."", 􀁾􀁊􀀠j 
BlT-2ZZ-5981 T-OT6 P.01l08 F-543lO:Olam From-FAA AIRSPACE. BRANCH 8-36 THE PEACEIV1A.KER BRUCE BEARD -SENIOR ollsmucnoN EVALUATION SPECIALIST FEDERAL AVIATIONADMINJsTRATION SO'VTBWEST
REGIONAL OFFICE AIR T.RAFF.IC AIRSPACE BB.A.NCH FORT WORTR 'IX 76193-0510 OFFrCE NTlMBERI 817 􀁉􀁬􀁚􀀲􀁾􀀵􀀵􀀳􀀶􀀠FAX NUMBER:, 81i􀁦􀀺􀁕􀀲􀁾􀀵􀀹􀀸􀀱􀀠TO: 􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁉􀁴􀀿􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀁬􀀮􀀬􀁏􀁾􀁇􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺�
�􀀮􀀮􀀧􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀺􀁻􀀬􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁌􀁟􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀽􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀭____ FAX NUMBER: 􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀻􀀮􀀭􀁪􀁾􀁌􀀽􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁌􀁻􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁜􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀱􀁦􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀂷-__􀀶􀀺􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀳􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀧􀁦􀀺􀀮
􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀷􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀭􀁾__. REFERENCE: 􀀭􀀮􀀡􀀮􀁁􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁉􀀮􀁦􀁜􀁾􀁳􀀽􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀮􀀮􀁁􀁾􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀱􀀭􀁑􀁴􀁺􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀧􀂷􀁦􀁬􀀽􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀭____ MESSACilE: 8NUMBEF<
OF PAGES. (INCLUDING COVER PAGE): ___________ A HARD COPY 􀁾􀁾8E SENT. 
m-m-5SBI T-OT6 p,n,/os r-548Jul-08-;9 IO:Olam From-FAA AIRSPACE BRANCH Federal Aviation Administration AERONAUTICAL STUDY Southwest Region NO: 99-ASW-2295-0E Air Traffic Division, ASW-520
Fort Worth, TX 76193-0520 ISSUED DATE: 07/07/99 ROGER. DAm.IN ROGER DAHLIN ARCHITECT 2207 VIA DEL NORTE CIRCLE CARROLLTON TX 75006 ** FEASIBILITY REPORT *T The Federal Aviation Administration
has conducted a limited aeronautical review concerning the feasibility of a structure described as follows: Description: FEASIBILITY STUDY /BUILDING POINT A /ADJACENT TO ADDISON AIRPORT
Location, CARROLLTON TX Latitude: 32-58-27.44 NAD 83 Long:i.eude: 096-50-28.00 Heights: 35 feet above ground level (AGL)660 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) The results of this review
can be found on the attached page(s) . NO'l'B: THE RESULTS OF OUR. LIMITED REVIEW IS NOT AN OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF FINDINGS BUT ONLY A REPORT BASED ON THE GENERAL . OR ESTIM!\.'l'ED
INFORMATION SUPPLIED FOR THE STRUCT'ORE. ANY FO'roRE,OFFICIAL AERONAUTICAL STUDY MAY REVEAL DIFFERENT RESULTS. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at 􀀸􀀱􀀷􀀭􀀲􀀲􀀲􀁾􀀵􀀵􀀳�
�􀀮􀀠On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please. refer to Aeronautical Study Number 99-ASW-2295-0E. 􀁳􀀯􀁊􀁾􀁡􀁲􀁾􀁁􀁾􀀠(FSB) Specialist, Airspace Branch Attachment
• 
---Jul-GS-99 10:02am From-:AA AIRSPACE BRANCH 817-222-5981 T-076 POS/08 F-543 ATTACHMENT SHEET AERONAUTICAL STUDY NUMBER 99-ASW-2295-0E CARROLLTON,TEXAS POINT A ( THIS IS NOT A FORMAL
DETERMINATION) PART 77 = TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGiJT...ATIONS, PA..u..T 77 AGL 􀁾􀀠ABOVE GROUND 􀁾􀁓􀁖􀁅􀁌􀀠I AWSL 􀁾􀀠ABOVE MEAN SEA 􀁌􀁅􀁖􀁅􀁾􀀠 SIAF = STANDARD 􀁌􀁾􀁓􀁔􀁒􀁕􀁍􀁅􀁎􀁔􀀠APP
ROACH PROCEvURE NM = NAUTICAL 􀁍􀁉􀁾􀁅􀀠 This informa: feasibility report used the data either 􀁳􀁵􀁢􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀠by you, determined by this office or a 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁢􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁾􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠of both
and is shown on Page 1. » The· proposed site would be located approximately 622 feet west and perpendicular to Runway l5 at the Addison Airport. > Based on the requirements contained
in part 77, FAA would be 􀁲􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁤􀀮􀀠notice to the > This notice should be submitted to our office at least 60 days prior to the start of any construction. » In addition, it
does appear that the proposal would penetrate the following Obstruction standards contained in part 77: • Section 77.23 la) (5) by 6 fe.et -a height exceeding the transition surface
as applied to Runway 15 at the.Addison Airport. A structure height of 29 feet AGL I 654 feet AMSL would not exceed this obstruction standard. » preliminary review indicates that a structure
at yourproposed location and a height no greater than 35 feet AGL I 660 feet AMSL is fea.sible: This is based on a site elevation of 625 feet. >-For a structure height of 42 feet AGt,
the site elevation would have to be 618 feet AMSL (618 + 42 & 660) > This is NOT a formal determination but only a report based on the information furnished this office. Please keep
in mind that there is always a possibility that the final outcome of a formal aeronautical study might prove to be different from the results of this informal feasibility study. 
61 r-m-S981 r-076 P.04/08 F-543J"1-08-99 lO:Olam From-FAA AIRSPACE BRANCH » PLEASE NOTE 􀁔􀁾􀀮􀁔􀀠YOUR 􀁐􀁒􀁏􀁐􀁏􀁓􀁽􀁾􀀠AT A ?EIGRT OF 35 FEET AGL I 660 FEET AMSL WILL REQUIRE A FORL"1l'\L
AERONAUTICAL STUDY. A FORMAL AERONAUTICAL STUDY TAKES 􀁁􀁐􀁐􀁒􀁏􀁘􀁉􀁾􀀮􀁁􀁲􀁅􀁌􀁙􀀠90 TO 120 DAYS TO COMPLETE, SO YOU WILL NEED TO 􀁐􀁉􀁊􀁌􀁾􀀠ACCORDINGLY. » This report does not relieve
the sponsor of any compliance responsibilities relating to laws, ordinances, or 􀁾􀁥􀁧􀁵􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀠of any Federal, state, or local governmental bodies. » This informal feasibility
report does not supersede or override any state, county, or local laws or ordinances. » If you do not agree with the coordinates, elevation, heights, or the results of this report, please
contact me at 817-2225536. > Based on the unofficial nature or this study, the FAA shall not be held responsible for any type of commitment entered into by the sponsor base solely on
this informal feasibility report. » Please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 99-ASW-229S-oE on any future correspondence concerning this 􀁦􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁩􀁢􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁴􀁹􀀠report or if 􀁾􀁯􀁵􀀠do
file formal notice with the FAA concerning the structure. Additional Comments: The existing building located south of your proposal has an overall height of 660 feet 1\MSL. A site elevation
of 618 feet 􀀦􀁾􀁌􀀠+ a build1nq height of 42 feet F$L = an overall height of 660 feet AMSL. The overall height is the magic number and not the AGL height of the structure. The overall
height is dependant: on the site elevation and structure height. Based on the Addison 7.5" Quadrangle Chart', the maximum site elevation at your location 625 feet 1\MSL. A site elevation
of 625 feet 1\MSL +. a building height of 3S feet 􀁾􀀠an overall height of 660 feet AMSL. For a site located this close to the airport, we request that when submitting your notice to
this office, the exact location and site elevation of Point A be determined by a survey. The location will need to be in latitude/longitude. It is certainly·possible that with surveyed
data, a height of 􀁾􀀲􀀠feet AGL miqht be acceptable. However, this cannot be determined Without conducting a formal study. 
--817-m-5981 ,-07S P.OS/OB F-543Jul-OS-9S lO:O!am From-FAA AIRSPACE BRANCH Federal Aviation Administration AERONAUTICAL STUDY Southwest RegionAir Traffic Division, ASW-520 Fort Worth,
TX 􀀷􀀶􀁾􀀹􀀳􀀭􀀰􀀵􀀲􀀰􀀠No: 99-ASW-2296-0E ISSUED DATE: 07/07/99 ROGER DAHLIN ROGER DAHLIN AaCHITECT 2207 VIA DEL NORTE CIRCLE CARROLLTON TX 75006 ** FEASIBILITY REPORT ** The Federal
Aviation Administration has conducted a limited aeronautical review conce=ing·the feasibility of a structure described as follows: Description: FEASIBILITY STUDY /BUILDING POINT B I
ADJACENT TO ADDISON AIRPORT Location: CARROLLTON TX LatitUde: 􀀳􀀲􀀭􀀵􀀸􀀭􀁊􀁾􀀮􀀸􀀵􀀠NAn 83 Longitude: 096-50-30.33 Heights: 3S feet above ground. level (AGL)660 feet above mean sea
level (AMSL) The results of this review can be found on the attached page(s) . NOTE: THE RESULTS OF OUR LIMITED REVIEW IS NOT AN OFFICIAL DETERMINP.TION OF FINDINGS BUT ONLY A REPORT
BASED ON THE GENERAL OR ESTIMATEI:l INFORMATION SUPPLIED FOR THE STRUCTORE. ANY FUTUR.E,OFFICIAL AERONAUTICAL S'I'tlDY MAY REVEAL DIFFERENT RESULTS. If we can be of further assistance,
please contact our office at 817-222-5534. On any tuture correspondence concerning this matter,please refer to 􀁁􀁥􀁲􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁵􀁴􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁾􀀠Study Number 99-ASW-2296-0E. 􀁦􀂣􀀱􀀡􀀧􀁥􀀯􀁬􀁡􀂣􀁾􀁗􀁶􀁲􀀱􀀠
(FSl'l)SpeCialist, Airspace Branch Attachment • 
m-m-S99I r-m P. 06/08 F-543Jul-Ca-99 IO:04am From-FAA AIRSPACE BRANCH ATTACHMENT SHEET AERONAUTICAL STUDY NUMBER 99-ASW·Z296-0E CARROLLTON, TEXAS POINTB fTHIS IS NOT A FORMAL DETERMINATION]
PART 77 '" TITLE l4 OF THE CODE 􀁏􀁾􀀠FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PA.."\T 77 AGL -ABOVE GROUND 􀁾􀁅􀁖􀁓􀁌􀀠I AMSL '" ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL SIAP 􀁾􀀠STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURE NM
NAUTICAL MILE 3 This 􀁩􀁾􀁦􀁯􀁾􀁡􀁾􀀠feasibility report used the data either submitted by you, determined by this office or a combination of both and is shown on Page 1. > The proposed
site would be located approximately 622 feet west ar-d perpendicular to Runway l5 at the Addison Airport. > Based on the requirements contained in part 77, notice 􀁾􀁯􀀠the 􀁾􀁁􀁁􀀠would
be required. > This notice should be submitted to our office at least 60 days prior to the start of any construction. > In addition, it does appear thac the proposal would 􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁥􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁾􀁥􀀠the
following obstruction standards contained in part 77: • Section 77.23 (al (5) by 6 6 feet -a height exceeding the transition surface as applied to Runway 15 at the Addison Airport. A
structure height of 29 feet AGL /654 feet AMSL would :lot exceeci this obstruction standard•. > Preliminary review inciicates that a structure at yourproposed location and a height no
greater than 35 feet AGL /660 feet AMSL is feasible. This is based on a site elevation of. 625 feet. > For a structure height of 42 feet AGL, the site elevation would have to be 615
feet AMSL (618 + 42 = 660) p This is 􀁾a formal determination but only a report based on the information furnished this office. Please keep in mind that there is always a possibility
that the final outcome of a formal aeronautical study might prove to be different from the results of this informal feasibi11tystudy. 
