information,ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management
guidance.As a general rule,do not rely on an environmental report
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance prepared for a different client,site,or project,or that is more than six
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift months old.
unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation.To help prevent Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
the costly,contentious problems this practice has caused,include the Infiltration and Mold
complete geotechnical-engineering report,along with any attachments While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
or appendices,with your contract documents,but be certain to note water infiltration,or similar issues in this report,none of the engineer's
conspicuously thatyou've included the material for informational services were designed,conducted,or intended to prevent uncontrolled
purposes only.To avoid misunderstanding,you may also want to note migration of moisture-including water vapor-from the soil through
that"informational purposes"means constructors have no right to rely building slabs and walls and into the building interior,where it can
on the interpretations,opinions,conclusions,or recommendations in cause mold growth and material-performance deficiencies.Accordingly,
the report,but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations
times,locations,and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration.Confront
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, the risk of moisture infiltration by including building-envelope or mold
including options selected from the report,only from the design specialists on the design team.Geotechnical engineers are not building-
drawings and specifications.Remind constructors that they may envelope or mold specialists.
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
&EPA ASSOCIATION
Telephone:301/565-2733
e-mail:info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association(GBA).Duplication,reproduction,or copying of this document,in whole or in part,by any means whatsoever,is strictly
prohibited,except with GBAs specific written permission.Excerpting,quoting,or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA,and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review.Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any
kind.Any other firm,individual,or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent
z F I r j
i
# %
'S #
IPL
+rev
-ell 4111 3 �
{� # Z i
77
iy i f iA v Ir r
%I-, ** - .-
M 0
I ** * # '
N {� r N
N 1 { N
mo * �� i mo
�
a_ # 4 I
i
4P F _
T 5IP
I _
i
_ 1+M
{xr
Sub
SITE ,Igo th
Cry-
0
* % ti '- O
r
I .
N
f N
87 46 0
4 y f # I * i r
y i i i
S M
y i i i i ; 5� y
F M i ir' ■
9 W1111 4 At
PIE jL
- a N T ANS
J
_
19
11 + O
r� #
{ f r a
O 4L. i. � O
7 °40 40. 7 ' 0.
Name: GLENS FALLS Location: 043°20'03.5" N 073°40' 39.9" W
Date: 10/24/117
Scale: 1 inch equals 666 feet
Copyright(C)1997,Maptech,Inc.
or r
In r N
a
SITE r
16
i
Harbor Freight, Queensbury, New York 1897
Soil Map—Warren County, New York
607020 607040 607060 607080 607100 607120
43°20'3"N I I = I I 43°20'3"N
Ik
r
v
9
8
Aw
OWN
r
v
r
v
r�Y
v
v
v
8 9
µ�
a
r
v
Soil MaN may not he valiel at this Scale.
r
v
43°19'58"N 43°19'58"N
607020 607040 607060 607080 607100 607120
Map Scale:1:781 if printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet.
Meters
N
0 10 20 40 60
Feet
0 3570 140 210
Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:lfrM Zone 18N WGS84
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Pagel of 3
� 2
0 0
N N
O)
7 y m i U) y O u!
