Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
3100 Courthouse Lane
J t Use BLUE or BLACK Ink For Office Use I'��` ills''-[ it l� Permit#1,000 Cityof Eaaau j kt Permit Fee: l � / 1 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan MN 55122 �s�,�4� Date Received: 7 I Phone: (651)675-5675 � I Fax: (651)675-569'-\--,e.,14 JUL 2017 Staff: Ifi - � 54 tiO'Ilir vvv,‘_ ' 2017 COMMERCIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION dddssC Date: 7 f2I/( 7 Site Address: Caar+- SSG LA rte.-- Tenant Name: if(y041-01 5t14 S ae---- (Tenant is: *----ICIew/ Existing) Suite#: Former Tenant: BSS Eagan, LLC Name:_ Phone: $�6'888'7380 Propel * ; r ` Address/city/zip:_ 4825 NW 41st St, Suite 500, Riverside MO 64150 Applicant is: Owner ✓Contractor T�of Description of work:_ 122,000sf Self Storage Facility Construction Cost .5/ 0 fl; / 2-7K Name: Core(4 w s( :no,• C.rr License#: Address: 767_6-- P2cf'va iii✓dQ ,�✓J,le-341° City: ,--:-_,-_,e....„. -,..„:,,,,,,,,„,,':Conitttiotot-%''.-:,-.,:.4, State: /'YIN Zip: �5L1 3 el Phone: 6(Z-- $-1$ - It-1( .8 Contact: /'-e ca Email: ✓°10e Cef.e i 4I9d1�� t% • Co►vt Name: /4'O 1411 A HA It S G! ./ Registration#: /8 O 7 N Address: /POO 7-wN.4 ©t its Ce,-. City: wa-y?JEYGt_ State: Mil Zip: CS-3 q I Phone: gS2 - V t6—74/00 Contact Person: Pe W G« Email: CPO at'(e/Nle `►eI..1ii ala e4.t-Ca fY-i M;`tit J It"'-`1 Q -:. / GVH Licensed plumberyinsttallling�yn(e seweerr ate�yr service: ALX S t(,?r/1 i✓1 Q/ Phone#. �t� y'0y2 7�- 7J OTE:Plans en uppori�documents .'-',.:i.'„',':!%),',,. F , . f 0 to P {9 . /F}Ft tion. Po the info tal cliitiiiitlef r ai4c bli if� � *0n ,.f n t ,{: , Ire .. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG. Call Gopher State One Call at(651)454-0002 for protection against underground utility damage. Call 48 hours before you intend to dig to receive locates of underground utilities. www.00pherstateonecall.org I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan;that I understand this is not a permit,but only an application for a permit, and work is not to start without a permit;that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of plans. X f2zi, ap�L — X d(6,-/--fr-t Applicant's Printed Name Appli ant's Signature Page 1 of 3 t C Z. 7/,T/ ' s `'/ U CU1 --D� NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE SUB TYPES Foundation T Public Facility _ Exterior Alteration-Apartments )( Commercial/Industrial _ Accessory Building _ Exterior Alteration-Commercial Apartments _ Greenhouse/Tent — Exterior Alteration-Public Facility Miscellaneous Antennae — WORK TYPES 4 New Interior Improvement _ Siding — Demolish Building* _ Addition _ Exterior Improvement _ Reroof _ Demolish Interior Alteration — Repair _ Windows _ Demolish Foundation Replace _ Water Damage _ Fire Repair _ Retaining Wall Salon Owner Change *Demolition of entire building-give PCA handout to applicant DESCRIPTION # / Valuation OC 41 Occupancy S-I / B MCES System Plan Review ,�' Code Edition `to/S /� ?G. SAC Units - �- ✓ (25%_100% 1!) Zoning City Water Census Code Stories 5 t aor.. ewi' Booster Pump — #of Units Square Feet11-22. Zit PRV ____/_____ #of Buildings Length Fire Sprinklers Type of Construction 'j.•6 Width RFQUIRED INSPECTIONS ," Footings_1 New Building_Deck_Addition Drain Tile —7 Foundation J Foundation Before Backfill Retaining Wall Vapor Barrier / Erosion Control 1 Framing 30 Minutes ✓ 1 Hour Steel Reinforcement Insulation / Concrete Entra�p9e Apron / Sheetrocl� / Other: P K. Si pp't J Roof: f Decking vinsulation _Ice&Water /Final eter Size: Siding:_Stucco Lath _Stone Lath _,__Brick T EFTS Electronic As-Built Plans Required Windows Fireplace:_Rough In _Air Test _Final I Final/C.O.Required — Pool: Footings Air/Gas Tests _Final 'Final/No C.O.Required Final CIO Inspection: Schedule Fire Marshal to be present: of/Yes No Reviewed By: , Planning New Business to Eagan: /1/ Reviewed By: det - , Building Inspector FEES Water Quality Base Fee 2 Z,Zo 8.-' Storm Sewer Trunk Surcharge5 o 3 Sewer Trunk Plan Review � y35 aWater Trunk • MCES SAC it L, 97P "' Street Lateral City SAC el* �_ Street S&W Permit&Surcharge i 19_ Water Lateral Treatment Plant P /7 83 - Stormwater Performance Security 4* $3,060 At- Treatment Plant(Irrigation) fi9't. 8%- Landscape Security 'a 1/, $`1 Z '` Park Dedication '* /` 1 3 r r Other: O Trail Dedication t 3-79 zs_ TOTAL: i 0 ��9, Page 2 of 3 MCES USE: Letter Reference: 170807A4 Address ID:713026 Payment ID:403661 (/S6 l Date of Determination: 08/07/17 Determination Expiration: 08/07/19 /�_ / �7 Greetings! Please see the determination below. Project Name: Beyond Self Storage Project Address: Courthouse Lane Suite tt/Campus: na City Name: Eagan Applicant: Rob Copeland, Copeland Building Corp. Special Notes: na Charge Calculation: Fixture Units: 27.73 fixture units @ 17 fixture units/SAC= 1.63 Total Charge: 1.63 or 2.00 Credit Calculation: na Total Credit: na Net SAC: 2.00 —or— 2 SAC Due The business information was provided to MCES by the applicant at this time. It is the City's responsibility to substantiate the business use and size at the time of the final inspection. If there is a change in use or size, a redetermination will need to be made. If you have any questions email me at: cory.mccullough@metc.state.mn.us Thank you, Cory McCullough SAC Technician Please visit our SAC website by going to: http://www.metrocouncil.org/SACprogram 390 Robert Street North I St. Paul,MN 55101-1805 /1111 Phone 651.602.1000 I Fax 651.602.1550 I TTY 651.291.0904 I metrocouncil.org METROPOLITAN COUNCILAi Equal Opportundy Employer '• a 11111 9 z O Fag z o z Nz yO�J - g� Q '.' 5 - ALL' o „e04 4; taF z u z▪ z � z Jm • a o a [a @e i@ ! a i sw m a m °0 s 4. J i FA a 111 8 P ILL2 'EP 2 iiaa N f =: .3 R QF, t 'e . F 0. W 4'1oz Sn N S 5Niii Q e. " 7 el � QI , 1 I CPI I 1 I I I i a F F F ` F z , 5 F b I F § I ,. .. hi 1 , I. /51-. $. E 3 3 33 3 H 3 &Q 3 3 313 3 33 �& 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6b I ' S I I I R e. S F IL I C)— - S d - . I_ j l l I I �-=- I -- I ; I t ip I I-- , L I - S 1 5 5 — d L- is $ g "a_ 1 c - L I_ - 1 I I I V I I 'OH , 9 I — 0-0 , I I Q I 1 I - 1 s H b - E 9a P € i I 1 y _ s s e 0—� r• 1. �. .�� .... ... r � H I I I I I H I I I H I I —� I I Ifirfi � -1 -1 � i I--t-1I � I I I I = 0---•---I--i-I--I--I-,--}--i- -----I- --}---±-4--1--1--i--I-F—f--I--- 5 I I a I I I I g- I I 1 I I I I I 1 i I I 2 0- - -I- 1 �- i� I- I—L — fir+ 444 -I -i H-1----- I---- ----------1-- --1-----I-----1-----I--1---1---4.---- --4---I-----I-----k----I-----1 i d© ® 116iiiiiii0 Use BLUE or BLACK Ink i For Office Use� j r/ City (� CALL ANNA WICKS L fYl I o Faftall Permit#: c? WITH PERMIT FEE OR QUESTIONS. O 3830 Pilot Knob Road 651-464-2988 Permit Fee: 6 1 Eagan MN 55122 awicks@cpandh.com Date Received: !) "I r I I Phone:(651)675-5675 1 Fax:(651)675-5694 1 p.r+ :t ,t/ Staff: fell I C +� 2017 COMMERCIAL PLUMBING PRMIT APPLICATION Please submit two(2)sets of plans with all commercial applications. � /�, Ali Date: `—1\CM\ Site Address: 3\00 —c..4,-)Q41-ic„,,...1s-es.,. Tenant e---`\3f'd - - \ 5\()% Suite#: x �1; Pr®h e r Name: Phone: Name: C F, cmc r,� �t: �c.A ,,�\�x=`` . License#: A Cls \\1 -:1--,,,,:W=-", c or --k -.:- _ _ Address:��`-�: `� C�-�-�..L.y ��,�;City: t,�=1- 4::, \,,e_ State: "+��Zip: ``�.��� 1- , Phone: Email: i„� y New Replacement _Repair Rebuild _Modify Space _Work in R.O.W. �p .1141111iII Description of work: PIJm ,ncf S�Salp 'ac 1,(j RR/uJ.;I P1/ ELe Sonia ,fCOMMERCIAL 54- New Construction Modify Space _Irrigation System( �(yes/_no)( RPZ/ PVB) x!1!,41 �g��;i10, • Rain •sensors required on irrigation systems �� r i4 • Avg.GPM (2"turbo required unless smaller size allowed by Public Works) 6 Meters Call(651)675-5646 to verity that tests passed prior to picking up meter. ltDomestic:Size&Type Fire: 1 Iii : �4 , Y ;E Avg.GPM High demand devices?_Yes i_No Flushometers_Yes !C No COMMERCIAL FEES Contract Value$ 3O,Do°. 4N- x.01 $60.00 Permit Fee Minimum =$ $60.00 PVB/RPZ Permit(includes State Surcharge) Permit Fee =$ Surcharge Surcharge=Contract Value x$0.0005 If the project valuation is over$1 million, please call for Surcharge =$ TOTAL FEE Following fees apply when installing a new lawn irrigation system $ Water Permit Contact the City's Engineering Department,(651)675-5646,for required fee amounts. $ Treatment Plant $ Water Supply&Storage $ State Surcharge _$ TOTAL FEE CALL BEFORE YOU DIG. Call Gopher State One Call at(651)454-0002 for protection against underground utility damage. \ I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan; that I understand this is not a permit, but only an application for a permit, and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of plans. -�, , x )C...; .... , ,C..� x --_•. CSS r —' Applicants Printed Name Applicants Signature FOS �d `" a a s a �+ d i s ®Yy d z I < ap;a a 1€ 1 fi S�^i R a e a ,„„ y ,.iA,,,d� r4r r 4 1 e ,�I a ,"�= a °1 _ �.k '': rlit ® X17 7, x...�. l�ti 4 3 �rr • 1'``' — '''':1"14';‘_";' Page 1 of 3 ��P- 01-0_0(T CA-0_0 I IJ 1=O r L It A s,- CA-(J._ ? zio Fr Al 01t-oStt 6-k— 763 - Use BLUE or BLACK Ink ,.-56) -. For Office Use Permit#: City ��� Ci Permit Fee: /lam�� -751 3830 Pilot Knob Road r`S L (e. 61'11-(1 Eagan MN 55122: \*. �� Date Received: Phone:(651)675-5675 buildinginspections(3?cityofeagan.com C�' Staff: IT) J 2017 FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS PERMIT APPLICATION �� 9/15/17 3 j/() Coa, IDuwe LA, `� � �� Date: Site Address: Tenant: Beyond Self Storage p Suite#: ' ° 0 Requirements:2 complete sets of drawings and specifications, cut sheets on materials and components Name: Phone: Property Owner Address/City/Zip: Applicant is: Owner Contractor Type of Work Description of work: Install Sprinkler System Construction Cost: 97500 Estimated Completion Date: 12-29-17 Name: SimplexGrinnell License#: C015 Contractor Address: 5400 Nathan Lane N, Suite 100 City: Plymouth State: MN Zip: 55442 Phone: 763-367004 57-- 515 S- -51 91 Contact: Gregory Moroshek Email: gmoroshek@simplexgrinnell.com FIRE PERMIT TYPE WORK TYPE ✓ Sprinkler System(#of heads ) 1 New Addition Fire Pump _Standpipe Alterations Remodel Other: Other: DESCRIPTION OF WORK: _Commercial Residential _Educational FEES $60.00 Permit Fee Minimum Contract Value$97500 x.01 Surcharge=Contract Value x$0.0005 =$ 975 Permit Fee If the project valuation is over$1 million,please call for Surcharge 48.75 =$ Surcharge $100.00 Residential New(includes State Surcharge) =$ 1023.75 TOTAL FEE 3/4"Fire Meter-$290.00 =$ Fire Meter _$ TOTAL FEE i You may subscribe to receive an electronic notification from the City of proposed ordinances by signing up for an email update on the City's website at www.citvofeagan.com/subscribe. I hereby apply for a Fire Suppression System permit and acknowledge that the information is complete and accurate;that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan and with the Minnesota Building/Fire Codes;that I understand this is not a permit,but only an application for a permit,and work is not to start without a permit;that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and ap royal of plans. x x G .,gk Mo K O Sit a Applicant's Print d ame Applicant's Signa re itt(P FOR OFFICE USE REQUIRED INSPECTIONS Hydrostatic Flow Alarm Drain Test Rough In Trip Pump Test Central Station Final Conditions of Issuance: Permit Reviewed by: - Date: i I 11/7 ?i,,,,„0 y avi_c_tc. , Vt_i2-C ' a For Office Use ,�, i i ••• • �CEJ��rrr^,.� Permit#: / / / ,, EAGAN ,.., ,,,oe.. ``•• •••• 9 tU l� Permit Fee:,2) S.9ta_7 JAN 0 Date Received: /— <'/0 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD I EAGAN, MN 55122-1810 (651)675-5675 I TDD:(651)454-8535 I FAX: (651)675-5694 Staff: buildinginspections(a�cityofeagan.com L 2018 MECHANICAL PERMIT APPLICATION tig Please submit two (2)sets of plans with all commercial applications. Date://ii/J1 Site Address:/3Z/(Y) L171�4 L� . ZaZ Tenant:ZSY/7 L2 SiL -C-A eSA Suite#: Resident/Owner Name: Phone: Address/ City/Zip: Name: Jf/f4j2// WL> )4/2- .5-4/,‘.5/72-21 'J1 License#: Address: Z945—c--- �7 7 iad/ SCi City: L l[�� Contractor State: /4 Zip: _ 5Llig ee Phone: eaci -e-#2..3"�i�10 Contact: l/.8/.4 Email: ,.4)477,_,?../r�A.t9y p /1L j.//Y7 New Replacement Additional Alteration Demolition Type of Work Description of work: NOTE:Roof mounted and ground mounted mechanical equipment is required to be screened by City Code. Please contact the Mechanical Inspector for information on permitted screening methods. RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL _Furnace XNew Construction Interior Improvement Air Conditioner Install Piping Processed Permit Type — — Air Exchanger —Gas Exterior HVAC Unit Heat Pump Under/Above ground Tank ( Install/_Remove) Other RESIDENTIAL FEES $60.00 Minimum Add or alteration to an existing unit, includes State Surcharge $100.00 Residential New,includes State Surcharge =$ TOTAL FEE COMMERCIAL FEES $60.00 Permit Fee Minimum Contract Value$ 7 7 S, 1_ x.01 $75.00 Underground tank installation/removal, includes State Surcharge =$ _2 7sg-- Permit Fee Surcharge=Contract Value x$0.0005 =$ /f1.. gJSurcharge If the project valuation is over$1 million,please call for Surcharge =$ ZQ'9 . 9i TOTAL FEE You may subscribe to receive an electronic notification from the City of proposed ordinances by signing up for an email update on the City's website at www.cityofeagan.com/subscribe. I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan;that I understand this is not a permit,but only an application for a permit,and work is not to start without a permit;that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of plans. x Del? a� 0h x Applicant's rinted Name A cant's Sig t re FOR OFFICE USE . I 1 f 4) Required Inspections: Reviewed By: Date: /i Underground (Rough In Air Test ( as Service Test In-floor Heat 4K Final HVAC Screening ..„, i ,t"" -ci e tck " '`- For Office Use % ` i ; 0 Permit#: /5° / I '#°..# EAGAN .1... ...so' /_ .c..v.. " Permit Fee: qg' tFi •� I / 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD I EAGAN, MN 55122-1810 JUN 0 7 Z018 i Date Received: 6-- !-1 (651)675-5675 I TDD:(651)454-8535 I FAX:(651)675-5694 I Staff: 1__ buiidinginspections@citvofeagan.com t_ .,2018 COMMERCIAL FIRE ALARM PERMIT APPLICATION Date: 6/1/18 Site Address: 3100 Courthouse Lane Tenant: Beyond Self Storage Suite#: 0 Requirements: 2 complete sets of drawings and specifications,cut sheets on materials and components Name: Beyond Self Storage Phone: Property OwnerAddress city zip: 3100 Courthouse Lane Eagan, MN 55121 Applicant is: Owner Contractor Type of Work Description of work: Fire Alarm Installation Construction Cost $9,490.00 Estimated Completion Date: Name: Tekno Services LLC License#: TS001756 Contractor Address: 12825 Van Buren St city. Blaine State: MN Zip: 55434 Phone: (763) 438-9088 Contact: Terry Brunkow Email: terryb@teknoservices.com ✓ New Remodel Work Type Addition Other: Alterations DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Commercial Residential Educational FEES Contract Value$9490 x.01 $60.00 Permit Fee Minimum _ 94.90 $ Permit Fee Surcharge=Contract Value x$0.0005 =$ 4.75 Surcharge* If the project valuation is over$1 million,please call for Surcharge 99.65 _$ TOTAL FEE You may subscribe to receive an electronic notification from the City of proposed ordinances by signing up for an email update on the City's website at www.citvofeagan.com/subscribe. I hereby apply for a Fire Alarm permit and acknowledge that the information is complete and accurate;that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan and with the Minnesota Building/Fire Codes;that I understand this is not a permit,but only an application for a permit,and work is not to start without a permit;that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of plans. XTerry Brunkow x Applicant's Printed Name Applicant's Signature - FOR OFFICE USE Reviewed By: ..