Geotechnical Report Draft

Providing Innovative Solutions to
Subsurface Problems Since 1985
REPORT OF
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
NARBERTH COMMUNITY BUILDING TERRACE ADDITION
80 WINDSOR AVENUE
NARBERTH BOROUGH, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PA
PREPARED FOR
BOROUGH OF NARBERTH
c/o CIRILLI ASSOCIATES
1489 BALTIMORE PIKE
SUITE 228
SPRINGFIELD, PA 19064
PROJECT 4545G1R1
April 7, 2015
DAVID BLACKMORE AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

3335 WEST RIDGE PIKE
POTTSTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA 19464
(610) 495-6255
____________________________
Mr. Brian D. McCree, PE
Vice President
__________________________
Matthew T. Uhrig, EIT
Geotechnical Engineer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
2. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
3. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
4. GEOTECHNICAL BACKGROUND
4.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
4.2 GEOLOGY
4.3 SOILS
5. LABORATORY TESTING
6. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
7. GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10
7.1 SITE PREPARATION
12
7.2 SOIL REPLACEMENT
13
7.2.1 SEISMIC SITE COEFFICIENT

7.3 SLAB ON-GRADE
14
15
7.4 BACKFILL OF FOUNDATION AND UTILITY TRENCHES 16

7.5 PAVEMENTS AND WALKWAYS
16
7.6 FILL AND COMPACTION CRITERIA
16
7.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES - RETAINING WALLS
17
8. QUALITY CONTROL
18
9. LIMITATIONS
19
2 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.
FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURE I: SITE LOCATION
FIGURE II: GEOLOGY
FIGURE III: SOILS
TABLE I: LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE IIA: APPROXIMATE ROCK and FILL ELEVATIONS
TABLE IIB: APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
TABLE III: COMPACTION CRITERIA
APPENDIX
SOIL PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS RESULTS
SOIL PLASTIC AND LIQUID LIMIT TEST RESULTS
TEST BORING LOGS
BORING LOCATION PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose
This exploration was completed to evaluate the subsurface conditions and their
effect upon the proposed site development. This exploration focused on the proposed
terrace addition to the existing Narberth Community Building located at 80 Windsor
Avenue in Narberth Borough, Montgomery County, PA.
Scope
A total of five (5) borings were completed at the subject site. The proposed borings
were drilled within the proposed terrace addition area to a maximum depth of 20
feet or auger refusal on schist bedrock. The test borings were located in the field by
DBA personnel using the Terrace Plan prepared by Brawer & Hauptman Architects
numbered A1 dated 02/28/2013.
Site design was underway during the
implementation of our exploration. Therefore, final site design may vary from the
preliminary design used to complete this exploration. A copy of the site plan used
for our exploration which has been annotated with our test boring locations is
included in the appendix of this report.
Findings
Preliminary finding include the following:
Existing fill soils