IOU 0 N a) a) ' m N N I U) O
(6 U >, O Q U O V p (6 N y 3 C
� � oy2 m 2 OE °� m DoE
a) p m o O a) 6 y
Q 7 N (n > — U N
O- 0) U N O C > U m O m
Z o m — m u) a) a U c m
O CL
m m a) m ao Q U o a)
m a) Y
a) y E m U) 3 y a) C7 O N z o o — E y -o
a 3 y rn a) o Q U) U -0a) o m > N 3: o >
O c m Cc: a a) y m Q a) a)
O °) EL y E U w m m 0 2 U) a) N m m a)
Q m cmi m 0 ami s y c p N m z Q a) m o o Q
o E y m o �U) m o Q vi m
O >. > 0 0 a) O O U >, � .2 U o 7 (fl N O m >, on E
LL a) a) — c m o US °) a) o o E a) O U) s � a)
Z w � .m O s a) o °) O U Q v°)i E
a) a) � (n o n c o m a) `m
CL 0
Q U mU 3 J > O U) Q'C O N — N m -O � O
m E Q 0 0 m Q m � a) n m a) o N o
Q m a) z E a) .o a) a) w m
y m E y > °? s 0)m ns a) E `o rn a)
rn
> 0 Q a) > a) m m N p y — O m Q
L 'o m a2) s O ami 2 3 U � m m � .o Q m 'E � m s � m E
U a) N Ern E U °? E m o `o a) Q m
y E a) — o — m a m O o
o °) m N a) a) o coi a) °? o > 3 > m o °) rn
U) m e m U) U) U � y N m Q a) U a) E o y o o ' a)
O I,() i N t m m -a O Q.� a) U N — L — O +? N a) E m'!5
p (-)
°) a) a) m o y LP pi s 0 s
H � S w E — U y a E c� U QoQ m H o U) U) U)
Y
} a)
a)
)
Z �
> )
7
O >
U )
O
U Q
j y O
CL
CL U-
L
a a o
� T a) � 2 y a -yo O �
'0 d Q 0 0 J N a) .0. O O L Z
U Q U) CL o a
0 ° R m
O N L y a U
U) 6 > O cn 2 Co g m J v Q
� R C
Q R 0 p
a)
LU F m
LU
J
y
CL 0 y CLo
aU)
o
O o N Q a
Q a
U C C C a) Q Q 3 R O > ° O` Q
> > > o w 3 y o > w o 0 w _ o
O Q Q Q R a Q a T O o O u U) U) > a) Q
0 R R R a) C) 3 a = a O � O N O O U)
a R LL 3 o T w > > a R w o v Y o a
y d 0 0 0 O `O 4 O N R C n a O 4 R a) O 0 O
Q cn cn cn S m m U U (7 (7 J J E A a cn cn ca) in in cn
w a �
R
H
20! o
a y o
y ,O
L
L
7N
w 0
r0 O
Z��U
�!`51
Soil Map—Warren County, New York
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
HnB Hinckley cobbly sandy loam,3 0.7 32.5%
to 8 percent slopes
OaC Oakville loamy fine sand,8 to 1.4 67.5%
15 percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest 2.0 100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3
Map Unit Description: Hinckley cobbly sandy loam,3 to 8 percent slopes---Warren County,
New York
Warren County, New York
HnB—Hinckley cobbly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 9xwv
Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 46 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 160 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Hinckley and similar soils: 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of
the mapunit.
Description of Hinckley
Setting
Landform: Deltas, outwash plains, terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial deposits derived
principally from granite, gneiss, and schist
Typical profile
Oi- 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material
H2- 1 to 5 inches: cobbly sandy loam
H3-5 to 28 inches: very gravelly loamy sand
H4-28 to 64 inches: stratified very gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Excessively drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat):
Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Pagel of 2
Map Unit Description: Hinckley cobbly sandy loam,3 to 8 percent slopes---Warren County,
New York
Minor Components
Castile
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Palms
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Marshes, swamps
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Wareham
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed soils
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Wareham
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Pits, sand, gravel
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Hydric soil rating: Unranked
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Warren County, New York
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 24, 2016
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2
Map Unit Description: Oakville loamy fine sand,8 to 15 percent slopes---Warren County, New
York
Warren County, New York
OaC—Oakville loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 9xxf
Elevation: 600 to 1,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 46 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 160 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Oakville and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of
the mapunit.
Description of Oakville
Setting
Landform: Deltas, outwash plains, terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Sandy eolian, beach ridge, or glaciofluvial
deposits
Typical profile
H1 -0 to 8 inches: loamy fine sand
H2-8 to 27 inches: sand
H3-27 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to
very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Pagel of 2
Map Unit Description: Oakville loamy fine sand,8 to 15 percent slopes---Warren County, New
York
Minor Components
Hinckley
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Elnora
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Warren County, New York
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 24, 2016
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/24/2017
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2
Noudra�s3a �tlooa szlos 'ax'an a+SA yax iAYe-zzc els
0300tl AVYJtlalSd01 Ll/ZZ/9 L A+oA yaN'd'Im�o�vauvy•6+ngevaanB)o woy iOSZi A+oA+wN'dm4�aan8 Peoy PvaMag SSI � O
`SitLue3 iiE O SAOXaAArnS Pue'I .Ir
jC Uja
+ol oPHm 6eemS s to daN d,,.e...ena,..,.m `a s na u�Lam' S a =o
O
(Q
O
J
O1
C
O
ED
1' N
I
;a rJ "
If
ol
/
I
I
I
I�
/ / ,3 �i � I M•y
M
m
/O6.9L -_t ,iIi R
R
m I
-
�s
g
>1.