__. ,f--- Date: lir Required Inspections: Rough-InFinal Fire Alarm Test For Office Use Permit#: EAGAN Pen-nit Fee:, ier) Date Received: 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD I EAGAN, MN 55122-1810 (651)675-5675 I TDD: (651)454-8535 I FAX:(651)675-5694 Staff: buildinoinspectionsCacitvofeaoan.com 2018 COMMERCIAL PLUMBING PERMIT APPLICATION El Please submit two (2)sets of plans with all commercial applications. Date: t<14;1 I Site Address: "1. 01) \ ) ' L e Tenant: I -e-tyi„I se (- 5 6) 5 Suite#: PropertyOwner Name: I -Se. s_7,-›-to it, el p Phone: Name: L., kyl t cf License#: a if t Contractor Address: 1..4 c City: — i trjle - Address: p." t.L.0s State: Mu Zip: 'S'St.)2 ‹.— TAT , Phone: loci' 14/0'-/-acrKg Email: fk ( Cpa ti,\A yy\ Type of Work New Replacement Repair Rebuild Modify Space Work in R.O.W. Description of work: COMMERCIAL y New Co struction Modify Space • // fr „ Irrigation System L.._yes/ no) RPZ/ PVB) ,W • Rain sensors required on irrigati n systems Permit Type 1;' • Avg.GPM (2"turbo required unless smaller size allowed by Public Works) Meters Call(651)675-5646 to verity that tests passed prior to picking uo meter. Domestic:Size&Type Fire: 1 Avg.GPM High demand devices? Yes No Flushometers Yes No COMMERCIAL FEES Contract Value$ x.01 $60.00 Permit Fee Minimum - 0 O $60.00 PVB/RPZ Permit(includes State Surcharge) =$ Permit Fee =$ 70 - b j4e ." Surcharge=Contract Value x$0.0005 If the project valuation is over$1 million, please call for Surcharge =$ TOTAL FEE Following fees apply when installing a new lawn irrigation system 67_5- 06 Water Permit Contact the City's Engineering Department,(651)675-5646,for required fee amounts. Treatment Plant Water Supply&Storage $ State Surcharge .. .... ...... ..... =$ -0 6 TOTAL FEE You may subscribe to receive an electronic notification from the City of proposed ordinances by signing up for an email update on the City's website at wwwcitvofeaaan.comisubscribe. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG. Call Gopher State One Call at(651)454-0002 for protection against underground utility damage. I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate;that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan;that I understand this is not a permit,but only an application for a permit,and work is not to start without a permit;that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of plans. PCk. ki/A1 xVtucOckAA.A-/—, Applicant's Printed Name Applicant's Signature FOR OFFICE USE Approved By: Date: Required Inspections:, Upder'GrogrdLN Rough,itiq,, Air Test 'G'as Test __Final- fR,VRequired: -Yes' No Meter Related Meter Size- . Radio,Read 'Manometer Staff, CALL ALISSA GRANDT WITH PERMIT Page 1 of 3 FEEpR'Ql.MqVoNS,' 651-464:2988 AGranatacnandh.rdm Peggy Fleck From: Abby Decker Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 7:45 AM To: 'dparry@cpandh.com'; Peggy Fleck Subject: 3100 Courthouse Lane Peggy, Beyond Self Storage located at 3100 Courthouse Lane in Eagan 1" irrigation meter approved to be located inside. Contact is : 00 Dave Parry ��� Commercial P&H , 5 • Q lJ P (651)464-2988 F (651)464-2506 6 C (651) 395-0257 dparry@cpandh.com G 6 _D Can you start the Permit Process for this and let Dave know.We have a 1" ready for him whenever the process is completed. Thank you. Abby Decker Clerical Tech- Utilities 3419 Coachman Pt I Eagan, MN 55122 Office: 651-675-5210 https://www.cityofeagan.com Original Message From: Brent Massmann Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 3:38 PM To: Abby Decker<adecker@cityofeagan.com> Subject: RE: Message from "RNP002673BF6001" This is approved for a 1" meter housed indoors. Brent Massmann Utilities Operations Supervisor 3419 Coachman Pt I Eagan, MN 55122 Office: 651-675-5217 https://www.citvofeagan.com Original Message From: Abby Decker 1 Sent: Wednesday,August 8, 2018 3:20 PM To: Brent Massmann<bmassmann@cityofeagan.com> Subject: FW: Message from "RNP002673BF6001" Let me know what you think. Abby Decker Clerical Tech - Utilities 3419 Coachman Pt I Eagan, MN 55122 Office: 651-675-5210 https://www.cityofeagan.com Original Message From: Dave Parry<dparry@cpandh.com> Sent: Wednesday,August 8, 2018 2:31 PM To:Abby Decker<adecker@cityofeagan.com> Cc: Alissa Grandt<AGrandt@cpandh.com> Subject: FW: Message from "RNP002673BF6001" Attached is the irrigation drawing for Beyond Self Storage located at 3100 Courthouse Lane in Eagan. Drawing was provided to us by the irrigation contractor. * Irrigation meter and backflow preventer to be located inside of building. * We assume 1.5" meter and 1.5" RPZ for the required 26 GPM. Thank you, Dave Parry Commercial P&H P (651)464-2988 F (651)464-2506 C(651) 395-0257 dparry@cpandh.com 2 City of EaRan August z;N.zo„ Copeland Building Corporation 7025 Metro Boulevard Suite 300 Edina, MN 55439 Re: Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Dear Mr. Copeland; We have started our review of the construction documents submitted in pursuit of obtaining a building permit for the above referenced project. This review is not intended to be an exhaustive and comprehensive report and is limited to the plans that were supplied to the City of Eagan. Unless otherwise noted, all references are to the 2015 Minnesota Building Code (MNBC) which has adopted, with amendments, the 2012 International Building Code as well as the 2015 Minnesota Accessibility Code (MNAC). It is our goal that this review will help you in complying with the applicable codes and we are, therefore, requesting that the following items be addressed: 1. Change address to 3100 Courthouse Lane. 2. Missing energy compliance forms (lighting, mechanical). 3. The documentation you provided for the building envelope (energy compliance forms) do not make sense. Please provide all of the material spec sheets, laboratory testing of any of the assemblies, and documentation to support the u values that were entered into the Comcheck program. 4. The Minnesota Electrical Code should be based on the 2017 version that was adopted 07/01/17. 5. Which energy code are you using? IECC or ASHRAE? 6. Under section "VI chapter 10 Means of Egress" on page A004 section A, it mentions exit access stairways. The stairwells I see are interior exit stairways. Please confirm. 7. Interior exit stairways shall be 2 hour rated when 4 or more stories per MNBC section 1022. 8. Plumbing calculations show a higher amount of plumbing fixtures then what you are providing. Explain your reasoning for the lower number. 9. Provide the mechanical plan set. This is needed for location of mechanical equipment and ventilation of the vehicle parking inside. 10. Is there any mechanical equipment on the roof? 11. On page A0001 "Interior Partition Tag" what does an "S" mean inside the box? 12. Please place the "Interior Partition Tag" on sheet A400. 13. Please show exit sign and egress lighting locations on the plans. 14. On sheet A400, under "General RCP Notes", number 8 makes a reference to MN Energy Code 2009. Please change. 15. Please provide the UL details of the rated assemblies you will be using and show the UL numbers on your plans. Clt,y of Eall 16. Gates, or approved barriers, are required on the first floor stairs per MNBC 1022.8. 17. Please provide details for the stairway identification signs, per MNBC section 1022.9, and show on the plans. 18. Provide an electronic plan set in pdf format to the City of Eagan. 19. The engineering you provided for "Storage Structures" must be stamped and signed by a structural engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota. Robert Warr is not licensed as a structural engineer. Provide an electronic plan set, with clouded revisions, in pdf format to the building inspection department for further review. If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me at (651) 675-5676 Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 4:30 pm or email me atm rannes(ar),cityofeagan.com. Sincerely, Mike Grannes Senior Building Inspector Cc: Dale Schoeppner, Building Official Michael Grannes From: Michael Grannes Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 3:01 PM To: 'Ron Powell' Subject: RE: Beyond Self Storage at Eagan - City of Eagan Response Letter Ron, I have a couple comments about your responses to my plan review letter. I will use the plan review number for these items. #9: The mechanical plans need to be designed by an HVAC engineer and not drawn on the fire sprinkler plans. #13: Provide a detailed legend for the markings on the electrical plan. #14: It should be changed to the 2015 Minnesota Energy Code. Also the next line down also needs to be changed. #19: You will need to provide a letter from the Minnesota Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture, Geoscience and Interior Design stating the engineer (Robert A. Warr) designed the plans to recognized and acceptable engineering standards and practice in this particular field (structural). Let me know if you have any questions. Mike Grannes I Senior Building Inspector I City of Eagan City Hall 13830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 1 (651) 675-5676 1 (651) 675- Cityof Eap 5694 (Fax) I mgrannes(a)cityofeagan.com THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. From: Ron Powell[mailto:rpowell@mohagenhansen.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 12:55 PM To: Michael Grannes <mgrannes@cityofeagan.com> Subject: Beyond Self Storage at Eagan - City of Eagan Response Letter Hello, Ron Powell (rpowell(a�mohagenhansen.com) has sent you files via ishipdocs. Mike, See attachment for our response letter and required information as requested in your letter dated August 23, 2017. Note that the drawing package includes the latest sheet issues from the original Building Permit documents and Change Order Proposal Requests No. 1, 2, and 3 integrated into one set. Change Order Proposal Request No. 3 addresses the issues raised by your plan review letter. Also attached are the mechanical and electrical drawings requested. Please click the download button to download your attachment(s). You can then click the Zip Download button to download all of the attachments at once. Thanks, Ron RON POWELL, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Registered Architect D: 952.426.7422 M: 952.426.7400 F: 952.426.7440 1000 Twelve Oaks Center Drive, Suite 200 Wayzata, MN 55391 Click here to download the files. Files will be available for download until 8th September, 2017. Tracking ID: 17123689 or PrintAnywhere Click Dere to send large files up to 3GB from Microsoft Outlook ! Already an ishipdocs user ? Loci. If you would like to print and get a price quote, please click here to send an email to ishipdocs or call 1 855-464-7447 ( 1 855 Go iship). ^ If you have any questions or issues with ishipdocs, please call ishipdocs support at 1 855-464-7447 ( 1 855 Go iship) or send an email to support(a-ishipdocs.com Thank you, The ishipdocs team. This email is auto generated by ishipdocs. Please do not reply to this email address. 2 From the Desk of Robert A. Warr, P.E. Structural Engineer September 7, 2017 Mr. Mike Grannes Senior Building Inspector City of Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Beyond Self Storage, Eagan, MN Structural Engineering Design Dear Mr. Grannes, Based on our conversation last week, you have concluded that I am fully licensed to practice Structural Engineering in the State of Minnesota. As of the date of this letter, my licensure is in good standing with the State of Minnesota Board of AELSLAGID. I am also fully licensed in 47 other States for the practice of Structural Engineering. In addition to licensure, I hold a Master's Degree in Structural Engineering. I have 25 years of structural experience specializing in structures of the type and material build for the subject project. I am the 2016-2017 Chairman of the Board for the Cold -Formed Steel Engineer's Institute (CFSEI) which is the primary material used for this structure. I serve on the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) Code of Framing Standards committee where we help to shape the International Building Code adopted by the State of Minnesota. Upon review, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to me to discuss. Sincerely, Robert Warr, P.E. 3590 Fricks Road, Marietta, GA 30062 • ph: 678-409-9186 September 7, 2017 Mr. Mike Grannes Sr. Building Inspector City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: City Response Letter Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Eagan, MN 55121 Mohagen I Hansen Project No. 17024.ONPD Dear Mr. Grannes: In response to your Inspection/Plan Review letter with follow-up e-mail dated August 29, 2017, regarding the above -referenced project, we would like to offer our explanation and resolution to the outstanding issues: 9. Provide the mechanical plan set. This is needed for location of mechanical equipment and ventilation of the vehicle parking inside. Response: The mechanical drawing set will be issued as a Deferred Submittal. 13. Please show exit sign and egress lighting locations on the plans. Response: The electrical lighting drawing set will be issued as a Deferred Submittal. 14. On sheet A400, under "General RCP Notes", number 8 makes a reference to MN Energy Code 2009. Please change. Response: See attachment for revised Sheet A400 per your request. 19. The engineering you provided for "Storage Structures" must be stamped and signed by a structural engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota. Robert Warr is not licensed as a structural engineer. Response: My understanding is that Robert Warr has contacted the State of Minnesota and has also had telephone conversations directly with you concerning this issue. My understanding is that he will be sending you a letter directly under separate cover for an explanation and agreement to proceed. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (952) 426-7400. 1000 twelve Oaks Center Drive I Suite 4200, Wayzata, MN 55391 M: 952 426 7400 F: 952 426 7440 MohagenHansen.com Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Response Letter September 7, 2017 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely, MOHAGEN HANSEN Architecture I Interiors Ron Powell, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Project Manager KAJOBS\North Point\Eagan_17024\01_Admin\Code\City Response\Originals\17024 City_Resp_Ltr Grannes_090717.docx Moh agen Hansen. corn August 28, 2017 Mr. Mike Grannes Sr. Building Inspector City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: City Response Letter Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Eagan, MN 55121 Mohagen I Hansen Project No. 17024.ONPD Dear Mr. Grannes: In response to your Inspection/Plan Review letter dated August 23, 2017, regarding the above -referenced project, we would like to offer our explanation and resolution to the outstanding issues: 1. Change address to 3100 Courthouse Lane. Response: See attached Sheet A000 for address revision. ,�2. Missing energy compliance forms (lighting, mechanical). Response: See attached compliance forms per your request. 3. The documentation you provided for the building envelope (energy compliance forms) do not make sense. Please provide all of the material spec sheets, laboratory testing of any of the assemblies, and documentation to support the u values that were entered into the Comcheck program. Response: See attached revised Exterior Wall Types on Sheet A003 and product information concerning the insulated metal panel system. ✓4. The Minnesota Electrical Code should be based on the 2017 version that was adopted 07/01/17. Response: See attached Sheet A000 for documented code revision per your request. A. Which energy code are you using? IECC or ASH RAE? Response: We are using ASHRAE 90.1 — 2010 criteria as stated on Sheet A000. -/6. Under section "VI Chapter 10 Means of Egress" on page AO04 section A, it mentions exit access stairways. The stairwells I see are interior exit stairways. Please confirm. Response: Stair A and Stair B are interior exit stairways. See attached Sheets A004, A005, A006, and A007 for revised wording. �/. Interior exit stairways shall be 2 hour rated when 4 or more stories per MNBC section 1022. Response: See attached Sheets A000, A004, A005, A006, A007, A700, A701, and A702 for revised rated wall revision. 