Compressible organic silt
Shallow depths to groundwater
The results of our exploration indicate the presence of existing fill material (Stratum
IF) across the addition footprints to depths ranging from 4.3 feet to 8.8 feet below
existing grade. This existing fill material is considered to vary from loose to
moderately dense and consists of brown and orange brown fine sand and silt with
quartz and schist fragments and occasional roots. A 0.58 to 2.92 feet thick layer of
brown and gray organic silt (Stratum I) was encountered below this fill material.
Laboratory analysis of this material indicates an organic content (by weight) ranging
from 1.93% to 5.20%. Dense weathered rock (DWR), as determined by SPR data and
auger difficulty was encountered predominately at the north and west portions of
the site at depths ranging from 11 feet to 19 feet below existing grade in borings B1
through B3. Bedrock, as determined by auger refusal, was encountered in borings
B1 and B2 at depths of 13.8 feet and 16.3 feet below existing grade, respectively. See
Table IIA Approximate Rock and Fill Elevations for information regarding the
depths and relative elevations at which rock was encountered in each test boring
completed.
Groundwater was encountered in each test boring completed at depths ranging from
6.6 feet to 9.2 feet below existing grade. In general, the groundwater surface
elevation is shallowest at the southwest end of the site and becomes deeper in a
northern direction. See Table IIB Approximate Groundwater Elevations for depths
and elevations at which groundwater was encountered in each test boring.
Recommendations:
Comparing the existing topography with the proposed elevation of the proposed
terrace, an embankment of up to 4.2 feet of structural fill will be required to achieve
the proposed terrace elevation. Due to this fill placement and the variability in both
the content and strength of the existing fill material of Stratum IF, there is a risk of
settlement of the terrace slab. The complete removal and replacement of the existing
fill material of Stratum IF would resolve this problem. However this approach is
considered to be economically infeasible for a project of this size. Therefore, as an
alternative, DBA recommends the removal of 2 feet of the existing fill material.
After this material is removed, the exposed subgrade shall be densified in-place and
evaluated through a proofroll via a heavy (minimum 15-ton) smooth drum roller to
detect the presence of any soft conditions. Any soft conditions encountered shall be
repaired to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer. In order to minimize the
potential for differential settlement within the terrace footprint, a geosynthetic
reinforced rigid stone layer shall be installed on the exposed subgrade prior to fill
placement to construct the terrace embankment.
Our settlement analysis indicates that the total settlement of the terrace addition is
estimated to be on the order of 1 inch. Settlements of this magnitude are typically
considered to be within normal construction tolerances, the differential settlement
between the terrace and the existing Community Building may create a tripping
hazard. The partial soil exchange procedure will mitigate this condition to some
extent. In an effort to further reduce the total settlement of the proposed terrace,
the use of a lightweight fill alternative for the construction of the terrace
embankment can be considered. The use of this material in lieu of traditional fill
material would reduce the stress imposed on the loose underlying soils and
consequently reduce the magnitude of settlement. For additional information
regarding these alternatives, see Section 7.2 Soil Replacement.
1. INTRODUCTION
David Blackmore and Associates, Inc. (DBA) has completed the geotechnical
exploration of the subject site in accordance with our Proposal 4545G1P1, dated May
14, 2014.
This Exploration was completed to evaluate the existing subsurface
conditions and their effect upon the proposed site development. Specifically, DBA
has provided recommendations regarding the following:
- Foundation support of the structure and slabs, including soil bearing
pressures, bearing elevations, foundation design recommendations and
anticipated settlement for shallow foundations,
- Depth to material requiring rock excavation methods for removal, if
encountered,
- Depth to and management of groundwater for design of structures and
pavements, if encountered
- Relative elevations of surface and subsurface features,
- Fill and compaction criteria,
- Pavements and floor slabs,
- Lateral earth pressures for retaining walls, and
- General geotechnical related construction procedures.
The following section (2. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION) summarizes the
information available to DBA regarding the proposed site development. This report
has been prepared based on the proposed construction. Changes to the proposed
construction may require alterations to this report or additional investigative work.
DBA should be notified of significant changes to the proposed construction.
2. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed construction consists of a terrace to the existing Narberth
Community
Building,
including
steps,
railings,
lighting,
receptacles,
and
underground rainwater piping. The terrace is to cover a footprint area of +/- 2,000
square feet, spanning the west side of the existing structure and wrapping around
the southwest corner. The terrace will consist of slab on grade construction with a
finished elevation that will match the Community Building finished floor elevation.
3. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
A total of five (5) borings were completed at the subject site.
The proposed
borings were drilled within the proposed terrace addition area to a maximum depth
of 20 feet or auger refusal on schist bedrock.
The test borings were located in the field by DBA personnel using the Terrace
Plan prepared by Brawer & Hauptman Architects numbered A1 dated 02/28/2013.
The test borings were drilled by our subcontractor, The Corcoran Drilling
Company, under the direction of DBA personnel.
All test boring logs and a test boring location plan are included in the appendix
of this report.
4. GEOTECHNICAL BACKGROUND
4.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located at the west and south portions of the property of
the Narberth Community Building located at 80 Windsor Avenue in Narberth
Borough, Montgomery County, PA. These portions of the site consist of
landscaped lawn area with medium to large sized trees scattered throughout the
area. The southeast corner of the proposed terrace addition is located within an
existing paved parking/driveway area. At the time of preparing this report, there
was no topographic survey data available; therefore an elevation of 100 feet was
arbitrarily assigned to the finished floor of the existing Community Building in
order to provide more specific recommendations for the proposed construction.
The terrace elevation will match this finished floor elevation to provide access to
the terrace from the Community Building. Using the surface elevations of the
borings determined in the field, the low point of the site is 95.8 feet (relative to
the assigned finished floor elevation of 100 feet) at the southwest corner of the
site, at boring B3. The grade then gently slopes to the north and east to an
elevation of 96.5 feet at both boring B1 and B5.
A photocopy of the USGS Topographical Map, Norristown Quadrangle,

indicating the site is included as Figure I.
4.2 GEOLOGY
Available geological sources indicate the site is underlain by Wissahickon
Formation Oligoclase-mica Schist (Xw). This rock consists primarily of
quartz, feldspar, muscovite, and chlorite, and is excessively micaceous. Bedding
of this formation is fissile to thin and steeply dipping in most places. Fracturing
is highly abundant, very closely spaced, open and steeply dipping. Joints are
primarily poorly formed, widely spaced, dipping and open. This formation is
moderately resistant to weathering and is often weathered to a moderate depth.
Weathering results in uneven, hackly, small sized, plate-like rubble at the base
of exposure.
A photocopy of the USGS Geological Map of the Norristown Quadrangle,
indicating the site is included as Figure II.
4.3 SOILS
Soil records indicate the site soils to be of the following series:
Urban land - Glenelg complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes (UrmB): This soil type
consists of soils of the Glenelg series as well as Urban land soils. Urban
land soils are variable due to earthmoving which has destroyed or
covered the soils natural profile. The parent material of this soil consists
of pavement, buildings and other artificially covered areas. Glenelg
series soils are primarily composed of loamy residuum weathered from
schist and phyllite. It is typically well drained with a moderately high to
high capacity to transmit water in the most limiting layer. A typical
profile of this soil type can be described as: 0 to 10 inches loam; 10 to 30
inches clay loam; 30 to 54 inches loam; 54 to 80 inches very
channery sandy loam.
A photocopy of site mapping prepared at the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service website indicating the site is included as Figure III.
5. LABORATORY TESTING
Representative soil samples taken during the field exploration were tested in
DBA's laboratory for basic engineering properties. The laboratory testing consisted
of classification of soil samples for engineering purposes. The laboratory testing
included Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D442), Plastic and Liquid Limits (ASTM
D4318), and Natural Moisture Content (ASTM D2216).
The Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS) was used to assign group symbols and group names to
the soils tested.
A summary of the test results is provided on Table I. A photocopy of the particle
size analysis results and the plastic and liquid limit analysis results are included in
the appendix of this report.
6. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The results of the drilling program revealed a fairly consistent subsurface profile.
The following strata, beneath 4 to 6 of topsoil in landscaped lawn or 3 of asphalt
and 11 of modified stone in paved areas, can describe a typical soil profile.
Stratum IF:
3.16 to 5.33 thick; FILL consisting of orange brown and