I i
I /
-
n
W
dew dry'F8z 31
��fi ffii-,� t5" 3N Ym
INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE LOGS
The Subsurface Logs present observations and the results of tests performed in the field by the Driller,Technicians,Geologists and
Geotechnical Engineers as noted. Soil/Rock Classifications are made visually, unless otherwise noted,on a portion of the materials
recovered through the sampling process and may not necessarily be representative of the materials between sampling intervals or
locations.
The following defines some of the terms utilized in the preparation of the Subsurface Logs.
SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
Soil Classifications are visual descriptions on the basis of the Unified Soil Classification ASTM D-2487 and USBR,1973 with additional
comments by weight of constituents by BUHRMASTER. The soil density or consistency is based on the penetration resistance
determined by ASTM METHOD D1586. Soil Moisture of the recovered materials is described as DRY,MOIST,WET or SATURATED.
SIZE DESCRIPTION RELATIVE DENSITY/CONSISTENCY basis ASTM D1586
SOIL TYPE PARTICLE SIZE GRANULAR SOIL COHESIVE SOIL
BOULDER > 12 DENSITY BLOWS/FT. CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FT.
COBBLE 3"-12" LOOSE < 10 VERY SOFT < 3
GRAVEL-COARSE 3" -3/4" FIRM 11 - 30 SOFT 4 - 5
GRAVEL - FINE 3/4" - #4 COMPACT 31 - 50 MEDIUM 6 - 15
SAND-COARSE #4 - #10 VERY COMPACT 50+ STIFF 16 - 25
SAND-MEDIUM #10 - #40 HARD 25 +
SAND-FINE #40 - #200
SILT/NONPLASTIC < #200
CLAY/PLASTIC < #200
SOIL STRUCTURE RELATIVE PROPORTION OF SOIL TYPES
STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION % OF SAMPLE BY WEIGHT
LAYER 6"THICK OR GREATER AND 35 - 50
SEAM 6"THICK OR LESS SOME 20 - 35
PARTING LESS THAN 1/4"THICK LITTLE 10 - 20
VARVED UNIFORM HORIZONTAL TRACE LESS THAN 10
PARTINGS OR SEAMS
Note that the classification of soils or soil like materials is subject to the limitations imposed by the size of the sampler,the size of the
sample and its degree of disturbance and moisture.
ROCK CLASSIFICATIONS
Rock Classifications are visual descriptions on the basis of the Driller's, Technician's, Geologist's or Geotechnical Engineer's
observations of the coring activity and the recovered samples applying the following classifications.
CLASSIFICATION TERM DESCRIPTION
VERY HARD NOT SCRATCHED BY KNIFE
HARD SCRATCHED WITH DIFFICULTY
MEDIUM HARD SCRATCHED EASILY
SOFT SCRATCHED WITH FINGERNAIL
VERY WEATHERED DISINTEGRATED WITH NUMEROUS SOIL SEAM
WEATHERED SLIGHT DISINTEGRATION,STAINING, NO SEAMS
SOUND NO EVIDENCE OF ABOVE
MASSIVE ROCK LAYER GREATER THAN 36"THICK
THICK BEDDED ROCK LAYER 12"-36"
BEDDED ROCK LAYER 4"-12"
THIN BEDDED ROCK LAYER V-4"
LAMINATED ROCK LAYER LESS THAN 1"
FRACTURES NATURAL BREAKS AT SOME ANGLE TO BEDS
Core sample recovery is expressed as percent recovered of total sampled. The ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD)is the total
length of core sample pieces exceeding 4"length divided by the total core sample length for N size cored.
GENERAL
• Soil and Rock classifications are made visually on samples recovered. The presence of Gravel,Cobbles and Boulders will
influence sample recovery classification density/consistency determination.
• Groundwater, if encountered,was measured and its depth recorded at the time and under the conditions as noted.
• Topsoil or pavements, if present,were measured and recorded at the time and under the conditions as noted.
• Stratification Lines are approximate boundaries between soil types. These transitions may be gradual or distinct and are
approximated.