Jul-08-99 IO:04am From-FAA AIRSPACE 􀀶􀁒􀁾􀁃􀁈􀀠 61 r-m-S981 􀀢􀁾􀀠» 􀁐􀁾􀁅􀁁􀁓􀁅􀀠NOTE THAT YOUR PROPOSAL AT A HEIGHT OF 35 FEET AGL ! 660 FEET 1\MSL WILL REQUIRE A FORMAL AERONAUTICAL
STUDY. .1'. FORMAL AERONAUTICAL STUDY TAKES APPROXIMATELY 90 TO 120 !lAYS TO COMPLETE, SO YOU WItL NEED TO PLAN ACCORDINGLY. » This report does not relieve the sponsor of any compliance
responsibilities relating to laws, ordinances, or 􀁲􀁥􀁧􀁵􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁾􀁳􀀠of any Federal, state, Or local goverpJnental bodies. » This in!ormal feasibility report does not supersede
or override any state, county, Or local laws or o.rdinances. > If you do not agree with the coordinates, elevation, 􀁨􀁥􀁩􀁧􀁾􀁴􀁳􀀬􀀠or the results of this report, please contact me
at 817-2225536. » 3ased on the unofficial nature of this study, the 􀁾shall not be held responsible for any type of commitment entered into by the sponsor base solely on this informal
feasibility report. > Please refer to Aeronautical study Number 99-ASW-2296-0E on any future correspondence concerning this feasibility report or it you do file for.mal notice with the
F.AA concerning the structure. Additional Comments: The existing building located south of your proposal has an overall height of $60 feet AMSL. A site elevation of 618 feet AMSL + a
building height of 42 feet AGL = an overall 􀁨􀁥􀁩􀁧􀁨􀁾􀀠of 660 feet AMEL. The overall height is the magic number and not the AGL height of the structure. The overall height is dependent
on the site elevation and structure heiqht. Based on the Addison 7.5" Quadrangle Chart, the maximum site elevation at your location 625 feet AMSL. A site elevation of 625 feet AMSL +
a building height of 35 feet = an overall heightof 660 feet AMSL. "For a site located this close to the airport, we request that when submitting your notice to "this office, the exact
location and site elevation of Point B be determined by a survey. The location will need to be in latitude/longitude. It is certainly possible that with surveyed data, a height of 42
feet AGL might be acceptable. However, this cannot be 􀁤􀁥􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁤􀀠without conductin9 a formal study. 
J.I-OS-99 IO:Q5am Fram-FAA AIRSPACE BRANCH 817-222-59al T-07G P.OS/OS F-S43 􀁾􀀠􀀧􀀮􀀠. ' I'l .,.. J -T CA ROLLT 􀁎􀁌􀁾􀀠s 
1 I , I I I . GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION PROPOSED OFFICEIW AREHOUSE BuaDING MIDWAY ROAD ADDISON, TEXAS JIC-􀁓􀁾􀁾􀁲􀁙􀁬􀀠PYl»Uf-I MAXIM TECHNOLOGIES INC" 
Prepared/or: S & B Investments Dallas, Texas GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION PROPOSED OFFICEIWAREHOUSE BUILDING MIDWAY ROAD ADDISON, TEXAS Jlt.. 5AhrYl Pr?;)UI-Prepared by: MAXIM TECHNOLOGIES,
INC. 2200 Gravel Drive Fort Worth, Texas 76118 (817) 589-7211 Report No. 9912696 February 8, 2000 
TECHNO"LOGIES tNC February 8, 2000 Mr. Vic Salun S&B Investments P.O. Box 700008 Dallas, Texas 75370 Re: Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed OfficelWarehouse Building Midway Road Addison,
Texas Maxim Project No. 9912696 Dear Mr. SaIun: Please find enclosed our report summarizing the results of the geotechnical evaluation performed at the above referenced project. We trust
the recommendations derived from this investigation will provide you with the information necessary to achieve a quality project in a timely and cost efficient manner. As your project
progresses through the design and constmction phases, we recommend that Maxim Technologies, Inc. be retained to provide geotechnical/construction materials engineering, testing, and
inspection services for this project. We thank you for the opportunity to provide you with our professional services. Ifwe can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
us. Sincerely, MAXIM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. T. Neill Lawrence, E.I.T. Geotechnical Divisio Doyle L. Smith, Jr., P.E. Vice President "Providing Cost-Effective So/unoos to Clients Nationwide"
/" 
TABLE OF CONTENTS Geotechnical Report Proposed OfficelWarehouse Building Midway Road Addison, Texas Page 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ......................................................................
.................... 1 2.0 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................... 1 3.0 FillLD OPERATIONS ......................................
.............................................................. 1 4.0 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................ 2
5.0 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITIONS ............................................... 2 5.1 Site Geology .........................................................................................
............................... 2 5.2 Subsurface Conditions ........................................................................................................ 3 5.3 Groundwater
....................................................................................................................... 3 6.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................
...................... 4 6.1 Soil Movements ................................................................................................................. 4 6.2 Foundation System
Recommendations .............................................................................. 4 6.2.1 Drilled Shaft Supported Grade Beams ............................................................
.................... 5 6.2.2 Group Effects on Straight Drilled Shafts ............................................................................ 6 6.2.3 Straight Drilled Shaft Soil
Uplifts Loads ............................................................................ 6 6.3 Drilled Shaft Construction Considerations ............................................................
............. 6 6.4 Floor Slab Systems ............................................................................................................. 7 6.4.1 Slab-On-Grade Floor System
(Select Fill Only) ................................................................. 7 6.4.2 Slab-On-Grade Floor System (Select Fill and Water Pressure Injection) ..........................
8 7.0 EARTHWORK GUIDELINES ......................................................................................10 7.1 Site Grading and Drainage .....................................................
............................................ 10 7.2 Site Preparation for Controlled Placement ofFill.. ............................................................ l1 7.3 Select Fill
...........................................................................................................................11 7.4 On-Site Clay Fill ...................................................
............................................................ 11 8.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 12 8.1 Pavement
Design Design Considerations ..................................................................................... 12 ;"..8.2 Recommended Pavement Sections Considerations ............................
.............................. 12 8.3 Other Pavement Considerations ........................................................................................ 14 9.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
AND TESTING ................................................. 15 10.0 LIMITATIONS ...............................................................................................................
15 
TABLE OF CONTENTS Geotechnical Evaluationt Proposed OjficeIWarehouse Building Midway Road Addison. Texas FIGURES Figure Boring Location Diagram .......................................................
........ ................................. ............. I Logs ofBoring ................................................................................................................
2 through 6 Terms and Symbols Used on Boring Logs and Classification System APPENDIX Appendix A Measures to Reduce to Reduce the Potential for Free Water Sources AppendixB Specifications
for Water Pressure Injection 
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION PROPOSED OFFICEIW AREHOUSE BUILDING MIDWAY ROAD ADDISON, TEXAS 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION The project will involve the construction of a new office/warehouse building
located on the vacant tract directly north of the existing office/warehouse building located at 16400 Midway Road in Addison, Texas. The proposed office/warehouse building is expected
to have a building footprint ofapproximately 70,000 square feet. Detailed structural information was not available, however, the maximum column loads for the building are expected to
be in the 100 kip range. It is assumed that fill required to develop the planned finished floor site grades will be 2 to 4 feet. One (I) to Seven (7) feet offill materials consisting
ofclay intermixed with limestone and concrete was encountered at this site. Further limited investigation of the fill materials will be made and submitted in an addendum report within
the next few days. Ifthe details ofthe proposed construction are different than stated herein, please contact our office to evaluate the potential impact to the recommendations presented
in this report. 2.0 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION Our services for this project were performed in general conformance with our proposal dated November 10, 1999 (Proposal No. 9-11-05. The purposes
ofthis geotechnical evaluation were to: 1) explore the subsurface conditions at the site, 2) evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the subsurface materials, 3) provide recommendations
concerning suitable types of foundation systems for the proposed structures, 4) provide pavement system recommendations, and 5) provide comments and recommendations concerning construction
guidelines for earthwork operations including excavation and fill placement. 3.0 FIELD OPERATIONS Eleven (II) test borings were drilled at the approximate locations shown on the Boring
Location Diagram on Figure I. Seven (7) borings were advanced to depths ranging from 20 to 25 feet each in the vicinity ofthe proposed building while four (4) borings were advanced to
a depth of 5 feet ; "." Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 1 
S&B Investments February 8, 2000 each in the vicinity ofthe proposed parking area and drives. The results ofthe boring program are presented on the Logs ofBorings, Figures 2 through
12. A truck-mounted continuous flight auger drill rig was used to advance the borings and to obtain samples for laboratory evaluation. Undisturbed samples of the cohesive soil were obtained
at intennittent intervals with standard, thin-walled, seamless tube samplers. These samples were extruded in the field, logged, sealed and packaged to protect them from disturbance and
to maintain their in-situ moisture content during transportetion to our laboratory. The bearing properties of the limestone formation encountered was evaluated by the Texas Department
ofTransportation's (fxDOT) Cone Penetrometer Test. This test consists ofmeasuring the penetration of a 3-inch diameter cone driven with a 170-pound hammer falling 24 inches. The results
ofthese tests are tabulated on the boring logs. 4.0 LABORATORY TESTING The project geotechnical geotechnical engineer examined the samples recovered during the field exploration program
at our laboratory. Select samples were then subjected to laboratory tests under the supervision ofthis engineer. The in-situ unit weight, moisture content, and liquid and plastic limits
ofthe 􀁳􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴􀀠soil samples were measured to evaluate the potential volumetric change ofthe different strata and as an indication ofthe unifonnity of the material. Unconfined compression
tests were performed to estimate the unconfined compressive strength of the soil. Hand penetrometer tests were performed to provide an indication ofthe variation ofsoil strength with
depth. The test results are tabulated on the Logs ofBoring. 5.0 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITIONS 5.1 Site Geology As shown on the Dallas sheet ofthe Geologic Atlas ofTexas, the
site is located in an area underlain by deposits ofthe Austin Chalk Formation. The Austin Chalk Formation consists ofmoderately to highly plastic overburden clays underlain by limestone.
Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 2 
S&B Investments February 8, 2000 5.2 Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions encountered in the bOrings, including descriptions of the various strata and their depths and thickness',
are presented on the Logs of Boring. Note that depth on all borings refers to the depth from the existing grade or ground surface present at the time of the investigation. Boundaries
between the various soil types are approximate. The subsurface soils encountered at this site consisted ofboth fill materials and native clay soils. The fill material consists of clay
soils intennixed with limestone fragments and concrete within the upper one (1) to seven (7) feet in the vicinity of borings B-2 through B-7. Based on field and laboratory tests, the
fill material appear to have been satisfactorily compacted. However, we recommend that all areas containing fill be proofrolled as described in Section 7.2 of this report. The native
soils encountered at this site consisted of7 to 14 feet ofmoderately to highly plastic dark brown, brown, yellowish brown, and gray clays underlain by tan weathered limestone ofthe Austin
Chalk formation. The primary gray limestone stratum was encountered at depths ranging from II to 22 feet below existing grade and extended to the termination ofthe deepest borings 25
feet below existing grade. 5.3 Groundwater The borings were advanced with continuous flight auger drilling equipment. This method allows relatively accurate short term groundwater observations
to be made while drilling. Subsurface perched groundwater seepage was encountered at depths ranging from 5 to 14 feet below existing grade at the time of this investigation at boring
locations B-1, B-3, B-4, and B-5. An accurate determination ofthe uppermost water bearing zone would require the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and a water level monitoring
program extending over several months. Furthermore, the presence and magnitude ofperched groundwater will fluctuate seasonally due to variations in the amount of precipitation, evapotranspiration,
upper elevation of the aquitard (limestone formation at this site) and the surface water runoff characteristics of this site and the surrounding area. The presence ofperched groundwater
should be verified prior to construction that wouid be adversely impacted by subsurface perched groundwater, such as temporary casing of drilled piers during installation. Maxim Technologies,
Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 3 
S&8 Investments February 8, 2000 6.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Soil Movements The Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) empirical method of predicting Potential Vertical
Rise (PVR) was utilized in the development ofthe foundation design criteria associated with soil movement. PVR values obtained using this method assume that the supporting soil is not
subject to free water sources and, as a result, never becomes fully saturated and never reaches its full swell potential. PVR values using this method are typically much lower than values
obtained from laboratory swell tests. When this design method is used it is imperative that all potential free water sources are eliminated in order to prevent excessive upward movement
caused by soil swelling. It is also imperative that measures be taken during design and construction to reduce the risk of free water sources near the foundation (see Appendix A ofthis
report) and that the owner be advised of the importance ofmaintaining the conditions described in Appendix A ofthis report. The clay deposits are highly expansive and have a high shrink/swell
potential within the normal zone of seasonal moisture change. Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) calculations were performed using TxDOT Method 124-E, assuming a "dry" soil moisture condition
to estimate the swell potential of the soil. The PVR value was estimated to be approximately 4.0 inches. Considerably more upward movement than the estimated above potential soil movement
will occur in areas where water is allowed to pond near or beneath the strocture for extended periods due to poor drainage, leaking utility lines, percolation in recessed landscaped
areas, or leaking sprinkler lines. The soil conditions may also differ from those encountered at the boring locations, which will influence the estimated soil movement. 6.2 Foundation
System Recommendations Due to the highly expansive nature ofthe subsurface clays encountered at this site, structural loads of the proposed building should be supported by straight drilled
shafts bearing into the gray Austin Chalk stratum encountered at depths ranging from 11 to 22 feet below existing grade. ,. 􀁾􀀮􀀠; Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 4

S&B Investments February 8, 2000 We recommend an allowable end bearing pressure of50,000 psfbe used for design for shafts bearing a minimum oftwo (2) feet into the hard gray limestone
stratorn. A skin friction value of 5,000 psf is recommended for compressive loads and 3,000 psf for uplift load resistance. Drilled shafts should have a minimum penetration depth of
2 feet into the hard gray limestone to develop the recommended end bearing values. Skin friction and uplift resistance may be considered after the minimum penetration of2 feet into the
hard gray limestone. Since some variation in the depth of drilled piers may be required due to the variable depth and potential weathered condition of the upper portion of the gray Austin
Chalk formation, bid and contract documents should include pay items for constructing drilled shafts on a unit price basis. Due to the presence of perched groundwater encountered during
our investigation, bid and contract documents should also include pay items for the use of temporary casing on a unit price basis for installation of drilled piers where casing is necessary.
When estimating total pier depths and developing unit costs for drilled pier installation for bidding purposes, the following items should be adequately addressed: • The drilling resistance
of the Austin Chalk limestone • The variable depth of the gray limestone formation, as noted on the individual boring logs • The surface elevation of each boring location relative to
the fInished floor elevation for the proposed building • Potential perched groundwater seepage encountered during drilled pier installation. 6.2.1 Drilled Shaft Supported Grade Beams
All grade beams or wall panels should be supported by drilled shafts and a minimum void space of eight (8) inches provided between the bottom of these members and the subgrade. This
void will serve to reduce distress resulting from swell pressures generated by the near surface expansi ve clays. Structural cardboard boxes are one acceptable means of providing this
void beneath cast-in-place beams. A soil retainer should be provided to help prevent in-fIlling of the void. Care must be Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 5 
S&B Investments February 8. 2000 exercised during concrete placement to avoid collapsing the cardboard void boxes. The grade beam or wall panel excavations around the perimeter ofthe
building should be carefully backfilled with on-site soils. 6.2.2 Group Effects On Straight Drilled Shafts In order to develop full load carrying capacity in end bearing, adjacent shafts
should have a minimum clear spacing oftwo (2) times the diameter ofthe larger shaft. Closer spacing may require a reduction in skin friction. Shafts spaced closer than three shaft diameters
should be evaluated on a case by case basis by the geotechnical engineer .. 6.2.3 Straight Drilled Shaft Soil Uplift Loads Straight drilled shafts should penetrate the hard gray limestone
a sufficient amount to provide resistance to potential uplift forces caused by soil swelling. Uplift loads will be induced on the shafts by soil heave in the overlying clays. The maguitude
of these loads varies with the shaft diameter, free water sources, soil parameters, the depth of the clays acting on the shaft, and particularly the in-situ moisture levels at the time
of construction. These pressures can be approxitnated at this site by assuming a uniform uplift pressure of 1,500 psf acting on the shaft perimeter for a shaft length of 10 feet. The
shafts should have sufficient continuous vertical reinforcement extending to the base ofthe shafts to resist the computed uplift loads. The sustained structure dead load may also be
considered to resist soil uplift pressures. 6.3 Drilled Shaft Construction Considerations Excavations for the shafts should be maintained in the dry. Based on our field investigation
groundwater seepage will likely be encountered during installation of some of the drilled shafts, especially if construction proceeds during wet periods ofthe year. In some cases, rapid
placement ofsteel and concrete may permit shaft instaIlation to proceed without the need for casing, however, provisions for temporary casing should be included in the contract documents.
Seepage rates that result in excessive standing water in the bottom ofthe shafts at the time ofconcrete placement will require pumping andlor the use of temporary casing for installation
of these shafts. If required, Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 6 
S&B Investments February 8. 2000 temporary casing should be seated in the hard dark gray shale and properly sealed below the seepage zone to prevent excessive seepage into the drilled
shaft excavation. Care must then be taken that a sufficient head of plastic concrete is maintained within the casing during extraction. If casing is required, specified pier penetrations
should be measured from the bottom ofthe casing. Concrete used for the shafts should have a slump of5 inches plus or minus 1 inch and be placed in a manner to avoid striking the reinforcing
steel and walls ofthe shaft during placement. Complete installation ofindividual shafts should be accomplished within an &hour period in order to prevent deterioration of bearing surfaces.