brown micaceous fine sand and silt with some quartz
fragments, occasional roots and schist fragments. This
stratum is considered to be variable in density with SPR1
values ranging from 3 blows per foot (B/F) to 10 B/F. This
stratum was encountered in each of the test borings
completed.
Stratum I:
0.58 to 2.92 thick; Brown and gray organic silt with roots.
This stratum is considered to be relatively loose to loose
with SPR1 values ranging from 1 blow per foot (B/F) to 7
B/F. The average SPR value for this stratum is 5 B/F.
Laboratory testing of representative soil samples retrieved
from this stratum indicates organic contents (by weight)
ranging from 1.93% to 5.20%. This stratum was
encountered in each of the test borings completed.
Stratum II:
3.0 to 5.17 thick; Orange brown and gray mottled fine sand
with some silt, occasional rock fragments. This stratum is
considered to be loose to moderately dense with SPR values
ranging from 6 B/F to 17 B/F. The average SPR value is
1 SPR = is the Standard Penetration Resistance or number of blows required of a 140 pound hammer
dropping 30", to drive a 2" OD split spoon sampler one foot.
11.4 B/F. This stratum was encountered in each of the test

borings completed.
Stratum III:
4.75 to 9.25 thick; Gray, brown and orange brown

weathered schist.
This stratum is considered to be
moderately dense to very dense with SPR values ranging
from 14 B/F to 50 blows per 2 inches of penetration. The
average SPR value for this stratum is 49 B/F. Low SPR
values ranging from 2 to 5 B/F were measured within the
upper portion of this stratum. The low blows counts can be
attributed to the release of hydrostatic pressure during the
drilling procedure and is not considered to be indicative of
that actual density of this stratum. These values were not
used for calculation of the average SPR value for this
stratum. This stratum was encountered in each of the test
borings completed.
Bedrock:
Bedrock was encountered in borings B1 and B2 at depths

ranging of 13.8 feet and 16.3 feet below existing grade,
respectively. In general, the bedrock surface slopes
downward in a southern direction. See Table IIA
Approximate Rock and Fill Elevations for information
regarding the depths and relative elevations at which rock
was encountered in each test boring completed.
Groundwater2: Groundwater was encountered in each test boring completed