DENTE GROUP, A TERRACON COMPANY SUBSURFACE LOG: B-1
PROJECT: Harbor Freight DATE START: 10/4/17 FINISH:10/4/17
LOCATION: Queensbury, New York METHODS: 3 1/4" Hollow Stem Augers, ASTM
CLIENT: Fusco Properties, LLC D1586 Drilling Methods with Auto Hammer
JOB NUMBER: FDE-17-205 SURFACE ELEVATION: +/- 451.0'
DRILL TYPE: CME 55 CLASSIFICATION: O.Burns
SAMPLE BLOWS ON SAMPLER CLASSIFICATION/OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH # 6" 12" 18" 24" N +/-6"Topsoil
1 1 3 FILL: Dark Brown F-C SAND and GRAVEL,
4 5 7 trace silt (MOIST, LOOSE)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brown/Orange F-M SAND, trace silt
5' 2 4 4 Grades Brown
5 9
10' 3 3 4 Grades trace gravel
5 9
15' 4 3 5 (MOIST, LOOSE TO FIRM)
6 11
End of boring 16.5' depth.
Groundwater was not present within auger
20' casings upon completion of borehole.
25'
DENTE GROUP, A TERRACON COMPANY SUBSURFACE LOG: B-2
PROJECT: Harbor Freight DATE START: 10/4/17 FINISH:10/4/17
LOCATION: Queensbury, New York METHODS: 3 1/4" Hollow Stem Augers, ASTM
CLIENT: Fusco Properties, LLC D1586 Drilling Methods with Auto Hammer
JOB NUMBER: FDE-17-205 SURFACE ELEVATION: +/- 460.0'
DRILL TYPE: CME 55 CLASSIFICATION: O.Burns
SAMPLE BLOWS ON SAMPLER CLASSIFICATION/OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH # 6" 12" 18" 24" N +/-7"Topsoil
1 WH 1 Brown/Dark Brown/Orange Mottled F-C
4 7 5 SAND, trace silt, cobbles noted (MOIST)
5' 2 3 4 Grades Brown, Little Gravel
5 9
10' 3 3 4 Grades Brown F-M SAND, trace silt
5 9
15' 4 3 4
6 10
20' 5 2 3 Grades Brown F-C SAND, trace silt and
3 6 Gravel
25' 6 5 7
7 14 Grades Brown Fine SAND, trace silt
DENTE GROUP, A TERRACON COMPANY SUBSURFACE LOG: B-2 contin.
PROJECT: Harbor Freight DATE START: 10/4/17 FINISH:10/4/17
LOCATION: Queensbury, New York METHODS: 3 1/4" Hollow Stem Augers, ASTM
CLIENT: Fusco Properties, LLC D1586 Drilling Methods with Auto Hammer
JOB NUMBER: FDE-17-205 SURFACE ELEVATION: +/- 460.0'
DRILL TYPE: CME 55 CLASSIFICATION: O.Burns
SAMPLE BLOWS ON SAMPLER CLASSIFICATION/OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH # 6" 12" 18" 24" N
30' 7 7 7 Brown Fine SAND, trace silt
9 16
35' 8 11 10 Grades Bands of F-C Sand and trace gravel
9 19
40' 9 50/.5' 50+ Band of Gravel and Cobbles noted at 39.5'-
41.0'
45' 10 14 17 Brown F-M SAND, trace silt
19 36
Grades Brown/Gray
50' 11 16 24 (MOIST, LOOSE TO COMPACT)
25 49
End of boring 51.5' depth.
Groundwater was not present within auger
55' casings upon completion of borehole.
DENTE GROUP, A TERRACON COMPANY SUBSURFACE LOG: B-3
PROJECT: Harbor Freight DATE START: 10/4/17 FINISH:10/4/17
LOCATION: Queensbury, New York METHODS: 3 1/4" Hollow Stem Augers, ASTM
CLIENT: Fusco Properties, LLC D1586 Drilling Methods with Auto Hammer
JOB NUMBER: FDE-17-205 SURFACE ELEVATION: +/- 455.0'
DRILL TYPE: CME 55 CLASSIFICATION: O.Burns
SAMPLE BLOWS ON SAMPLER CLASSIFICATION/OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH # 6" 12" 18" 24" N +/-2"Asphalt, +/-2"Crusher Run
1 3 4 Brown F-M SAND, trace silt (MOIST)
5 5 9
5' 2 4 5
5 10
10' 3 3 4 Grades Brown F-C SAND, trace silt, gravel
4 8 and cobbles noted
Grades Little Gravel
15' 4 27 14 (MOIST, LOOSE TO FIRM)
12 26
End of boring 16.5' depth.
Groundwater was not present within auger
20' casings upon completion of borehole.
25'