Planning & Zoning Commission (linked)

16 OLD FORGE ROAD
SUITE A
ROCKY HILL, CT 06067
860.726.7889
whitestoneassoc.com
 
Office Locations: 
 
NEW JERSEY 
PENNSYLVANIA 
MASSACHUSETTS 
CONNECTICUT 
FLORIDA 
NEW HAMPSHIRE 
NEW YORK 
 
 
June 21, 2023 
 
via email 
 
KINCORA WATERFORD, LLC 
c/o KINCORA DEVELOPMENT, LLC 
170 Worcester Street  
Suite 204 
Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts 02481 
 
Attention: 
Mr. William H. McCabe, III 
Principal 
 
Regarding:  
LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 
PROPOSED CHIPOTLE RESTAURANT 
 
 
122-124 BOSTON POST ROAD 
 
 
MAP 133, PORTIONS OF LOTS 569 & 570 
 
 
WATERFORD, NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT 
 
 
WHITESTONE PROJECT NO.: GM1613982.001 
 
 
Dear Mr. McCabe: 
 
Whitestone Associates, Inc. (Whitestone) has completed a limited geotechnical investigation at the above-
referenced site.  The results of the investigation and recommendations presented below are based on the 
soil conditions disclosed from a limited number of soil explorations conducted during Whitestone’s field 
investigation.  The purpose of the investigation was to assess subsurface conditions within and adjacent to 
the proposed development area accessible to a tracked excavator.  Recommendations for support of the 
proposed structure and pavement, and anticipated earthwork requirements are included herein. 
 
 
1.0  
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
 
1.1 
Site Location & Existing Conditions 
 
The subject property, which is located at 122-124 Boston Post Road in Waterford, New London County, 
Connecticut, is further identified as Map 133, Lots 569 and 570.  The portion of the parcel proposed for 
the Chipotle development is west of the M&T Bank building and northwest of the ALDI grocery store.  
The site, which currently is vacant, was previously occupied by a commercial structure demolished 
around 2007. 
 
1.2 
Site Geology 
 
Based on a review of the Surficial Materials Map of Connecticut (1992), the site is underlain by glacial 
till.  The Bedrock Geologic Map of Connecticut (1985) indicates that the site is underlain by Proterozoic 
Z-age New London Gneiss, consisting of gneiss with minor amphibolite, part of the Eastern Uplands; 
Avalonian (Continental) Terrane; Avalonian Anticlinorium. 
 
 
 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 2
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
1.3 
Proposed Construction 
 
Based on a March 8, 2023 Conceptual Plan, prepared by RJO’Connell & Associates, Inc. of Stoneham, 
Massachusetts, the proposed development will include the construction of a Chipotle restaurant with a 
footprint of 2,325 square feet, a drive-thru, new pavements, and utilities.  Access will be from Boston 
Post Road by access roadways for the adjacent bank and grocery store.  The location is shown on attached 
Figure 1 - Test Location Plan. 
 
The proposed building is anticipated to be a single-story, masonry and metal-framed structure with a 
ground-supported floor slab and no basement or crawl space.  An underground stormwater management 
system is planned to the south of the restaurant.  No new retaining walls are indicated. 
 
Detailed structural information was not available at the time of this report, however, based on experience 
with similar facilities, Whitestone anticipates that maximum column, wall, and floor loads will be less 
than about 50 kips, 2.0 kips per lineal foot, and 150 pounds per square foot, respectively. 
 
 
2.0  
FIELD EXPLORATION & TESTING 
 
2.1 
Field Exploration 
  
Field exploration at the project site consisted of advancing eight test pits (identified as TP-1 through TP-
8) within accessible portions of the site.  The explorations subsequently were backfilled to the surface 
with excavated soils from the investigation.  The locations of the explorations are shown on the 
accompanying Test Location Plan included as Figure 1.  Records of Subsurface Exploration are provided 
in Appendix A. 
 
The subsurface tests were conducted in the presence of a Whitestone engineer, who conducted field tests, 
recorded visual classifications, and collected samples of the various strata encountered.  The tests were 
located in the field using normal taping procedures and estimated right angles.  These locations are 
presumed to be accurate within a few feet. 
 
Groundwater level observations, where encountered, were recorded during and immediately after the 
completion of field operations prior to backfilling the tests.  Seasonal variations, temperature effects, 
man-made effects, and recent rainfall conditions may influence the levels of the groundwater, and the 
observed levels will depend on the permeability of the soils.  Groundwater elevations derived from 
sources other than seasonally observed groundwater monitor wells may not be representative of true 
groundwater levels. 
 
2.2 
Infiltration Testing 
 
Test pits were completed to evaluate soil conditions prior to infiltration testing.  Test pits TP-2 and TP-3 
were advanced to depths of 7.2 feet below ground surface (fbgs) and 7.7 fbgs, respectively.  Infiltration 
tests I-1 and I-2 were conducted as falling head tests in cased holes at the locations shown on the Test 
Location Plan.  PVC casing, four inches in diameter, was installed to depths of seven fbgs and six fbgs.  
A thin layer of clean sand was placed at the bottom of the casing.  The soil was pre-soaked for 
approximately one hour.  Following testing, the casings were removed.  The results are tabulated below. 
 
