HomeMy WebLinkAboutOVERLOOK ESTATES S-6954 & S-6954A
~UNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
Departmen~ of Health & Environmental _rotection
Environmental Health Division
Case Review Worksheet
Case Number
S-6954
Date Received
March 31, 1983
Comments Due By
April 20, 1983
Subdivision or Project Title:
Overlook Estates Subdivision
( ) Public water available
( ) Community water available
( ) Public sewer available
Comments:
/
January 20, 1977 R & M No. 652178
Paul Nangle
Attorney at Law
705 West 6t3a Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
.RE: Materials Site Investigation, Eagle .River, Alaska
Dear ~. Nangle:
In response to your request of November 12, 1976, for an evaluation of a
potential materials source near Eagle River, a field investigation was
begun on Nove.~Lber 18, 1976; Subseqllently, we have conducted laborato~],
tests to identify the apparent grain-size distribution and natural
moisture content of the on-site material. Three (3) copies of the
Materials Site Investigation Report which includes our recommendations
for the possible development of the materials site are enclosed.
We are pleased t~ ~tave been given ~his opportunity to perfoz~ this
investigation. Should you have any questions with regard to this report
or if we can be of assistance to you in any way please contact us at
your earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
R & M CONSULTANTS, INC.
Rooney ~/
ident
PRELI~INARY MATERIALS SITE INVESTIGATION
EAGLE Ri-v-ER, ALASKA
p REPA3{ED FOR
PAUL N~NGLE
I. INTP, OQUCTION
A prelhninary materials site investigation near Eagle River, Alaska, has
been completed. ~ne site is located approxi~.atel/ 8~3 miles east of
Eagle River along the north side of Eagle River Road, more specifically
described as SE1/4 NE1/4, ~E1/4 S%~1/4 >~1/4, N1/2 ~1/4 SW1/4 ~E1/4,
SE1/4 ~1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4, N1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 ME1/4, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4
NE!/4, and NE1/4 NE1/4 ~1/4 SE1/4 of Section 25, T14N, .R1W, Seward
}~eridian, Alaska. The subsurface investigation was performed in accord~tce
wi~ verbal inst_-uctions received from >~r. Paul N~ngle on November 12,
1976. On-site field exploration was initiated on November 18 and completed
on December 1, 1976.
it is our understanding that the site is being considered as a potential
source of coarse-grained soil to be used as a construc=ion material.
It is also understood that much of this material might be used for the
reconstruction of the Eagle River Road and would nee~to meet specifications
as set forth in the Alaska Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.
The purpose of this report is to:
1). Descr~_b~e soil conditions as enco.~ntered during subsurface
exploration.
2). Evaluate the data obtained from =~_~d exploration and laboratory
testing programs.
3). Present our findings and recommendations regarding availability
and suitability of the soil as a construction material.
3
II. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
The soil exploration and sampling operations were perfomned utilizing a
track-mounted C~.~-45 rotary-type hydraulic drilling u_~it, a truck-
mounted C~-55 rota~l-type hydraulic drilling unit, and a rubber-tired
Drott 40 hydraulic backhoe. A total of two borings and four test pits
were placed within the boundaries of ~he proposed development. Test
hole and test pit locations are shown on ~he Location Diagram, Drawing
A-OI. Test Pit 4 was advanced to a total depth of 18 feet below existing
ground surface; Test Pit 3 and Test Hole 2 to 13 feet and ~ae remaining
t.~ee holes ranged in depth from 15 ~o 16 feet. Drawings B-03 ~hrough
B-05 present the complete logs of ~he tes~ holes and test pits.
Test Hole 1 was advanced using a continuous flight 8-inch diameter
hollow-st~ auger with representative material being obtained from the
auger flights in the form of "grab" samples and by means of split-spoon
sampling procedures modified from ASTM Specification D-1586-67. The
modification in this latter procedure consisted of using a 2.5" I.D.
split-spoon sampler driven with a 340-po~d drop hammer. For this
procedure, a split-barrel sampler is driven into undisturbed natural
soil with a drop-hammer having a 30-inch free fall. The penetration.
resistance (as measured by blow count) gives an indication of t~e relative
density of the in-place, unfrozen natural soil.
Test Hole 2 was advanced using a continuous flight.6-inch diameter solid
stem auger and Test Pits 1 through 4 were excavated with the bac'~hoe.
Representative "grab" samples were obtained from each hole by the field
geologist.
After visual classification in the field, all soil samples were returned
to the !~-boratory for further examination and testing.
Iii. LA~O.RATOKY TESTI}~G
~T~e laboratory testing prcgr~ was limited to ~he evaluation of general
soil index properties. Laboratory deter?,ination of the natural moist"-re
content on representative s~.ples was perfor~,ed according to AS~.[ Specifica-
tion D-2216-66. Particle size distribution a~aly$is was perform.,~ed on
selected samples in accordance with AS~4 Specification D-422-63. The
results of the laborato-~Y testing progr~ are - prided on Drawing C-01o
IV. GENEraL SITE- DE$CRIPTIC~
For ~e purpose of topographic description, the site can be divided
an eastern section ~%d a western section. The western section consists
of a g!acio-fluvial fan wi~ boulders one to ~o feet in diameter occasion-
ally dotting the surface. This fan is of Quaternary age ~nd is characterized
by a broad sloping fan-like appearance. The eastern section of ~he site
is ~o~ated on the lower slopes of a mountain and was inaccessable to
exploration equipment because of its higk degree of inclination. A
small stream approximates the boundary between ~he eastern a~d western
sections. The vegetation consists primarily of birch, aspen, and spruce
trees wi~h some cottonwood trees in the vicinity of the stream.
Because of the site topography, the field investigation was limited to
the western portion of the site. Therefore, all field descriptions,
discussions and conclusions noted in this report generally apply only to
that area.
v. SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS
The entire area is overlain by a silty organic mat approximately 0.2
feet t_hick. Beneath the organic mat, gravel to sandy gravel with varyin~
am,.ounts of silk predominated to ~he total dep~s explored. As much as
30% of the material in the gravelly layere consisted of cobbles and
boulders as shown in the logs of Test Pits 2 ~d 4. Cobbles are defined
as material between three and six inches ~n diameter with boulders beinq
over six inches in diameter. No permafrost: was encountered during the
field exploration and it is felt that ~%e possibility of encountering
deep frozen material at this site is remote.
vi. GROUNDWAT~.R CONDITIONS
No water table was enco=ntered during the field exploration of the site
and it is felt that perched water is unlikely in this area due to the
permeable nature of the soil. However, the gravelly layers were observed
to be wet in all of the test pits with the exception of Test Pit 2, and
and locally, heavy precipitation could result in standing water in open
excavations.
VII. DISCUSSICM, CONCLUSIONS A~ KECO~t~I~ATICNS
The ultimate disposition and intended use of ~he site material will be
the primary factor governing the quantities of accept~)le material mined
~
at'chis locationl': In addi~ion,'t~he nature of the mining operations and
the actual depositional character and composition of the deposits will
quantitatively influence the available volumes of high quality material°
Most of the soil on site contains boulders and cobbles which may re?~ire
c~ashL~g before utilization (depending on governing specifications)
may contain excessive am. ounts of fine grained material that could necessi-
tate sieving and/or washing in order to satisfy quality requirements.