1000 Twelve Oaks Center Drive I Suite 200, Wayzata, MN 55391 M: 952 426 7400 f 952 426 7440 MohagenHansen. com Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Response Letter August 28, 2017 Page 2 of 3 APlumbing calculations show a higher amount of plumbing fixtures then what you are providing. Explain your reasoning for the lower number. Response: These facilities are staffed with a single manager and the Owner only expects to have up to 4.5 average customer visits per hour of operation during the lease up phase. Once stabilized occupancy is reached, the daily visits would be even less. These counts are based upon business experience of similar sized facilities in other Beyond Self Storage locations. We request Building Official's determination and acceptance of lower occupancy count. 9. Provide the mechanical plan set. This is needed for location of mechanical equipment and ventilation of the vehicle parking inside. .Sys,,}.. Response: See attachment for mechanical drawing set. Ahz,L1„„ti., w. (144VAr— 10. Is there any mechanical equipment on the roof? Response: Only elevator relief hoods. 11. On page A0001 "Interior Partition Tag" what does an "S" mean inside the box? Response: The "S" inside of the box on the "Interior Partition Tag" is an abbreviation for steel studs. See attachment for Sheet A001 revision. 12. Please place the "Interior Partition Tag" on sheet A400. Response: See attached Sheet A400 for "Interior Partition Tag" per your request. 13. Please show exit sign and egress lighting locations on the plans. u Response: See attachment for electrical lighting plan drawings. r''►'s�� ''^�- 14. On sheet A400, under "General RCP Notes", number 8 makes a reference to MN Energy Code 2009. Please change. Response: The MN Energy Code 2009 has been revised to 2012 per your request. See attached Sheet A400 for revision. 15. Please provide the UL details of the rated assemblies you will be using and show the UL numbers on your plans. Response: See attachment for UL rated assemblies. See attached Sheet A001, Interior Partition Tags; Sheet A400, Interior Partition Tags; and Enlarged Elevator Plan 3/A702. 16. Gates, or approved barriers, are required on the First Floor stairs per MNBC 1022.8. Response: See attached Sheets A700 and A701 for added gate per your request. 17. Please provide details for the stairway identification signs, per MNBC section 1022.9, and show on the plans. Response: The Owner will comply with stairway identification sign requirements as stated. Moh agen Hansen. corn Beyond Self Storage 3100 Courthouse Lane Response Letter August 28, 2017 Page 3 of 3 X18. Provide an electronic plan set in pdf format to the City of Eagan. Response: See attachment for an electronic plan set per your request. tilde 6 19. The engineering you provided for "Storage Structures" must be stamped and signed by a structural engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota. Robert Warr is not licensed as a structural engineer. as r d Response: See response from Storage Structures dated August 25, 2017 as shown below: "Robert Warr looked into the issue about having a registered structural engineer seal the plans. Here is the link to the rule: https://www. revisor. mn.Qov/rules/?id=1800.4200 It says: "A professional engineer may engage in practice in any branch of engineering; provided, however, that a professional engineer who certifies and signs plans, specifications, or other documents may be required to establish, to the satisfaction of the board, that the work was performed according to recognized and acceptable engineering standards and practice. " And, there is no restriction or requirement for an SE seal within any of the board rules that I can find. Therefore, a qualified PE can seal buildings in MN. " Summary: Our understanding is that his professional registration is legal and valid in the State of Minnesota. No change is required. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (952) 426-7400. Sincerely, MOHAGEN HANSEN Architecture I Interiors Ron Powell, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Project Manager K.\JOBS\North Point\Eagan_17024\01_Admin\Code\City Response\17024 City_Resp Ur Grannes_082817.docx Moh agen Hansen. corn y i i i • i 1 t `AINTEItAN ENGINEERING 8`1`1NG; NC' ; 1 i II IIIIIF- � � t CONSULTANTS' :ENVIRONMENTAL I ''mQT IALS ` I •;FRIENSICS' ' vi •' �I' I'' I'j li 1. i,� I I ' M I' j j'I I I�jI I !'I ii jli i I.' i i ! � iww�'a�e�ogtest.�om� i;l� II'.' I I �, I I I'� I.► t�) I�, I t1► I GI.TUJ074-4j'CHNUCA1L � L► I (�� I., •� I I t�} � �� � iii I': ! 1 � � Beyond Self -Storage Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane Eagan, Minnesota Report No. 01-07196A Date: May 24, 2017 Prepared for: NorthPoiut Development, LLC 230 South Bemiston Ave: Suite 500 Clayton, MO 63105 AmERICA.N ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. May 24, 2017 NorthPoint Development 23 0 South B emiston Avenue Suite 500 Clayton, MO 63105 Attn: J.J. Jenkins (jieiikins(a%northpointkc.com) RE: Revised Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane Eagan, Minnesota Report No. 01-07196A Dear Mr. Jenkins: CONSULTANTS • ENVIRONMENTAL • GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS FORENSICS American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) is pleased to present the results of our additional subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering review for the Beyond Self- Storage elfStorage project in Eagan, Minnesota. These additional services were performed according to authorization received from Tim Holliday of NorthPoint Development, LLC on May 19, 2017. This report supersedes the report issued on May 1, 2017. We are submitting two copies of the report to you (one hard copy and one electronic PDF copy). Additional electronic copies are also being sent on your behalf, as shown below. Please contact me if you have any questions about the report or if I can provide additional assistance. I can also be contacted to arrange engineering observations and testing services. Sincerely, Amer'can Engineering T g, Inc. Michael P. McCarthy, Principal Engineer Phone: (651) 659-1364 Cell: (612) 685-0058 nuuc carthyLty]amen gtest. c om pc: NorthPoint Development - Attn: Benjamin Hagedorn (bhaQedonn ,no1-thpointkc.coin) NorthPoint Development — Attn: Tim Holliday(tholliday(cr�noi-thpointkc.com) Kin -ley Horn - Attn: Ryan Phipps (Ryan.Phipps(2kimley-horn.com) Page i 550 Cleveland Avenue North ( St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651-659-90011 Toll Free 800-972-6364 Fax 651-659-1379 1 www.amengtest.corn j AAJEE0 This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc. Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN May 24, 2017 Report No. 01-07196A SIGNATURE PAGE Prepared for: NorthPoint Development, LLC 230 South Bemiston Ave. Suite 500 Eden Prairie, MN 55436 Attn: J.J. Jenkins Authored by: Michael P. McCarthy, PE Principal Engineer I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under Minnesota Statute Section 326.02 to 326.15 Michael P. McCarthy, PE Date: `{ 7 License #16688 Copyright 2017 American Engineering Testing, Inc. All Rights Reserved Prepared by: AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 (651) 659-9001 «r\vw. amen gtest. coni Reviewed by: Robin . ger Senior Engineer Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project. Page ii Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES..........................................................................................................................1 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION...................................................................................................................1 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING...............................................................................2 4.1 Field Exploration Program..................................................................................................................2 4.2 Laboratory Testing...............................................................................................................................3 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS...............................................................................................................................3 5.1 Surface Observations...........................................................................................................................3 5.2 Subsurface Soils/Geology and Soil Properties....................................................................................3 5.3 Groundwater........................................................................................................................................ 5 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................5 6.1 Discussion............................................................................................................................................5 6.2 Building Grading................................................................................................................................. 6 6.3 Building Foundations...........................................................................................................................8 6.4 Building Floor Slab.............................................................................................................:. 6.5 Exterior Building Fill.................................................................................................................:.........9 6.6 Below -Grade Walls...........................................................................................................................10 6.7 Pavements..........................................................................................................................................11 6.8 Stonnwater Infiltration......................................................................................................................12 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................................13 7.1 Potential Difficulties..........................................................................................................................13 7.2 Excavation Backsloping....................................................................................................................14 7.3 Observations and Testing ............................................. .. ..................................:...............................14 8.0 LEVRTATIONS.....................................................................................................................................14 STANDARD SHEETS Floor Slab Moisture/Vapor Protection Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design APPENDIX A Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Notes Unified Soil Classification System Figure 1 —Boring Locations Subsurface Boring Logs Test Hole Logs APPENDIX B. Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Page iii Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Construction of a new Beyond Self -Storage is planned in Eagan, Minnesota. To assist in planning and design, NorthPoint Development, LLC (NorthPoint) authorized American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) to conduct a subsurface exploration program at the site, conduct soil laboratory testing, and perform a geotechnical engineering review for the project. This report presents the results of these services, and provides our engineering recommendations based on this data. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES AET's services were performed according to our proposal to NorthPoint, dated April 17, 2017, which they authorized on the same date. The authorized scope consisted of the following: • Drilling five standard penetration test borings to depths of 15 to 25 feet. • Performing soil laboratory testing. • Conducting a geotechnical engineering analysis based on the obtained data, and preparing this report. After issuing our initial report, dated May 1, 2017, we were informed the building was modified to include a basement level. We are revising this report to incorporate that design change. AET's services are intended for geotechnical purposes. The scope is not intended to explore for the presence or extent of environmental contamination. 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION . We understand a three-story Beyond Self -Storage building will be constructed in Eagan, Minnesota. A below -grade level is also planned below the eastern 140 feet of the building. The building will be heated during freezing temperatures. Finished floor elevation for the building is proposed to be 946.55; which is roughly 1 %2 to 41/2 feet higher than existing site grades. The below -grade level will be at elevation 936.55, and an elevator pit will be at elevation 932.55. The building will have approximate overall dimensions of 180 feet by 180 feet. The building location and configuration are shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A. The building will have concrete foundations around the perimeter of the building and an isolated foundation pad below the elevators. The below -grade walls and on -grade slabs will be Page 1 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. constructed with cast -in-place concrete, as will the thickened slab foundations under all interior steel stud load bearing walls spaced approximately 10 feet apart. The above -grade portion of the building will have light gauge structural steel framing with elevated concrete slabs supported by metal decking. The western 40 feet of the building will not have a below -grade level, but will include a vehicle loading and unloading zone inside the building. Based on this information, we estimate that bearing wall loads will range from about 4 to 51/2 kips per linear foot of wall in basement areas and about 3 to 41/2 kips per linear foot of wall in non -basement areas. Isolated columns may be incorporated into the design around a first floor office space and the elevator pit. These column loads will be about 100 kips. Our foundation design assumptions include a minimum factor of safety of three with respect to the ultimate soil bearing pressure for spread footings. We assume the structure will be able to tolerate total foundation settlements of 1 -inch, and differential settlements over a 30 -foot distance of up to 1/2 -inch. A small on -grade parking lot will be located near the southwest corner of the building for exterior parking of automobiles and light trucks having axle loads less than 4 tons. A stormwater infiltration basin is planned east of the building between two existing wet stormwater ponds. The bottom of the new infiltration basin is proposed to be at elevation 830; approximately 1 to 4 feet below existing grades. The above stated information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are appropriate. 