The drilling of individual shafts should be excavated in a continuous operation and concrete placed as soon as practical after completion ofthe drilling. No shaft should be left open
for more than 8 hours. We recommend that Maxim Technologies, Inc., be retained to observe observe and document the driiled pier construction. The geotechnical engineer, or his representative,
should document the shaft diameter, depth, cleanliness, plumb ness ofthe shaft, the type of bearing material and casing installations. Significant deviations from the specified or anticipated
conditions should be reported to the owner's representative, the structural engineer, and the geotechnical engineer. The drilled pier excavation should be observed after the bottom ofthe
hole is cleaned ofany mud or extraneous material, and dewatered, ifnecessary. 6.4 Floor Slab Systems Due to the potential for excessive upward slab movements, designed system performance
and constructability (schedule intpact and construction cost) the floor slabs should consist ofa slab-ongrade that is placed on 1) select fill materials or 2) select fill soils placed
over a stabilized subgrade that has been pre-swelled by water pressure injection. 6.4.1 Slab-On-Grade Floor System (Select Fill Only) The presence ofexpansive clay soils at this site
will result in differential movement ofslab-on-grade floor slabs, therefore, site preparation work will be required in order to lower the potential soil movement. 􀁾􀀠.-. Maxim Technologies,
Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 7 
S&B Investments February B, 2000 We recommend that the following building pad preparation work be perfonned for the building in order to reduce potential differential floor movements
to 1,00 to 1,25 inches. 1. Adjust the building pad subgrade as required to allow the placement ofat least 5 feet of"select" fill beneath the floor slab (not including the thickness of
the moisture retarding layer and concrete floor slab). The grade adjustment, and "select" fIll placement should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the building perimeter and beneath adjacent
sidewalks and entry slabs. Proofroll with exposed subgrade. Proofrolling can generally be accomplished using a heavy (25 ton or greater total weight) pneumatic tired roller making several
passes over the area. Where soft or compressible zones are encountered, these areas shouid be removed to stiff subgrade. Any resulting void areas should be backfilled to finished subgrade
in 6 inch compacted lifts compacted to 95 percent ofmaximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 between 0 and +5 percentage points ofits optimum moisture content. 2. ScarifY, rework,
and recompact the upper 8 inches ofthe exposed subgrade. The scarified soils should be recompacted to 95 percent ofthe maximum density as detennined by ASTM D 698 between 0 and +5 percentage
points ofits optimum moisture content. 3. The upper 5 feet ofpad fill should consist of non-expansive select fill having a PI of5 to 15. Compact at-2 to +3% above optimum to a minimum
of95% Standard Proctor Density. The upper 2 feet of backfill in unpaved areas near the building should consist of on-site cay compacted to 95 percent (to minimum water infiltration into
the select fill). 4. The subgrade moisture content within the building pad must be maintained until all slabs have been constructed. 6.4.2 Slab-On-Grade Floor System (Select Fill and
Water Pressure Injection) Site preparation work will be required in order to lower the potential soil movements to a tolerable level. Water pressure injection stabilization to pre-swell
the clay soils can be perfonned at this site to reduce the potential soil movement. We recommend that a guaranteed maximum price be obtained from an injection subcontractor to reduce
the average swell to less than one (1) inch for a 10 foot depth of treatment. Water injection stabilization is a time consuming process and should be considered during schedule planning
since several injection passes will be required. Recommendations for water pressure injection procedures are presented below. . Maxim Technologies. Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 8 
1. Adjust the building pad subgrade as required to allow the placement ofat least 2.5 feet of "select" fill beneath the floor slab (not including the thickness of the moisture retarding
layer and concrete floor slab. The grade adjustment, "select" fill placement and water inj ection should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the building perimeter and beneath adjacent
sidewalks and entry slabs. 2. Water inject to a ten (10) foot depth. The water injection process should be continued until the desired PVR has been achieved. Injection stabilization
should be performed 5 feet beyond building lines, entries and adjacent sidewalks. For a 1.0 inch PVR., the acceptance criteria should be based on the results of volumetric swell tests,
moisture content tests, and hand penetrometer readings perform for each test boring (the loading for the swell tests should include the select fill surcharge loads). Multiple injections
will be required. Specifications for this work are included in Appendix B. 3. After completion and acceptance of injection stabilized pad, remove ponding water, aerate, proofroll, rework
as needed and compact at +2% to +5% above optimum moisture content to a minimum density of 93% Standard Proctor Compaction. 4. The upper 2.5 feet around the building perimeter and upper
two feet in the building interior of pad fill should consist of non-expansive select fill having PI of 4 to 15. Compact at -2 to +3% above optimum to a minimum of 95% Standard Proctor
density. The upper 8 inches offill in unpaved areas adjacent to building should consist ofon-site compacted clay to minimize water infiltration into the select fill. 5. Moisture condition
of all earthwork and completed pad must be maintained until all slabs are in place. A set of General Specifications for this process is presented in Appendix B of this report. Compliance
with these specifications is essential if maximum benefits are to be gained. We recommend the injection process be observed on a full time basis by qualified Maxim personnel. A polyethylene
moisture barrier is recommended below the building floor slabs where floor coverings or painted floor surfaces will be applied with products which are sensitive to moisture or if products
stored on the building floors are sensitive to moisture. Procedures for installation of vapor barriers are recommended in ACI 302 Section 2.4.1. Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493
Page 9 
S&B Investments Fe!<ruary 8, 2000 7.0 EARTHWORK GUIDELINES 7.1 Site Grading and Drainage All grading should provide positive drainage away from the structure and should prevent water
from collecting or discharging near the foundations. Water mnst not be permitted to pond adjacent to the structure during or after construction. Surface drainage gradients should be
designed to divert surface water away from the building and edges ofpavements and towards suitable collection and discharge facilities. Unpaved areas and permeable surfaces should be
provided with steeper gradients than paved areas. Surface drainage gradients within 10 feet ofthe building should be constructed with a minimum slope of 1 percent for paved areas and
3 percent for unpaved areas. The roof should be provided with gntters and downspouts to prevent the discharge of rainwater directly onto the ground adjacent to the building foundations.
Downspouts should discharge directly into storm drains or drainage swales, ifpossible. Roofdownspout and surface drain outlets should discharge into erosion-resistant areas, such as
paving or rock riprap. Water permitted to pond in planters, open areas, or areas with unsealed joints next to the structure can result in on-grade slab or pavement movements that exceed
those indicated in this report. It is emphasized that predictions ofmoisture related differential movements indicated in this report are based on empirical calculations and previous
experience. In some cases movements can exceed those predicted, particularly when unusual sources ofwater become available to the underlying clay. Exterior sidewalks and pavements will
be subject to some post construction movement. Flat grades should be avoided. Where concrete pavement is used, joints should be sealed to prevent the infiltration ofwater. Since some
post construction movement ofpavement and flatwork may occur, joints particularly around the building should be periodically inspected and resealed where necessary. Maxim Technologies,
Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 10 
S&B Investments February 8, 2000 7.2 Site Preparation for Controlled Placement ofFill SUbgrade preparation should include the removal ofthe existing structures, including all foundations,
floor slabs, pavements, and any other below grade structures. Any underground utilities that are not going to be reused should be removed and capped at the property lines, or rerouted
around the site and reconnected. All topsoil, surface vegetation, tree root balls, and any other deleterious materials should also be removed from the planned pavement areas. Following
removal operations, the subgrade should be proofrolled under the observation of the geotechnical engineer or a qualified engineering technician. Proofrolling should be accomplished using
a heavy (25 ton or greater total weight) pneumatic tired roller making several passes over the area. Any soft or unstable soil that is encountered should be removed to a firm subgrade.
The overexcavation should then be backfilled to fmished subgrade with suitable fill. The backfill should be placed in 6 inch lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard
Proctor density at a moisture content between 0 and +5 percent ofthe optimum moisture value. 7.3 Select Fill Select fill should consist ofsandy clay to clayey sand with a liquid limit
of32 or less and a plasticity index between 4 and 15. The fill should be spread in loose lifts, less than 9 inches thick, and uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of Standard Prcctor
density at a moisture content within 3 percent of the optimum moisture value. The moisture content of the completed pad must be maintained during construction until all slabs have been
constructed (including pavement slabs). 7.4 On-Site Clay Fill The on-site surficial clay may be used as fill in pavement and landscaped areas. The fill should be free of surficial vegetation
or debris. Clay fill should be spread in loose lifts, less than 9 inches thick, and uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent ofthe Standard Proctor density at a moisture content between
optimum and 5 percent above optimum. Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 11 
S&8 Investments February 8, 2000 8.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS We assume that a typical automobile is representative of essentially all ofthe traffic on the proposed parking area pavements.
We further assume that only occasional heavy to medium truck traffic from primarily waste disposal trucks and delivery trucks will be present on the parking area pavements. The following
recommendations are based upon these assumed conditions, 8.1 Pavement Design Considerations The clays that are present on this site are active and will lose strength with the increases
in moisture content that normally occur beneath pavements. However, the support characteristics of these clay deposits can be improved through lime stabilization. Lime stabilization
consists of mixing the subgrade soil with hydrated lime in order to improve the support characteristics of the soil and to provide a firm, uniform subgrade beneath the pavement. We typically
recommend lime stabilization of subgrede used for support of all asphalt pavements (with with the exception ofsoluble sulfate bearing clays), that will be subject to moderate to high
traffic loads. Recommendations for subgrade stripping and proofrolling, lime stabilization, and subgrade recompaction are presented in the following sections. If lime stabilization is
performed the application rate should be determined by performing a lime series test on the exposed subgrade after the pavement area has achieved approximate final grade. Lime stabilization
criteria should be established using current TxDOT (Item 260) and/or applicable NCTCOG (Item 4.6) specifications. 8.2 Recommended Pavement Sections Considerations Recommendations for
both Portland Cement concrete pavement and asphalt pavement are provided in the following Tables 1 and 2. The pavement sections provided in Table 1 are recommended for areas that will
be subject to relatively light traffic loads, such as the parking stalls for automobiles. Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 12 
S&B Investments February S, 2000 The pavement sections provided in Table 2 are recommended for areas that will be subject to moderate traffic loads, such as drives and areas subject
to occasional truck traffic. TABLE 1 LIGHT DUTY PAVEMENT SECTION 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀽􀀽􀁾􀀠HMAC SECTIONS 2.0 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surrace Course Type D 3.0 inches Asphaltic Concrete
Base Course Type B 6.0 inches Lime Treated Subgrade PCCSECTION 5.0 inches Portland Cement Concrete 6.0 inches Scarified and Compacted Subgrade TABLE 2 HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENT SECTION 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠HMAC
SECTIONS 3.0 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surrace Course Type D 4.5 inches Asphaltic Concrete Base Course Type B 6.0 inches Lime Treated Subgrade PCCSECTION 7.0 inches Portland Cement Concrete
6.0 inches Scarified and Compacted Subgrade Asphaltic concrete pavement should be placed in accordance with Item 340 of TxDOT's Standard Specification, 1995 edition. The sutface course
asphaltic concrete should comply with Type D of Item 340 and the base course asphaltic concrete should comply with Type B ofTxDOT Item 340. The Portland Cement concrete should have a
minimum 28 day compressive strength of 3,500 psi. Concrete quality will be important in order to produce the desired flexural strength and long teon Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No.