These factors should be given consideration ~ the overall evaluation of
the development of the ..materials source.
in addition to oversize material restrictions, ~na frost susceptibility
of the soil must be considered. For estLmating ?~rposes, soil can be
considered acceptable for use as a non-frost susceptible (NFS) material
if it has been less than 10% (by weight) passing a 5200 sieve. Soil
with 10% to 20% (by weight) passing a ~200 sieve is marginally acceptable
as an NFS construction fill and soil wi~h more ~d?_n 20% (by weight)
passing on ~00 sieve is normally not acceptable as an NFS fill material.
Of course, applicable specifications will govern final N~S criteria.
Based upon our laboratory tests, most of the soil samples tested fell
into the 0-10% range; however, r~ving oversize material could cause an
~nacceptable increase in the percentage by weight of soil passing a ~200
sieve. In addition, material which is only marginally acceptable in its
natural state could be rendered unacceptable if oversize material is
removed.
Based upon the information gained from t-he t~o test hole and four test
pit field exploration progr~.m, ~_nd t~he 1Ln, ited laboratory test da~a, it
.... ~.~'~, / . ., . · ,,.. ,..~.~,,. ~,.~., --.,~,,.,,.,,~,~',, '~":~,.>,~r',..~,.,.,~,'~-~.=x.~-.~ ---.,,.. ~ -. · .. ..... ~',.i.-.,-._.9?. .......
· : · i "." r"'~"'~--""Jx'~/ .... 'r'~-d .....,..,..-:.~ ~.:~'.,.t,,.~ ~. ¥,/.~2..'~.,~., ..~.,?; -- ,~:..~--. ~ ·, .,-.,- .~
~%pp.ears that the site. is.unsuitable .for development as a construction
materials site without employing some me~ns of processing the materia~
before use.
Any of four different materi~ls processing procedures could be employed
at the site to modify the material to meet expected governing specifica-
tions, for ex~,~ple, the Alaska Standard Specifications for Highway
Construction as sho,~n in Appendix A. The four types of processing are:
Crushing - This technique reduces t_he size of the large
particles in the material by breaking them into smaller pieces.
Screening - This technique can segregate material accordL~g to
particle size.
3. Washing - This tecb_nique reduces the amount of fines in &
material by washing them away with water.
4. Some comfoination of the above.
The crushing process can produce products ~%at are in high demand such
as concrete aggregate or roadway material. By utilizing a crushing
process, the boulders and cobbles could be reduced to a desirable size.
The crushing process, however, produces two products that can be enviror~entally
undesirable: noise and dust. For ~his reason, a crushing plant should
be located in an area where it will cause minimal disturbance to
surrounding inhabitants.
Before a crushing process could be ~plemented, additional lab testing
should be undertaken to determine the so~dness of ~he material to be
crushed~ In addition, noise suppression and dust disposal techniques
should be analyzed.
Screening c~n segregate material by particle size and the segregated
material can possibly be sold as rip-rep, orn~.ental rock, filter rock,
concrete a~gregate, depending upon its size. D~ screening can, however,
create ~ ~desir~-ble dust source and may be e~viro~entelly ur. appealing.
A washing process at this site might be advantageous if used in conjunction
with ei~er a crushing or a screening process. By their nature, washing
pl~ts re,dire a high vol~T,e of water to operate and because of environmental
restraints, tko wash water cannot be discharged into a stream or lake
without some m~er of filtration. Therefore, a settling pond should be
incorporated to trap silt and clay sized particles if a washing plant is
pla~ed.
The available quantity of useable material available for processing at
this site is roughly estimated to be 800,C00 cubic yards. Up to 30
percen~ of this material is oversize (boulders and cobbles) ~nd because
of the highly variable silt content, all material must be classified as
only marginally non-frost susceptable unless processed. The following
assumptions were used in establishing ~is estimate:
1. Useable material extends only to ~ae ~epths investigated (it
..a .... al extends to depths of at
is suspected that similar -
least 20 fee~ throughout ~te %¢orkab!e portion of the site,
quantity estimates are probably conservative).
Only the western portion of the site is workak;le. (This does
not imply that the eastern portion of ~he site ca~uuot be
mined).
3. A buffer zone will remain along property lines and along the
creek.
4. One or two acres of the site would be needed for waste storage
and processing equipment.
5o NO waste area for storage of overburd~ will be required.
The sides of the excavation will be r~intained on a one to one
(1:1) slope.
We reco~end that the following be considered if ~he site is to be
developed as a materials source.
long range plan should be developed which will allow ~he land to
'b~ fully utilized even after the salable materials have been removed.
2. A minimum buffer zone of 50 feet should be provided along the
boundaries of the site and along the small stream that flows ~urough
~_he site. This provision will not only reduce ~he enviromme~tal
Lmpact during the extraction period, but will also provide a
favoraDle condition for future development.
After the site.is excavate~ ta the depths explored, a further ..........
subsurface investigation should be undertaken to determine the
feasibility of continued mining~ Initial site planning and development
should not preclude excavation to depths greater ~han those explored
if acceptable material is found at greater dep~s.
Due to the inclination of the site, a large excavation may require
terracing to prevent slope failures and provide ease of mobility
for extraction e~dipment.
If the material is to be processed to elLmLnate ~he high percentage
of cobbles, boulders and fines we feel ~kat a crushing operation
(if termed feasible by additional lab tests and enviror~enta!
factors) would be superior to a scieening operation. Crusher
products are generally in greater defend ~an ~he specialized
screenin9 products and therefore are usu=l!y r~re economically
beneficial to produce.
If a crushing operation is termed feasible, ~he crusher may produce
more fines than acceptable to any governing specifications~ Therefore,
some provision for washing the crushed material should be included
in the processing operation.
t
'~P- I
7"b4 - /
/!
VIIIo CLOSURE ..... '~' ~
We appreciate being given the opportunity to perform this investigation.
If you have any questions regarding the field inYestigation or this
report, please contact us at you~ e~rliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
R & M CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ed Yarma2<, Jr.