at depths ranging from 6.6 feet to 9.2 feet below existing
grade. In general, the groundwater surface elevation is
shallowest at the southwest end of the site and becomes
deeper in a northern direction. See Table IIB
Approximate Groundwater Elevations for depths and
elevations at which groundwater was encountered in each
test boring.
7. GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of our exploration indicate the presence of existing fill material
(Stratum IF) across the addition footprints to depths ranging from 4.3 feet to 8.8 feet
below existing grade. This existing fill material is considered to vary from loose to
moderately dense and consists of brown and orange brown fine sand and silt with
quartz and schist fragments and occasional roots. A 0.58 to 2.92 feet thick layer of
brown and gray organic silt (Stratum I) was encountered below this fill material.
Laboratory analysis of this material indicates an organic content (by weight) ranging
from 1.93% to 5.20%. Beneath the organic silt, a 3.0 to 5.17 foot thick layer of orange
The groundwater information provided is based on conditions encountered during the drilling
program. Seasonal fluctuations in the groundwater table are to be expected.
brown and gray mottled fine sand and silt with occasional schist fragments (Stratum
II) was encountered which transitions into gray, brown, and orange brown
weathered schist (Stratum III). Dense weathered rock (DWR), as determined by SPR
data and auger difficulty was encountered predominately at the north and west
portions of the site at depths ranging from 11 feet to 19 feet below existing grade in
borings B1 through B3. Bedrock, as determined by auger refusal, was encountered
in borings B1 and B2 at depths of 13.8 feet and 16.3 feet below existing grade,
respectively. See Table IIA Approximate Rock and Fill Elevations for information
regarding the depths and relative elevations at which rock was encountered in each
test boring completed.
Groundwater was encountered in each test boring completed at depths ranging
from 6.6 feet to 9.2 feet below existing grade. In general, the groundwater surface
elevation is shallowest at the southwest end of the site and becomes deeper in a
northern direction. See Table IIB Approximate Groundwater Elevations for depths
and elevations at which groundwater was encountered in each test boring.
Comparing the existing topography with the proposed elevation of the proposed
terrace, an embankment of up to 4.2 feet of structural fill will be required to achieve
the proposed terrace elevation. Due to this fill placement and the variability in both
the content and strength of the existing fill material of Stratum IF, there is a risk of
differential settlement of the terrace slab. In order eliminate this risk, the complete
removal and replacement of the existing fill material of Stratum IF and underlying
organic silt of Stratum I from beneath the proposed terrace addition and
replacement with structural fill would be required. However, the removal and
replacement alternative is considered to be economically infeasible for a project of
this size.
As an alternative to the complete removal of the existing fill within the proposed
terrace footprint, DBA recommends the removal of 2 feet of the existing fill material.
After this material is removed, the exposed subgrade shall be densified in-place and
evaluated through a proofroll via a heavy (minimum 15-ton) smooth drum roller to
detect the presence of any soft conditions. Due to the loose nature of the existing fill
material of Stratum IF, localized subgrade repair consisting of removal of unsuitable
material and replacement with structural fill shall be anticipated. In order to
minimize the potential differential settlement within the terrace footprint, a
geosynthetic reinforced rigid stone layer shall be installed on the exposed subgrade
prior to fill placement to construct the terrace embankment. The subgrade
evaluation and stabilization is to be completed under the direction of the
Geotechnical Engineer.
Our settlement analysis indicates that the total settlement of the terrace
addition is estimated to be on the order of 1 inch. Settlements of this magnitude are
typically considered to be within normal construction tolerances, the differential
settlement between the terrace and the existing Community Building may create a
tripping hazard. The partial soil exchange procedure will mitigate this condition to
some extent. In an effort to further reduce the total settlement of the proposed
terrace, the use of a lightweight fill alternative for the construction of the terrace
embankment can be considered. The use of this material in lieu of traditional fill
material would reduce the stress imposed on the loose underlying soils and
consequently reduce the magnitude of settlement. For additional information
regarding these alternatives, see Section 7.2 Soil Replacement.
7.1 SITE PREPARATION
All deleterious materials including topsoil, root mass, trees and vegetation,
asphalt and other materials determined in the field by the Geotechnical
Engineer to be unsuitable shall be removed from all structural areas (buildings,
pavements and walkways) prior to placement of structural fill. Recycling of the
asphalt and underlying stone can be accomplished on site if the asphalt is milled
to a maximum 1 inch particle size and the material is used in the upper fill zones
of pavement areas only. This fill is not suitable for other structural areas.
7.2 SOIL REPLACEMENT
Comparing the existing topography with the proposed elevation of the
proposed terrace, it is anticipated that an embankment of up to 4.2 feet of
structural fill will be required to achieve the proposed terrace elevation. Due to
this fill placement and the variability in both the content and strength of the
existing fill material of Stratum IF, there is a risk of settlement of the terrace
slab. In order eliminate this risk, the complete removal and replacement of the
existing fill material of Stratum IF and underlying organic silt of Stratum I from
beneath the proposed terrace addition and replacement with structural fill would
be required. In addition this removal shall extend beyond the building footprint
for a minimum lateral distance equal to the removal depth to ensure adequate
lateral stability. However, the removal and replacement alternative is considered
to be economically infeasible for a project of this size.
As an alternative to the complete removal of the existing fill within the
proposed terrace footprint, DBA recommends the removal of 2 feet of the existing
fill material.
After this material is removed, the exposed subgrade shall be
densified in-place and evaluated through a proofroll via a heavy (minimum 15ton) smooth drum roller to detect the presence of any soft conditions. Due to the
loose nature of the existing fill material of Stratum IF, localized subgrade repair
consisting of removal of unsuitable material and replacement with structural fill
shall be anticipated. In order to minimize the potential differential settlement
within the terrace footprint, geosynthetic reinforcement via a layer of Tensar BX
Type 1 (or approved equal) geogrid shall be placed on the exposed subgrade prior
to placing fill to build the terrace embankment. The geosynthetic reinforcement
shall be covered with a 12 to 18 of dense graded aggregate meeting the
gradation requirements of PADOT 2A stone. The subgrade evaluation and

stabilization is to be completed under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer.
DBA performed a settlement analysis of the embankment under the proposed
loading assuming a partial replacement of the existing fill material. This
analysis considered normally consolidated conditions and an embankment
material weight of 140 lb/ft3. Based on these assumptions, an estimated
settlement of 1.0 inch was calculated. While settlements of this magnitude are
typically considered within normal construction tolerances, the differential
settlement between the Community Building and the proposed terrace may
cause a tripping hazard. The partial soil exchange procedure will mitigate this
condition to some extent. If this condition is considered to be unacceptable, In an
effort to further reduce the total settlement of the proposed terrace, the use of a
lightweight fill alternative for the construction of the terrace embankment can be
considered. Options for lightweight fill options include expanded aggregate
material and Geofoam. The use of this material in lieu of traditional fill material
would greatly reduce the stress imposed on the loose underlying soils and
consequently reduce the magnitude of settlement. In the event the use of a
lightweight fill alternative is determined to be necessary, DBA can provide
further direction and calculate anticipated settlement reduction.
7.2.1 SEISMIC SITE COEFFICIENT
A review of Section 1613.5.5 of the International Building Code (IBC 2006
edition) and the existing soil profile indicates that a site class C should be
used in the design of the proposed structure for seismic load resistance.
7.3 SLAB ON-GRADE

The proposed terrace elevation will reportedly match the existing community
buildings finish floor elevation of 100.0, which was assigned arbitrarily for
discussion purposes of this report. This elevation compared to the existing
topography indicates that the placement of up to 4.2 feet of structural fill of
existing fill with structural fill will be required. Prior to the placement of this fill,
the soil replacement procedure set forth in Section 7.2 shall be completed.
Upon completion of the soil replacement and prior to the placement of fill to
achieve the proposed terrace grades, the exposed slab subgrade areas shall be
proofrolled with a heavy smooth drum roller (minimum 15 ton static weight) to
detect the presence of loose or soft zones. This proofrolling operation shall be
performed in the proposed fill areas under the supervision of the Geotechnical
Engineer. Proofrolling of the subgrade shall also be performed in the cut areas
when the required grades have been achieved and immediately prior to pouring
the floor slab. Loose or soft zones detected during the proofrolling operation
shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer.
Based on the soil type encountered, standard penetration testing of the
existing slab subgrade and provided that all structural fill will be placed in
accordance with the fill and compaction criteria set forth is Section 7.7 an
estimated modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 psi/inch may be used for the
design of slab sections.
Should an increased modulus of subgrade reaction be
required for the proposed design it is recommended that field or laboratory