2005493 Page 13 
S&B Investments February 8, 2000 durability. Assuming a nominal maximum aggregate size of 1 to 1-112 inches, we recommend that the concrete have entrained air of 5 percent (± 1%) with
a maximum water cement ratio of 0.50. Proper joint placement and design are critical to pavement performance. Load transfer at all longitudinal joints and maintenance ofwatertight joints
should be accomplished by use oftie bars. Control joints should be sawed as soon as possible after placing concrete before shrinkage cracks occurs. Joints should also be properly cleaned
and sealed as soon as possible to avoid infiltration ofwater, small gravel, etc. Our previous experience indicates that joint spacing on 12 to 15 foot centers have generally performed
satisfactorily. A 12 foot spacing is preferred. It is recommended that the concrete pavement be reinforced with No. 3 bars on approximately IS-inch centers in each direction or equivalent
reinforcing steel. We recommend that the perimeter of the pavement area have a stiffening curb section to prevent possible distress due to heavy wheel loads near the edge of the pavement
and to provide channeli2ed drainage. 8.3 Other Pavement Considerations All joints and pavements should be inspected at regular intervals to ensure proper performance and to reduce the
potential for crack propagation. The site soil is active and differential heave of the pavement could occur. The service life ofthe pavement may be reduced due to water infiltration
into the subgrade soil through heave induced cracks in the pavement section. This will result in softening .and loss of strength ofthe subgrade soils. A regular maintenance program to
seal paving cracks will help prolong the service life ofthe pavement. The life ofthe pavement can be increased with proper drainage. Areas should be graded to prevent ponding adjacent
to curbs or pavement edges. Curb areas should be backfilled as soon as possible after the concrete has set, preferably with the on-site clay soil. Backfill materials that could hold
water behind behind the curb should not be permitted. Flat pavement grades should be avoided. Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 14 
S&B Investments February 8, 2000 9.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND TESTING Many problems can be avoided or solved in the field ifproper monitoring and testing services are provided. It
is recommended that all foundation excavation, proofroUing, site and sub grade preparation, and subgrade stabilization be monitored by a qualified engineering technician. Field density
and moisture content determinations should be made on each lift offill with a minimum of 1 test per lift per 5,000 square feet in the building pad, 1 test per lift per 100 linear feet
of utility trench backfill, and 1 test per lift per 10,000 square feet in other fill areas. Inspection should be performed prior to and during concrete placement operations. We employ
a group ofexperienced, well-trained technicians for inspection and construction materials testing who would be pleased to assist you on this project. 10.0 LIMITATIONS The professional
services that have been performed, the findings obtained, and the recommendations prepared were accomplished in accordance with currently accepted geotechnical engineering principles
and practices. If there are any unusual conditions differing significantly from those described herein, Maxim Technologies, Inc. should be notified to review the effects on the performance
ofthe recommended foundation system. The recommendations given in this report were prepared exclusively for the use of S&B Investments or their consultants. The information supplied
herein is applicable only for the design ofthe previously described project to be constructed at location indicated at this site and should not be used for any other structures, locations,
or for any other purpose. We will retain the samples acquired for this project for a period of 30 days subsequent to the submittal date printed on the report. After this period, the
samples will be discarded unless otherwise notified by the owner in writing. Maxim Technologies, Inc. Report No. 2005493 Page 15 
􀁆􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀽􀀭􀁾􀀽􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀂷􀁜􀀠"'1 I r----------------, 􀁜􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁜􀁜􀁬􀁩􀁾􀀺􀀩􀀠􀁣􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭I Ia.. 􀁾􀀠I fV S_2 B-J'!1
I I I I I Ni ! i i \\ I I I I \ \ I I I I'\ -:'J B8i ! i ! A -\,\ 1II I I I V f I I \ \ i I 1\ ,,-;:= . II r1I I \,\\I I I I I I I I I I , \ I r-J rJ i II \ I I I I I : I 􀀺􀀮􀀨􀁬􀀿􀁾􀁊􀁦􀀬􀁩􀀠I
\\ I I I I 􀁾c-􀁌􀁜􀁾􀁡􀁟􀀳􀀠􀁂􀀭􀀴􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁂􀀭􀀮􀀠\\1! 􀁾􀁾􀀠i I '------------\;-.., \ \ I I I \ \ \\􀀡􀁴􀁾􀀠i 􀁾􀀠! I 􀁾􀁜􀀠\ \\ V! l ,i B_7 \ \ \\ I I I ' \I I I I \ I \ : l 􀁾􀁂􀀭􀁡􀀠􀁾􀁂􀀭􀀵􀀠I}
\ \i i L ___________________________􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁬􀀯􀀠\\ L r-J 􀁾􀁂􀀭􀁬􀁬􀀠􀁾􀁡􀀭􀁬􀀰􀀠􀁾􀀽􂂬􀁾---l \ 􀀭􀁜􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀠 EXISllNG 􀁲􀀢􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠PAIlE!.lOO
􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁾􀀢"""􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁜􀀠 EXISTING , BUILDING FIGURE 1 BORING LOCATION PLAN PROPOSED WAREHOUSE-LOT 2/llWCK 1 BELTWOOD NORTB-AIRPORT ADDIT10N
ADDlSON, TEXAS NOTE: BORING lOCATIONS ARE APPROXlt.lATE. PRWECT PRWECT NO. 9912696 fiLE HAW£: 99269I1.OWG 
I LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 PROJECT: BEL TWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS DATE: 1/11/00 FIELD DATA SHEET 1 of 1 LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS SURFACE
ELEV: LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using air !---;---;rr---t--,---,--,-,--r-rr--;--,--i rotary drilling equipment. I I 􀁾􀀠(\ 􀁾􀀭5􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀭􀀱􀀰􀀭-15 -20.. ' ..!....
fi'" R l P-S.25 P=4.5+ P=1.75 T=1001 T=10011" 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁉􀀻􀀻􀀠li' w US a 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀡􀀻􀁬􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠Q 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠22 90.0 19 105.0 50 23 27 22 : 23 55 23 32: I I 􀁾􀀠-' : GROUNDWATER INFORMATION:
Groundwater seepage 􀁾􀀠: was encoutered at a depth of 5 feet while drilling. Water '" at 24 feet at eompletlon of drilling activities. i I 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠«
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM I Brown CLAY with limestone fragments ! ! 5.0 : Yellowish brown and light gray clay with calcareous nodules 13.0 Tan LIMESTONE 22.0 Gray LIMESTONE 􀁾􀀠T=100/.75"􀀭􀀲􀀵􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾�
�􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀭􀀫􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁔􀀭􀀭􀁴􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭_____􀁾􀀲􀁾􀀵􀀮􀁾􀁏􀀠End of Boring at 25' ,30 -35 ruBE SAMPLE 9912696 􀁓􀁐􀁕􀁔􀁾􀀠spoon 􀁾􀁏􀁃􀁋􀀠CORe -REMARKS:
THO NO 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠! AECOVERY FIGURE 2 MAXIM 
LOG OF BORING NO. B-2 PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1111100 SURFACE ELEV: ! FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using air rotary drilling equipment. ! ;I' ;I' ! i!':-' ,.: ;I' w GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater-'0 Z -' In illi!':
seepage was encountered while drilling. Boring was dryl􀁾;I'􀁾􀀠t!; ll; , UI :::iii u. z$! i., VJ ,... I z c.... : at completion of drilling activities.:tt: 0 0 '" \l!t!􀁾􀀠t' . "' zNt:::
Ii;; ! '" '" v; • 􀀬􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁦􀁩􀀡0 Q '" UI 􀀨􀁩􀀳􀁾􀀠.,IE 􀁾-' -' -' '"E: d!; .. .cr; 􀁾􀀠.. li1 z'" z'" In Q w"􀀺􀁾􀀠.0Wc cr;l: I ii= Ij;:; "'zcz􀀡􀁾􀀠,.: Q 􀁾􀀠. ., '" "-w"-:I:
.. => '" 01 l-ig3>=>'" Ii: 􀁾􀀠. 􀁾'" I0 ::i is!!''" 0<1)l!! : :Z )..: a.: 􀁦􀀡􀁬􀁾􀀠::I IQ. 􀁾::E 􀁾􀀠DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM '"'" 􀁾􀀠'" '" Brown CLAY with Limestone fragment. (FILL)
1.0􀁾􀀠31 92.0 .~ Light gray and yellowish brown CLAY wilh calcareous nodules P=3.0 89 26 43 23P=4.5+ --􀁾I-5 ! 􀀮􀁾􀀠, i i ,P·3,0 23 57 22 35 -I-10 􀁾􀀠13.0 i ; Tan' LIMESTONE :􀁾􀁔􀀽􀀱􀀰􀀰􀁦􀁬􀀮􀀵�
�􀂷􀀠i15 -: : : 18.0 Gray LIMESTONE =10011.2520 -!! ! : i i !1r.100/1.25' ! 25.0 -25 : : End of Boring at 25 ! : ! , : i! -30! ! : ! -35 ! : -! i : c---'-40 REMARKS: 􀁾􀀠􀁉􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠THOROC]{ruB
E NQAUGER SPliT• CONESAMPlE RECOVERYSAMPlE SPOON CORE PEN. FIGURE 3 MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B· 3 PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH -AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 ! CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1111100 SURFACE ELEV: FIELD
DATA ! LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using air ! ! : I rotary drilling equipment. ;11 ;11 􀁾􀀠i􀁾􀀠!i ;11 􀁾􀀠:::l GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: Groundwater seepage
Ia 􀁾'" ttu. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠w was encoutered at a depth of 14 feet while drilling. Water!::!l ;11 u. g i: 􀁾􀀠i 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀻􀀠I a 􀁾􀁴􀀻􀀠;11 􀀡􀁾􀀠0 0 􀁾􀁾􀀠'" at 24 feet at completion of drilling
activities, ! '" t:: ;;; 0 zOOUl:O N 9<) 􀁾􀀠-'" 5 gj:{a ....t ..J Il. ' W VI" ::!l :::; d VI fa: co 03 0 a:: ZVl :::; <.l Z UJ(; W 0... " ,.: c:i z F! Wc Q ;:: ;:: '" a:z a: a: f0.