Geotechnical Engineer
EY/~.~./dap
SOILS
_..CL.ASS[FICATION, CONSISTENCY AND SYMBOLS.._:
CLASSIFICATION: Ic~en~if~c'a~ibn and cla~{~ida'~ion o~ ~he s~ is acco~plished
accord~ce wi~h ~he Unified So~ Clas~lca~{on System. Normally, the grain
dis~bution de~e~m~es clas~ica~ion of the soil. ~ne ~oR is dabbled accortina
major ~d m~or const{buen~sw{~h the m~or elements serves as modifiers
major elements. For cohesive so~s, the clay becomes thepr~c{palnoun
other maj~r~so~cons~{tuenbs use~ as mod{fler; {.e. s~ clay, when the clay
are such ~hat ~he claydom~a~es so5 properties. M~or so2 constituents may
added ~o ~he class~ica~{on 5reg~down ~n accordance w{~h the par~{cle size proportion
listed below; i.e. sandy s~t w/some ~ravel, ~race clay.
no c~ ~ 0 - 3~ trace - 3 - 12~ ~ome - 13 - 30~
SOIL CONSISTENCY - CRITERr. A: SoY consisteacy as de~L-~ed below a-~.d
by normal ~i~ld and l~ora~o~ me~hods appl{es o~y ~o non-~rozen ma~er~!. For
~hese mater{~, the ~uance o~ ~uch fac:or~ a~ so~ s~c~e, i.e.
sys~e~s~ s~a~e cra~s, s~<ens[des, e~c., mustbe t~en ~o cons{darat{oa
~ m~<~g ~y coz:re!at{on with ~he consistent' vaIuesEstedbe!ow. Inpe~afros~
Cohes{o~ess Cohas{ve
N*~lows/ft) Relax-ira
Loose 0 - 10 0 to 40~
b'Ied{um Dense 10 - 30 40 to 70~
Dense ~0 - 60 70 to 90~
Very Dense - 60 90 to 100~
*Standard Pene~ca~ion "N": Blow~ per foo~ of
a 140-pou~d har~, met ~al/in~ 30 [.~oh-=s on a
2-inch OD spl{t-spoon excep~ where noted.
DRILLING SY~..q30L $
T- (tsf)
Very Sof~ 0 - 0.25
Sof~ 0.25 - 0.5
S~= 0.5 -1.0 .
F{x-r~ 1.0 - 2.0
Very Fi~m 2.0 - 4.0
Hard - 4.0
WO: Wash Out WD:
W]'.: Water Level BCR:
WCI: Wet: Cave In ACK:
DCI: Dry Cave In AB:
WS: l~n kle Sampl;mg TD:
Wh{Ie Dr LllLng'
Before Cashng Removal
After Cas{ng Removal
AJ~er Boring
Total Depth
Note: Water levels {nd{.¢ated on the bo.~mg log~ are the levels re. easu~ed {m the
borLng ak the t{raes {ndicated. In pervious unfrozen soils, the {nd{cared e!evakion$
are considered to represent actual ground water conditions. In ~ape~vious and
frozen soils, accurate deterr~-[nations o~ ground water elevations cannot be obtaLued
with{n a lJ.-nited period o~ observation a~ud other evidence on' ground \rater e!evat:ons
and condi~"lons are requLred.
~C{~XO: G.L.B.
?
I'.-~:, 3-1-72
M E'"rAMORPHIO RG~K
ICE, h:ASSIVE
ICE-SILT
ORGANIC SILT
SILT GRACING TO
SAN0¥ SILT
SA,*-'C~ GRAVEL,
SCATT-ZREO CCBBLES
(ROCK FRAGMENTS)
INTE.~.-AYEREO SAND
~ $A~;OY GRAV~
SILT'T CLAY
St ..... 1.4" SPLIT SPOON
Ss ..... I.~." SPLIT SPOON
SI ..... ~5" SPLIT SPOON
Sh ..... 2.5" SPLIT SPOOM
Sx ..... ?.O" SPLIT SPOON
Sz ..... 1.4" SPLIT SPOON
Sp ..... 2.5" SPLIT SPOON,
Hs ..... 1.4" SPLIT SPOON
S¢.MPLER TYPE SYMBOLS
WITH 47~*~~ HAMMER
VtlTH 140~ HAMME~
WITH I40~ HAMME8
WITH 3~ HAMMER
WITH I~0~ H~MME~
WITH ~40~ HAMMER
PUSHED
DRIVEN WITH AIR HAM~4ER
Ts .... SHELBY TUBE
Tm .... MODIFIED SHELBY TUBE
Pb .... PITCHER BARREL
Cs .... CORE BARREL WITH SINGLE TUEE
Cd .... CORE BARREL WITH DOUBLE TU~E
8s .... BULK SAMPLE
A ..... AUGER SAMPLE
G ..... GRAB SAMPLE
HI ..... 2.5" SPLIT SPOON DRIVEN WITH AIR HAMMER
NOTE: SAMPLER TYPES ARE EITHER NOTED ABOVE THE BORING LOG OR
SAMPLE DEPTH.
ADJACEHT TO IT AT T~..E RESPECTIVE
GRAD4TIO, V4&
TYP!CAL BO,=,IHG LOG
Cons~ Visible Ic~ 0'-7' lC~ -SILT
90, 56.2%
CHA / I G E
, ~' I
S~OY SI LT
~--eco;v~/Foor . SAI/PL~ ,VU,~IBE~
SANDY GRAVEL
AgC~rlO>l 30' ' D~I4L D~P~H
~ ;ZD.-WHI&[ ORI&L,;'/g, A.B.--AF?ER BOR/MG
F.?, ¢1 .~1: L.u.S.
I C~, O: G.L.-%
EXPLAHATION
OF
SELECTED SYMBOLS
Ir.s. N/A
G~iO: N/A
Sh
11-19-76 Elev. 279.2
0.0'
SA~IDY GRAVEL
w/ SCALE SILT 1.0'
SOt-~ ~ILT
Occasional Boulders 3.0
G~'~I~Y S.~D w/ T~CE SILT
~-~ny Cobbles
G~¥ZEL w/ SO:,~ SA2~
~any Cobbles ~ ~
Some Boulders ""~
~Dense
TH 2
11-19-76
:Elev o 276.7
All Samples A -
SA~Y GRAVEL w/ TP~%C~-
TO SO:,~ SILT
0.0~
--.1.5 '
GRAVEL'#/ SO~.~
Many Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
De~se
GRAV]~L
Loose, Dry
8.5'
Sh
@
[.L~ny Cobbles
Refusal on Largs Bo~lder
Refusal on Large Bod'~.der!3'0'
EY
12-3-76
LCG OF TEST HOLES
PAUT~ N ~GLE
/I,~O,.NO 65217~
: LOwG. NO. B-03
12-1-76
GRAVELLY S~D w/ $O~'~ SILT
Occasional Cobbles and Boulders
--3o0'
SA~Y G.o~A%~L w/ TRACE S1-LT
Hany Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
Dense, Wet
15.0' T.D.
Refusal on Large Boulders
TP 2 , Elev. 2y6~7
,.12-1-76 i Ail. Samples A
$A~Y GRAVEL w/ SO~.~
25-30% Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
Brown, Loose
SA~Y G.~A~L TO G~A~L ~/
Approxir~tely 30% Cobbles
and Boulders, Loose
16.0'
Refusal on Large Boulders
LSC~L~: 1"=3' . . .