testing be completed to establish specific modulus values.
All slab subgrade areas shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer prior
to pouring the slab so that repair can be completed. It is recommended that the
slab be poured under roof during periods of harsh weather.
A smooth drum roller shall be made available to seal the subgrade in the
event of predicted precipitation.
7.4 BACKFILL OF FOUNDATION AND UTILITY TRENCHES
All foundation and utility trenches shall be backfilled with structural fill,
under the supervision of a Geotechnical Engineer (Refer to Section 7.7, Fill and
Compaction Criteria).
7.5 PAVEMENTS AND WALKWAYS
Pavement and sidewalk areas shall be prepared in a manner similar to the
slab on-grade areas. A minimum of 8 inches of crushed aggregate base shall be
used beneath exterior pavements due to the frost heave potential of the subgrade
soils. The pavement subgrade shall be graded to drain water from beneath the
pavement system to prevent ponding and subsequent pumping of silty subgrade
soils.
For pavement design a preliminary estimated California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
Value of 5.0 may be used for stabilized subgrade areas consisting of stabilized
portions of on-site existing fill consisting of silty sand (Stratum IF) or structural
fill selected and placed in accordance with the Section 7.7 of this report. Should
anticipated heavy duty pavement requirements or other project conditions
require final site specific CBR values DBA can complete field and/or laboratory
CBR testing of proposed subgrade soils at the clients request.
7.6 FILL AND COMPACTION CRITERIA
Fill supporting slabs, pavements, and foundations is considered herein to be
structural fill.
Structural fill shall be placed on an approved, proofrolled,
nonyielding, level subgrade, in lifts not exceeding 8 inches (loose thickness),

unless otherwise directed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Structural fill shall be
maintained nominally at Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM D-698) and
uniformly compacted to the percentages of Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D-698)

provided in Table III - Compaction Criteria.
Suitable structural fill shall consist of clean soils without deleterious
inclusions. On-site soils identified as Stratum II, and Stratum III, are acceptable
for use as structural fill if given the opportunity to dry and the soils are
maintained nominally at Optimum Moisture Content. It is anticipated that the
existing fill material of Stratum IF will be suitable for reuse as structural fill
provided any deleterious/organic content is removed. The organic silt of Stratum
I is NOT considered suitable for re-use as structural fill. Samples retrieved from
the upper 5 feet of the subgrade indicated moisture contents ranging from 18.7 to
20.1 percent. The optimum moisture content for compaction of these soils is
estimated to range between 14 and 18 percent. Therefore, some of these soils
may require aeration and drying prior to re-use as structural fill, which is best
accomplished in the summer months. Specific moisture content test results and
associated depths are indicated on the test boring logs in the appendix of this
report.
Borrow fill shall be clean well-graded soils with good strength characteristics
with a maximum particle size of 3 inches and containing not more than 20%
silt/clay (by weight).
Samples of on-site or borrow sources of fill shall be
submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for testing at least 1 week before use on
site. A minimum of 65 lbs. or two (2) five-gallon buckets is required for testing.
7.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES - RETAINING WALLS
The retaining/loading dock walls of the structure, if proposed, should be
designed for an at rest condition (Ko). The foundations and walls must be fully
drained to relieve potential hydrostatic pressure. A foundation/wall drainage
system is recommended. Soil backfill around the basement walls shall be well
compacted and should consist of granular soils to prevent the trapping of water.
Retaining walls outside the structure which are free to rotate should be
similarly designed except with an active earth pressure as opposed to Ko
condition.
Soil parameters used to establish the effective fluid pressures
(excluding hydrostatic loads) and some additional parameters which may be used
in the design of a retaining wall system are summarized in the following table:
SOIL PROPERTIES FOR DETERMINATION OF LATERAL LOADS
Parameter
Stratum II
Stratum III
28 degrees
30 degrees
125 pcf
120 pcf
Active Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ka
0.36
0.33
Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient, Kp
2.77
3.03
At Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ko
0.53
0.50
22 degrees
24 degrees
Angle of Internal Friction,

Moist unit weight,
Soil/Mass concrete interface friction Angle,
8. QUALITY CONTROL
This report was prepared to provide design criteria for the design team. DBA
assumes that Geotechnical and Construction Quality Control Services will be
provided in order to implement the recommendations provided herein and to identify
unanticipated or changed conditions. The Geotechnical Engineers representative
should review the consistency and texture of the exposed soils with the conditions
encountered by this exploration as described herein.
Since localized loose and
yielding subgrade conditions may be encountered between test locations, provisions

for the undercutting and subsequent replacement of these materials should be
anticipated in the construction documents.
The environmental quality of the
subgrade soils was not reviewed as part of this evaluation. All materials generated
by grading and excavation shall be managed in accordance with regulatory

requirements.
DBA can provide a contract for Geotechnical and Construction Quality Control
Services (Special Inspections), as required. A pre-work meeting with the design
professionals, contractors, and the Geotechnical Engineer is strongly recommended.
9. LIMITATIONS
Services performed by DBA, including the Geotechnical Exploration, report, and
any subsequent construction monitoring have been or will be conducted in a manner
consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the
profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions. No
other warranty or guarantee is indicated or intended in this report or any opinion,
document or otherwise stated.
The recommendations included herein are based on the conditions encountered
by the test borings performed at the subject site. It is noted that, although soil
quality has been inferred from the interpolation of the site sampling data,
subsurface conditions beyond the test borings are in fact, unknown. As a result,
these recommendations may require modifications based on the conditions
encountered and exposed during construction excavation. Should any conditions
encountered during construction differ from those described in the report, this office
should be notified immediately in order to review and possibly modify the
recommendations included in this report.
FIGURES
AND
TABLES
SITE
GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOC., INC.