i!: :If •'II Cz '" '" " o.w " a􀁾􀀠0. 'II ,.." ::> :s :s z ::!la: =1 VIa UJ Z .:-: 0.: 􀁾􀀠!Sft a :! 8 Iii if III DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM'" 0 :::; 0. 0. .., 􀁾􀀠P=4,25 23 105.0 Brown
etAY with limestone fragments and sand (FILL) 2.0 : 􀁾􀀠i Dark brown eLAY with calcareous nodules P=4,;;' 25 75 28 47 I-5 -I ! -􀁾􀀠! 􀁾􀀠'.0 Light gray and yellowish brown ClAT with
calcareous P=3.25 24 59 23 36 nodules 􀁾􀀠I-10 -􀁾􀀠t\: " 14.0 I-15 -T=l 0011 " Tan LIMESTONE -,I ! ! , 16.0 : Gray LIMESTONE 20 -T=1001,75" -• , .1':, I-25 T-l001.5" 25.0 End of Boring
at 25' I ! I-30 --: I-35 --! !L-L40 : . 􀁾􀀠! 􀁾􀀠p1 􀁾􀀠􀁉􀁾􀀠REMARKS: TIl•• AUGER 􀁓􀁐􀁕􀁔􀁾􀀠ROCK lHD NO SAMPLE SAMPLE SPOON ! COR' CONE RECOVERYPEN. FIGURE 4 MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B-4 PROJECT: BEL TWOOD NORTH -AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1/11/00 SURFACE ELEV: FIELD
DATA ! ! 􀁾􀁊􀁾􀀠0 !zl'" 􀁾􀀠, t;;5!l; w'.... ' "' .... z 1;:";: ;: z 0'" " , :;," g 􀁓􀁧􀁾iil w "'>1<Xl <Xl 0 0:: ill'":;, '" l: ...... z .... ofil 􀁾􀀠.... 􀁾􀀠c.. 0 :i! ill a .. "'
i!: 0 ,.::>w 􀁾􀀠:Z ;.; n. :Sf('" 0 :; 􀁾􀀠P=3.25 ' 21 t\ t\ 􀁾I-5 -P=4.5+ 18 P=3.25 125 I-10 -1,.=10011.25" , I :;,1' , l-15 -T=100/1" :J: 20 T=100/.5" , 􀁾􀀲􀀵􀀭! i I-30 -! I-35 I--L
40• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠rus. AUGER SPLITI SAMPlE SAMPlE SPOON 9912696 LABORATORY DATA ! 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠w :> 􀁾􀀬􀀱􀀺􀁬􀀠!!! "' u. 􀁾􀀠􀁴􀀺􀀺􀁩􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠w"'>"t:: :; -rJ:r:::; I;::; d:::; 􀁾􀀠!.1 '" w ....0:'"0
􀁾􀀠'" c..'"5 ::> :;w 0 z o I!'liE:::; c.. "<I) 62 24 38 I I , , ! ! ! i ! 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠ROCK TNO CORE CONE PEN. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾! z 0 "' i= ! DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using
air rotary drilling equipment. : GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: Groundwater seepage : was encoutered at a depth of 12 feet while drilling. Water ! at 18 feet at completion of drilling activities.
, !!w c.. 􀁾􀀠I0:: ;l "' i;! '" DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM '" I , Brown CLAY with lim.stone fragments (FILL) 1,0 ' 1'-3' No sample -Concrete boulder ! i Brown CLAY wilh calcareous nOdules
(possible FILL) 5.0 : Brown CLAY wilh calcareous nodules ! i 8.0 i Tan LIMESTONE ! ! ], 16.0 Gray LIMESTONE , 20.0 End of Boring at 20' !, I -􀁾􀀠-i 􀁾􀀠REMARKS: "0 RECOIIERY FIGURES
MAXIM 
LOG OF BORING NO. B-5 PROJECT: BEL TWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITlON SHEET 1 of 1 CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1/11/00 SURFACE ELEV: i FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA ! DRilliNG METHOD: Boring was advanced using air 􀁩􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀧􀀭􀀽􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀻􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀀺􀀧􀀭􀀭􀁉􀀭􀀭􀁲􀀭􀀭􀀻􀀺􀀢􀀧􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀢􀀺􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀭􀁔-,.---1--.--·
rotary drilling equipment. II 􀁾􀀠􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀁉􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠a !i <I' ill ;; !GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: Groundwater
seepage !II Ii: Ii: u. W <I' 1iI' 􀁾􀀠u. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀠was encoutered at a depth of 8 feet while drilling. Water o I 􀁾􀀠, iii <Ii it? 􀁾􀀠,.Ii: <I'!£ 0 w<I> :i' <I> at19 feet at completion
ofdriUing actMtles. :L i 􀁾􀀠<: :t z "-I I-. 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀠i 􀁾􀀠Z 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠g g g: w 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠-􀁾􀀠a 􀁾􀁾􀀠'U 􀁯􀁾􀀠; 􀁾􀀠-w: eo a:::\ Q 5 WOO 0 Z a:::Ci W ...
􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠i 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠Ul w ..... 􀁾􀀲􀀡􀁾􀁦􀁌􀀺􀁳􀀲􀁬􀀠.....􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁊􀁑􀀮􀀮􀁡􀀮􀁾􀀸􀁴􀀻􀀠􀀻􀂣􀀡􀁾􀀠DESCRIPTlON OF STRATUM 􀁾􀀫􀀭I Brown CLAY with limestone fragments (FILL) .. P=4.5+ 17 106.0􀁾􀁾􀀠3.0􀁾􀁾􀀠Brown eLA Y with caJcareous nodules P=4.5+
20 72 25 47 I􀁉􀁾􀀭5. -􀁾􀀠I 8.0I Tan LIMESTONE !r=100/1.25' I -10 -􀁾􀀱􀀬􀀮􀀽􀀱􀀰􀀰􀀯􀀱􀀮􀀲􀀵􀀧􀀠I-15 -! I I 18,1) , Gray LIMESTONE, !: T=100/.75" I 20.{I I 1'-20 End 01 BOring at 20'I
! I !! .25 I I-30 -I I .f-35 􀁾􀀠1 " I􀁾􀀴􀀰􀀠I REMARKS: I 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠"'0 NOROCKruBE AUGER SPUT.• -! CONE !$AMPLE SAMPLE SPOON RECOVERYCORE 1PE" FIGURE 6 MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B· 6 PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CWENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1111100 SURFACE ELEV: I FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced USing air ! ! rotary drilling equipment. I 􀁾􀀠I ;i'. 􀁉􀁾􀀠I􀁾􀀠,.: GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater0 􀁾􀁉􀁗􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠'"
z 􀁾􀀧􀁩􀁩􀀡􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠!;; t:u. I!! 􀁾􀀠seepage was encountered whlle drilling. Boring was dry 􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁾􀀠z ;i'. " '" u. z at completion of drilling activities."' 1:;t: ;i'. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀡􀁱􀀠􀁾􀀠'"
:w: ;; ;; . 0 " '" " ;11.:, 01J:i '-' I ::i !::' l'l 􀁾􀀠'-' g: 0 1:; ...w 􀁾􀁾􀀠" ' . lal' '"0 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁮􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀠'0 ,'" '" "'0 0: :::l '-' '-' Z W" w'" ",'".. 􀁾􀀠,.: 􀁧􀁾􀀠... 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀠"
;:: Iii '" o.Z '" '"􀁾􀀠0. !!l :; "' " :;w ;;! 0 0 '" i;;" :5 :5 Z og: '" W 0 g tt: '" "' " iii ;":'CL " "I( 􀁾􀀠0. 0. " 0"' '" DESCRIPTION OF 3TRATUM 􀁾􀀠P;3.25 19 103.0 ! Brown CLAY
with limestone fragments (FILL) , 2.0 􀁾􀀠CONCRETE (FILL) 4.0 P=4,O 32 75 27 48 , Brown eLAYwith calcareous nodulesf5 -, · 􀁾􀀠, 􀁾f.-10 -􀁾􀀠P;1.75 32 ! .' 􀁾􀀠I I , 14.0 f-15 =100/1.75'
I Tan LIMESTONE · , , i 18.Q, ! ! Gray LIMESTONE T;1001.75" , f.-20 -I · I f.-25 T=100/.25" 25.0 , ! I end of Boring a125' , ! ! f-30 I I -, I ,f.-35 --􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀴􀀰􀀠I• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠REMARKS:
TUllE AUGER 􀁓􀁐􀁌􀁦􀁔􀁾􀀠ROCK THD I NOCONESAMPlE SAMPLE: SPOON CORE PEN. RECOVERY FIGURE 7 MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B-7 PROJECT: BELTWOO'D NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 i CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS DATE: 1/11/00 LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS SURFACE ELEV: 􀁾􀀠0
al 􀁾􀀠i., " 0 II􀁾􀀠,. Iitill; 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀱􀀸􀀡􀀯􀀺􀀱􀁩􀀺􀀻􀀠'$ t::o ,,_::J: ...I ..J a. ' w '(/,) 0 '" alOlO:ct: ,.1 i ,. w-I (jj Gi!,. ;;;' u.. 􀁾􀀠" 0 􀁾􀁾i!: 0 􀁾􀀠N 􀁾􀀺􀁩􀀢6 ii:
􀁾􀀠... VI l 􀁾􀀠iii 􀁾􀀠z 2 i GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater ! seepage was encountered while drilling. Boring was dry at completion of drilling activities. Z(3 ;;;; 0 z UJG
UJ0 iii 3 0:", a: 􀁾I ;-;ciz,i=! 􀁾􀁏􀀠:;) .. "uJ ":;0 􀁾􀀠a. lil:!'" UJ »> 􀁾􀁾􀂷􀀶􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠'" Z "'0:g '" :5 :5 01..VI 􀁚􀁾􀁇􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀠􀁩􀀵􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠rt"VI 􀁾􀀠DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
'" Brown CLAY with limestone (FILL) 1\ P=3.0 23 ! 25 3560 '" I-" 1\ N=471\ P=4.5+ 17I-5 􀁾􀁉􀁜􀀠P=4,5+ 15 7.0 ;􀁾􀁾􀀠Tan LIMESTONE T=100/1"I-10 11.0 Gray LIMESTONE T=100/,75"'-15 -T=1001.75"
􀀱􀀭􀀲􀀰􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾__L-__􀁾􀁾__􀀫􀀭􀁾__􀁾__􀁾__􀁾􀁾􀁌􀀭__________􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾____􀁾__________􀁾􀀲􀀰􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀰􀀴􀀠End of Boring at 20' 1-25.c.. 30 􀁾􀀴􀀰􀁾􀁌􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀴􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁌􀁾􀁌􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭
􀁾􀀭􀀴􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠REMARKS:I • 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁰􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠THOr TUBE AUGER 􀁓􀁐􀁬􀁬􀁔􀁾􀀠ROCK NOCONE , $AMPLE SAMPLE SPOON CORE
RECOVERYPEN. FIGURES MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B· 8 PROJECT: BELlWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CLIENT: S&8 INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1111100 SURFACE ELEV: FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using air rotary drilling equipment. '" '" " -' "GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: 0 '"' " ui 􀁾􀀠;;j No groundwater z 􀁾􀀠'" i t;:u.
w 􀁾􀀮􀀠w seepage was encountered while drilling. Bering was dry 􀁾􀀠􀁑􀀩􀁾􀀠!;; '" 0 u. 􀁾􀀠;: at completion of drilling actlvltles.􀁾􀁴􀀻􀀠" t:: 0 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀠'" " ;: . 0 3; 􀁾􀀠zom
" t:: ::!" t; 􀁾􀀠53 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠0 0 -'0. W ::! :l 0 wi!' '" ;::De w '" "'0 De :l " " :< w 0. !" ",'".. i!' -' >-0:< >eS 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠'" 0." a: '"-' a. a. 􀁩􀀡􀀧􀁾􀀠!a " 􀁾􀁬􀁬􀀱􀀠" 0a.