LOG OF T~BT PITS
PAUL ~GLE
EAGLE P. IVER~ ALASKA
~3
12-1-76
TP 4
Elev~ 271.0
12-1-76 ' Ail:. S.a~mples A
0.0'
S~IDY GP~VEL w/ SO~r~ SILT
Many Cobbles
Some Boulders ~-},
Loose, We~ /
6.0~
GRAVEL w/ SO:.~ SAZKD;
TRACE TO SO[LE SILT
f~ny Cobbles
Some Boulders
TRAC~.'~ TO SO~-~ SILT
ApProximately 20% Cobbles
Occasional Boulder
~Loose, Wet
Large Boulders @ 12.0'
Refusal on Bedrock
or Large Boulder
13.0' T.D __
Approximately 30% Cobb!es~
and Boulders @ 10.0'
SA,XYDy GRA.VEL w/ ~.~?~C~ SiLT
Dense, Wet
Approximately 25% Cobbles
and Boulders
18.0" T.D~
12-3-76
i"-3 '
- ,,
1 ~.NO. 652178
LOG OF TEST P~TS
PAUL ~IANGLS:
~\GL~ R3TV~R, ALASKA
January 20, 1977 R & M No. 652178
Paul Nangle
Attorney at Law
705 West 6th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
RE: Materials Site Investigation, Eagle River, Alaska
Dear Mr. Nangle:
In response to your request of November 12, 1976, for an evaluation of a
potential materials source near Eagle k~ver, a field investigation was
begun on November 18, 1976. Subsequently, we have conducted laboratory
tests to identify the apparent grain-size distribution and natural
moisture content of the on-site material. Three (3) copies of the
Materials Site Investigation Report which includes our recommendations
for the possible development of the materials site are enclosed.
We are pleased to have been given this opportunity to perform this
investigation. Should you have any questions with regard to ~%is report
or if we can be of assistance to you in any way, please contact us at
your earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
R & M CONSULTANTS, INC.
JWR/ddp
PRELIMINARY MATERIALS SITE INVESTIGATION
EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
PREPARED FOR
PAUL NANGLE
I. INTRODUCTION
A preliminary materials site investigation near Eagle River, Alaska, has
been completed. The site is located approximately 8.3 miles east of
Eagle River along the north side of Eagle River Road, more specifically
described as SE1/4 NE1/4, NE1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4, N1/2 ~1/4 SW1/4 NE1~4,
SE1/4 NWl/4 SW1/4 NE1/4, N1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 ME1/4, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4
NE1/4, and NE1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 of Section 25, T14N, R1W, Seward
Meridian, Alaska. The subsurface investigation was performed in accordance
with verbal instructions received from Mr. Paul Nangle on November 12,
1976. On-site field exploration was initiated on Nove~ber 18 and completed
on December 1, 1976.
It is our understanding that the site is being considered as a potential
source of coarse-grained soil to be used as a construction material.
It is also understood that much of this material might be used for the
reconstruction of the Eagle River Road and would need to meet specifications
as set forth in the Alaska Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.
The purpose of this report is to:
1). Describe soil conditions as encountered during subsurface
exploration.
2). Evaluate the data obtained from field exploration and laboratory
testing programs.
3).
Present our findings and recommendations regarding availability
and suitability of the soil as a construction material.
II. SUBSUP~'ACE INVESTIGATION
The soil exploration and sampling operations were performed utilizing a
track-mounted C~-45 rotary-type hydraulic drilling unit, a truck-
mounted C5~-55 rotary-type hydraulic drilling ~mit, and a rubber-tired
Drott 40 hydraulic backhoe. A total of two borings and four test pits
were placed within the boundaries of the proposed development. Test
hole and test pit locations are shown on the Location Diagram, Drawing
A-01. Test Pit 4 was advanced to a total depth of 18 feet below existing
ground surface; Test Pit 3 and Test Hole 2 to 13 feet and the remaining
tlLree holes r~nged in depth from 15 to 16 feet. Drawings B-03 through
B-05 present the complete logs of the test holes and test pits.
Test Hole 1 was advanced using a continuous flight 8-inch diameter
hollow-stem auger with representative material being obtained from the
auger flights in the form of "grab" samples and by means of split-spoon
sampling procedures modified from ASTM Specification D-1586-67. The
modification in this latter procedure consisted of using a 2.5" I.D.
split-spoon sampler driven with a 340-pound drop hammer. For this
procedure, a split-barrel sampler is driven into undisturbed natural
soil with a drop-hammer having a 30-inch free fall. The penetration.
resistance (as measured by blow count) gives an indication of the relative
density of the in-place, unfrozen natural soil.
Test Hole 2 was advanced using a continuous flight.6-inch di~neter solid
stem auger and Test Pits 1 through 4 were excavated with the bac~dnoe.
Representative "grab" sa]nples were obtained from each hole by the field
geologist.
After visual classification in the field, all soil samples were returned
to the laboratory for further examination and testing.
III. LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAS!
The laboratory testing program was limited to the evaluation of general
soil index properties. Laboratory determination of the natural moisture
content on representative samples was performed according to AST~! Specifica-
tion D-2216-66. Particle size distribution analysis was performed on
selected samples in accordance with AST~! Specification D-422-63. The
results of the laboratory testing program are provided on Drawing C-01.
IV. GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
For the purpose of topographic description, the site can be divided into
an eastern section and & western section. The western section consists
of a glacio-fluvial fan with boulders one to two feet in diameter occasion-
~lly dotting the surface. This fan is of Quaternary age and is characterized
by a broad sloping fan-like appearance. The eastern section of the site
is {o'cated on the lower slopes of a mountain and was inaccessable to the
exploration equipment because of its high degree of inclination. A
small stre~n/n approxk~ates the boundary between the eastern and western
sections. The vegetation consists primarily of birch, aspen, and spruce
trees with some cottonwood trees in the vicinity of the stream.
at'~his locationl In ad~ition,~t~e nat~e of the mining operations and
the actual depositional character and composition of the deposits will
quantitatively influence the available vol~nes of high quality material.
Most of the soil on site contains boulders and cobbles which ma~ require
crushing before utilization (depending on governing specifications) and
may contain excessive amounts of fine grained material that could necessi-
tate sieving and/or washing in order to satisfy quality requirements.
These factors should be given consideration in the overall evaluation of
the development of the materials source.
In addition to oversize material, restrictions, the frost susceptibility
of the soil must be considered. For estimating purposes, soil can be
considered acceptable for use as a non-frost susceptible (NFS) material
if it has been less than 10% (by weight) passing a ~200 sieve. Soil
with 10% to 20% (by weight) passing a ~200 sieve is marginally acceptable
as an NFS construction fill and soil with more than 20% (by weight)
passing on ~200 sieve is normally not acceptable as an NFS fill material.
Of course, applicable specifications will govern final N~S criteria.
Based upon our laboratory tests, most of the soil samples tested fell
into the 0-10% range; however, removing oversize material could cause an
unacceptable increase in the percentage by weight of soil passing a ~200
sieve. In addition, material which is only marginally acceptable in its
natural state could be rendered unacceptable if oversize material is
removed.
Based upon the information gained from the t;~o test hole and four test
pit field exploration program, and the limited laboratory test dasa, it
~ppears that the site.is~unsuitable for development as a construction
materials site without employing some means of processing the material
before use.
Any of four different materiauls processing procedures could be employed
at the site to modify the material to meet expected governing specifica-
tions, for example, the Alaska Standard Specifications for Highway
Construction as shownn in Appendix A. The four types of processing are:
1. Crushing - This technique reduces the size of the large
particles in the material by breaking them into smaller pieces.
Screening - This technique can segregate material according to
particle size.
Washing - This technique reduces the amount of fines in a
material by washing them away with water.
4. Some combination of the above.
The' crushing process can produce products that are in high demand such
as concrete aggregate or roadway material. By utilizing a crushing
process, the boulders and cobbles could be reduced to a desirable size.