 
 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 3
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
 SUMMARY OF INFILTRATION TESTING 
Location 
Approximate Ground 
Elevation (ft NAVD) 
Test Depth (fbgs) 
Approximate Test 
Elevation (ft NAVD) 
Infiltration Rate 
(in/hr) 
I-1 (TP-2) 
± 74.5 
7.0 
± 67.5 
3.0 
I-2 (TP-3) 
± 72.5 
6.0 
± 66.5 
2.0 
NAVD = North American Vertical Datum (1988); ft - feet; in/hor - inches per hour 
 
The infiltration testing was conducted within the natural glacial till.  The measured infiltration results are 
reasonably consistent with the Rawls Rate of 1.02 to 2.41 for similar silty sand material.  Typically, a 
Factor of Safety (FoS) is applied to measured infiltration rates to account for siltation and consolidation of 
soil below the systems over time.  Safety factors used should consider how critical the systems are to the 
development and the available storage.  If the system is critical or storage limited, a higher FoS should be 
applied.  Infiltration rates are variable and dependent on test depth and stratification. 
 
2.3 
Laboratory Testing 
  
Laboratory testing was conducted to determine additional, pertinent engineering characteristics of 
representative samples of on-site soils.  The laboratory testing was conducted in general accordance with 
applicable ASTM standard test methods and included physical/textural testing of representative samples. 
 
The results of the laboratory testing are presented in this section in a general manner and qualitatively 
interpreted.  The results are incorporated into the findings and recommendations discussed throughout this 
report.  Quantitative test results are provided in Appendix B. 
 
Physical and Textural Analysis:  Three representative samples were subjected to a laboratory testing 
program that included moisture content determinations (ASTM D2216) and washed gradation analyses 
(ASTM D422) in order to conduct supplementary engineering soil classifications in general accordance 
with ASTM D2487.  The soil strata tested were classified by the Unified Soil Classification System 
(USCS), provided in Appendix C.  The results of the laboratory testing are summarized in the following 
table. 
 
PHYSICAL/TEXTURAL ANALYSES SUMMARY 
Exploration 
Sample 
Depth (fbgs) 
Moisture Content 
(%) 
Passing No. 200 
Sieve (%) 
USCS 
Classification 
TP-2 
S-3 
6.0 
9.1 
33.3 
SM 
TP-4 
S-1 
2.0 
10.3 
28.0 
FILL (SM) 
TP-6 
S-2 
7.0 
7.7 
22.6 
SM 
 
The gradation analyses for the samples of glacial till indicated USDA classifications of “sand” and “sandy 
loam”.  However, the glacial till in New England is typically classified according to USDA as “loamy 
sand” or “sandy loam”.  The gradation analysis for the sample of existing fill indicated a USDA 
classification of “loamy sand”. 
 
 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 4
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
 
3.0 
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 
 
The subsurface soil conditions encountered within the subsurface tests conducted by Whitestone consisted 
of the following generalized strata in order of increasing depth.  Records of Subsurface Exploration are 
provided in Appendix A. 
 
Surface Cover Materials:  The test pits encountered four inches to eight inches of topsoil at the ground 
surface.  In test pit TP-4, the topsoil was underlain by two inches of asphaltic concrete. 
 
Existing Fill:  Beneath the surface cover materials, the test pits encountered existing fill, generally 
consisting of brown, silty sand with gravel to poorly graded sand with silt and gravel, brick and asphalt 
fragments, occasional cobbles and boulders.  In test pits TP-5, TP-6, and TP-8, asphaltic concrete layers 
two inches to eight inches thick were encountered within the fill.  Test pit TP-6 encountered refusal on a 
large boulder close to the ground surface and was offset to continue excavation.  Where penetrated, the 
existing fill extended to depth of 1.7 fbgs to 5.6 fbgs. 
 
Former Topsoil/Subsoil:  Beneath the existing fill, test pits TP-2, TP-3, TP-5 and TP-8 encountered 
seven inches to 12 inches of former topsoil, generally underlain by 12 inches to 22 inches of former 
subsoil with roots.  The former topsoil/subsoil extended to depths of 3.5 fbgs to 4.1 fbgs. 
 
Glacial Till:  Beneath the existing fill or former topsoil/subsoil, the test pits, except TP-4, encountered 
glacial till, consisting of gray, silty sand with gravel (USCS: SM), cobbles and boulders.   Test pits TP-5 
through TP-8 terminated in the glacial till at a depth of 10 fbgs.  Test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3 
encountered excavator refusal on cobbles and boulders in the glacial till at depths of 7.2 fbgs to 8.5 fbgs. 
 
Refusal Materials:  Test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3 encountered excavator refusal on boulders, at depths 
of 7.2 fbgs to 8.5 fbgs, that are likely directly above bedrock and may be dislodged pieces of bedrock.  
However, test pit TP-4 encountered excavator refusal on possible bedrock at a depth of 3.4 fbgs. 
 