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING 4.1 Field Exploration Program Our subsurface exploration program for this project included five standard penetration test borings performed on April 21, 2017. We also observed the excavation of six test holes on May 11, 2017. The logs of the borings and test holes, and details of the methods used are included in Appendix A. The boring logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, geologic description, and moisture condition. Relative density or consistency is also noted for the natural soils, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N -value). Page 2 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. The boring locations were selected by NorthPoint Development and AET, and are shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A. The boring locations were staked by the AET drill crew, and referenced to the existing building to the west of this site. The test hole locations were selected by NorthPoint Development. The ground surface elevations were measured at each boring by AET personnel using an engineer's level. We used the rim of a catch basin located south and west of the northwest property corner as our benchmark (see Figure 1). The elevation of this benchmark was given as 846.7 on the Grading and Drainage Plan for the project. Ground surface elevations were not measured at the test hole locations. 4.2 Laboratory Testing Our laboratory testing program included performing water content tests, organic content tests, and hand penetrometer strength tests on selected samples. The results of the tests appear on the individual boring logs in Appendix A, adjacent to the samples upon which they were performed. 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS 5.1 Surface Observations The project site is located on the south side of Courthouse Lane, north of Highway 55, and east of Holiday Lane. The site is unoccupied, and is located east of an existing retail building. Based on the topographical information shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan, the site terrain appears to slope downward to the east, in the direction of two existing ponds. The ground surface elevations measured at our boring locations range from 832.9 at Boring B-5 (at the proposed infiltration basin) up to 845.8 at Boring B-2 (near the northwest building coiner). 5.2 Subsurface Soils/Geology and Soil Properties 5.2.1 General Profile The borings and test holes indicate a general soil profile consisting of fill and topsoil overlying naturally deposited alluvial soils. A layer of silty sand till was present below the alluvium at the bottom of Boring B-1. The fill depths appear to range from about 1 -foot to 111/2 feet, and the topsoil extends to depths of about 4 to 14 feet. The fill and topsoil are deepest at Boring B-4. 5.2.1 .Fill The fill encountered at our boring locations consists of a variety of soils; including silty sands, lean clays, sandy lean clays, and clayey sands. Some of the darker colored fill soils also contain organic fines, traces of roots, and a little gravel. Page 3 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. The N -values recorded in the fill are variable; therefore, these soils are judged to have variable strength and compressibility. Generally, the fill soils are judged to be moderately slow to slow draining and should be considered susceptible to freeze -thaw movements. 5.2.2 Topsoil Topsoil was encountered below the fill at Borings B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-5, as well as at Test Holes TH-1, and TH-6. Topsoil (or possible fill) also exists at the surface of Test Hole TH-5. The topsoil contains traces of roots and organics. We judge the topsoil to have low to moderate strength and moderate to moderately high compressibility. The topsoil is slow draining and is judged to be frost susceptible if exposed to freezing temperatures. The organic content test on the silty sand in Boring B-4 showed a result of 3.5%, which is moderately love. 5.2.3 Alluvium The naturally deposited alluvial soils consist of mostly fine alluvial lean clays and coarse alluvial sands and silty sands. A layer of mixed alluvial clayey sand was found in Boring B-2. The fine alluvial and mixed alluvial soils are judged to have moderately low to moderately high strength and moderate to moderately low compressibility. It is our opinion that the soft clays found from about 11 %2 to 14 feet in Boring B-3 likely would have a higher N -value than shown; however, these soils were wet and they were probably disturbed during sampling. The .f ne alluvial clays and mixed alluvial clayey sands are slow draining and are judged to be susceptible to freeze - thaw movements if they are exposed to freezing temperatures in exterior site areas, or during excavation for the building or underground utilities. The coarse alluvial sands and silty sands contain variable amounts of gravel. There is a possibility that larger cobbles and/or boulders may also be encountered. The sands and silty sands are judged to have moderate to high strength and moderately low to low compressibility. The sands are fast draining soils which have low susceptibility to freeze -thaw movements. The silty sands are moderately slow draining soils which we judge to be moderately frost susceptible. 5.2.4 Till Silty sand till soils exist at the bottom of Boring B-1. These soils have variable amounts of gravel, and could also include cobbles and/or boulders. The till soils are judged to have high strength and low compressibility. They till is below normal frost penetration depths and is not likely to be affected by freezing temperatures. Page 4 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. 5.3 Groundwater Groundwater levels were measured only in Borings B-4 and B-5, at depths of about 281/2 feet and 121/2 feet, respectively. These depths correspond to approximate elevations of about 8141/2 and 8201/2, respectively. Groundwater was also observed at a depth of about 81/2 feet in Test Hole TH-6. The groundwater was found in free draining sands at Boring B-4, and should provide a reliable indication of the steady-state groundwater level at the times and locations measured. The water levels at Boring B-5 and Test Hole TH-6 are higher than at Boring B-4, and are likely perched water conditions. We caution that groundwater can become trapped or perched above lenses and laminations of silts or clays that exist within the sands. Groundwater levels should be expected to fluctuate seasonally due to varying amounts of rainfall and snow melt, as well as other factors. Typically, the hydrostatic groundwater levels are highest in the Spring and Fall of the year, and lowest during the Summer and Winter. 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Discussion Based on the soil conditions encountered by our borings, it is our judgment that the proposed building can be supported by conventional spread footings and an on -grade slab with thickened edges. Corrective earthwork will be needed to remove the undocumented fill soils, the clayey topsoil, and any softer alluvial clays that exist immediately below the fill or topsoil; especially where the building will not have a basement level. These soils are judged to be unsuitable for building support. The unsuitable soils should be removed at most boring and test hole locations by excavating to the basement level, except at Boring B-4 and possibly at Test Hole TH-6. The coarse alluvial sands and silty sands and the firm to very stiff fine alluvial and mixed alluvial soils should provide adequate support for new fill and building loads. The silty sand topsoil at Boring B-4 and Test Hole TH-6 is not highly organic and has moderate strength, and should not need to be excavated unless other portions are more organic. The soils which are expected to be present in the bottom of the infiltration basin consist of slower draining clays, clayey sands, and silty sands which are not conducive to infiltration. This may require the use of an underground chamber filtration system, or designing the proposed pond based on very low infiltration rates (discussed later in this report). Deeper excavation to the faster draining sands is another option for filtration. However, if the design bottom elevation of 830 is to be maintained, this will require importing significant amounts of free draining sand for infiltration. Page 5 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. 6.2 Building Grading 6.2.1 Excavation We recommend the excavation be performed remove all undocumented fill and all clayey topsoil. The softer clays that exist immediately below the fill or topsoil should also be removed from all building areas. At most boring and test hole locations, excavating to design basement floor and footing elevations should remove these unsuitable soils. The soils in the bottoms of the excavations should consist of naturally deposited coarse alluvial sands and silty sands, or firm to very stiff fine alluvial clays. Silty sand topsoil at Boring B-4 and Test Hole TH-6 appear to have sufficient strength, based on the N -value, and have relatively low organic content. We judge these silty sands suitable for support of the fill and building loads. Table 6.2.1 below provides the recommended excavation depths and excavation bottom elevations at each of the boring locations: Table 6.2.1— Recommended Excavation Depths and Excavation Bottom Elevations Boring Ground Surface Elevation Estimated Excavation Depth (ft)l Estimated Excavation Bottom EIevationl B-1 844.4 1 * 843Y2* B-2 845.8 4* 842* B-3 842.8 61/2* 836%2* B-4 842.7 11 %2 831 TH-1 Not Measured 51/2* Not Measured TH-2 Not Measured 6* Not Measured TH-3 Not Measured 4* Not Measured TH-4 Not Measured 1 * Not Measured TH-5 Not Measured 1 * Not Measured TH-6 Not Measured 8V2 Not Measured I Excavation depths and excavation bottom elevations sounded to the nearest % foot. *Excavation to design basement floor elevation of 836.55, and footing elevations of about 835.55 should extend into competent naturally deposited soils. The depths of excavation shown in Table 6.2.1 above are based on the soil conditions at the specific boring locations and test hole locations. Since conditions will vary away from these locations, we recommend that AET geotechnical personnel observe and evaluate the competency of the soils in the building excavations prior to placement of new fill. Page 6 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. In Boring B-3, we encountered soft lean clays from about 11'/2 to 14 feet. These soils are wet, likely due to perched water in the laminations of silty sand and silt, and probably became disturbed during sampling. This provided an N -value which is lower than the actual condition of the clays would indicate. It is our judgment that these clays would have a higher N -value than shown if they were not disturbed. We recommend these soils be explored during excavation of the basement level. If these or other fine alluvial soils become disturbed during excavation, they should be subcut and replaced with compacted fill. In areas where the recommended excavation will extend deeper than planned bottom -of -footing elevations, the excavation bottom should be enlarged horizontally beyond the outside edges of the perimeter building footings to provide support of the lateral loads that extend down and out from the footings and through the fill. This lateral excavation should be enlarged at least 1 -foot horizontally beyond the edges of the footings for each vertical foot of fill needed below the footings (i.e. 1:1 lateral oversizing). Based on our observations of the samples, it is our judgment that the darker colored clayey fill soils and the topsoil which will be removed during excavation of the building and the pond do not appear suitable to re -use as structural fill. Excavated inorganic clays, silty sands, clayey sands, and sands may be re -usable; however, they should be free of debris and rubble.. The silty and clayey soils may also require moisture conditioning (either moistening of dry soils or drying of wet soils) to obtain moisture contents that are suitable for compaction. 6.2.2 Filling and Compaction We recommend the fill placed in the building excavations to support the building footings consist of inorganic sands, sands with silt, silty sands, clayey sands, or sandy lean clays. The fill should be free of organics and miscellaneous rubble or debris. Frozen soils should not be used as fill, and fill should not be placed over frozen soils. We caution that the silty sands and clayey soils are moisture sensitive and more difficult to work with than sands, especially when placed over sensitive fine alluvial soils. The clayey fill should be placed and compacted at moisture contents between +2% to -3% of their respective optimum moisture contents as determined by the Standard Proctor test (ASTM: D698). Sands and sands with silt can be placed at a wider range of moisture contents, although if they are too dry they may need to be moistened to be effectively compacted. Page 7 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. If wet clays or wet conditions exist at the bottom of the excavation, or if groundwater is present, we recommend using free draining sands as fill until filling operations are at least 2 feet above the water or wet conditions. The free draining sands should have no more than 5% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #200 sieve and no more than 40% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #40 sieve. We recommend all fill placed below the building footings and floor slab be compacted in thin lifts to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density. This includes all backfill placed around footings and along walls, as well as all utility trench backfill. If any areas exist where more than 8 feet of fill will be placed below building footings, we recommend limiting the total thickness of clay fill to 8 feet or less. If more than 8 feet of clay fill is used, excessive settlements could occur due to long term compression of the clayey fill. We recommend using sand fill, having no more than 10% of the particles finer than the #200 sieve, as fill to make up the difference between the 8 feet of clay and the building footing grades. If fill will be placed on a sloping excavation, we recommend benching or terracing the sloped surface (benches cut parallel to the slope contour) prior to placing the fill. Benching is recommended where slopes are steeper than 4:1 (H:V). 6.3 Building Foundations After completion of the excavation and refill operation as recommended above, it is our opinion the building can be supported by conventional spread footings. We recommend placing perimeter foundations for heated building spaces at least 42 inches below exterior grade for frost protection. Interior footings within heated buildings can be placed at a convenient depth below the floor slab. Thickened slab "footings" should also be acceptable in heated building areas. Exterior footings in unheated building spaces, such as canopy footings or loading dock footings, should be placed at least 60 inches below exterior grade. After completing the excavation and refill operation, we recommend the building footings be designed using a net maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). This design pressure should provide a factor of safety of three with respect to the ultimate bearing capacity. Total foundation settlements should be 1 -inch or less, and differential settlements should be I/2 -inch or less. Page 8 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. 