The crushing process, however, produces two products that can be enviror~entally
undesirable: noise and dust. For this reason, a crushing plant should
be located in an area where it will cause minimal distturbance to the
surrounding inhabitants.
Before a crushing process could be implemented, additional lab testing
should be undertaken to determine the soundness of the material to be
c~n/shed. In addition, noise suppression and dust disposal techniques
should be analyzed.
Screening can segregate material by particle size and the segregated
material can possibly be sold as rip-rap, ornamental rock, filter rock,
concrete aggregate, depending upon its size. Dry screening can, however,
create an undesirable dust source and may be environmentally unappealing.
A washing process at this site might be advantageous if used in conjunction
with either a crushing or a screening process. By their nature, washing
plants require a high volume of water to operate and because of environmental
restraints, the wash water cannot be discharged into a strea~, or lake
without some manner of filtration. Therefore, a settling pond should be
incorporated to trap silt and clay sized particles if a washing plant is
planned.
The available qllantity of useable material available for processing at
this site is roughly estimated to be 800,000 cubic yards. Up to 30
percent of this material is oversize (boulders and cobbles) and because
of the highly variable silt content, all material must be classified as
only marginally non--frost susceptable unless processed. The following
assumptions were used in establishing this estimate:
1. Useable material extends only to the depths investigated (it
is suspected that similar material extends to depths of at
least 20 feet throughout the workab!a portion of ~he site, so
............. ~-~-~-~-~-~-~r~ .... ,.,~, .......... .,...~ ..... ...........-~ ....... . ........ ~.-?.~., .~ .......... ~... ~
quantity estimates are probably conservative).
Only the western portion of the site is workable. (This does
not imply that the eastern portion of the site cannot be
mined).
3. A buffer zone will remain along property lines and along the
creek.
One or two acres of the site would be needed for waste storage
and processing equipment.
5. No waste area for storage of overburden will be required.
6. The sides of the excavation will be maintained on a one to one
(1:1) slope.
We recommend that the following be considered if the site is to be
developed as a materials source.
A long range plan should be developed which will allow the land to
b~ fully utilized even after the salable materials have been removed.
2. A minimum buffer zone of 50 feet should be provided along the
boundaries of the site and along the small strewn that flows through
the site. This provision will not only reduce the environmental
impact during the extraction period, but will also ]provide a
favorable condition for future development. ~
-':.'~r' .- r.-~f.~'x~/L, -.~.~,,%,%,,.e~;..~,~:~:,~;~,,~.,,~a.,,,. .... ,, ....... -, ~-...~o.,:,.. ..... ,.- ............. . ....... ,-..-.~ ...,, ~;
After the site is excavated to the depths explored, a further .......
subsurface investigation should be undertaken to determine the
feasibility of continued mining. Initial site planning and development
should not preclude excavation to depths greater ~han those explored
if acceptable material is found at greater depths.
Due to the inclination of the site, a large excavation may require
terracing to prevent slope failures and provide ease of mobility
for extraction equipment.
5o
If the material is to be processed to eliminate the high percentage
of cobbles, boulders and fines we feel that a crushing operation
(if termed feasible by additional 1~) tests and environmental
factors) would be superior to a screening operation. Crusher
products are generally in greater demand than the specialized
screening products and therefore are usu~_lly more economically
beneficial to produce.
If a crushing operation is termed feasible, the crusher may produce
more fines than acceptable to any governing specifications. Therefore,
some provision for washing the crushed material should be included
in the processing operation.
VIII. CLOSURE
We appreciate being given the opportunity to perfozm ~is investigation.
If you have any questions regarding the field investigation or this
report, please contact us at youz earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
R & M CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ed Yarmak, Jr.
Geotechnical Engineer
EY/~R/ddp
"-L.- I./ 4
SOILS
__,.CI.~ASS[FICATION, CONSISTENCY AND SYMBOLS_ ..;
" CLASSIFICATION: Iden%iflc'a%{6n and cla~'s{fidat{on o~ the s~i~ {s accomplished in
accord~cewlth the Uni~{ed So~ Class~lcat{on System. Normally, the gra~
disk.but{on determ~es classY{cation of the soil. ~ae meg is defied accord{nE to
major ~d m~or constituents with the m~or elements serv~g as mod{fiefs o~ the
major elements. For cohesive soils, the clay becomes thepr~cipalnounw{th the
other major',soHconst{tuentsused as modifier; i.e. sH~clay, when the clayp~icl~s
are such that the claydom~atessohproperties. Mh~or so~ const{tuents~ay
added to the class~lcat{on breakdown ~ accord~ce wl~h the particle size properS{on
listed below; i.e. sandy s~t w/some gravel, trace clay.
: no c~ ~ 0 - 3~ trace - 3 - 12% some - 13 - 30~
SOIL CONSISTENCY - CRITERIA: Soil consistency as defined below and deterr~,L-.ed
by normal field and laborato-~y methods applies only to non-~rozen mater~I. For
these mater{als, the influence of such facto~:s as so{1 structure, i.e. 'fissure
systems, shrinkage, cracks, sllckensides, etc., must be taken into cons{derek{on '
in making any correlation with the cons;.stency values listed below. In permafrost
zones, ~he consistency and strength o~= frozen so{ls may var), s{~nificantly and
unexplalnably with ice content, thermal regi~ne and so{1 typ~.
Cohes{onless Cohesive
T- (tsf)
N*¢lows/ft) Relative Density
Loose 0 - 10 0 to 40% Very Soft: 0 - 0.25
Medium Dense 10- 30 40 to 70~ Soft 0.25'- 0.5
Dense 30- 60 70 to 90~o St{f-~ 0.5 - 1.0 .
Very Dense - 60 90 to 100~ Firn% I. 0 - 2.0
*Standard Penetration "N": Blows per foot of Very FLrm 2.0 - 4.0
a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches on a Hard - 4.0
2-{nch OD split-spoon except where noted.
DRILLING S~f MB eLS
we: Wash Out WD:
WL: Water Level BCR:
WCI: Wet Cave In ACR:
DCI: Dry Cave In AB:
WS: V~£le Samplin~ TD:
While Drilling'
Before Casing Removal
After Casing Removal
After Boring
Total Depth
Note: Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured [n t]-~e
boring at the times karl{caked. In pervious unfrozen soils, the indicated elevations
are considered to represent actual ground water conditions. In impervious and
frozen so{Is, accurate deterrnina~ions of ground water elevations cannot be obtaLned
withLn a lk-nited period o~ observation and other evidence on gte%tad water elevations
and conditions are required.
CWN: LmD.S.
GE. NERAL
Lov,,,q. NO. B-OI
gxO: G.L.B.