3335 West Ridge Pike
Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464
Telephone: (610) 495-6255 FAX: (610) 495-7353
Project 4545G1
Figure I
SITE LOCATION & TOPOGRAPHY
U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle
Norristown Quadrangle
SITE
KEY
Xw - Wissahickon Formation

Telephone: (610) 495-6255 FAX: (610) 495-7353
Project 4429G3
Figure II
SITE GEOLOGY
USGS Geologic Quadrangle Maps of PA
Norristown Quadrangle
SITE
KEY
UrmB - Urban land - Glenelg complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes

Telephone: (610) 495-6255 FAX: (610) 495-7353
Project 4545G1
Figure III
Soils
Soil Mappig via
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
TABLE I
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
B1
B4
S-2
S-3
4-6
6-8
S-7
S-8
14-16
16-18
B4
B5
S-6
S-5
12-14
13-15
STRATUM
II
III
III
NMC* (%)
18.7
21.4
51.3
44.7
50.8
54.4
BORING #
SAMPLE #
DEPTH
* NMC = Natural Moisture Content

SOIL PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
SIEVE #
PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT
3/4"
100.0
100.0
100.0
3/8
96.1
100.0
100.0
93.9
100.0
100.0
10
90.3
99.2
99.8
40
75.6
94.3
97.5
100
53.0
71.9
67.4
200
37.0
57.6
37.5
ATTERBERG LIMIT ANALYSIS

LL*
N/A
N/A
N/A
PL*
N/A
N/A
N/A
PI*
N/A
N/A
N/A
* LL = Liquid Limit; PL = Plastic Limit; PI = Plasticity Index

USCS CLASSIFICATION
Eng.
Class.
SM
ML
SM
Descr.
Orange brown
and gray silty
sand
Brown sandy silt

(weathered
schist)
Brown silty sand

(weathered
schist)
TABLE I (CONTD)
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
BORING #
B3
B4
B5
SAMPLE #
S-2
S-3
S-3
DEPTH
4-6
6-8
6-8
STRATUM
NMC* (%)
38.92
26.52
20.11
ORG** (%)
5.20
2.76
1.93
* NMC = Natural Moisture Content

** ORG = Organic Silt Content
TABLE IIA
APPROXIMATE ROCK ELEVATIONS
Boring
Number
Surface
Elevation
Depth to
Stratum
II
Stratum II
Surface
Elevation
Depth to Dense
Weathered
Rock1
Dense
Weathered
Rock Elevation
Depth to
Bedrock2
Bedrock
Elevation
B1
96.5 feet
4.3 feet
92.2 feet
11 feet
85.5 feet
13.8 feet
82.7 feet
B2
96.5 feet
6.3 feet
90.2 feet
13.8 feet
82.7 feet
16.3 feet
80.2 feet
B3
95.8 feet
6.8 feet
89.0 feet
19.0 feet
76.8 feet
>20.3 feet
<75.5 feet
B4
96.1 feet
7.0 feet
89.1 feet
>20.0 feet
<76.1 feet
>20.0 feet
<76.1 feet
B5
96.5 feet
8.8 feet
87.7 feet
>21.0 feet
<75.5 feet
>21.0 feet
<75.5 feet
NOTES:
Surface elevations at each boring location were determined using an arbitrary finished floor elevation of 100.0 for the existing
Narberth Community Building.
1
2
As determined by drilling difficulty and Standard Penetration Resistance data.

As determined by auger refusal.
TABLE IIB
APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
Boring Number
Surface Elevation
Depth to Groundwater
Groundwater Elevation3
B1
96.5 feet
9.2 feet
87.3 feet
B2
96.5 feet
8.5 feet
88.0 feet
B3
95.8 feet
6.7 feet
89.1 feet
B4
96.1 feet
6.6 feet
89.5 feet
B5
96.5 feet
6.8 feet
89.7 feet
NOTES:
Surface elevations at each boring location were determined using an arbitrary finished floor elevation of 100.0 for the existing
Narberth Community Building.
Groundwater information is based on conditions encountered during the field exploration.

Seasonal fluctuation in groundwater elevation shall be expected.
3
TABLE III
COMPACTION CRITERIA
LOCATION
PERCENT COMPACTION (ASTMD698)
Foundations
98%
Floor Slabs
98%
Pavements
95%
Berms(non
structural)
93%
APPENDIX
SOIL PARTICLE
SIZE ANALYSIS
RESULTS
SOIL PLASTIC AND

LIQUID LIMIT
TEST RESULTS
TEST BORING
LOGS
DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers
Boring Number : B1
Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353

www.dbaengineering.com
Project : Narberth Community Building Terrace Addition

Location:
Twp/City/State: Narberth Borough, Montgomery County, PA
Drilling Contractor : Corcoran Drilling Company
X Coordinate (ft) : 0
Y Coordinate (ft) : 0
Drilling Method #1 : 6" Solid Augers from 0' to 13.83'
Drilling Method #2:
Project Number : 4545G1