Groundwater:  Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations during the investigation.  There 
were no indications of estimated seasonal high groundwater (ESHGW) levels in the walls of the test pits.  
Groundwater levels should be expected to fluctuate seasonally and following periods of precipitation. 
 
 
4.0 
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 
 
Contingent upon construction phase evaluation, Whitestone’s findings indicate that the proposed building 
may be supported on conventional shallow foundations bearing on the approved glacial till and/or 
structural fill placed on the glacial till.  Existing fill was encountered in the test pits up to a depth of 5.6 
fbgs.  Former topsoil/subsoil up to 2.5 feet in thickness was encountered beneath the existing fill in four 
test pits.  Deeper existing fill and former topsoil/subsoil may be encountered during construction between 
the widely spaced explorations.  Existing fill and former topsoil/subsoil should be overexcavated under 
footings and replaced with structural fill.  A ground-supported floor slab may derive support from the 
inspected, approved, and improved existing fill, and/or controlled structural fill materials, provided any 
significant buried organic and asphaltic concrete materials are removed.  Additionally, the site conditions 
support the use of typical pavement sections using standard CTDOT specified materials. 
 
 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 5
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
A commercial building previously occupied a portion of the site.  Concrete elements associated with the 
demolished building may be encountered in excavations for the planned development. 
 
The following recommendations have been developed on the basis of the previously described project 
characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered within the limited exploration conducted.  If there 
are any significant changes to the project characteristics or if significantly different subsurface conditions 
are encountered during construction, Whitestone should be consulted, such that the recommendations of 
this report can be reviewed. 
 
4.1 
Site Preparation & Earthwork 
 
Surface Cover Stripping:  Prior to stripping operations, utilities should be identified and secured.  The 
surface cover materials to be stripped should be removed from within and at least five feet beyond the 
limits of the proposed building and pavement areas.  The contractor should perform earthwork in 
accordance with the recommendations in this report, including backfilling any excavation with structural 
fill.  Fill or backfill placed within areas requiring structural support, such as the proposed building area, 
should be placed as structural fill in accordance with Section 4.2 of this report. 
 
Surface Preparation:  Prior to placing granular subbase after grading is complete, the exposed soils 
should be compacted to a firm and unyielding surface with several passes in two perpendicular directions 
of a minimum 10-ton vibratory compactor.  The surface should then be proofrolled with a loaded tandem 
axle truck in the presence of the geotechnical engineer to help identify soft or loose pockets that may 
require removal and replacement, or further evaluation.  Proofrolling should be conducted after a suitable 
period of dry and non-freezing weather to reduce the likelihood of degrading an otherwise stable 
subgrade.  Should construction be started during the winter months, Whitestone should be contacted for 
alternate surface preparation procedures.  Fill and backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance 
with Section 4.2. 
 
Excavation Difficulties:  The very dense glacial till, which includes cobbles and boulders, will present 
excavation difficulties at marginal depths below the ground surface within portions of site.  Excavation 
difficulties will be affected by excavation size and depth.  The speed and ease of excavation also will 
depend on the type of equipment used and the skill of the operator.  Although soil excavation will 
generally be feasible with a large excavator, a “hoe-ram” or other mechanical device may be required to 
break up larger boulders to facilitate excavation.  In addition, possible shallow bedrock was encountered.  
The bedrock surface typically undulates and may also be encountered at shallow depths elsewhere on the 
site.  The upper couple of feet of fractured/weathered bedrock can likely be broken up with the “hoe-ram” 
and removed with a large excavator.  However, removal of any hard gneiss bedrock below the upper 
couple of feet of weathered and fractured rock will require significant effort. 
 
Weather Performance Criteria:  The site soils are moisture sensitive.  Every effort should be made to 
maintain drainage of surface water runoff away from construction areas by grading and limiting the 
exposure of excavations and prepared subgrades to rainfall.  Accordingly, excavation and fill placement 
procedures should be conducted during favorable weather conditions.  Overexcavation of wet or disturbed 
soils and replacement with controlled structural fill per the recommendations of this report may be 
required prior to resuming work on subgrade soils. 
 
Subgrade Protection and Inspection:  The site soils are moisture sensitive.  Every effort should 
therefore be made to reduce disturbance of the on-site soils by construction traffic and surface runoff.  
The contractor should be responsible for protection of subgrades and minimization of exposure of the site 
soils to precipitation by covering stockpiles and subgrades with plastic and preventing ponding of water 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 6
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
by sealing subgrades before precipitation events and grading the site to allow proper drainage of surface 
water.  The services of the geotechnical engineer should be retained to observe soil conditions during 
construction and review the suitability of prepared foundation subgrades for support of design loads. 
 