6.4 Building Floor Slab It is our opinion that the building floor slab can be supported on -grade by the new compacted fill after performing the recommended excavation and refilling operation. Using a clay subgrade as a limiting condition, we recommend the floor slab be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction (k -value) of 150 pci. Consideration should be given to placing at least 6 inches of free draining sand or gravel immediately below the slab and above the clay subgrade soils. The sand and gravel will improve moisture -vapor transmission protection, and provide a better subgrade. If at least 6 inches of free draining sand or aggregate base (MnDOT Spec. 3138 Class 5 or 6) is placed immediately below the floor slab and above the clayey subgrade, we recommend using a k -value of 175 pci. For recommendations pertaining to moisture and vapor protection of interior floor slabs, we refer you to the standard sheet entitled "Floor Slab MoistureNapor Protection" at the end of this report. Typically, the use of moisture and vapor protection of interior slabs is recommended if moisture sensitive floor coverings will be placed over the on -grade slab. 6.5 Exterior Building Fill 6.5. I Perimeter Building Fill The existing near -surface soils around the building are likely to consist of silty and clayey soils. These soils are judged to be frost susceptible and will heave if they freeze. When the soils freeze and heave, this will cause corresponding upward movements of exterior slabs, sidewalks, stoops, or other features. The heaving will also cause elevation differences between door jambs and adjacent sidewalks, stoops, or exterior slabs that may create trip hazards for pedestrians. Ultimately the soils will thaw, lose strength, and settle; however, the sidewalks and slabs likely will not return to their original elevation. Refer to our standard sheet "Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction" found at the end of this report for more information. Often, sub -excavation of the frost susceptible soils is performed and they are replaced by non - frost susceptible sands. To provide noticeable improvement, at least 18 inches of frost susceptible soils should be removed and replaced with non -frost susceptible sands. Shallower excavation is possible if naturally deposited sands (SP or SP -SM) are encountered within 18 inches of the bottoms of the slabs and stoops. We recommend the non -frost susceptible sands have no more than 8% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #200 sieve and no more than 40% finer than the #40 sieve. We caution that drainage of the sand layer will be needed if silty Page 9 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. and clayey soils exist below the sand. Drain tiles should be placed at the bottom of the sand layer to collect and discharge water that may accumulate in the sands, which could lead to the formation of ice lenses. 6.5.2 Backfill Compaction Fill that is placed below sidewalks, stoops, and exterior slabs should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density. Fill placed in landscaped areas should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density. Fill that will be in the top 3 feet of pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 100%. 6.6 Below -Grade 'Walls We recommend the backfill placed around the perimeters of all below -grade basement walls and elevator pit consist of free -draining sands having no more than 8% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #200 sieve and no more than 40% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #40 sieve. This sand backfill should be used within a wedge-shaped zone that extends outward from the wall at least 2 feet at bottom -of -footing elevation and then upward and outward from the wall at a 30 degree angle from vertical. All excavation backslopes must also meet OSHA requirements. In landscaped areas, the sand backfill against the walls should be covered with about one foot of low permeability soil (preferably clay) which is graded to shed surface water away from the building. We recommend the lower level floor slab be constructed prior to backfilling the basement walls. All walls should be properly braced before, during, and after backfilling. Because slower draining silty and clayey soils may exist at bottom -of -footing elevation, drain tiles should be installed to remove water from the sand backfill. The drain tiles should be placed at the bottom of the sand backfill, at about bottom -of -footing elevation. Drain tiles should be provided with adequate slope to direct the water to sumps for removal of the collected water. We also recommend the below -grade walls be damp -proofed prior to backfilling. Because the basement walls will not be allowed to rotate at the top during backfilling (either because the first floor will be in place or lateral bracing will be provided), we recommend the wall design be based on an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pcf using the at --rest case. Passive lateral pressures could also act on the foundations. Sand fill should be used as backfill on both sides of the footings; therefore, we recommend designing the walls and foundations using an Page 10 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. equivalent passive fluid weight of 400 pcf. Assuming silty sands or clayey sands will exist below at least some of the building foundations, we recommend using this condition as the governing factor. Therefore, we recommend using a friction factor of 0.35 for calculating sliding resistance. We recommend using a factor of safety of two for the calculated passive resistance and friction resistance values. Refer to our standard sheet entitled `Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control" at the end of this report for further information and details. 6.7 Pavements 6.7.1 Subgrade Preparation All surface vegetation and highly organic soils should be removed from below future pavement areas. In addition, we recommend removing any organic soils and soft/unstable soils that may exist within the upper 3 feet of the subgrade (also called the critical subgrade zone). After removing surface vegetation and soft/unstable soils, the inorganic soils exposed in the subgrade excavations should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, blended, and then recompacted. Following preparation and compaction of existing soils, fill should be placed as needed to reattain subgrade elevation. All fill should be placed and compacted per the requirements of Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1 (Specified Density Method). This specification requires soils placed within the upper 3 feet of the subgrade be compacted to a minimum of 100% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry weight as defined in ASTM: D698, at water contents of 65% to 102% of their respective optimum water content. A reduced minimum compaction level of 95% can be used below the upper 3 feet of the subgrade zone. Refer to our standard sheet "Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design" at the end of this report for further details. We recommend using inorganic sands, silty sands, clayey sands, or clay as fill. The fill should be free of miscellaneous rubble and debris. The fill should be placed and compacted per the requirements of Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3171, described above. If sands or silty sands are placed over clayey subgrade soils, subsurface drainage should be provided to prevent build-up of water within the sands and silty sands. This can be accomplished by placing "finger drains" or short segments of drain tiles which are connected to catch basins in low elevation areas. Where paved areas are relatively level, and if finger drains are not frequent, longer, parallel drainage lines should be placed through the level areas to provide more Page 11 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. subsurface drainage. The clayey subgrade below the sands and silty sands should be graded and sloped to promote subsurface movement of the water to the drain tiles and finger drains. 6. Z2 Subgrade Stability and Test Roll Subgrade stability within the critical subgrade zone is important for pavement support, construction, and performance. After final subgrade elevation is established, the stability of the Subgrade soils should be evaluated prior to placing the sand subbase layer and/or the aggregate base layer. The test roll should be performed using a loaded, tandem -axle dump truck malting repeated passes over the subgrade. 6.7.3 Pavement Section Thicknesses Assuming the pavements are placed on a clay or clayey sand subgrade which passes a test roll procedure, we recommend the bituminous pavements be designed using an R -value of 15. Based on this R -value, we recommend the following pavement section thickness designs as shown in Table 6.7.3 below: Table 6.7.3 -- Pavement Thickness Design (Assumes R -value of 15) Bituminous Material Light Duty Traffic Heavy Duty Traffic Bituminous Wear 11/z inches 2 inches Bituminous Non -Wear 2 inches 21/2 inches Class. 5 Aggregate Base 6 inches 8 inches Total Section Thickness 9% inches 12% inches 6.7.4 Pavement Maintenance Even if placed and properly compacted on a stable, prepared subgrade, bituminous surfaces will crack in 1 to 3 years primarily due to temperature related expansion and contraction. We recommend that a regularly scheduled maintenance program, consisting of patching of cracks and local distressed areas, be implemented after construction. Seal coating of the bituminous pavement surfaces after 3 to 5 years often helps prolong their pavement life. 6.8 Stormwater Infiltration An infiltration basin is proposed in the vicinity of Boring B-5. The bottom of this basin is planned to be at elevation 830. At this depth, Boring B-5 indicates the soils should consist of mixed till, including lean clays, clayey sands, and silty sands. These soils axe considered to be Page 12 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. slow draining and not conducive to infiltration. Design of an infiltration system should use the infiltration rates provided in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Minnesota Stormwater Manual (MSM). According to the August 22, 2016 version of the MSM, the recommended design infiltration rate will be 0.06 in/hr for clayey sands and clays and 0.45 in/hr for silty sands. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 Potential Difficulties 7.1.1 Water in Excavations Water may collect in excavation bottoms during times of inclement weather or snow melt, or groundwater may enter deeper excavations. To allow observations of the excavation bottoms, to reduce the potential for soil disturbance, and to facilitate filling operations, we recommend water be removed from within the excavation during construction. We anticipate the groundwater can be handled with conventional sump pumping in shallower excavations. Deeper excavations in sands and silty sands may require the use of well points. 7.1.2 Disturbance of Soils The alluvial clays and silty sands, as well as much of the fill, may become disturbed due to construction traffic, especially if they are wet. If soils become disturbed, they should be subcut to the underlying undisturbed soils. The subcut soils can then be dried and recompacted back into place, or they should be removed and replaced with drier imported fill. In deeper excavations where groundwater may accumulate, it may be necessary to remove wet and disturbed soils and place crushed gravel to provide a stable working surface and to allow the pumping of ground water from the excavations. 7.1.3 Cobbles, Boulders, Debris, and Rubble Although not detected by the borings, some rubble and debris may exist within the fill soils at locations away from our borings. Larger gravel or cobbles might also exist in the fill soils and in the naturally deposited alluvial soils. These larger pieces will make excavating procedures and driving of piles more difficult than normal if they are encountered. Page 13 of 14 Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. 7.2 Excavation Backsloping If excavation faces are not retained, the excavations should maintain maximum allowable slopes in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards 29 CFR), Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations" (can be found on wwviv.osha.gov). Even with the required OSHA sloping, water seepage or surface runoff may induce sideslope erosion which would require slope maintenance. 7.3 Observations and Testing The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found at our test boring locations. Since the soil conditions can be expected to vary away from the soil boring locations, we recommend on-site observations by AET geotechnical personnel during construction to evaluate these potential changes. Soil density testing should also be performed on new fill placed in order to document that project specifications for compaction have been satisfied. 8.0 LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of scope, budget, and schedule, our services have been conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied, is intended. Important information regarding risk management and proper use of this report is given in Appendix B entitled "Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use". Page 14 of 14 FLOOR SLAB MOISTURENAPOR PROTECTION Floor slab design relative to moisture/vapor protection should consider the type and location of two elements, a granular layer and a vapor membrane (vapor retarder, water resistant barrier or vapor barrier). In the following sections, the pros and cons of the possible options regarding these elements will be presented, such that you and your specifier can make an engineering decision based on the benefits and costs of the choices. GRANULAR LAYER In American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302JR-04, a "base material" is recommended over the vapor membrane, rather than the conventional clean "sand cushion" material. The base layer should be a minimum of 4 inches (100 mm) thick, trimmable, compactable, granular fill (not sand), a so-called crusher -run material. Usually graded from 1% inches to 2 inches (38 to 50 mm) down to rock dust is suitable. Following compaction, the surface can be choked off with a fine -grade material. We refer you to ACI 302.1R-04 for additional details regarding the requirements for the base material. In cases where potential static water levels or significant perched water sources appear near or above the floor slab, an under floor drainage system may be needed wherein a draintile system is placed within a thicker clean sand or gravel layer. Such a system should be properly engineered depending on subgrade soil types and rate/head of water inflow. VAPOR MEMBRANE The need for a vapor membrane depends on whether the floor slab will have a vapor sensitive covering, will have vapor sensitive items stored on the slab, or if the space above the slab will be a humidity controlled area. If the project does not have this vapor sensitivity or moisture control need, placement of a vapor membrane may not be necessary. Your decision will then relate to whether to use the ACI base material or a conventional sand cushion layer. However, if any of the above sensitivity issues apply, placement of a vapor membrane is recommended. Some floor covering systems (adhesives and flooring materials) require installation of a vapor membrane to limit the slab moisture content as a condition of their warranty. VAPOR MEMBRANE/GRANULAR LAYER PLACEMENT A number of issues should be considered when deciding whether to place the vapor membrane above or below the granular layer. The benefits of placing the slab on a granular layer, with the vapor membrane placed beIow the granular layer, include reduction of the following: • Slab curling during the curing and drying process. • Time of bleeding, which allows for quicker finishing. • Vapor membrane puncturing. • Surface blistering or delamination caused by an extended bleeding period. • Cracking caused by plastic or drying shrinkage. The benefits of placing the vapor membrane over the granular layer include the following: • A lower moisture emission rate is achieved faster. • Eliminates a potential water reservoir within the granular layer above the membrane. • Provides a "slip surface", thereby reducing slab restraint and the associated random cracking. If a membrane is to be used in conjunction with a granular layer, the approach recommended depends on slab usage and the construction schedule. The vapor membrane should be placed above the granular layer when: • Vapor sensitive floor covering systems are used or vapor sensitive items will be directly placed on the slab. • The area will be humidity controlled, but the slab will be placed before the building is enclosed and sealed from rain. • Required by a floor covering manufacturer's system warranty. The vapor membrane should be placed below the granular layer when: • Used in humidity controlled areas (without vapor sensitive coverings/stored items), with the roof membrane in place, and the building enclosed to the point where precipitation will not intrude into the slab area. Consideration should be given to slight sloping of the membrane to edges where draintile or other disposal methods can alleviate potential water sources, such as pipe or roof leaks, foundation wall damp proofing failure, fire sprinkler system activation, etc. There may be cases where membrane placement may have a detrimental effect on the subgrade support system (e.g., expansive soils). In these cases, your decision will need to weigh the cost of subgrade options and the performance risks. OIREP013 (12/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. FREEZING WEATHER EFFECTS ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION GENERAL Because water expands upon freezing and soils contain water, soils which are allowed to freeze will heave and lose density. Upon thawing, these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave and density/strength loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition. Heave is greater in soils with higher percentages of fines (silts/clays). High silt content soils are most susceptible, due to their high capillary rise potential which can create ice lenses. Fine grained soils generally heave about 1/4" to 3/8" for each foot of frost penetration. This can translate to 1" to 2" of total frost heave. This total amount can be significantly greater if ice lensing occurs. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Clayey and silty soils can be used as perimeter backfill, although the effect of their poor drainage and frost properties should be considered. Basement areas will have special drainage and lateral load requirements which are not discussed here. Frost heave may be critical in doorway areas. Stoops or sidewalks adjacent to doorways could be designed as structural slabs supported on frost footings with void spaces below. With this design, movements may then occur between the structural slab and the adjacent on -grade slabs. Non -frost susceptible sands (with less than 5% passing a #200 sieve) can be used below such areas. Depending on the function of surrounding areas, the sand layer may need a thickness transition away from the area where movement is critical. With sand placement over slower draining soils, subsurface drainage would be needed for the sand layer. High density extruded insulation could be used within the sand to reduce frost penetration, thereby reducing the sand thickness needed. We caution that insulation placed near the surface can increase the potential for ice glazing of the surface. The possible effects of adfreezing should be considered if clayey or silty soils are used as backfill. Adfreezing occurs when backfill adheres to rough surfaced foundation walls and lifts the wall as it freezes and heaves. This occurrence is most common with masonry block walls, unheated or poorly heated building situations and clay backfill. The potential is also increased where backfill soils are poorly compacted and become saturated. The risk of adfreezing can be decreased by placing a low fiiction separating layer between the wall and backfill. Adfreezing can occur on exterior piers (such as deck, fence, or other similar pier footings), even if a smooth surface is provided. This is more likely in poor drainage situations where soils become saturated. Additional footing embedment and/or widened footings below the frost zones (which include tensile reinforcement) can be used to resist uplift forces. Specific designs would require individual analysis. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Foundations, slabs and other unprovements which may be affected by frost movements should be insulated from frost penetration during freezing weather. If filling takes place during freezing weather, all frozen soils, snow and ice should be stripped from areas to be filled prior to new fill placement. The new fill should not be allowed to freeze during transit, placement or compaction. This should be considered in the project scheduling, budgeting and quantity estimating. It is usually beneficial to perform cold weather earthwork operations in small areas where grade can be attained quickly rather than working larger areas where a greater amount of frost stripping may be needed. If slab subgrade areas freeze, we recommend the subgrade be thawed prior to floor slab placement. The frost action may also require reworking and recompaction of the thawed subgrade. OIREP015 (12/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BASEMENT/RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND WATER CONTROL DRAINAGE Below grade basements should include a perimeter backfill drainage system on the exterior side of the wall. The exception may be where basements lie within free draining sands where water will not perch in the backfill. Drainage systems should consist of perforated or slotted PVC drainage pipes located at the bottom of the backfill trench, lower than the interior floor grade. The drain pipe should be surrounded by properly graded filter rock. A filter fabric should then envelope_ the filter rock. The drain pipe should be connected to a suitable means of disposal, such as a sump basket or a gravity outfall. A storm sewer gravity outfall would be preferred over exterior gravity drainage, as the latter may freeze during winter. For non -building, exterior retaining walls, weep holes at the base of the wall can be substituted for a drain pipe. BACKFILLING Prior to backfilling, dampproofing or waterproofing should be applied on perimeter basement walls. The backfill materials placed against basement walls will exert lateral loadings. To reduce this loading by allowing for drainage, we recommend using free draining sands for backfill. The zone of sand backfill should extend outward from the wall at least 2 feet, and then upward and outward from the wall at a 30 degree or greater angle from vertical. As a minimum, the sands used on this project should contain no greater than 5% ofparticles (by weight) finer than the #200 sieve and no more than 40% of the particles (by weight) finer than the #40 sieve. The sand backfill should be placed in lifts and compacted with portable compaction equipment. This compaction should be to the specified levels -if slabs or pavements are placed above. Where slab or pavements are not above, we recommend capping the sand backfill with a layer of clayey soil to minimize surface water infiltration. Positive surface drainage away from the building should also be maintained. If surface capping or positive surface drainage cannot be maintained, then the trench should be filled with more permeable soils, such as the Fine Filter or Coarse Filter Aggregates defined in MnDOT Specification 3149. You should recognize that if the backfill soils are not properly compacted, settlements may occur which may affect surface drainage away from the building. Backfilling with silty or clayey soil is possible but not preferred. These soils can build-up water which increases lateral pressures and results in wet wall conditions and possible water infiltration into the basement. If you elect to place silty or clayey soils as backfill, we recommend you place a prefabricated drainage composite against the wall which is hydraulically connected to a drainage pipe at the base of the backfill trench. High plasticity clays should be avoided as backfill due to their swelling potential. LATERAL PRESSURES Lateral earth pressures on below -grade walls vary, depending on backfill soil classification, backfill compaction and slope of the backfill surface. Static or dynamic surcharge loads near the wall will also increase lateral wall pressure. For design, we recommend the following ultimate lateral earth pressure values (given in equivalent fluid density values) for a drained soil compacted to 95% of the Standard Proctor density and a level ground surface. Equivalent FIuid Density Soil Type Active (pcf) At -Rest (pet) Free Draining Sands (SP or SP -SM) 35 50 Silty Sands (SM) 45 65 Fine Grained Soils (SC, CL or ML) 70 90 Basement walls are normally restrained at the top which restricts movement. In this case, the design lateral pressures should be the "at -rest" pressure situation. Retaining walls which are free to rotate or deflect should be designed using the active case. Lateral earth pressures will be significantly higher than that shown if the backfill soils are not drained and become saturated. OIREP014(12/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND DESIGN GENERAL Bituminous pavements are .considered layered "flexible" systems. Dynamic wheel loads transmit high local stresses through the bituminous/base onto the subgrade. Because of this, the upper portion of the subgrade requires high strength/stability to reduce deflection and fatigue of the bituminous/base system. The wheel load intensity dissipates through the subgrade such that the high level of soil stability is usually not needed below about 2 feet to 4 feet (depending on the anticipated traffic and underlying soil conditions). This is the primary reason for specifying a higher level of compaction within the upper subgrade zone versus the lower portion. Moderate compaction is usually desired below the upper critical zone, primarily to avoid settlements/sags of the roadway. However, if the soils present below the upper 3 feet subgrade zone are unstable, attempts to properly compact the upper 3 feet zone to the 100% level may be difficult or not possible. Therefore, control of moisture just below the 3 feet level may be needed to provide a non -yielding base upon which to compact the upper subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance is dependent on the soil subgrade drainage and frost characteristics. Poor to moderate draining soils tend to be susceptible to frost heave and subsequent weakening upon thaw. This condition can result in irregular frost movements and "pop -outs," as well as an accelerated softening of the subgrade. Frost problems become more pronounced when the subgrade is layered with soils of varying permeability. In this situation, the free -draining soils provide a pathway and reservoir for water infiltration which exaggerates the movements. The placement of a well -drained sand subbase layer as the top of subgrade can minimize trapped water, smooth frost movements and significantly reduce subgrade softening. In wet, layered and/or poor drainage situations, the long-term performance gain should be significant. If a sand subbase is placed, we recommend it be a "Select Granular Borrow" which meets Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2B2. PREPARATION Subgrade preparation should include stripping surficial vegetation and organic soils; where the exposed soils are within the upper "critical" subgrade zone (generally 2 feet deep for "auto only" areas and 3 feet deep for "heavy duty" areas), they should be evaluated for stability. Excavation equipment may make such areas obvious due to deflection and rutting patterns. Final evaluation of soils within the critical subgrade zone should be done by test rolling with heavy rubber -tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck. Soils which rut or deflect I" or more under the test roll should be corrected by either subcutting or replacement; or by scarification, drying, and recompaction. Reworked soils and new fill should be compacted per the "Specified Density Method" outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1 (a minimum of 100% of Standard Proctor density in the upper 3 feet subgrade zone, and a minimum of 95% below this). Subgrade preparation scheduling can be an important consideration. Fall and Spring seasons usually have unfavorable weather for soil drying. Stabilizing non -sand subgrades during these seasons may be difficult, and attempts often result in compromising the pavement quality. Where construction scheduling requires subgrade preparation during these times, the use of a sand subbase becomes even more beneficial for constructability reasons. SUBGRADE DRAINAGE If a sand subbase layer is used, it should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage to prevent water build-up. This can be in the form of draintile lines which dispose into storm sewer systems, or outlets into ditches. Where sand subbase layers include sufficient sloping and water can migrate to lower areas, draintile lines can be limited to finger drains at the catch basins. Even if a sand layer is not placed, strategically placed draintile lines can aid in improving pavement performance. This would be most important in areas where adjacent non -paved areas slope towards the pavement. Perimeter edge drains can aid in intercepting water which may infiltrate below the pavement. OIREP016 (12/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. Appendix A Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Notes Unified Soil Classification System Figure 1 — Boring Locations Subsurface Boring Logs Test Hole Logs Appendix A Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 01-07196A A.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The subsurface conditions at the site were recently explored by drilling and sampling five (5) standard penetration test borings and six (6) test holes. The locations of these borings and test holes appear on Figure 1, preceding the Subsurface Boring Logs and Test Hole Logs in this appendix. A.2 SAMPLING METHODS A.2.1 Split -Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to N60 Values Standard penetration (split -spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM: D1586 with one primary modification. The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2 -inch O.D. split -barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140 -pound hammer dropped from a height of 30 inches. The sampler is driven a total of 18 inches into the soil. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the standard penetration resistance or N -value. Our method uses a modified hammer weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod. In the past, standard penetration N -value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy transferred to the split -spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of its potential energy due to the friction inherent in this system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N60 blow count. The most recent drill rigs incorporate an automatic haminer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and subsequently results in lower N -values than the traditional N60 values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100°/x. Therefore, the intent of AET's hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140 -pound weight falling 30 inches. The current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N -values, stating that N -values of 100% or more have been observed. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that the accuracy deviation of the N -values using this method is significantly better than the standard ASTM Method. A.2.2 Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SU) Sample types described as "DS" or "SU" on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger. Because the auger disturbs the samples, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate. A.2.3 Sampling Limitations Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present in the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs. Determining the thickness of "topsoil" layers is usually limited, due to variations in topsoil definition, sample recovery, and other factors. Visual -manual description often relies on color for determination, and transitioning changes can account for significant variation in thickness judgment. Accordingly, the topsoil thickness presented on the logs should not be the sole basis for calculating topsoil stripping depths and volumes. If more accurate information is needed relating to thickness and topsoil quality definition, alternate methods of sample retrieval and testing should be employed. A.3 CLASSIFICATION METHODS Soil descriptions shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USC) system. The USC system is described in ASTM: D2487 and D2488. Where laboratory classification tests (sieve analysis or Atterberg Limits) have been performed, accurate classifications per ASTM: D2487 are possible. Otherwise, soil descriptions shown on the boring logs are visual -manual judgments. Charts are attached which provide information on the USC system, the descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs. The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional origin of each soil layer is interpreted primarily by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development can sometimes aid this judgment. Appendix A - Page 1 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Appendix A Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Report No. 01-07196A AA WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water Level Measurements" on the logs: • Date and Time of measurement • Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement • Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow -stem auger at time of measurement • Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole • Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is encountered • Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid The true location of the water- table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This is possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include: permeability of each soil layer in profile, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings, presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing. A.5 LABORATORY TEST METHODS A.5.1 Water Content Tests Conducted per AET Procedure 01 -LAB -010, which is performed in general accordance with ASTM:D2216 and AASHTO:T265. A.6 TEST STANDARD LIMITATIONS Field and laboratory testing is done in general conformance with the described procedures. Compliance with any other standards referenced within the specified standard is neither inferred nor implied. A.7 SAMPLE STORAGE Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30 days. Appendix A - Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS Symbol Definition AR: Sample of material obtained from cuttings blown out the top of the borehole during air rotary procedure. B, H, N: Size of flush joint casing CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in inches COT: Clean-out tube DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry DR: Driller (initials) DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights DP: Direct push drilling; a 2.125 inch OD outer casing with an inner 1 %2 inch ID plastic tube is driven continuously into the ground. FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in inches HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter in inches LG: Field logger (initials) MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of samples and for the ground water level symbols N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N -value) in blows per foot (see notes) NQ: NQ wireline core barrel PQ: PQ wireline core barrel RDA: Rotary drilling with compressed air and roller or drag bit. RDF: Rotary drilling with drilling fluid and roller or drag bit REC: In split -spoon (see notes), direct push and thin-walled tube sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample. In rock coring, the length of core recovered (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered. SS: Standard split -spoon sampler (steel; 1.5" is inside diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated otherwise SU Spin -up sample from hollow stem auger TH Test hole; usually excavated with backhoe TW: Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter in inches WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside the borehole after "falling" through drilling fluid WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and hammer WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel ♦ : Water level directly measured in boring 7: Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance TEST SYMBOLS Symbol Definition CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test DEN: Dry density, pcf DST: Direct shear test E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf HYD: Hydrometer analysis LL: Liquid Limit, % LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf OC: Organic Content, % PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field; L - Laboratory PL: Plastic Limit, % qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approximate) qc: Static cone bearing pressure, psf q,,: Unconfined compressive strength, psf R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm -ems RQD: Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length as a percent of total core run) SA: Sieve analysis TRX: Triaxial compression test VSR: Vane shear strength, remolded (field), psf VSU: Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight %-200: Percent of material finer than #200 sieve STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES (Calibrated Hammer Weight) The standard penetration test consists of driving a split -spoon sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in ASTM: D1586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0. F below the slash. The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC" column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N column. The disparity is because the N -value is recorded below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in ASTM: D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even extend more than 18"). OIREP052C (7/11) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. .too UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 0 AMERICAN ASTM Designations: D 2487, D2488 a ENGINEERING Q 60 20 TESTING, INC. o Z W Z Z aso Soil Classification Notes Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Group Group Name ABased on the material passing the 3 -in 3 L) 40 Db=2.5mm Symbol CL 0-m -n) sieve. If field sample contained cobbles or Coarse -Grained Gravels More Clean Gravels Cu>4 and 1 <Cc<3 GW Well graded gravel Soils More than 50% coarse Less than 5% rw boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or than 50% fraction retained fines Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3 GP Poorly graded gravel boulders, or both" to group name. retained on on No. 4 sieveGravels .4 with 5 to 12% fines require dual No. 200 sieve Gravels with Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel symbols: Fines more GW -GM well -graded gravel with silt than 12% fines c Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Fa—vel"- GW -GC well -graded gravel with clay GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay Sands 50% or Clean Sands Cu>6 and l <Cc<3 SW Well -graded sand more of coarse Less than 5% °Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual fraction passes fines° Cu<6 and/or I>Cc>3E SP Poorly -graded sand symbols: No. 4 sieve SW -SM well -graded sand with silt Sands with Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand SW -SC well -graded sand with clay Fines more SP -SM poorly graded sand with silt than 12% fines ° Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand m SP -SC poorly graded sand with clay Fine -Grained Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above CL Lean cla T Soils 50% or Liquid limit less "A" line! (D30)2 more passes than 50 PI<4 or plots below ML Sil ECU = D60 /Dio, Cc = the No. 200 "A" line] Dlox D6o sieve organic Liquid limit—oven dried <0.75 OL Organic cla FIf soil contains >15% sand, add "with (see Plasticity Liquid limit —not dried Organic siltK,L.M,o sand" to group name. Chart below) OIf lines classify as CL -ML, use dual ymbol GC -GM, or SC -SM. Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat cla Liquid limit 50 If fines are organic, add "with organic or more PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt ' - fines" to group name. 'If soil contains > 15% gravel, add "with organic Liquid limit—oven dried <0.75 OH Organic clay gravel" to group name. Liquid limit — not driedL M.Q Organic If Atterberg limits plot is hatched area, siltK soil is a CL -ML silty clay. Klf Soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200 Highly organic Primarily organic matter, dark PT Peat g Y g Y soil in color, and organic in odor add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. LIf soil contains >30% plus No. 200, .too SIEVEANALYSIS E- =w ayerirg (n+ -Sieve Nwkb -] 3 21h 1 % iL 4 10 20 40 60 .1r0= 0 6 5 a Q 60 20 .40 Z W Z Z aso D.=15 ao F 30 3 L) 40 Db=2.5mm 4 20 CL w a 20 rw 0n=0.075mm .10 .7 0 too .4 0 For classification of fine-grained soils and fineaained fraction of coarse-grained sols "A, 0 Equation of line Hodzontal at PI = 4 to LL= 25.5. then Pf = 0.73 (LL -20) Equation of U'Lline` vertical at LL=l6 to P1 7. = G then PI = 0.9 (LL -8) MH aR OH --- cL-M L aR OL predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MIf soil contains >30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. "PI>4 and plots on or above "A" line. 0Pl<4 or plots below "A" line. PPI plots on or above "A" line. Q plots below "A" line. RFiber Content description shown below. 61 it) s .005 01 ,0 .10 .16 20 30 .40 50 60 .70 80 90 .100 .110 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Q= -RR= G'o=20° °=o=sx-56 5 Dao.o t° Plasticity Chart ADDITIONAL TERMINOLOGY NOTES USED BY AET FOR SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION, Grain Size Gravel Percentages Consistengy of Plastic Soils Relative Density of Non -Plastic Soils Tenn Particle Size Term Percent Term N -Value, BPF Term N -Value, BPF Boulders Over 12" A Little Gravel 3%-14% Very Soft less than 2 Very Loose 0-4 Cobbles 3" to 12" With Gravel 15%-29% Soft 2-4 Loose 5-10 Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Gravelly 30%-50% Firm 5 - 8 Medium Dense 11-30 Sand #200 to #4 sieve Stiff 9-15 Dense 31-50 Fines (silt & clay) Pass #200 sieve Very Stiff 16-30 Very Dense Greater than 50 Hard Greater than 30 Moisture/Frost Condition Layering Notes Peat Description Organic Description (if no lab tests) (MC Column) Soils are described as or anic, if soil is not peat D (Dry): Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to and is judged to have sufficient organic fines Laminations: Layers less than Fiber Content touch. content to influence the Liquid Limit properties. %2" thick of Term (Visual Estimate,) M (Moist): Damp, although free water not differing material Slightly organic used for borderline cases - visible. Soil may still have a high Root Inclusions water content (over "optimum"). or color. Hemc Peat: Greater than 67% With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity Hemic Peat: 33 — 67°/n g q ty W (Wet/ Free water visible, intended to describe non -plastic soils. Lenses: Pockets or layers Sapric Peat: Less than 33% of roots to influence the soil Waterbearing): p greater than %z" properties. Waterbearing usually relates to Trace roots: Small roots present, but not judged sands and sand with silt. thick of differing to be in sufficient quantity to F (Frozen): Soil frozen material or color. significantly affect soil properties. 01 CLS021 (07/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MIf soil contains >30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. "PI>4 and plots on or above "A" line. 0Pl<4 or plots below "A" line. PPI plots on or above "A" line. Q plots below "A" line. RFiber Content description shown below. 61 it) s .005 01 ,0 .10 .16 20 30 .40 50 60 .70 80 90 .100 .110 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Q= -RR= G'o=20° °=o=sx-56 5 Dao.o t° Plasticity Chart ADDITIONAL TERMINOLOGY NOTES USED BY AET FOR SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION, Grain Size Gravel Percentages Consistengy of Plastic Soils Relative Density of Non -Plastic Soils Tenn Particle Size Term Percent Term N -Value, BPF Term N -Value, BPF Boulders Over 12" A Little Gravel 3%-14% Very Soft less than 2 Very Loose 0-4 Cobbles 3" to 12" With Gravel 15%-29% Soft 2-4 Loose 5-10 Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Gravelly 30%-50% Firm 5 - 8 Medium Dense 11-30 Sand #200 to #4 sieve Stiff 9-15 Dense 31-50 Fines (silt & clay) Pass #200 sieve Very Stiff 16-30 Very Dense Greater than 50 Hard Greater than 30 Moisture/Frost Condition Layering Notes Peat Description Organic Description (if no lab tests) (MC Column) Soils are described as or anic, if soil is not peat D (Dry): Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to and is judged to have sufficient organic fines Laminations: Layers less than Fiber Content touch. content to influence the Liquid Limit properties. %2" thick of Term (Visual Estimate,) M (Moist): Damp, although free water not differing material Slightly organic used for borderline cases - visible. Soil may still have a high Root Inclusions water content (over "optimum"). or color. Hemc Peat: Greater than 67% With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity Hemic Peat: 33 — 67°/n g q ty W (Wet/ Free water visible, intended to describe non -plastic soils. Lenses: Pockets or layers Sapric Peat: Less than 33% of roots to influence the soil Waterbearing): p greater than %z" properties. Waterbearing usually relates to Trace roots: Small roots present, but not judged sands and sand with silt. thick of differing to be in sufficient quantity to F (Frozen): Soil frozen material or color. significantly affect soil properties. 01 CLS021 (07/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. 01 CLS021 (07/08) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. V � `� `!r � i If ' 1�- �•. ti';�';1 �'-r. � „��i•�r �� , I�! � � �o � � �i!' i; ' �i!'� is r itr `, \ \ •�.''.-�Ci _ � •F •I;jj l r j , h,l ,1 \•, _^� Yom- + i P,I —41 • t � '--� - _ IL -fill r• t , l -1 I i1 r , lr l' • t f l O 4 p `, > i rrfff1j 1 �.Q a U3 ;•t 1, i � es.' �m � t,'.�j f }11i,1' , ' it �, 1 a aawU- 0 co � � ` � 1C�!