::! '" -' en0 w 0 a:o g 􀁾􀀠it. '" '" 0 :ii .:-;0: ::! 00. -' a. a. "I;; 0( DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM 􀁾􀁲􀁜􀀠I Brown CLAY with limeslone and gravel (FILL) r-.. P=4.0 19 108.0 r-.. P=4.5+
10 52 22 30 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠5 5.0 End of Boring at 5' i-10 -L 15 --f-20 --f-25 --I-30 --. L f-35 --L-c.. 40• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁰􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠N REMARKS: ruBE AUGER 􀁓􀁐􀁬􀁬􀁔􀁾􀀠ROCK THO NOCONESAMPLE SAMPlE
SPOON CORE PEN. ReCOVERY FIGURES MAXIM 9912696 
LOG OF BORING NO. B-9 PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH -AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CLIENT: S&B INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1/11/00 SURFACE ELEV: FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILUNG METHOD: Boring was advanced using air rotary drilling equipment. ... ... 􀁾􀀠<5 Ii ... uf l -' GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater'" 􀁾􀀠-' 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠w
&1 􀁾􀀠seepage was encountered while drilling. Boring was dryI;f. u; u. %% 􀁾􀁾􀀠;f. " 0 0 w'" 􀁾􀀠'" at completlon of drilling activities. '" 􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁦􀁩􀀠8 " 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠>'" z U !; " 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀺􀂣􀀠I􀁾􀁾􀀠
-' -' 0. W !:llij §i ::l d '" '" '" 0 0: Q Q 20 wI; W.. 􀁾􀀠• • 20 􀁾􀀠Wo 9 􀁾􀀠I;; '" 0:20 0:: 0::t;: 0 :E 020 .. w :3 0'" '" i'!: 􀁾􀀵􀀠=> => "0:: '":s 200 W Z 􀁾􀀠0.: g :e 01£ OJ
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM '" c " 00. .. .. "'" « X" P=4.5+ 17 Brown and dark brown eLA Y with limestone fragments (FILL) if' P=4.5+ 13 105.0 62 24 36g'2'-5 -P=4.5+ 16 5.0 End of Boring
at 5' -10--15 • --20 ---25-t f-30----35---40• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠REMARKS: TUBE AUGER AUGER SPLIT· ROCK THO NO SAMPLE SAMPlE SPOON CORE CONE RECOVERY􀀢􀀢􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁧􀀢􀁾􀁌􀀢􀀢􀀠FIGURE 10
MAXIM 9912696 
I LOG OF BORING NO. B·10! PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH • AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 CUENT: S&BINVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS DATE: 1/11/00 SURFACE ELEV: FIELD
DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILUNG METHOD: Boring was advanced using airI rotary drilling equipment. II "' "' 􀁾􀀠..J Ii "' ui ::l GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater0 ! a; fE'" 􀁾􀀠i
􀁾􀀠w 1;\ w seepage was encountered while drilling. Boring was dry 􀁾􀀠I:fi! iii .. ! ;!!; ;:z 􀁦􀁾􀀠"' .", " 8 UJ(/) 􀁾􀀠<Il at completion of drilling activities. " ;: 0 Z 8 '" ;!!;
>" zS 􀁾􀀠N 􀁾􀀠:c" I0U [ 9 ..J 􀁾􀀠ii! w <Ill,! ;i ci '" ! Ii:"''''0 a: i ffi 8 'i! wI-UJ ; 􀁾􀀠..J !.l z a: ".. :c Ii:" ci 􀁾􀀠g !n,t; '" a. Z a: a:." z " 0=' Ii: I '" i!' I '" 􀁾􀀠8
i 5 :5 ! :5 ::> ::;:UJ =' (/) I 0 UJ i 􀁾􀀠;!!; 0'" i'f III . '" " z 􀁾􀀠0.: 00.1::; Q. i a.. ::;: ui;; -< DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM I i' 96,0 I Brown and tan CLAY wilh limestone fragments
(FILL) I i' P=3,Q 25 :\ . . . i 􀁾􀀠P=4,5+ 13 ! 64! 25 39 . 4, • +5 -. Dark brown CLAY 5,0 End of Boring at S' 10 --f-15 --I-20 --! 1-25i I -I-30 --I ! 1-35-I I c I---40• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠REMARKS:
ruBE AUGER SPliT. ROCK THO NO SAMPlE SAMPLE SPOON CORE CONE RECOVERYPEN, 9912696 FIGURE 11 MAXIM 
I LOG OF BORING NO. B-11 CLIENT: SiB INVESTMENTS LOCATION: N. OF 16400 MIDWAY RD. ADDISON, TEXAS PROJECT: BELTWOOD NORTH· AIRPORT ADDITION SHEET 1 of 1 DATE: 1/11100 SURFACE ELEV: i
FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD: Boring was advanced using air ! ! I rotary drilling equipment. ;[< ";II 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠,..: ... w 􀁾􀀠i GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater0
ffi ili 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠"' 􀁾􀀠1;:0. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠seepage was encountered while drilling. Boring was dry:IE i 1-' ;[< ,"' u. z 􀁾􀀠􀁣􀁮􀁾􀀠zi /:1;:; "w'" 􀁾􀀠i at completion of drilling activities.
" 􀁾􀀠i::i 0' t:: i ii :5 >" z0 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠N 􀁾􀀠[ ow -" i 􀁾􀀠<n-;i S􀁾􀀠alo. w ",0 0 "'Ia: co 0: men ::l ffi '0 z i li!'" w Q.--0 i:!'" ::c 􀁾􀀠I0 :z 􀁣􀁾􀀠0 i 􀁾􀀠<n n. Z a: a: 15 I0.
􀀸􀀾􀁩􀀽􀁾􀀠'" 5 ::> "w '3 0 Q. 5 >-::> :5 :5 Z oJ: '" w « Z )..: 0.: 0:0 g i if '" i DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM VI c " 00. , 0. , 0. i 0", « 􀁾􀁲􀀻􀀻􀀻􀀠P=2.5 20 99.0 i Brown CLAY with
Ilmesione & asphalt (FILL) 􀁾􀀠P=4.5 16 53 22 31 , 3.0 i Dark brown CLAY with calcareous nodules 􀀬􀁾-5 -P=4.5+ 23 5.0 End 01 Bonng at 5' I-10 --15 --I-20 --i I-25 --i ! ! I-30 --I I-35
-􀁾􀀠f---.L 40 , I I• 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠REMARKS: ruBE AUGER SPUT. ROCK THo NOCONESAMPl.E SAMPLE SPOON CORe PEN. RECOVERY 9912696 FIGURE 12 MAXIM 
Symbols and Terms Used on Boring Logs son or Bock Types GRAVEL ORGANIC SANDSTONE SANa SANOY SHALE SILT SILTY UMESTONE ClAY ClAYEY FILL Shelby Tube Auger ROCk Cor. T.H.O. Soil Properties
Consistency of Cohesive Soils Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils 􀁕􀁎􀁃􀁏􀁎􀁾􀁎􀁅􀁏􀀠COMPRESSWE STD. PENETRATION OESCRlPTWE TERM STRENGTH (TON/SO.FOOT) RESISTANCE SLOWS/FOOT DESCRIPTIVE
TERM Very Soft Less thon 0.25 0-10 Loose Soft 0.25-0.50 to-30 Medium OenseFirm 0.50-1.00 Stiff 1.00-2.00 30-50 Oense Very Stiff 2.00-4.00 Hard Soil Structure CALCAREOUS SUCKENSIDED lAMINATED
􀁾􀁓􀁓􀁕􀁒􀁅􀁄􀀠INTERBEDDED More thon 4.00 OVER 50 Description Containing deposits of calcium carbonate: generally nodulor Hoving inclined plones of weakness that ore slick cnd glossy
in appearance. Composed of thin layers of votying color cnd texture. Containing shrinkage crocks frequently filled with fine sand or silt. Usually more or less verticol. Composed of
clternole layers of different soil types. Very Dense Subsurface Water Symbols 52 = WATER LEVEL AT COMPlETION OF DRILLING DElAYED WATER LEVEL READING Rock Properties Reletive Herdness
of Rock Description VERY SOFT OR PlASTIC SOFT MODERATELY HARD HARD VERY HARD Description UNWEATHERED SLlGf!ll.Y WEATHERED WEATHERED EXTREMELY WEATHERED Con be remolded in hond: Corresponds
in consistency up ta very stiff In soils. Con be scratched with fingernail. Con be scrolched easily with knife! Cannot be scratched with fingernail. OifficlJlt to scratch with knife.
Cannot be scrotched with knife. Grades of Rack Rock in its noturol stote before being exposed to atmospheric ogents. Noted predominoUy by color chongeS' with no disintergroted zones.