Groundwater Control:  Groundwater was not encountered during the exploration.  However, shallow 
perched water may be encountered during construction above less permeable material, such as at the 
interface of the existing fill and natural glacial till.  Construction phase dewatering may consist of 
removing surface water runoff, infiltrating water, or trapped water at this site.  Whitestone anticipates that 
such construction phase dewatering would typically include installing temporary sump pits and filtered 
pumps within trenches and excavations.  Whitestone recommends that foundation construction occur 
during periods of relatively dry weather.  Every effort should be made to maintain drainage of surface 
water runoff away from construction areas by grading and limiting the exposure of foundation areas to 
precipitation. 
 
4.2 
Structural Fill & Backfill 
 
Imported Fill Material:  Any imported material placed as structural fill or backfill to restore design 
grades should consist of clean, relatively well-graded sand or gravel with a maximum particle size of 
three inches and up to 15 percent of material finer than a #200 sieve.  The material should be free of clay 
lumps, organics, and deleterious material.  Any imported structural fill material should be approved by a 
qualified geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site. 
 
Soil Reuse:  Whitestone anticipates that only limited portions of the existing fill and glacial till will be 
suitable for selective reuse as structural fill/backfill material, provided that soil moisture contents are 
controlled within three percent of optimum moisture level, particles larger than three inches in diameter 
are either removed or crushed, and any deleterious material, such as the former topsoil/organic subsoil 
and asphaltic concrete, is segregated.  The site soils have a relatively high fines content.  Prior to reuse, 
drying will likely be necessary for these materials or mixing with more granular materials.  In addition, 
reuse of on-site soil with a higher fines content should not be attempted during inclement weather or in 
damp conditions.  Cobbles and boulders should be crushed or discarded.  Reuse of the site soils will be 
contingent on careful review in the field by the owner’s geotechnical engineer by visual observation 
during construction as recommended herein. 
 
Compaction and Placement Requirements:  Fill and backfill should be placed in maximum 12-inch 
thick loose lifts when compacted using a vibratory drum roller with a minimum weight of one ton, and in 
maximum eight-inch thick loose lifts when compacted with a plate compactor.  Structural fill and backfill 
should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density within three percent of the 
optimum moisture content, as determined by ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor).  Whitestone recommends 
using only a small hand-held vibratory compactor to compact the on-site soils within footing excavations. 
 
4.3 
Foundation Design Criteria 
 
Foundations:  Contingent upon construction phase evaluation, Whitestone preliminarily recommends 
supporting the proposed building on conventional shallow spread foundations designed to bear within the 
approved glacial till and/or on controlled structural fill materials that are properly placed and compacted 
as described herein.  Existing fill was encountered in the test pits up to a depth of 5.6 fbgs.  Former 
topsoil/subsoil up to 2.5 feet in thickness was encountered beneath the existing fill in four test pits.  
Deeper existing fill and former topsoil/subsoil may be encountered during construction between the 
widely spaced explorations.  Existing fill and former topsoil/subsoil should be overexcavated under 
footings and replaced with structural fill.  Foundations bearing within these materials may be designed 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 7
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
using a presumptive load-bearing value of 4,000 pounds per square foot.  Regardless of loading 
conditions, new foundations should be sized no less than minimum dimensions of 24 inches for 
continuous wall footings and 36 inches for isolated column footings. 
 
Foundation subgrades should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer.  Where exposed in footing 
excavations, significant organic and asphaltic concrete materials should be “chased out” under the 
proposed floor slab and replaced with structural fill.  Foundation subgrades should be compacted in the 
presence of the geotechnical engineer to densify loose upper soils and disturbed soils. 
 
Footings subject to lateral loads and/or overturning should be designed so that the maximum toe pressure 
due to the combined effect of vertical loads and overturning moment does not exceed the presumptive 
load-bearing value.  In addition, positive contact pressure should be maintained throughout the base of the 
footings such that no uplift or tension exists between the base of the footings and the supporting soil.  
Uplift loads should be resisted by the weight of the concrete.  Side friction should be neglected when 
proportioning the footings so that lateral resistance should be provided by friction resistance at the base of 
the footings.  An allowable coefficient of friction against sliding of 0.4 is recommended for use in the 
design of the foundations bearing within the existing site soils or imported structural fill soils. 
 
Seismic Site Class:  Based on a review of the subsurface conditions relevant to the Connecticut State 
Building Code, the subject site has been assigned a Site Class C.  The site soils are not susceptible to 
earthquake induced liquefaction. 
 
Inspection/Overexcavation Criteria:  Whitestone recommends that the suitability of the bearing soils at 
the footing bottoms be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer immediately prior to placing concrete for the 
footings.  In the event that areas of unsuitable materials are encountered, additional overexcavation and 
replacement of the materials may be necessary to provide a suitable footing subgrade.  Any 
overexcavation to be restored with structural fill should extend at least one foot laterally beyond footing 
edges for each vertical foot of overexcavation.  Lateral overexcavation may be eliminated if grades are 
restored with lean concrete. 
 
Frost Coverage:  Footings subject to frost action should be placed at least 42 inches below adjacent 
exterior grades, in accordance with the Connecticut State Building Code, to provide protection from frost 
penetration.  Interior footings not subject to frost action (including during construction) may be placed at 
a minimum depth of 18 inches below the floor slab subgrade, but should not be placed on existing fill or 
over former topsoil/subsoil. 
 
Settlement:  Whitestone estimates post construction settlements of proposed foundations of less than one 
inch, if the recommendations outlined in this report are properly implemented.  Differential settlement of 
spread foundations should be less than one half inch. 
 
4.4 
Floor Slab 
 
Whitestone anticipates that the properly inspected and approved existing fill (improved with thorough 
surface compaction), and/or compacted structural fill will be suitable for support of the proposed floor 
slab, provided these materials are properly evaluated, compacted, and proofrolled in accordance with the 
recommendations of this report during favorable weather conditions.  Areas of overexcavation should be 
anticipated if the subgrades are exposed to precipitation and because of the inherent variability of the 
existing fill and presence of organic materials.  However, supporting the floor slab on existing fill will 
require that significant organic material and asphaltic concrete layers be removed under the building 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 8
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
footprint.  Where exposed in footing excavations, significant organic material and asphaltic concrete 
layers should be “chased out” under the proposed floor slab and replaced with structural fill.  Shallow test 
pits should also be excavated within the building footprint to further delineate significant organic material 
and asphaltic concrete layers, and facilitate their removal and replacement with structural fill. 
 
Areas that are, or become, softened or disturbed as a result of wetting and/or repeated exposure to 
construction traffic should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill.  The properly 
prepared on-site soils are expected to yield a minimum subgrade modulus (k) of 150 psi/in. 
 
 
A minimum 12-inch layer of CTDOT M.05.01 Processed Aggregate Base (or approved equivalent) 
should be placed below the floor slab to provide a uniform granular base.  If the floor slab has a moisture-
sensitive covering and/or supports moisture-sensitive equipment, a moisture vapor barrier should be 
installed beneath the slab in accordance with flooring manufacturer’s recommendations. 
 
4.5 
Pavement Design 
 
Whitestone anticipates that the properly inspected and approved existing fill (improved with thorough 
surface compaction), and/or compacted structural fill and/or backfill placed to raise or restore design 
elevations will be suitable for support of the proposed pavements, provided these materials are properly 
evaluated, compacted, and proofrolled in accordance with the recommendations in this report during 
favorable weather conditions. 
 
 
A California Bearing Ratio value of 8.0 has been assigned to the properly prepared subgrade soils for 
pavement design purposes.  This value was correlated with pertinent soil support values and assumed 
traffic loads to a prepare flexible pavement design per the AASHTO Guide for the Design of Pavement 
Structures. 
 
Design traffic loads were assumed based on typical volumes for similar facilities and correlated with 18-
kip equivalent single axle loads (ESAL) for a 20-year life.  Estimated maximum pavement loads of 
30,000 ESALs and 75,000 ESALs were used for the standard-duty and heavy-duty pavement areas, 
respectively.  These values assume the pavements primarily will accommodate both automobile and 
limited heavier truck traffic, with the heavier truck traffic designated to the main drive lanes.  Actual 
loading experienced is anticipated to be less than these values. 
 
Pavement components should meet material specifications from CTDOT Standard Specifications 
specified below.  The recommended flexible pavement sections are tabulated below: 
 
FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SECTION 
Layer 
Material 
Standard-Duty 
Thickness 
(inches) 
Heavy-Duty 
Thickness 
(inches) 
Asphalt Wearing Course 
CTDOT HMA S0.375 (Superpave); PG 64S-22 
1.5 
1.5 
Asphalt Binder Course 
CTDOT HMA S0.5 (Superpave); PG 64S-22 
1.5 
2.5 
Granular Base 
CTDOT M.05.01 Processed Aggregate Base 
6.0 
6.0 
Granular Subbase 
CTDOT M.02.02 Subbase; M.02.06 Gradation A 
6.0 
6.0 
 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 9
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
Rigid concrete pavement should be used to provide suitable support at areas of high traffic or severe 
turns, such as at ingress/egress locations and the trash enclosure.  The recommended rigid pavement is 
tabulated in the following table: 
 
RIGID PAVEMENT SECTION 
Layer 
Material 
Thickness (inches) 
Surface 
4,000 psi Air-Entrained Concrete 
6.0 1 
Granular Base 
CTDOT M.05.01 Processed Aggregate Base 
6.0 
Granular Subbase 
CTDOT M.02.02 Subbase; M.02.06 Gradation A 
6.0 
1 The outer edges of concrete pavements are susceptible to damage as trucks move from rigid pavement to adjacent flexible 
pavement.  Therefore, the thickness at the outer two feet of the rigid concrete pavement should be 12 inches. The concrete 
should be reinforced with at least one layer of 6-inch by 6-inch W5.4/W5.4 welded wire fabric (ASTM A185). 
 
The pavement section thickness designs presented in this report are based on the design parameters 
detailed herein and are contingent on proper construction, inspection, and maintenance.  Additional 
pavement thickness may be required by local code.  The designs are contingent on achieving the 
minimum soil support value in the field.  To accomplish this requirement, subgrade soil and supporting 
fill or backfill should be placed, compacted, and evaluated in accordance with the recommendations of 
this report.  Proper drainage should be provided for the pavement structure, including appropriate grading 
and surface water control.  
 
The performance of the pavement also will depend on the quality of materials and workmanship.  
Whitestone recommends that CTDOT standards for materials, workmanship, and maintenance be applied 
to this site.  Project specifications should include verifying that the installed asphaltic concrete material 
composition is within tolerance for the specified materials and that the percentage of air voids of the 
installed pavement is within specified ranges for the respective materials.  Rigid concrete pavements 
should be suitably air-entrained, jointed, and reinforced in general accordance with ACI 330R-08 Guide 
for the Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots. 
 
4.6 
Excavations 
 
The site soils encountered during this investigation typically are, at a minimum, consistent with Type C 
Soil Conditions as defined by 29 CFR Part 1926 (OSHA), which require a maximum unbraced excavation 
angle of 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical).  Actual conditions encountered during construction should be 
evaluated by a competent person (as defined by OSHA), so that safe excavation methods and/or shoring 
and bracing requirements are implemented. 
 
 
5.0  
SUPPLEMENTAL POST INVESTIGATION SERVICES 
 
Construction Phase Evaluation of Existing Fill and Organic/Asphaltic Concrete Material:  
Whitestone recommends further reviewing the condition of the site soils for floor slab support, and/or re-
use of existing fill as structural fill by means of supplemental test pit evaluation during the early stages of 
construction, as discussed further herein, to identify areas requiring removal and possible uncontrolled 
conditions or deleterious materials not disclosed by the soil explorations conducted during the 
exploration.  The test pits should also further delineate the buried organic and asphaltic concrete 
materials, and facilitate their removal and replacement with structural fill. 

 
Kincora Waterford, LLC
c/o Kincora Development, LLC
Limited Geotechnical Investigation
122-124 Boston Post Road
Waterford, Connecticut
June 21, 2023
Page 10
 
Environmental & Geotechnical Engineers & Consultants 
 
Construction Inspection and Monitoring:  The owner’s geotechnical engineer with specific knowledge 
of the site subsurface conditions and design intent should conduct inspection, testing, and consultation 
during construction as described in previous sections of this report.  Monitoring and testing should also be 
conducted to confirm that any encountered underground structures, such as foundations and slabs of the 
former building on the site, are properly backfilled and suitable materials, used for controlled fill, are 
properly placed and compacted over suitable subgrade soils.  The proofrolling of all subgrades prior to 
foundation, floor slab, and pavement support should be witnessed and documented by the owner’s 
geotechnical engineer. 
 
 
6.0  
CLOSING 
 
Whitestone’s Geotechnical Division appreciates the opportunity to be of service to Kincora Waterford, 
LLC and Kincora Development, LLC.  Please note that Whitestone has the capability to conduct the 
additional geotechnical engineering services recommended herein.  Please contact us with any questions 
regarding this report. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Jason R. Landry 
 
 
 
 
 
Ryan R. Roy, P.E. 
Senior Project Manager 
 
 
Vice President 
 
RWM/lc 
N:\Job Folders\2016\1613982GM\Reports and Submittals\Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 LimGI 6-21-23.docx,  
 

 
 
  FIGURE 1 
  Test Location Plan 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

TP-8
TP-1
TP-2
TP-7
TP-6
TP-5
TP-3
TP-4
I-2
I-1
FIGURE:
DATE:
PROJECT #:
SCALE:
CLIENT:
DESIGNED BY:
PROJ. MGR.:
PROJECT:
DRAWING TITLE:
LEGEND
REFERENCE
16 OLD FORGE ROAD, SUITE A, ROCKY HILL, CT 06067
860.726.7889  WHITESTONEASSOC.COM
THIS PLAN IS BASED ON A 3/8/23 CONCEPTUAL PLAN
PREPARED BY RJOC.
1" = 40'
6/20/23
1
RR
MR
GM1613982.001
TEST LOCATION PLAN
KINCORA WATERFORD, LLC
PROPOSED CHIPOTLE RESTAURANT
122-124 BOSTON POST ROAD
WATERFORD, NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT
NOTE: ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.
WHITESTONE
An Employee-Owned Company
TEST PIT LOCATION
TP-1
I-1
INFILTRATION TEST

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  APPENDIX A 
  Records of Subsurface Exploration  

TP-1
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
75.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
8.5
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
4.3
5.0
10.0
15.0
Test Pit Log TP-1 Terminated upon Refusal at Depth of 8.5 Feet Below Ground Surface
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
GLACIAL
TILL
Brown, Silty Sand with Gravel, Brick/Asphalt Fragments, Cobbles, Boulders (FILL)
EXISTING
FILL
No indication of ESHGW
4" Topsoil
TOPSOIL
Number
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
At Completion:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Building
ZH
During:
--
1
1
Grab
2
Grab
3
6
3
Grab
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-2
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
75.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
7.2
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
2.5
3.5
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
SWM Area
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
FILL
TOPSOIL
6" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
EXISTING
12" Former Topsoil
TOPSOIL
TILL
Infiltration Test @ 6 fbgs
GLACIAL
Brown to Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
Test Pit Log TP-2 Terminated upon Refusal at Depth of 7.2 Feet Below Ground Surface
Brown, Silty Sand (FILL)
1
1
Grab
4
2
Grab
6
3
Grab
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-3
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
72.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
7.7
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
SWM Area
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
Brown, Silty Sand with Gravel, Asphalt Fragments, Occ. Cobbles and Boulders (FILL)
TOPSOIL
8" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
EXISTING
SUBSOIL
12" Former Subsoil, Roots
12" Former Topsoil 
GLACIAL
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)
Infiltration Test @ 6 fbgs
Test Pit Log TP-3 Terminated upon Refusal at Depth of 7.7 Feet Below Ground Surface
TILL
1
1
Grab
6
2
Grab
TOPSOIL
FILL
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-4
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
76.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
3.4
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Building
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
EXISTING
Brown, Silty Sand with Gravel (FILL)
TOPSOIL
4" Topsoil over 2" Asphalt
No indication of ESHGW
Test Pit Log TP-4 Terminated upon Refusal at Depth of 3.4 Feet Below Ground Surface
FILL
2
Grab
1
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-5
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
76.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
10.0
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
1.8
2.7
3.5
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Building
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
TOPSOIL
6" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
EXISTING
(feet)
(Classification)
TOPSOIL
10" Former Topsoil
FILL
Brown, Poorly Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (FILL)
2" Asphalt @ 1.4 fbgs
SUBSOIL
12" Former Subsoil, Roots
Test Pit Log TP-5 Terminated at Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground Surface
GLACIAL
TILL
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
2
Grab
1
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-6
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
77.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
10.0
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
5.0
5.6
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Building
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
TOPSOIL
5" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
Boulder @ 2 fbgs
FILL
Test pit offset
5" Asphalt @ 1.2 fbgs
EXISTING
Brown, Poorly Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel, Occ. Cobbles and Boulders (FILL)
TILL
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
Test Pit Log TP-6 Terminated at Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground Surface
4
Grab
1
7
Grab
2
GLACIAL
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-7
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
77.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
10.0
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
4.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Building
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
EXISTING
TOPSOIL
4" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
Pipe encountered.
FILL
Brown, Poorly Graded Sand wth Silt and Gravel, Asphalt Fragments, Occ. Cobbles and 
Boulders (FILL)
GLACIAL
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
Grab
TILL
Test Pit Log TP-7 Terminated at Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground Surface
7
2
2
Grab
1
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

TP-8
of
1
Project:
Location:
Surface Elevation:
±
77.0
feet NAVD88
|
|
Termination Depth:
10.0
|
|
Proposed Location:
Logged By:
| --
Contractor:
At Completion:
| --
-- |
Rig Type:
| --
Depth (ft.)
Type
0.0
1.7
2.3
4.1
5.0
10.0
15.0
                       RECORD OF
Test Pit No.:
                      SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Page
1
Date Started:
5/23/2023
Water Depth
Elevation
Cave-In Depth
Elevation
Proposed Chipotle Restaurant
WAI Project No.:
GM1613982.001
122-124 Boston Post Road, Waterford, New London County, Connecticut
Client:
Kincora Waterford, LLC
(ft NAVD88)
Drive-thru 
ZH
During:
--
feet bgs
Date Completed:
5/23/2023
(feet bgs)
(ft NAVD88)
(feet bgs)
Test Method:
Visual Observation
John Deere 60G
24 Hours:
--
Excavating Method:
Compact Excavator
GS
--
At Completion:
--
(feet)
(Classification)
SAMPLE INFORMATION
DEPTH
STRATA
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
REMARKS
Number
FILL
8" Asphalt @ 1 fbgs
TOPSOIL
7" Former Topsoil
TOPSOIL
6" Topsoil
No indication of ESHGW
EXISTING
Brown, Poorly Graded Sand with Silt and Sand, Occ. Cobbles and Boulders (FILL)
SUBSOIL
22" Former Subsoil, Roots
GLACIAL
Gray, Silty Sand with Gravel, Occasional Cobbles and Boulders (SM)
Test Pit Log TP-8 Terminated at Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground Surface
4
Grab
1
7
Grab
2
TILL
 NOTES:  bgs = below ground surface, msl = mean sea level, NA = Not Applicable, NE = Not Encountered, NS = Not Surveyed, P = Perched
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 
Kincora Chipotle Waterford CT GM1613982.001 Test Pit Logs 5-23-23 6/20/2023

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  APPENDIX B 
   Laboratory Test Results 
 
 
 

MM
RR
PL=
LL=
PI=
D90=
D85=
D60=
D50=
D30=
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
USCS=
AASHTO=
*
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100