Date Drilled : 2/18/15
Inspected by : MU
Boring Depth: 13.83'
Ground Surface Elevation (ft msl) : 96.54'
Water Level - Immediate (ft bgs) : 9.66' (5 min)
Water Level -Static (ft bgs): 9.17' (1 hr)
1.0
2.0
96.04
3.66
92.88
4.25
92.29
5.0
6.0
SPT DATA
510 20 30 40 50
SPT GRAPH
(Blows Per Foot)
100
Strattum IF
FILL consisting of orange
brown and brown micaceous
finesand and silt with some
quartz fragments.
3.0
4.0
Water Content
SPT Value
0.50
NUMBER
ELEVATION
Topsoil (6")
SAMPLING DATA
DEPTH (FT)
LITHOLOGIC
SYMBOL
WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW
LITHOLOGY
GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION OF
SOIL AND ROCK STRATA
Sheet 1 of 1
Topsoil
Strattum II
Orange brown and gray
mottled finesand with some
silt, occassional rock
fragments
7.0
8.0
Strattum III
Gray weathered schist
9.0
Multi-colored weathered
schist
S-1*
4-6-4-4
10
S-2*
2-3-3-4
3-4-8-10
12
6-10-19-18
29
7.25
89.29 S-3**
8.33
88.21
S-4**
10.0
11.0
12.0
S-5
13.0
50/2"
N.R.
100
13.83 82.71
14.0
Auger Refusal
15.0
Notes:
16.0
*Very moist
**Moist
-Hard Augering from 11'
17.0
18.0
The boring results represent subsurface conditions at the boring locations only and are not necessarily representative of conditions at other locations. Water levels are taken at the time of drilling and are not
indicative of seasonal variations in the ground water level. NR = No Recovery, S =Split Spoon sample(2" O.D.), C=Rock Coring Run.

Boring Number : B2
Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353


Location:
Drilling Method #1 : 6" Solid Augers from 0' to 16.25'
Drilling Method #2:

Inspected by : MU
Water Level - Immediate (ft bgs) : 10.25 (5 min)
Water Content
SPT DATA
510 20 30 40 50
SPT Value
NUMBER
ELEVATION
SAMPLING DATA
DEPTH (FT)
LITHOLOGIC
SYMBOL
WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW
LITHOLOGY
Sheet 1 of 1
SPT GRAPH
(Blows Per Foot)
100
Topsoil (4")
1.0
2.0
3.0
Strattum IF
finesand and silt with
occasional schist fragments
and roots.
S-1*
2-2-3-3
S-2*
3-3-4-6
S-3**
6-3-5-8
S-4*
5-6-7-8
13
S-5**
44-50/3"
100
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
Strattum I
Brown and gray organic silt
with roots.
Strattum II
Orange brown and brown
gray slightly micaceous
finesand, some silt,
occassional schist fragments,
and traces of pebbles.
5.25
91.25
6.33
90.17
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
11.50 85.00
Strattum III
schist
14.0
15.0
16.0
16.25 80.25
Auger Refusal
17.0
Notes:
18.0
19.0
*Very moist
**Moist
-Fairly hard to hard augering from
12'
-Hard augering from 13.75'
20.0

Boring Number : B3
Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353


Location:
Drilling Method #1 : 6" Solid Augers from 0' to 20'
Drilling Method #2: 2" O.D. Split Spoon Sample from 20' to 20.25'

Inspected by : MU
Ground Surface Elevation (ft msl) : 0
Water Level - Immediate (ft bgs) : 8.5 (5 min)
Water Level -Static (ft bgs): 6.66 (1 hr)
Water Content
SPT DATA
510 20 30 40 50
SPT Value
NUMBER
ELEVATION
SAMPLING DATA
DEPTH (FT)
LITHOLOGIC
SYMBOL
WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW
LITHOLOGY
Sheet 1 of 1
SPT GRAPH
(Blows Per Foot)
100
Topsoil (5")
1.0
2.0
3.0
Strattum IF
finesand and silt with
occasional quartz fragments
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
4.25

brown and brown slightly
micaceous finesand with
occassional schist fragments,
some silt.
Strattum I
Brown and gray organic silt
with some roots.
Strattum II
Gray and orange brown
mottled finesand and silt
some quartz fragments and
roots.
14.0
Orange brown, brown, and

gray finesand with schist
fragments, some pebbles.
Strattum III
schist.
15.0
Notes:
12.0
13.0
16.0
17.0
6.75
8.00
S-1*
2-2-1-2
S-2**
2-1-1-2
S-3*
3-9-18-7
27***
S-4**
7-7-9-9
16
S-5*
5-12-19-26
31
S-6*
24-38-50/5"
100
50/3"
100
91.57
89.07
87.82
11.00 84.82
*Moist
**Very Moist
***High blow due to quartz fragments
-Fairly hard augering from 16.5' to
19'
-Hard augering from 19'
18.0
19.0
20.0
20.25 75.57
S-7*
Boring Terminated
21.0
22.0

Boring Number : B4
Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353


Location:
Drilling Method #2: 2" O.D. Split Spoon Samples from 12' to 20'