Complete color change with zones of sltgnUy decomposed rock. Complete color cnange wit11 consistency. texture, ond general oppearance opprOChing soi!. TECHNOLOGIES LNe 
SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SOtlS Ofe visually classified according to ASTM 02488 it closslflcotion tests ore not performed. Groin-size analysis and Atterberg limit Tests ore often performed
on selected samples to oid in classification. The classification system is briefly outltned on this ¢ohOrt, For 0 more detoiled description of the system. pleose refer to ASTM Oesignation
0-2487. MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMTYPICAL NAMESBOlS CLEAN GW Well graded grovels, grovel -SOnd mixtures, little or no fines GRAVELS GRAVELS (Little or no tines) GP Poorly graded grovels or
gravel -sond (More thon SOlI: of mixtures. little or no fines eoorse froctio n is LARGER thon the CLEAN GMCOARSE No. 4 sieve size) i Silty grovels, grovel-sand-sifl mixtures GRAVELSGRAINED
(Appreciable omt.SOILS of fines) GC Clayey grovels, grovel-send-cloy mixtures (More thon 50X 01 moterial is ! Well graded sonds. grovelly sonds, LARCER thon SW No, 200 sieve !;lize)
CLEAN SANDS little or no fines SANDS (Uttle or no fines) SP Poorly graded sonds or grovelly grovelly sonds. little or no fines (More thon SOY. of coarse fraction is SMALLER than the
SANDS SM Silty sands. sond-silt mixtures No. 4 sieve size) WITH FINES (Apprecioble amt. of fines) SC Clayey sonds, sand-cloy mixtures ML Inorgonic silts and very fine sands, rock flour,
silly or cloyey fine sands or doyey silts with sliQht plostlcity. SilTS AND CLAYS Inorganic cloys of low to medium plasticity: (Liquid limit GREATER thon 50) CL grovelly cloys. sandy
cloys. silty cloys. leon clo)'s. FINE GRAINED " I ...',;", ,00 " .." ." "-. of SOILS losticity. (More than 􀀵􀀰􀁾􀀠of micoceous or diatomaceous material is ty soils, elastic silts. SMAlLER
than No. 200 sieve size) SILTS AND CLAYS : cloys I(Liquid limit LESS thon 50) CH Igh plasticity. fat i OH Organic cloys 0' medium to high Plosticity,1 orgonie silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT Peot ond other highly organic soils. BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils 􀁰􀀰􀀵􀁓􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁾􀀠characteristics 01 two qroups ore designated by combinations 0 group symbols. NOTE: COA$E
SOILS WITH BETWEEN 5X ole 12" PASSING THE NO. 200 SI& AND FINE GRAINED SOILS WITH LIMITS PLaITING IN THE HATCHED ZONE Of THE PLASTICITY CHART ARE TO HAVE DUAL SYMBOLS 􀁐􀁾􀁃􀁉􀁔􀁙􀀠CHART
6 V DEGREES OF PLASTICITY OF COHESIVE SOIL' SO V I CH 0' H/OEGREE OF PLASTICITY PLASTICITY INDEX 40 LINE I"A" NONE 0-4 30 V ",H , 0' ! SLIGHT 5 -10 20 MEOIUM 11 -20 CL , OL ./V HIGH
2t -40 10 IML , OL VERY HIGH >40 0 0 10 20 JO 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 • AFTER BURMISTER (1948) MAXIM T(CHN01.ClCIES PIC 
APPENDIX A MEASURES TO REDUCE THE RISK OF FREE WATER SOURCES In order to reduce the risk of excessive upward ground movements caused by soil swelling associated with free water sources,
the following measures should be taken during design and construction: • The use of superior utility contractors and utility line materials accompanied with Quality Control inspection
and testing of all utility line installations including automatic sprinkler systems installed after construction. • Utility under-drains with impervious barriers along the trench bottom
may be used as an additional safeguard at lots where it is desired to minimize post-construction upward movement. • Elevated landscaped beds should be used in lieu of recessed beds to
prevent ponding water conditions near the structure. • Positive drainage should be provided at all lot locations. Lot drainage near structure: 3% minimum. Lot drainage swales: 1% minimum.
• Roof gutters should be used to direct roof runoff away from the structure in the most direct direct manner. Downspouts should not be allowed to discharge into landscaped areas located
near the structure. Downspouts extensions should be used to facilitate rapid drainage away from the structure. • If retaining walls are required due to site topography, drainage swales,
having a minimum 1 percent slope, should be provided near the top of the retaining walls to prevent runoff from the up slope property from draining onto the lower adjacent property.

RESPONSIBILITY OF OWNER • Use of superior contractors and materials for installation of sprinkler systems and Quality Control inspection and testing ofsystems installed. Sprinkler lines
should not be installed near the structure. Instead, the system should be designed so that the lines themselves are as far away from the structure as possible. Sprinkler heads should
be used with a capacity to direct water toward the structure from distances ofseveral feet. • Rapid repair ofany utility leak including water lines, sewer lines, sprinkler lines, sprinkler
heads. • Maintaining site drainage provided by the builder, particularly in landscaped areas adjacent to the structure. • Using elevated landscaped beds in lieu of recessed planters
to prevent ponding water conditions near the structure. Gutter downspout extensions should be added in all areas containing landscaped beds to prevent downspout discharge into the beds.
• Trees and deep rooted shrubs should be located no closer to the structure than one-half their ultimate mature height to reduce foundation settlement effects caused by moisture absorption
of the root systems. • A moist soil condition (not a soaked condition) must be maintained within 5 feet of the foundation during prolonged periods of dry weather to prevent differential
settlements caused by ground shrinkage. 
APPENDIXB SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER PRESSURE INJECTION SITE PREPARATION Prior to the start of injection stabilization, the building areas should be staked out to accurately mark the area
to be injected. The area to be injected should extend at least five feet beyond the limits ofthe building areas and adjacent sidewalks. Allowance should be made for swelling that may
occur as a result ofthe injection process depending on soil properties and in-situ moisture. EQUIPMENT AND MATERlALS 1. The injection vehicle shall be capable of forcing injection pipes
into the soil with minimal lateral movement to prevent excessive blowback and loss ofliquid around the injection pipes. The vehicle may be rubber tire or track mounted suitable for the
purpose intended. 2. Slurry pumps shall be capable ofpumping at least 3000 gph at 50-200 psi. 3. A nonionic surfactant (wetting agent) shall be used according to manufacturer's recommendations,
but in no case shall proportions be less than one part (undiluted) per 3,500 gallons water. APPLICATION I. Injection stabilization work shall be accomplished prior to installation ofany
plumbing, utilities, ditches or foundations. 2. The injection pressures shall be adjusted as directed by a Maxim technician within the range of 50 to 100 psi to inject the greatest quantity
offluid into the soil mass. In order to assure that the pressure is within this specified range, each injection vehicle shall be equipped with an accurate pressure gauge attached to
the manifold (the pipe fitting on which the probe valves are attached). 3. Space injection so as not to exceed five feet on center each way, and inject a minimum offive feet outside
building areas. 
4. Injection shall either proceed from the ground surface downward to the specified depths or in an upward manner beginning at the specified injection depth and proceeding upward, as
directed by a Maxim technician. Inject fluid to the required depth, or to impenetrable material, whichever occurs first. Impenetrable material is the maximum depth to which two injection
rods can be mechanically pushed into the soil using an injection machine having a minimum gross weight offive tons. Injections are to be made in 12" to 16" intervals, with a minimum
ofsix stops for seven feet and eight stops for ten feet. The probes shall be forced into the soil, not washed down by scouring action ofthe fluids. The lower portion of the injection
pipes shall contain a hole pattern that will uniformly disperse fluid in a 360 radial pattern. Inject at each interval to "refusal" (Le. until the maximum quantity offluid has been injected
into the soil and fluid is running freely at the surface, either out of previous injection holes or from areas where the surface soils have fractured around each injection probe). Backpressure
flow out of previous injection holes shall not constitute "refusal". Fluid coming up around or in the vicinity of one injection probe shall also not be considered as refusal. If this
occurs around any probe, this probe shall be cut off so that water can be properly injected through each probe at each 12 inch illiection depth interval. If this occurs around any probe,
this probe shall be cut off so that water can be properly injected through each probe at each 12 inch injection depth interval. In any event, no probe shall be cut off within the first
30 seconds of injection (after verification of no blockage as specified below). The 30 second criterion is a minimum time for each 12 inch depth interval and not a maximum time limit.
The injection vehicle shall be fitted with individual cut off valves for each probe. At each 12 inch interval, each valve will be cut off and on to assure that each probe is not blocked
and that water is flowing. Ifone or two probes are blocked, the others shall be cut off so that the added pressure will clear out the blockage. 5. After a minimum curing time of48 hours,
the injected pad may be tested to determine ifadditional injections with water and surfactant are necessary. The water injections will be five feet on center each way and spaced 2\1,
feet offset in two orthogonal directions from the initial injection. 6. A minimum of48 hours shall elapse between each injection application in anyone area to allow for moisture absorption,
ifrequired. 7. After four injection applications, the surface soils shall be scarified and recompacted to form a surface seal prior to additional injections. 8. The required final moisture
content shall be controlled by swell test results as outlined below. 
9. Upon completion of the final iIUection, scarify the top eight inches of soil and recompact to a minimum of 93% Standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698), at a moisture content ranging
from +3 to +6 percentage points above the optimum moisture value. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 1. A full-time Maxim engineering technician will be present throughout the entire injection
operation. After completion, undisturbed samples will be taken at one foot intervals to the total depth injected as specified by the Geotechnical Engineer. 2. Inspection, test drilling
and verification of moisture contents will be performed under the direction ofthe Geotechnical Engineer. 3. Moisture content tests and hand penetrometer determinations shall be performed
on one foot intervals. One dimensional swell tests shall be performed on selected soil samples. The number of swell tests along with the corresponding depths will be selected by the
Geotechnical Engineer in such a way that the PVR for each test boring can be estimated. One dimensional dimensional swell tests shall be conducted in a manner similar to that ofASTM
D 454685 MethodB. 4. The average swell from each test boring shall not exceed 1.0 percent, and the PVR for a 10 foot depth for each boring shall not exceed one (I) inch. This criteria
is based upon a design PVR ofone (1) inch within the depth of treatment. 5. Where swell criteria is not met, reinjection will be required. Additional testing will be performed in the
reinj ected areas. 6. The surfuce ofthe injected area should be sealed or otherwise protected against moisture loss. 7. After approval of the injection operations, standing water should
be removed and the subgrade be proofrolled. The subgrade should then be excavated to select fill sub grade and compacted to a minimum of93% ofthe maximum dry density as determined by
ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor) between +3 and +6 percentage points above the optimum moisture content. 8. The moisture condition ofthe completed pad must be maintained until all slabs
are inplace. 
.VIC-􀀮􀀮􀁳􀁾􀀱􀀧􀁖􀀱􀀠􀁦􀁖􀁢􀁊􀁾/􀁖􀁬􀀱􀁾􀁲􀀴􀁊􀀮􀀠. Pnrp. 􀁾􀀠􀁜􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁧􀁾􀀠F. F 'E1.. '" 􀀧􀁌􀁾􀀠. S'