MM
RWM
PL=
LL=
PI=
D90=
D85=
D60=
D50=
D30=
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
USCS=
AASHTO=
*
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100

MM
RWM
PL=
LL=
PI=
D90=
D85=
D60=
D50=
D30=
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
USCS=
AASHTO=
*
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  APPENDIX C 
   Supplemental Information 
  (USCS, Terms & Symbols) 
 
   
 

16 OLD FORGE ROAD
SUITE A
ROCKY HILL, CT 06067
860.726.7889
whitestoneassoc.com
 
 
Office Locations: 
 
NEW JERSEY 
PENNSYLVANIA 
MASSACHUSETTS 
CONNECTICUT 
FLORIDA 
NEW HAMPSHIRE 
NEW YORK 
 
 
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART 
 
 
MAJOR DIVISIONS 
 
LETTER 
SYMBOL 
 
 
TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS 
 
 
 
 
 
COARSE 
GRAINED 
SOILS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MORE THAN 
50% OF 
MATERIAL IS 
LARGER THAN 
NO. 200 SIEVE 
SIZE 
 
GRAVEL AND 
GRAVELLY SOILS 
 
 
 
MORE THAN 50% OF 
COARSE FRACTION 
RETAINED ON NO. 4 
SIEVE 
CLEAN 
GRAVELS 
(LITTLE OR 
NO FINES) 
 
GW 
 
WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND 
MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES 
 
GP 
 
POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES 
GRAVELS WITH 
FINES 
(APPRECIABLE 
AMOUNT OF 
FINES) 
 
GM 
 
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT 
MIXTURES 
 
GC 
 
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY 
MIXTURES 
 
SAND AND SANDY  
SOILS 
 
 
 
MORE THAN 50% OF 
COARSE FRACTION 
PASSING NO. 4 
SIEVE 
CLEAN SAND 
(LITTLE OR NO 
FINES) 
 
SW 
 
WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, 
LITTLE OR NO FINES 
 
SP 
 
POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY 
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES 
SANDS WITH 
FINES 
(APPRECIABLE 
AMOUNT OF 
FINES) 
 
SM 
 
SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES 
 
SC 
 
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES 
 
 
 
FINE 
GRAINED 
SOILS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MORE THAN 
50% OF 
MATERIAL IS 
SMALLER THAN 
NO. 200 SIEVE 
SIZE 
 
 
 
SILTS 
AND 
CLAYS 
 
 
 
LIQUID LIMITS 
LESS THAN 50 
 
ML 
 
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, 
ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE 
SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT 
PLASTICITY 
 
CL 
 
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM 
PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY 
CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS 
 
OL 
 
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY 
CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY 
 
 
 
SILTS 
AND 
CLAYS 
 
 
 
LIQUID LIMITS 
GREATER  
THAN 50 
 
MH 
 
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR 
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY 
SOILS 
 
CH 
 
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, 
FAT CLAYS 
 
OH 
 
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH 
PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS 
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS 
 
PT 
 
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH 
ORGANIC CONTENTS 
 
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS FOR SAMPLES WITH 5% TO 12% FINES 
 
GRADATION* 
COMPACTNESS* 
Sand and/or Gravel 
CONSISTENCY* 
Clay and/or Silt 
% FINER BY WEIGHT 
RELATIVE 
DENSITY 
RANGE OF SHEARING STRENGTH IN 
POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT 
TRACE........... 1% TO 10% 
LITTLE.......... 10% TO 20% 
SOME............ 20% TO 35% 
AND............... 35% TO 50% 
LOOSE.  .................. 0% TO  40% 
MEDIUM DENSE.... 40% TO  70% 
DENSE................... 70% TO  90% 
VERY DENSE........ 90% TO 100% 
 
VERY SOFT....... LESS THAN 250 
SOFT.................... ..... 250 TO 500 
MEDIUM................... 500 TO 1000 
STIFF..................... 1000 TO 2000 
VERY STIFF.......... 2000 TO 4000 
HARD...... GREATER THAN 4000 
* VALUES ARE FROM LABORATORY OR FIELD TEST DATA, WHERE APPLICABLE.   
  WHEN NO TESTING WAS PERFORMED, VALUES ARE ESTIMATED. 
L:\Geotechnical Forms and References\Reports\USCSTRMSSYM CT.docx 
 
 
 

16 OLD FORGE ROAD
SUITE A
ROCKY HILL, CT 06067
860.726.7889
whitestoneassoc.com
 
 
Office Locations: 
 
NEW JERSEY 
PENNSYLVANIA 
MASSACHUSETTS 
CONNECTICUT 
FLORIDA 
NEW HAMPSHIRE 
NEW YORK 
 
GEOTECHNICAL TERMS AND SYMBOLS 
 
 
SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION 
 
The Unified Soil Classification System is used to identify the soil unless otherwise noted. 
 
SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS 
 
N: 
Standard Penetration Value: Blows per ft. of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30" on a 2" O