OCTE: 3-1-72
GENERAL NOTES
STANDARO GYM OOLS
oOO GRAVEL LIMESTONE
IGNEOUS POCK ~
M ~TAMORPHIC ROCK
ICE~ MASSIVE
ICE-SILT
ORGANIC SILT
~hOY SILT
SILT GRADING TO
SANDY SILT
SANDY GRAVEL,
SCATTERED COBBLES
(ROCK FRAGMENTS)
IN TE.="--AY ER ED SAND
~ SAC;DY GRAVEL
SILTY CLAY
St ..... 1.4"
Ss ..... 1.4"
SI ..... ~5"
Sh ..... 2.5"
Sx ..... 2-_0"
Sz ..... 1.4"
Sp ..... 2.5"
Hs ..... 1,4"
SAMPLER TYPE SYMBOLS
SPLIT SPOON WITH 4?# HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON WITH 140# HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON WITH 140# HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON WITH 340# HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON WITH 140~t~ HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON WITH 340# HAMMER
SPLIT SPOON, PUSHED
SPLIT SPOON DRIVEN WITH AIR HAMMER
Ts .... SHELBY TUBE
Tm .... MODIFIED SHELBT TUBE
Pb .... PITCHER BARREL
Cs .... CORE BARREL WITH SINGLE TIJRE
Cd .... (;ORE BARREL WITH DOUBLE TUBE
Bs .... BULK SAMPLE
A ..... AUGER SAMPLE
G ..... GRAB SAMPLE
HI ..... 2.5" SPLIT SPOON DRIVEN WITH AIR HAMMER
NOTE: SAMPLER TYPES ARE EITHER NOTEO ABOVE THE BORING LOG OR ADJACENT TO IT AT TH,,E RES~'~¢TIVE
SAMPLE DEPTH.
TYPICAL BORING LOG
BORliVG A!UI'48ER-...,.T. H. 30- 15
DAT~ DRILL~O--~iO. 21- 70
SAMPLEFF TYPE%ss
FtA TS/?
Gr?ADATIO, VAL
FI?OZ£N
S5
Cd
Elev. 274.6 ....-ELEFAT/O,V ~iV FEET'
All S~mples Ss''''''''S~/''I?LE/? TYPE
0'
ORGANIC MAT~RIA L I'
Consi~ Visible Ice 0'-7' ICE+ML
ICE. SILT
SANDY SI LT
LiHle toNoVisible Ice 13'-~' Vx ~ICE, D~SC~IPTIO/V
~ =?lO/ 859~'f 28° GP (CO~PS OF
~ ~ %. ~ U~/I~'ED OR FAA
X ~'~rEn CC, VT~7/T
SANDY GRAVEL
95 SCHIST ~OS, VEP~L/ZSD SO/~ O~
LOC~r/~H ~0'
~ ~YO.-WHILE Dt?ILL/,VE, A.~-AFT£R
f 3 W .N: L,.u.S.
[CKD: G.L.B.
[C,£,TU: FE~. 1972
l::l&i'V1 C::r"D.~,~I. JLTANT~, IN~--_,I.
EXPLA HATION
OF
S~LECTED SYMBOLS
N/A
N/A
GENERAL
Sh
Sh
TH 1
11-19-76
Elev. 279.2
SAMDY GRAVEL
w/ SOME SILT
, 0.0'
_1.0'
GRAVELLY SA~ w/
SO~-~ SILT
Occasional Boulders
3.0I
GRAVELLY SAND w/ TRACE SILT
t.~ny Cobbles
34
5.5~
GRAVEl, w/ SO~ SAND
Many Cobbles
Some Boulders
Dense
Q 36
TH 2
11-19-76
Elev. 276.7
All Samples
S~DY GRAVEL w/ TRACE
TO SO?~ SILT
--.1.5'
GRAVEL w/ SO~ S~4qD
Many Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
Dense
GRAVEL
Loose, Dry
--8.5'
13.0'
Refusal on Large Boulder
Sh
~ 15.0'
---~f-w~ ~-o~ S~D
~.~ny Cobbles 16.0' T,D,
Refusal on Large Boulder
LOG OF TEST HOLES
PAUL NA~GLE
LA~E R/VER, ALASiKA
j LO, O. No. B-OB
TP 1
12-1-76
Ele~. 279.2 ......
Ai~ S~ples A
GRAVELLY SAND w/ SO~.~ SILT
Occasional Cobbles and Boulders
TP 2 , Elev. 2~6.7 · z
.12-1--76 ~ All. Samples A 5.0'
SANDY GRAVEL w/ $O~ SILT
25-30% Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
Brown, Loose
2.0'
--3.0'
SANDY GRAVEL w/ TRACE SILT
Hany Cobbles
Occasional Boulders
Dense, Wet
SAb~Y GRAVEL TO GRAVE~L w/
SO,GE SA>~
Approximately 30% Cobbles
and Boulders, Loose
15 0' T.D.
Refusal on Large Boulders'
16.0' T.D
Refusal on Large Boulders
fE__~.' _ 12-3_____-76
~LE: 1"=3'
LOG OF TEST PITS
PAUL ~]~NGLE
EAGLE RIGOR, ALASKA
IIF'B
GRID.
PROJ. NO 652178
O',¥O NO. B-04
· 'TP 3 Elev. 326.8 ' ~' m TP 4
~-,~ ' 12-1-76 A'~I-samples A- ~ ~J~ .... 12-1-76
0.0'
S~IDY GRAVEL w/ SOME SILT
Many Cobbles
Some Boulders
Loose, Wet
Elev. 271.0
AI~ Samples A
0.0'
GRAVEL w/ SO~ SA~;
TRACE TO SO~ SILT
Many Cobbles
Some Boulders
6.0~
GRAVEL w/ SO}~ SA/~D;
TRACE TO S0~,~ SILT
Approximately 20% Cobbles
Occasional. Boulder
, Wet
Large Boulders @ 12.0'
Refusal on Bedrock
or Large Boulder
13.0' T.D.
Approximately 30% Cobbles
and Boulders @ 10.0'
~ -- 13.0'
SANDY GRAVEL w/ TRACE SILT
Dense, Wet
Approximately 25% Cobbles
and Boulders
18.0' T.D.
: - ~-3-76
1"-3 '
LOG OF TEST PITS
PAUL %IANGLE
EAGLE RIVER, ALASKA
]~.NO 652178
(3-
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
December 14, 1983
Planning Department Attention: Chris
IIea]th and Environmental Protection
S-6954A: Overlook Estates Subdivision
The review of eighteen(18) soils logs submitted to this office
on December ]_2, 1983 indicate the following: lots will support
on-site sewer systems, however, soils characteristics will not
be used to issue on-site sewer system permits.
This departa~ent will request soils test per lot from the developer
on the soils log format used by 'this department.~
John W. Lynn
Environmental Specialist
JWL/1 j w
/
91 010 (4/76)
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Environmental Health Division
CASE REVIEW WORKSHEET
CASE NUMBER: DATE RECEIVED: COMMENTS DUE BY:
S-6954A November 3, 1983 November 18, 1983
SUBDIVISION OR PROJECT TITLE:
Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, and Tract A Overloo,k Estates Subdivision
( "i ~i PUBLIC WATER AVAILABLE (:b ~) PUBLIC SEWER AVAILABLE
(/ ) COMMUNITY WATER AVAILABLE /
COMMENTS:
We Des~ To Last
ARMSTRONG & ASSOCIATES
OONSULTING £NelNEERS
ENGINEERING · PLANNING o SURVEYING
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAG~
DEPT, OF HEALTiI
1317 E"."ast 74th Avenue ENVI~ONMENT/,,L P~-,-~ECTiON
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
(907) 349-6577
/
Date: ........ ,:CZ.:../...z...-...¢.. ~ .....................................................
Job No. ,¢~.~0.~.;~ .................................................................
Re: . . .~. . . . .v. . c. .,C.~ c. . o. ,~ :. . . . . ~:. ~ . T, T_. . ./t. . .~. .:.~ ............................
Gentlemen:
I am sending you ~Attached Sent by: [] Mail
[] Under separate cover
~ Messenger
Copies Date Description
These are transmitted as checked:
] As requested
'~For review and comment
[] For approval
~.j Approved as submitted
[] Approved as noted
] Returned for corrections
]For your use
[] For bids due .....................................................................
[] Prints returned after loan to us
If enclosures are not as listed, please notify us at once.
SOILS INVESTIGATION
Overlook Estates
Anchorage, Alaska
Prepared for
Armstrong & Associates, Inc.
SRA Box 571-1317 East 74th
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
by
R. W. CHRISTENSEN
Consulting Engineer
P.Oo Box 111248
Anchorage, Alaska 99511
(907) $45-0019
December 2, 1983
,¢
R, W. Christensen, Consulting Engineer
P.O. Box 111248* Anchorage, Alaaka 99511, (907) 345 - 0019
Armstrong & Associates, Inc.
SRA Box 571-1317 East 74th
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Attention: Craig L. Templin
December 2,.1983
i,!J, JHICI?ALI~'i' 0~' I,NCIIORAr~E
/)EI>'F, O~ HEA!'Tii $~
[i.?./tRONiJ~Z~'il/"L ~;'' ~ LCiiON
Soils Investigation
Overlook Estates
Eagle River, Alaska
Gentlemen:
This report presents the results of a soils investigation for
Overlook Estates near Eagle River, Alaska. The purpose of the
investigation was to provide soils data for design of on-site septic
systems and roads. The scope of the investigation, as described in ~
proposal dated November 8, 1983, was planned based on discussions with
Craig Templin of Armstrong and Associates, Inc., and John Lynn of the
Municipality of Anchorage, Department of Health and Environmental
Protection. Verbal authorization to proceed was given on November 14,
1983 by Craig Templin.
Fourteen borings were drilled to depths ranging from 9.5 to 16.0
feet at the locations described on Plate 1. The borings were drilled
with a Nodwell-mounted CME-55 drill rig equipped with hollow-and
solid-flight augers. The boring locations were established in the
field by Craig Templin. Most of the borings were drilled within about
l0 feet of the intended locations. For the intended boring locations
that proved to be inaccessible to the drilling equipment, as-drilled
locations are noted on Plate 1.
The field operations were supervised by R. W. Christensen, P.E.
The borings were logged in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System, as described on Plate 16. Bulk samples from
auger cuttings were taken at depths of approximately 2.5, 59 10, and
15 feet. (The original intent to obtain split-spoon drive samples
abandoned after meeting refusal on the first attempt and breaking the
i,AUIqlCli~ALI-F'f OF /,ix;L. xRAGF:
DEPI'. OF IlEA-HI &
I],~Vli:.Oi%',.Eiql,'-,L FL.. i'LC~iON
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
cobbles and boulders would render standard penetration tests
meaningless and make sample recovery very difficult.) Logs of the
borings are presented on Plates 2 through 15.
Three percolation tests were performed in shallow boreholes about
8 inches in diameter located adjacent to Borings 3, 6, and 14. The
percolation test holes were drilled to a depth of approximately 2.5
feet; all loose soil was removed, and the holes were filled with water
to a depth of about 12 inches three times before percolation rates
were measured. Percolation rates were measured by adding water to the
hole to a depth of 6 inches and observing the water level at several
time intervals until all the water had seeped into the ground. The
percolation test results are presented on the boring logs.
Grain size distribution tests (sieve analyses) were performed on
several samples. The results of those tests were used to estimate the
frost classification of the soils and to extrapolate the results of
shallow percolation tests to deeper strata that may influence the
design and performance of on-site septic systems. The results of the
grain size tests are presented on the boring logs.
The on-site soils appear .to be quite uniform to the depths
explored (approximately ~6 feet)~ In general, the soils are granular,
with a high percentage of~obbl'e§ and boulders. The actual percentage.,
of cobbles and boulders is difficult to estimate from the boreholes.
However, based on the difficulty of drilling and frequent auger
refusal, it probably exceeds 20 percent. Based on laboratory sieve
analyses, the soil fraction smaller than about 2 inches is
predominately gravel and sand with varying amounts of silt. The
measured silt content of the minus 2-inch fraction ranged from 4 to 19
percent. If the 'test samples had included the particles larger than 2
inches, the percentage silt content would, of course, have been
lower. All the soils encountered were dry to slightly moist~ The
ground water table was not encountered in any of the borings.
The measured percolation rates ranged from abo~t 1 to 9 minutes
per inch. These rates a~pear to be consistent with the grain size
characteristics of the on-site soils. Although the percolation tests
were conducted in shallow boreholes (about 2.§ feet deep), the
uniformity of the soil conditions suggests that similar percolation
rates would apply throughout the depths explored.
The on-site soils appear to be excellent for road construction.
The compaction characteristics should be very good. The frost
R. W. Christensen
Consulfing Engineer
classification of the majority of the soils is NFS to F1 with some
(probably minor) amount of F2.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please call.
It has been a pleasure to assist you on this project.
Very Truly Yours,
RICHARD W. CHRISTENS£N
Consulting Engineer
rl
Z
o ~
/~/ '~ ~ .., ~
1,,.~1 ~ ro ~ ~
I~1 ~ ~
// ~
/ ~'~
UNSUBDIVIDED - U-
BORING
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
LOCATION
Lot2-BIk.1
8+33 Overlook Drive
Lot4-Blk.2
Paramount Drive
Lot6-Blk.2
Lot4-Blk.3
Lot2-Blk.3
Lot4-Blk.1
4+80 Vantage Ave.
Lot6-Blk.1
10+35 Vantage Ave.
Lot2-Blk.4
15+00 Vantage Ave.
Lot4-Blk.4
DRILLED
as staked
75 ft.
S-SW from stake
as staked
30 ft.+ E from stake
as staked
80 ft.
W-NW from stake
as staked
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
BORING LOCATION PLAN
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ale
SYMBOLS
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
SANDY GRAVEL
numerous cobbles and boulders
occasionally silty
medium dense
dry to slightly moist
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) ~ 14.5 ft. on
11/16/83
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
DEFT. OF
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ate
2
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
tCb? 3P- SANDY GRAVEL
-- "~' GM numerous cobbles and boulders
__ occasionally silty
-B i~l medium dense
'.'~d:.0~ dry to slightly moist
~:~ fewer cobbles
~ numerous cobbles/boulders
... fewer cobbles
Boring completed ~ 16,0 ft,
on
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ate
3
~ ' ,, TEST DATA
: Grain Size OTHER
~ N ~¥MBoLS DESCRIPTIONS (%) GraVel Sand Silt TESTS
· ~:!o')~..(,Gp_ SANDY GRAVEL
-- ",%):~ GM numerous cobbles and boulders
~.( . ~-medium dense
-~ ,~-' dry to slightly moist
fewer cobbles
~'~ clean, uniform, medi~
cobbles
n~erous
Boring completed (~ 16.0 ft.
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
PERCOLATION TEST
Elapsed Time Water Depth
(min:sec) (in.)
0 6
1:50 4
3:05 3
5:40 2
10~50 1 ',
19~50 0 ~
LOG
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Final Perc. Rate= 9.0 min/in
OF BORING ~#3 Plate
4
~ N SYMBOLS
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
qDY' GRAVEL
~umerous cobbles and boulders
~ccasional ly silty
~ed i um dense
iry to slightly moist
Lumerous cobbles
ewer cobbles, with more silt
~umerous cobbles
,lean, uniform, medium
uger refusal on cobble
'ring c°mpleted L~' 15'0 ft'
'ound water table not{~
.ncountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulling Engineer'
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
5
,~ TEST DATA
= Grain Size OTHER
u~ N SYMBOkS DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
~.':~.~'GP- SANDY GRAVEL
-- .~..~.~ GM numerous cobbles and boulders
· occasionally silty
---- O~. medium dense
- ~.'~ dry to slightly moist
-B 0'~'~,
B ~:~.( ~e~ co~e~, ~th mo~e ~-,',
~..
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) L~ 12.5 ft. on
~ ~/~ 7/~
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W, Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
6
0
TEST DATA
'~ Grain Size OYHER
sYMBoLs ' " DESCRIPTIONS (?~) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
~OJGP-. SANDY GRAVEL
~..'~;
~ ~'~'"( GM numerous cobbles and boulders
I ~""
B ~ ..C2 occasionally silty
~ q~:~::
k ;:.~:, ~medium dense
~:~ ~'dry to slightly moist
,~.'~'.~
~.~ fe~er cobb~e~, ~th mo~ ~i~
B ~:~'C
Boring completed ~ 16.0 ft.
on
Ground water table not
encountered
~.
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. ha,~er, 30-inch drop
PERCOLATION TEST
El_~sed Time Water Depth
(min:sec) (in.)
0 6
1:55 5
4:10 4
5~05 3
8:15 2
9~55 1
14:55 0
Final Perc. Rate= 5 min/in
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ate
7
TEST DATA
(%) Grain Size OTHER
SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
~3P- SANDY GRAVEL
-- ~.~.~ GM numerous cobbles and boulders
-- ~C occasionally silty
- 3~ medium dense
r~,C dry to slightly moist
~. fewer cobbles, with more silt
Boring completed ~ 16.0 ft.
on 11/17/83
Ground water table not
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING $7
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
8
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
, ,o~?3P- SANDY GRAVEL
Bi ~i~GM numerous cobbles and boulders
, ~C~[ occasionally silty
~ ,>.~ '~< medium dense
- ~ dry to slightly moist
_ ~,~: a~ ~s~<ho~e
~.~ relocated)
[ ~ ~ ~er ~o~e~, ~th more
~,
~?
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) ~ 15.0 fl, on
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Chrislensen
Consulling Engineer
LOG OF BORING ~.8
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ale
9
SYMBOLS
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel. Sand Silt TESTS
SANDY GRAVEL
numerous cobbles and boulders
occasionally silty
medium dense
dry to slightly moist
auger refusal (hole
relocated)
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) ~ 10.0 ft. on
11/17/83
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING ~9
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ate
10
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
-
o?
SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS (/o) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
~!~'~SP- SANDY GRAVEL
'.'~:'.;': GM numerous cobbles and boulders
-~B .'.~';, occasionally silty
~;~ medium dense
- dry to slightly moist
-- ~o~ auger refusal (hole
2 >
L.~. auger refusal (hole
--
Boring kerm~na~ed {auger
refusal) ~ ~5.5 ft. on
Ground wat~r.tabie not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2,4-inch I,D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING ~10
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plale
11
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
-- %!i~3P- SANDY GRAVEL
)~'0 GM numerous cobbles and boulders
- ~ ~.~ medium dense
__ ~7.2<::~ dry to slightly moist
-- ~. fewer cobbles, with more silt
)',~.-~,
~ numerous cobbles/boulders
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) ~14,5 ft. on
Ground water table not
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Christensen
Consulling Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
12
UJ
~ TEST DATA
~L
m Grain Size OTHER
~ N SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS (%) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
.: 37- SANDY 'GRAVEL
- B 3:.'eqGM numerous cobbles and boulders
~ occasionally silty
.'- ' medium dense
;,o,~.?, dry to slightly mci. st
,.~.,~ auger refusal (hole
Boring terminated (auger
Ground water table not
encountered
Key~
N: number of blows renu±red
to advance the sampler
the last ~ inches of
~8-inch d~±ve
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. halmaer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Chrislensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING ~12
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
13
SYMBOLS
DESCRIPTIONS
SANDY GRAVEL
TEST DATA
Grain Size OTHER
Gravel SaBd Silt TESTS
numerous cobbles and boulders
occasionally silty
medium dense
dry to slightly moist
Boring terminated (auger
refusal) ~ 9.5 ft. on
11/18/83
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
R. W. Chrislensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
P/ale
14
-'~ TEST DATA
~ ~ Grain Size OTHER
SYMBOLS i DESCRIPTIONS (~) Gravel Sand Silt TESTS
~' .~.Gp.. SANDY GkAVEL
-- "..'.' GM numerous cobbles and boulders
- B ~j'~ir occasionally silty
i~!~ medium dense
~.~ dry to slightly moist
Boring terminated (auger
refusal)
1/1
Ground water table not
encountered
Key:
N= number of blows required
to advance the sampler
the last 12 inches of
18-inch drive
B= bulk sample
S= standard split-spoon sample
(ASTM D 1586)
S= 2.4-inch I.D. sampler
340-1b. hammer, 30-inch drop
PERCOLATION TEST
Elapsed Time Water Depth
(min~sec) (in.)
0 6
1:50 4
2:30 3
4~05 1
5~10 0
Final Perc. Rate= 1.0 min/in
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
LOG OF BORING ¢14
OVERLOOK ESTATES
Eagle River, Alaska
Plate
15
SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP i
MAJOR [~IVI$[ONS SYMBOLSI TYPICAL NAMES
PARTICLE SI Z I[ LIMITS
RELATIVE DENSITY (sand-siltl CONSISTENCY (clay)
R. W. Christensen
Consulting Engineer
UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Plate
16
COR
- UNSUBDIVIDED-
BLOCI 2
- UNSUBDIVIDED -
N
S
5
VANTAGE
BL CK 4
TRACT A
NOTARY
PRELIMINARY
PLAT
ui~SUBgI~D
UNSUBDIVIDED
'~q-['31 , _ ' ^
~L C [,~[SERVE AREA PL~sN
PRELIMINARY
PLAT
UNSUBDIVIDED ~
2:,
RESERVE AREA PLAN
DT1001230
A pR~.~IMARy P]hAT OF
OVERLOOK ESTATES SUBDIVISION