Inspected by : MU
Boring Depth: 20
Water Level - Immediate (ft bgs) : 8.33" (5 min)
Water Content
SPT DATA
510 20 30 40 50
SPT Value
NUMBER
ELEVATION
SAMPLING DATA
DEPTH (FT)
LITHOLOGIC
SYMBOL
WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW
LITHOLOGY
Sheet 1 of 1
SPT GRAPH
(Blows Per Foot)
100
Topsoil (4")
1.0
2.0
3.0
Strattum IF
finesand and silt with some
rock fragments.
S-1*
4-2-2-2
S-2*
3-3-2-2
S-3*
3-6-7-7
13
S-4*
4-3-3-3
S-5**
3-3-3-4
S-6*
1-1-1-1
S-7*
1-2-3-4
S-8*
4-5-9-9
14
S-9*
6-10-12-13
22
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
Strattum I
Gray and brown organic silt
with roots.
Strattum II
Orange brown, brown, and
orange brown micaceous
finesand with some schist
fragments, traces of silt, and
occassional pebbles.
5.66
90.45
7.00
89.11
11.00 85.11
Strattum III
schist
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
20.00 76.11
Boring Terminated
21.0
22.0
Notes:
23.0
*Very moist
**Moist'
24.0
25.0

Boring Number : B5
Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353


Location:
Drilling Method #2: 2" O.D. Split Spoon Augers from 13' to 21'

Inspected by : MU
Boring Depth: 21'
Water Level - Immediate (ft bgs) : 9.42'' (5 min)
Modified Stone (11")
2.0
Strattum IF
finesand, some silt with some
rock fragments.
3.0
4.0
95.54
5.0
5.83
6.0
7.0
Water Content
SPT DATA
510 20 30 40 50
SPT Value
0.92
NUMBER
ELEVATION
Asphalt (3")
1.0
SAMPLING DATA
DEPTH (FT)
LITHOLOGIC
SYMBOL
WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW
LITHOLOGY
Sheet 1 of 1
S-1*
2-1-3-5
S-2*
2-2-2-2
S-3**
2-2-5-8
S-4**
8-8-9-9
17
S-5**
1-1-1-1
S-6**
2-5-6-8
11
S-7**
5-6-9-9
15
S-8***
6-7-10-12
17
SPT GRAPH
(Blows Per Foot)
100
90.63
Strattum I
Gray and brown organic silt
with roots.
8.0
8.75
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
Strattum II
Orange brown, brown and
gray micaceous finesand with
schist fragments, traces of
silt.
87.71
12.00 84.46
Strattum III
schist
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
21.00 75.46
Boring Terminated
22.0
Notes:
23.0
24.0
*Very moist
**Moist
***Wet
25.0
TEST BORING
LOCATION PLAN
B5
B4
B1
B3
B2
KEY
Test Boring Location

Telephone: (610) 495-6255 FAX: (610) 495-7353
Project 4545G1
TEST BORING PLAN
Narberth Community Building
Terrace Addition
Narberth Borough, Montgomery County, PA

Geotechnical Report Draft

Uploaded by

Geotechnical Report Draft

Uploaded by

Providing Innovative Solutions to

Subsurface Problems Since 1985

DAVID BLACKMORE AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

4.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

7. GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 SITE PREPARATION

7.2 SOIL REPLACEMENT

7.2.1 SEISMIC SITE COEFFICIENT

7.4 BACKFILL OF FOUNDATION AND UTILITY TRENCHES 16

7.6 FILL AND COMPACTION CRITERIA

7.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES - RETAINING WALLS

2 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

FIGURES AND TABLES

3 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

Existing fill soils

4 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

5 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

This Exploration was completed to evaluate the existing subsurface

6 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

7 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

A photocopy of the USGS Topographical Map, Norristown Quadrangle,

8 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

The Unified Soil

3.16 to 5.33 thick; FILL consisting of orange brown and

9 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

11.4 B/F. This stratum was encountered in each of the test

4.75 to 9.25 thick; Gray, brown and orange brown

Bedrock was encountered in borings B1 and B2 at depths

Groundwater2: Groundwater was encountered in each test boring completed

10 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

11 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

12 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

After this material is removed, the exposed subgrade shall be

13 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

gradation requirements of PADOT 2A stone. The subgrade evaluation and

14 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

7.3 SLAB ON-GRADE

Should an increased modulus of subgrade reaction be

required for the proposed design it is recommended that field or laboratory

15 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

Structural fill shall be placed on an approved, proofrolled,

nonyielding, level subgrade, in lifts not exceeding 8 inches (loose thickness),

16 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

uniformly compacted to the percentages of Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D-698)

Samples of on-site or borrow sources of fill shall be

17 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

Soil parameters used to establish the effective fluid pressures

Active Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ka

Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient, Kp

At Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ko

Angle of Internal Friction,

Soil/Mass concrete interface friction Angle,

Since localized loose and

yielding subgrade conditions may be encountered between test locations, provisions

The environmental quality of the

18 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

by grading and excavation shall be managed in accordance with regulatory

19 Report 4545G1R1 | David Blackmore & Associates, Inc.

GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS

DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOC., INC.

DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOC., INC.

GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS

DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOC., INC.

* NMC = Natural Moisture Content

PERCENT PASSING BY WEIGHT

ATTERBERG LIMIT ANALYSIS

* LL = Liquid Limit; PL = Plastic Limit; PI = Plasticity Index

Brown sandy silt

Brown silty sand

* NMC = Natural Moisture Content

As determined by drilling difficulty and Standard Penetration Resistance data.

Groundwater information is based on conditions encountered during the field exploration.

PERCENT COMPACTION (ASTMD698)

SOIL PLASTIC AND

DAVID BLACKMORE & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Phone: 610-495-6255 Fax: 610-495-7353