• r 1 m ab C t� O a 4D - AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BOWNG LOG AET No: 01-07196 Log of Boring No. B-1 (p. 1 of 1) Project: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN DEPTH Surface Elevation 844.4 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL c,420 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel; trace FILL 16 1 roots, dark grayish brown, a little black 8 M SS 22 : COARSE SAND, a little gravel, medium to fine grained, 2 :'. ALLUVIUM brown, moist, loose (SP) 35 M SS 3 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 3 41 brown, moist, dense to medium dense to dense (SP) 5 20 M SS 15 6- 7 8 22 M SS 16 9 10 34 M SS 16 11 12 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine grained, light brown, moist, dense to very dense (SP -SM) 32 M SS 16 13 14- 15 56 M SS 17 16- 17 18 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, grayish brown, a : TILL 19 little brown, very dense (SM) 20 86 M SS 18 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-19/2 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED PTHCASING E PH CEPDIDEELEEL DTH FLUID LVL V THE ATTACHED 4/21/17 1:30 21.0 19.5 21.0 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 4/21/17 THIS LOG DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 92C 03/2011 u 1-lltilC-u0u AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET No: 01-07196 Log of Boring No. B-2 (p.1 of 1) Project: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN DEPTH Surface Elevation 845.8 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL qp FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IIs. FILL, mostly lean clay with organic fines, a little FILL 1 gravel and silty sand, trace roots, black, dark 9 M SS 15 21 brown and brown 2 13 M SS 14 FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, brown 3 LEAN CLAY, trace roots, dark brown, stiff 3//4 TOPSOIL OR (CL) (possible fill) FILL 5 23 1 LEAN CLAY, brown, firm (CL) FINE ALLUVIUM 8 M SS 4 CLAYEY SAND, brawn, firm, laminations of MIXED 6 silty sand (SC) :: ALLUVIUM 7 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine grained, COARSE 8 brown, moist, medium dense (SM) :-LUVIUM 16 M SS 12 9- 10 10- 17 17 M SS 15 11 12 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, light brown, moist, medium23 M SS 16 13 dense, laminations of silty sand (SP -SM) 14- 15 23 M SS 16 16- 6171$ 17- 18 19- 20— 23 M SS 15 21 22- 23 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, brown, a little 24 grayish brown, moist, dense, lenses and laminations of sandy silt (SM) 25 41 M SS 16 26 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 1 � � 0-24/2 3.25 HSA DATE TIME STD CASING DEPTH I FLUID LEVEL LEVEL T� ATTACHED 4/21/17 9:15 26.0 24.5 25.9 None SHEETS FOR AN 4/21/17 9:30 26.0 24.5 25.9 None EXPLANATION OF BO G4/21/17 COMPLETED: 4/21/17 9:35 260 . None . 140 None TERMINOLOGY ON THIS LOG DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 92C 03/2011 v i-Vru1._-wv AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET No: 01-07196 Log of Boring No. B-3 (p. 1 of 1) Project: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, N N DEPTH Surface Elevation 842.8 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL qp FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE FILL, mixture of clayey sand, sandy lean clay, FILL 1 silty sand and lean clay, a little gravel, trace 10 W/M SS 20 11 roots, black and dark grayish brown, a little 2 brown 3 20 M SS 18 24 4 LEAN CLAY, trace roots and organic fines, TOPSOIL 5 black, stiff (CL) 12 M SS 18 20 6- 7— LEAN CLAY, trace roots, dark brown, stiff to FINE very stiff (CL) ALLUVI[ 13 M SS 17 27 1% 8 9 10 18 M SS 16 30 1% 11 12 LEAN CLAY, light brown and gray mottled, soft, laminations of silty sand and sandy silt 3 W SS 18 36 13 (CL/CH) 14 LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light brownish MA 15 gray, stiff, lenses and laminations of sandy silt 12 W SS 8 361'/a (CL) 16 17 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium : COARSE grained, dark brown, moist, loose (SM) ALLUVFUM 18 9 M SS 10 19 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 20 medium grained, brown, moist, medium dense, 13 M SS 10 lenses and laminations of silty sand (SP -SM) 21 22- 23 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 24 medium grained, light brown, moist, dense (SP -SM) 25 42 M SS 14 26 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-241/2' 3.2511 HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE -M DEPTH DRILLING FLUIDLEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 4/21/17 11:45 26.0 24.5 26.0 None SHEETS FOR AN 4/21/17 12:05 26.0 24.5 26.0 None EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 4/21/17 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 92C THIS LOG 03/2011 01-DHR-060 ANIERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AET No: 01-07196 Log of Boring No. B-4 (p. 1 of 1) Project: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN DEPTH Surface Elevation 842.7 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN OC PL qp FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. FILL, mostly clayey sand, a little silty sand, trace FILL 1 roots, dark brown 8 M SS 18 20 2 FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel and clayey sand, grayish brown 15 M SS 13 3 FILL, mixture of lean clay, clayey sand and silty 4 sand, a little gravel, trace roots, dark brown and dark gray, a little brown 5 b M SS 10 21 6- 7- 78 8— 13 M SS 15 19 9- 10— 21 M SS 18 I1 I2 SILTY SAND, trace roots, fine grained, black, ` ": TOPSOIL 13 loose (SM) 10 M SS 16 3.5 14 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, brown, stiff (CL) FINE 15 ALLUVIUM 11 M SS 10 26 1'/4 16- 17— SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine grained, : COARSE brown, medium dense (SM) ALLUVIUM 11 M SS %2 18 19 SAND, a little gravel, medium to fine grained, 20 light brown, moist, medium dense (SP) 16 M SS 16 21 22- 23 24- 25 11 M SS 15 26- 62728 27- 28— SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, SAND, 29 grayish brown, waterbearing, medium dense (SP) 30 11 W SS 12 31 END OF BORING _T_T DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO „ 0-2912 3.25 HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPT�'H CAVE-IN DEP H FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED 4/21/17 10:35 31.0 29.5 29.5 28.7 SHEETS FOR AN 4/21/17 10:45 31.0 29.5 29.4 28.4 EXPLANATION OF TERMINOLOGY ON BORINCOMPLETED: 4/21/17 4/21/17 10:55 31.0 None 18.3 None DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 92C THIS LOG 03/2011 01-DHR-060 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING- LOG AET No: 01-07196 Log of Boring No. B-5 (p. 1 of 1) Project: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN DEPTH Surface Elevation 832.9 GEOLOGYN MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o-#20 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. FILL, mixture of lean clay, silty sand and clayey FILL 1 sand, a little gravel, trace roots, black and dark 7 M SS 16 14 brown 2 4 M SS 20 18 4 LEAN CLAY, trace roots, black to dark brown, TOPSOIL firm (CL) 5 M X32 SS 11 5 6 LEAN CLAY, brown, firm (CL) FINE ALLUVIUM 5 M SS 14 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium J.1, COARSE grained, brown, moist, loose, lenses of lean clay :ALLUVIUM 8- 9— 9 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine grained, 9 M SS 18 brown, moist, loose (SP -SM) 10 1t 9 M SS 18 12 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 13 medium grained, grayish brown, waterbearing, 21 W SS 2 medium dense to loose, lenses and laminations 14 of lean clay (SP -SM) 15 10 W SS 15 15 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 0-141/2' 3.25" HSA 4/21/17 2:15 14.0 12.0 13.9 13.5 SHEETS FOR AN 4/21/17 2:25 14.0 12.0 13.1 12.6 EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 4/21/17 4/21/17 2:50 16.0 14.0 14.7 13.8 TERMINOLOGY ON THIS LOG DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 92C Al r'N'Lm ncr 03/2011 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. TEST HOLE LOG AET JOB NO: 01-07196 LOG OF BORING NO. Thi -1 (p° 1 of 1) PROJECT: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, NI[N DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL G420 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. FILL, mostly clayey sand with organic fines, FILL M DS 1 trace roots, black FILL, mostly sand, a little gravel and silty sand, M DS TOPSOIL OR 2 brown and dark brown 3— LEAN CLAY, trace roots, black (CL) (possible FILL M DS 4 fill) LEAN CLAY, brown (CL) WIC M DS 5 5 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to COARSE medium grained, brown, moist (SP -SM) ALLUVIUM M DS 8 SAND, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, 10 light brown, moist (SP) 11 M DS 12- 13 14 BOTTOM OF TEST HOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH G FLUID LEVEL ATE LEVEL THE ATTACHED 0-14 Backhoe 5/11/17 9:15 14.0 None None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: MPMRig: TTTTI !/A 03/2011 AMERICAN ® ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. TEST HOLE LOG AET JOB NO: 01-07196 LOG OF BORING NO. _ TIHI-2 (p° I of 1) PROJECT: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, NDN DEPNTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o-#20 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Z YPE FILL, mixture of silty sand and clayey sand, FILL M DS 1 trace roots, black M DS FILL, mostly sand with silt, a little gravel and 2 silty sand, brown 3 --FILL, mostly lean clay, a little clayey sand and gravel, trace roots, black and dark brown M DS 5 LEAN CLAY, trace roots, brown, a little gray FINE 7 mottled (CL)F///,ALLUVIUM M DS 8- 9— BOTTOM OF TEST HOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 0-9' Backhoe 5/11/17 9:30 9.0 None None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: MPMRig: 03/2011 V 1 -Ll Lll-V V V AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. TEST HOLE LOG AET JOB NO: 01-07196 LOG OF BORING NO. TH-3 (po I of I) PROJECT: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday ,ane; Eagau, NIN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o-#20 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN' FILL, mostly silty sand with organic fines, trace FILL M DS I roots, black FILL, mostly sand with silt, a little gravel and 2 silty sand, brown, a little dark brown M DS 3- 4 4— SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to SAND : COARSE S medium grained, brown, moist (SP -SM) ALLUVIUM 6- M DS 7- 9- 910M 10- M DS 12- 13 1 BOTTOM OE TEST MOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLEDD H CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN D PTH NG FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 0-14f Backhoe 5/11/17 9:20 14.0 None None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: Mi MRig: 03/2011 V AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-07196 LOG OF BORING NO. TH-4 (p° I of 1) PROJECT: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, NN FIELD &LABORATORY TESTS DEPTH IN SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE TYPE REC IN. FEET MATERIAL DESCRIP'T'ION DEN LL PL %-#20 FILL, mostly silty sand, a little clayey sand, trace FILL M DS I roots, black ; COARSE SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine grained, 2 ALLUVIUM brown, moist (SM) M DS 3 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 5 medium grained, light brown, moist (SP -SM) 6- M DS 7- 8 8- 9 9 10 11 M DS 12 13 14 BOTTOM OF TEST HOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 0-14' Backhoe 5/11/17 9:25 14.0 None None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: MPMRig: ni r�Tm ntr 03/2011 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. TEST HOLE LOG AET JOB NO: 01-07196 LOG OF BORING NO. TH-5 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Beyond Self Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MIDI EP' 'H SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL a#20 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. SILTY SAND WITH ORGANIC FINES, trace : TOPSOIL OR M DS 1 roots, fine grained, black (SM) {possible fill) : ' FILL SILTY SAND, fine grained, brown, moist (SM) COARSE 2 M DS Al.LUVIUM SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, fine to 4 medium grained, brown to light brown, moist (SP -SM) 5 M DS 6- 7- 79M 9- M DS 11 12 13 BOTTOM OF TEST (HOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL TIM ATTACHED 0-13' Backhoe 5/11/17 9:40 13.0 None None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF ORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: MPMRig: 03/2011 u i-lit-etc-uou AMERICAN L ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. TEST HOLE LOG AFT JOB NO: 01-071.96 LOG OF BORING NO. TH-6 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Beyond Self ,Storage; Courthouse Lane & lHloUday Vane; Eagan, MIS DEPPITH SURFACE ELEVATION: GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE ' WC DEN LL PL 420 FILL, mostly silty sand with organic fines, trace FILL M DS 1 roots, black 2 FILL, mixture of silty sand and sand with silt, a little gravel, brown M DS 3 4 FILL, mixture of silty sand and clayey sand, a little gravel, gray, dark brown and black 5- M DS 6 Perched water level at about 8%' g M DS g SILTY SAND, trace roots, fine grained, black to = : TOPSOIL dark brown (SM) M DS 10 M DS LEAN CLAY, brown (CL) FINE 11 ALLUVIUM 12 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fine grained, COARSE brown, moist (SM) ALLUVIUM M DS 13 14 BOTTOM OF TEST HOLE DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-14t Backhoe DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH EDPTLEEEEL DPTH EH FLUID LL LV T ATTACHED 5/11/17 9:50 14.0 None 8.5x SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 5/11/17 THIS LOG DR: LG: MPMRig: 03/2011 u I -Ut iK-ueu Revised Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review Beyond Self -Storage; Courthouse Lane & Holiday Lane; Eagan, MN AMERICAN May 24, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07196A TESTING, INC. Appendix B Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Appendix B Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Report No. 01-07196A B.1 REFERENCE This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks relating to subsurface problems which are caused by construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. This information was developed and provided by ASFEI, of which, we are a member firm. B.2 RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION B.2.1 Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure thea services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one, not even you, should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. B.2.2 Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. B.2.3 A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on A Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project -specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typically factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes, even minor ones, and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. B.2.4 Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. 1 ASFE, 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733: «Nvw.asfe.ora Appendix B — Page 1 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC Appendix B Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Report No. 01-07196.A. B.2.5 Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identified subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. B.2.6 A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not over rely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. B.2.7 A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. B.2.8 Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognizes that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. B.2.9 Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In the letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage thein to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they. need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional tudy. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. B.2.10 Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their report. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. B.2.11 Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenvironmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Appendix B — Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC