Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOX GROVE SUBDIVISION - Filed SEPD-SURFACE EXPLORATION/PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT - 2017-12-13TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1 SITE LOCATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 SUBGRADE PREPARATION 3 PAVEMENT DESIGN 5 Traffic Projections 5 Pavement Thickness Calculations 6 Pavement Recommendations 6 PAVEMENT SELECTION 7 SUBGRADE AND PAVEMENT MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 7 MAINTENANCE 8 WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATES 9 LIMITATIONS 9 FIGURE 1 – LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 2 AND 3 – SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS APPENDIX A – RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX B – PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX C – MAINTENANCE PROGRAM LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 1 SCOPE This report presents the results of our Subgrade Investigation and Pave- ment Design for the planned roadway improvements within Phase I of Fox Grove in Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of our subgrade investigation was to de- termine the subsurface conditions and to evaluate pavement support characteris- tics. The report was conducted in general conformance with the Chapters 5 and 10 of the Larimer County Urban Areas Street Standards (LCUASS) updated Sep- tember 2016, as adopted by the City of Fort Collins (City). This report was prepared from data developed during field exploration, la- boratory testing, engineering analysis, and experience with similar conditions. The report includes a description of the subsurface conditions found in explorato- ry borings and laboratory test results for the proposed neighborhood roadways. If plans change significantly, we should be contacted to review our investigation and determine if our recommendations still apply. A brief summary of our con- clusions is presented below, with more detailed criteria and recommendations contained in the report. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. Soils encountered in our borings consisted of 4 to 8 feet of sand and clay fill over native sand and gravel to the depths explored. Bedrock was not encountered during our investigation. Groundwa- ter was encountered in one boring during drilling at a depth of 8 feet. 2. The subgrade soils were variable and classified as A-1, A-2, A-2-6 and A-6 group materials. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 2 SITE LOCATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Fox Grove is located southeast of Interstate 25 and Highway 14 in Fort Collins, Colorado. The project consists of constructing portions of Carriage Parkway, Fox Grove Drive, Huntsman Drive and Vixen Drive and constructing all of Kit Den Drive and Todd Drive. The area slopes down gradually to the south with ground cover consisting of sparse vegetation. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION Our field investigation consisted of drilling eight borings to a depth of ap- proximately 10 feet, logging the subsurface conditions, recording penetration- resistance tests, and acquiring samples of the subgrade materials. The approx- imate boring locations are shown on Figure 1. The borings were drilled with 4- inch diameter solid-stem augers and a truck-mounted drill. Our field representa- tive directed the field investigation and collected samples. Bulk samples were obtained from the upper 4 feet of each boring. Drive samples were taken at se- lected intervals in each boring by driving a modified California sampler with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. Borings were backfilled following drilling. Summary logs of the borings, including results of field penetration re- sistance tests, are presented on Figure 2. Samples were returned to our laboratory and examined by the geotech- nical engineer for the project. Laboratory testing was performed in general ac- cordance with AASHTO and ASTM methods to determine index properties, clas- sification, and subgrade support values for those soil types influencing the pave- ment design. Laboratory tests included moisture content, swell-consolidation, Atterberg limits, particle size analysis, and water-soluble sulfate testing. A Hveem stabilometer test was conducted on a combined sample of the upper 4 LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 3 feet of our borings. Results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix A and summarized in Table A-I. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soils encountered in our borings consisted of 4 to 8 feet of sand and clay fill with occasional gravel. The fill was underlain by sand and gravel to the depths of explored. Bedrock was not encountered during this investigation. Sam- ples of the fill tested indicated nil to 8.4 percent swell with only one sample swell- ing greater than 2 percent. A Hveem stabilometer test was conducted on a com- posite sample (S-1) of the upper 4 feet from all the borings. The test indicated an R-value of 43, which we converted to a resilient modulus of 10,471 psi according to CDOT criteria. The sand and gravel encountered in our borings classified as loose to dense based on field penetration test results. Laboratory testing indicated fines contents (percent passing No. 200 sieve) of 5 and 7 percent. These soils are considered low-swelling to non-expansive based on laboratory testing and our experience. One boring (TH-4) showed groundwater at 8 feet during the time of our in- vestigation. There is a low risk of pavement performance when groundwater is located at least 5 feet below the pavement section. Further description of the subsurface conditions is presented on our boring logs (Figure 2) and in our la- boratory test results (Appendix A). SUBGRADE PREPARATION Soil samples were tested for swell-consolidation. The majority of the soils were low-swelling to non-expansive with the exception of one swell of 8.4 per- LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 4 cent. We judge the existing fill is suitable for support of the majority of the road- way. If larger areas of clay fill are identified during construction, the clay fill should be removed, moisture conditioned and recompacted to a minimum depth of 2 feet. We believe chemical stabilization is not necessary for the soils encoun- tered. Subgrade soils that do not require stabilization can be prepared with con- ventional moisture treatment and compaction. To prepare the subgrade for pav- ing with conventional moisture treatment and compaction, subgrade soils should be scarified a minimum of 12 inches deep and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T99). Sand fill should be moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Clay fill should be moisture conditioned to 1 percent to 3 percent above optimum moisture content before compaction. Scarification and recompaction of the upper 12 inches of subgrade soils should occur as close to the time of pavement construction as possible. The final subgrade surface must be protected from excessive drying or wetting until such time as the pavement section is constructed. Maintaining moisture contents near optimum will be critical to avoid ex- cessive deflections, rutting and pumping of the subgrade during subgrade prepa- ration of streets. If moisture and density cannot be sufficiently controlled during subgrade preparation and stabilization is required, chemical stabilization, stabili- zation by removal and replacement, or stabilization using geotextiles and import- ed granular materials may be used. For isolated or small areas requiring stabili- zation, removal and replacement or “crowding” crushed, coarse aggregate into the subgrade may be effective. If large areas require stabilization, chemical treatment of the soils may be a more effective alternative. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 5 PAVEMENT DESIGN New construction is planned for portions of Carriage Parkway, Fox Grove Drive, Huntsman Drive and Vixen Drive and all of Kit Den Drive and Tod Drive. We understand roadway construction is regulated by the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) which requires the use of the AASHTO pave- ment design methods for their roadways. These design methods require input parameters for traffic projections for a specified design life, roadway classifica- tion, characteristics of the subgrade materials, type and strength characteristics of pavement materials, groundwater conditions, drainage conditions, condition of the existing pavement, number of construction stages, minimum pavement sec- tions, and statistical data. Traffic Projections Traffic projections were provided by City of Fort Collins personnel using a 20-year design life. Traffic projections are expressed as an 18-kip Equivalent Daily Load Application (EDLA) for a single day and as an 18-kip Equivalent Sin- gle Axle Load (ESAL) for the design life. Table A presents the Design ESALs used with our calculations. TABLE A DESIGN 18-kip EQUIVALENT SINGLE AXLE LOADS (ESALs) Street ESAL (20-Year Design Life) Carriage Parkway 547,500 Fox Grove Drive, Huntsman Drive and Vixen Drive 73,000 Kit Den Drive and Tod Drive 36,500 LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 6 Pavement Thickness Calculations We used AASHTO Design methods to develop our pavement thickness recommendations for both flexible and rigid pavements with input values provid- ed by the City, LCUASS, and our laboratory tests and observations. For our de- sign, we assumed the pavement will be constructed during a single stage. Input values including initial and terminal serviceability indices, reliability factor, layer strength coefficients, and minimum sections were provided by LCUASS for the planned roadways. Other input values not specified by LCUASS were estimated based on our experience with similar projects. Pavement Recommendations For our design, we assume the pavement will be constructed during a sin- gle stage. If multiple-stage construction is desired, we should be consulted to revise our recommendations. Our pavement thickness calculations did not in- clude credit towards chemically treated subgrade soils or the design of a soil/fly ash mixture. If plans change, we are available to perform a soil/fly ash lime mix design. We have provided pavement design alternatives for new construction in- cluding hot mix asphalt (HMA) on aggregate base course (ABC), and portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement. Our pavement thickness alternatives are presented on Table B. Additional discussion regarding advantages and disad- vantages of the pavement alternatives and their expected performance is includ- ed under the PAVEMENT SELECTION section of this report. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 7 TABLE B MINIMUM PAVEMENT THICKNESS RECOMMENDATIONS Roadway Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) + Aggregate Base Course (ABC) Portland Cement Con- crete (PCC) Carriage Parkway 5” HMA + 6” ABC 7.5” PCC Fox Grove Drive, Huntsman Drive And Vixen Drive 4” HMA + 6” ABC 7” PCC Kit Den Drive and Tod Drive 4” HMA + 6” ABC 7” PCC PAVEMENT SELECTION Both HMA/ABC composite (flexible) and PCC (rigid) pavements are ex- pected to perform well for the roadways. However, PCC pavement has better performance in freeze-thaw conditions and should require less long-term mainte- nance than HMA pavement. PCC pavement is also recommended for sections that may experience frequent stopping and turning, heavy point loads, or chemi- cal spills. SUBGRADE AND PAVEMENT MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION The construction materials are assumed to possess sufficient quality as reflected by the strength factors used in our design calculations. Materials and construction requirements of LCUASS should be followed. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 8 Based on the results of laboratory testing and LCUASS, we believe that mitigation for swell will not be required. Only one of twelve fill samples tested swelled beyond 2 percent. We judge the existing fill is suitable for support of the majority of the roadway. If larger areas of clay fill are identified during construc- tion, the clay fill should be removed, moisture conditioned and recompacted to a minimum depth of 2 feet. We believe conventional moisture treatment and com- paction of the subgrade is appropriate for these conditions. These criteria were developed from analysis of the field and laboratory data, our experience and LCUASS requirements. If the materials cannot meet these requirements, our pavement recommendations should be re-evaluated based upon available materials. The use of recycled materials, such as recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) and recycled concrete may be used in place of aggre- gate base course provided they meet minimum R-values and gradations estab- lished by LCUASS and CDOT. Materials planned for construction should be submitted and the applicable laboratory tests performed to verify compliance with the specifications. Recommendations for subgrade and pavement materials and construction are presented in Appendix B. MAINTENANCE Routine maintenance, such as sealing and repair of cracks, is necessary to achieve the long-term life of a pavement system. We recommend a preven- tive maintenance program be developed and followed for all pavement systems to assure the design life can be realized. Choosing to defer maintenance usually results in accelerated deterioration leading to higher future maintenance costs, and/or repair. A recommended maintenance program is outlined in Appendix C. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 9 Excavation of completed pavement for utility construction or repair can destroy the integrity of the pavement and result in a severe decrease in service- ability. To restore the pavement top original serviceability, careful backfill com- paction before repaving is necessary. WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATES Concrete that is exposed to sulfate-rich soils can be subject to sulfate at- tack. If concrete pavements or structures will not be in contact with sulfate-rich soils, by means of an aggregate base course layer or other materials, the risk of sulfate attack should be low. We measured water-soluble sulfate concentrations in eight samples from this site; concentrations were 0.01 percent or less. Water- soluble sulfate concentrations less than 0.1 percent indicate Class 0 exposure to sulfate attack for concrete that is exposed to the soils, according to the American Concrete Institute (ACI). For this level of sulfate concentration, ACI indicates any type of cement can be used for concrete that is exposed to the soils. In our ex- perience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly per- meable concrete, even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze-thaw deterioration, the water-to-cementitious material ratio should not exceed 0.50 for concrete in contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or high water tables. Concrete should be air entrained. LIMITATIONS Our borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate indication of subgrade and/or pavement conditions for the proposed construction. The bor- ings are representative of conditions encountered only at the exact boring loca- tions. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our borings are TH-2 TH-1 TH-3 TH-4 TH-5 TH-6 TH-7 TH-8 Huntsman Drive Huntsman Drive Fox Grove Drive Fox Grove Drive Vixen Drive Tod Drive Carriage Parkway Kit Den Drive LEGEND: INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING TH-1 E. MULBERRY ST./ HWY 14 I-25 S. CR 5 E. PROSPECT RD. CARRIAGE PKWY. SITE FIGURE 1 Locations of Exploratory Borings LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 0 150' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1"=150' VICINITY MAP FT. COLLINS, CO NOT TO SCALE 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 11/12 6/12 30/12 WC=13.1 DD=118 SW=1.7 SS=<0.01 WC=11.0 DD=114 SW=0.2 WC=13.1 DD=118 SW=1.7 SS=<0.01 WC=11.0 DD=114 SW=0.2 TH-1 11/12 13/12 23/12 WC=7.4 DD=119 SW=0.4 SS=<0.01 WC=9.2 DD=127 LL=25 PI=13 -200=37 WC=7.4 DD=119 SW=0.4 SS=<0.01 WC=9.2 DD=127 LL=25 PI=13 -200=37 TH-2 9/12 15/12 15/12 WC=9.6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 13/12 16/12 38/12 WC=10.1 DD=122 SW=1.7 SS=<0.01 WC=6.2 LL=30 PI=17 -200=28 WC=1.9 -200=5 WC=10.1 DD=122 SW=1.7 SS=<0.01 WC=6.2 LL=30 PI=17 -200=28 WC=1.9 -200=5 TH-5 9/12 9/12 34/12 WC=7.5 DD=124 SW=0.2 SS=0.010 WC=19.7 DD=105 SW=0.5 WC=7.5 DD=124 SW=0.2 SS=0.010 WC=19.7 DD=105 SW=0.5 TH-6 27/12 15/12 APPENDIX A RESULTS OF LABORATORY TEST Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 118 PCF From TH - 1 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 13.1 % Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 114 PCF From TH - 1 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 11.0 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-1 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 119 PCF From TH - 2 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 7.4 % Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 123 PCF From TH - 3 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 9.6 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-2 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 119 PCF From TH - 3 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 7.4 % Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 110 PCF From TH - 4 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 17.1 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-3 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 122 PCF From TH - 5 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 10.1 % Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 122 PCF From TH - 5 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 10.1 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-4 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 124 PCF From TH - 6 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 7.5 % Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 105 PCF From TH - 6 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 19.7 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-5 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 122 PCF From TH - 7 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 9.4 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE A-6 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 116 PCF From TH - 8 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 11.4 % Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 112 PCF From TH - 8 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT= 10.2 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF COMPRESSION % EXPANSION Swell Consolidation FIGURE A-7 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 NO MOVEMENT DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 100 0.1 1.0 10 100 Sample of FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) GRAVEL 6 % SAND 42 % From Bulk - Test AT 0-4 FEET SILT & CLAY 52 % LIQUID LIMIT 33 % PLASTICITY INDEX 21 % Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 15 % SAND 48 % From TH - 2 AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 37 % LIQUID LIMIT 25 % PLASTICITY INDEX 13 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 FIGURE A-8 Gradation Test Results 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. Sample of GRAVEL, SANDY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY (GP-GC) GRAVEL 56 % SAND 37 % From TH - 4 AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % Sample of FILL, SAND, GRAVELLY, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 30 % SAND 42 % From TH - 5 AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 28 % LIQUID LIMIT 30 % PLASTICITY INDEX 17 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 FIGURE A-9 Gradation Test Results 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. Sample of SAND, GRAVELLY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY (SP-SC) GRAVEL 28 % SAND 67 % From TH - 5 AT 9 FEET SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % Sample of FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 19 % SAND 43 % From TH - 7 AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 38 % LIQUID LIMIT 28 % PLASTICITY INDEX 15 % LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 FIGURE A-10 Gradation Test Results 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. PASSING WATER- MOISTURE DRY LIQUID PLASTICITY APPLIED NO. 200 SOLUBLE R- DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY LIMIT INDEX SWELL* PRESSURE SIEVE SULFATES VALUE BORING (FEET) (%) (PCF) (%) (PSF) (%) (%) DESCRIPTION S-1 0-4 6.4 33 21 52 43 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-1 2 13.1 118 1.7 200 <0.01 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-1 4 11.0 114 0.2 500 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-2 2 7.4 119 0.4 200 <0.01 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-2 4 9.2 127 25 13 37 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-3 2 9.6 123 0.3 200 <0.01 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-3 4 7.4 119 0.1 500 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-4 2 17.1 110 0.3 200 <0.01 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-4 4 4.0 7 GRAVEL, SANDY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY (GP-GC) TH-5 2 10.1 122 1.7 200 <0.01 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-5 4 6.2 30 17 28 FILL, SAND, GRAVELLY, CLAYEY (SC) TH-5 9 1.9 5 SAND, GRAVELLY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY (SP-SC) TH-6 2 7.5 124 0.2 200 0.01 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-6 4 19.7 105 0.5 500 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-7 2 9.4 122 8.4 200 0.01 FILL, CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-7 4 9.3 125 28 15 38 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-8 2 11.4 116 0.5 200 0.01 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) TH-8 4 10.2 112 0.0 500 FILL, SAND, CLAYEY (SC) SWELL TEST RESULTS* TABLE A-I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING ATTERBERG LIMITS Page 1 of 1 * NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 APPENDIX B PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION Moisture Treated Subgrade (MTS) 1. The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter, scarified, mois- ture treated and compacted to the specifications stated below in Item 2. The compacted subgrade should extend at least 3 feet be- yond the edge of the pavement where no edge support, such as curb and gutter, are to be constructed. 2. Sandy and gravelly soils (A-1-a, A-1-b, A-3, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A- 2-7) should be moisture conditioned near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). Clayey soils (A-6, A-7-5, A-7-6) should be moisture conditioned between optimum and 3 per- cent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). 3. Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and tested prior to paving. As a minimum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. 4. Final grading of the subgrade should be carefully controlled so the design cross-slope is maintained and low spots in the subgrade that could trap water are eliminated. 5. Once final subgrade elevation has been compacted and tested to compliance and shaped to the required cross-section, the area should be proof-rolled using a minimum axle load of 18 kips per ax- le. The proof-roll should be performed while moisture contents of the subgrade are still within the recommended limits. Drying of the subgrade prior to proof-roll or paving should be avoided. 6. Areas that are observed by the Engineer that have soft spots in the subgrade, or where deflection is not uniform of soft or wet subgrade shall be ripped, scarified, dried or wetted as necessary and recom- pacted to the requirements for the density and moisture. As an al- ternative, those areas may be sub-excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural backfill. Where extensively soft, yielding subgrade is encountered; we recommend a representative of our office observe the excavation. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-2 Chemically Stabilized Subgrade (CSS) 1. Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and tested prior to subgrade preparation. As a mini- mum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. 2. The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter and should be shaped to final line and grade. 3. The contractor or owner’s representative should have a mix design performed in general accordance with ASTM D 558 using the actu- al site soils and the approved stabilizing agent (lime, fly ash or a combination of lime and fly ash). Scheduling should allow at least two weeks for the mix design to be completed prior to construction. 4. High calcium quicklime should conform to the requirements of ASTM C 977 and ASTM C 110. Dolomitic quicklime, magnesia quicklime with magnesium oxide contents in excess of 4 percent, or carbonated quicklime should not be used. 5. Fly ash should consist of Class C in accordance with ASTM C 593 and C 618. 6. All stabilizing agents should come from the same source as used in the mix design. If the source is changed, a new mix design should be performed. 7. Stabilizing agents should be spread with a mechanical spreader from back of curb to back of curb for detached sidewalks or back of walk to back of walk for attached sidewalks, where applicable. 8. The subgrade should be mixed to the specified depth and at the specified concentration until a uniform blend of soil, stabilizing agent and water is obtained and the moisture content is at least 2 percent (for fly ash) and 3 percent (for lime) above the optimum moisture content of the design mixture (ASTM D 558). 9. If lime is used, a mellowing period of up to seven days may be re- quired following initial mixing. Once the pH of the mixture is 12.3 or higher and the plasticity index is less than 10, the soils shall again be mixed and moisture conditioned to at least 3 percent over opti- mum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the mixture’s maximum dry density (ASTM D 558). Up to sev- LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-3 en additional days may be required for curing prior to paving. The treated surface shall be kept moist or sealed with emulsified as- phalt. Traffic should not be allowed on the surface during the mel- lowing and curing periods. 10. If fly ash is used, the mixture should be moisture conditioned to at least 2 percent over optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the mixture’s maximum dry density (ASTM D 558) within 2 hours from the time of initial fly ash mixing. 11. If a lime/fly ash combination is used, the lime should be mixed first and allowed to mellow as indicated for lime treatment in item 9. Following the mellowing period, the fly ash should be added, mois- ture conditioned and compacted as indicated above within 2 hours of initial fly ash mixing. 12. Samples of loose, blended stabilizing agent/soil mixture should be sampled by a representative of CTL Thompson, Inc. for compres- sive strength testing (ASTM D 1663) to determine compliance (op- tional) when full credit for the FASS layer is used in the pavement thickness design. 13. Batch tickets should be supplied to the owner or owner’s repre- sentative with the application area for that batch to determine com- pliance with the recommended proportions of fly ash to soil. 14. The subgrade should be re-shaped to final line and grade. 15. The subgrade should be sealed with a pneumatic-tire roller that is sufficiently light in weight so as to not cause hairline cracking of the subgrade. 16. Where sulfate concentrations are over 0.5 percent, a double treat- ment method should be performed. When a double treatment is re- quired, the first half of the stabilizing agent should be placed, mois- ture treated and allowed to mellow or cure for at least two weeks. The remaining half of the stabilizing agent plus an additional 0.5 (for lime) to 2 (for fly ash) percent shall then be applied. 17. Mixing of the fly ash, lime, or lime/fly ash treated subgrade should not occur if the temperature of the soil mixture is below 40o F. 18. We recommend a minimum of 2 days curing prior to paving. The surface of the stabilized area should be kept moist during the cure period by periodic, light sprinkling if needed. Strength gains will be LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-4 slower during cooler weather. Traffic should not be permitted on the treated subgrade during the curing period. The subgrade should be protected from freezing or drying at all times until paving. 19. The treated areas will gain greater strength if they are allowed to cure for 1 to 3 days prior to paving. Construction traffic on the treated subgrade prior to pavement section construction should be limited and the subgrade should be protected from freezing or dry- ing at all times until paving. 20. Placement, mixing and compaction of stabilized subgrade should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm. Geogrid Stabilized Subgrade (GSS) 1. Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and tested prior to subgrade preparation. As a mini- mum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. 2. For areas identified as requiring stabilization, at least 3 feet of soil should be removed from below the subgrade elevations and dis- carded or stockpiled for reuse. 3. The sub-excavation should be flat so that there are no ridges or de- pressions prior to placement of the geogrid. 4. Tensar® BX1100 geogrid, or equal, should be placed over the sub- excavation, making any overlaps at seams per the manufacturer’s recommendations. 5. Recycled concrete or other crushed, granular material should be placed and compacted over the geogrid, being careful not to cause any distortion of the geogrid. Construction equipment should not be allowed over the surface until at least 18 inches of fill overlies the geogrid. 6. The crushed concrete or other approved fill should have a maxi- mum particle size no more than 3 inches and at least 50 percent fractured faces. The top 12 inches of the fill may consist of the na- tive soil that was removed from the sub-excavation. 7. The native soil fill should be compacted and proof-rolled to the re- quirements for the MTS. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-1 PAVEMENT MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION Aggregate Base Course (ABC) 1. A Class 5 or 6 Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) specified ABC should be used. Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) or reclaimed concrete pavement (RCP) alternative which meets the Class 5 or 6 designation and design R-value/strength coefficient is also acceptable. 2. Bases should have a minimum Hveem stabilometer value of 72, or greater. ABC, RAP, and RCP must be moisture stable. The change in R-value from 300-psi to 100-psi exudation pressure should be 12 points or less. 3. ABC, RAP or RCP bases should be placed in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches and moisture treated to near optimum moisture content. Bases should be moisture treated to near optimum moisture con- tent, and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor max- imum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). 4. Placement and compaction of ABC, RAP, or RCP should be ob- served and tested by a representative of our firm. Placement should not commence until the underlying subgrade is properly prepared and tested. Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) 1. HMA should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler, hydrated lime and asphalt cement. Some mixes may require polymer modi- fied asphalt cement, or make use of up to 20 percent reclaimed as- phalt pavement (RAP). A job mix design is recommended and pe- riodic checks on the job site should be made to verify compliance with specifications. 2. HMA should be relatively impermeable to moisture and should be designed with crushed aggregates that have a minimum of 80 per- cent of the aggregate retained on the No. 4 sieve with two mechan- ically fractured faces. 3. Gradations that approach the maximum density line (within 5 per- cent between the No. 4 and 50 sieves) should be avoided. A gra- LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-2 dation with a nominal maximum size of 1 or 2 inches developed on the fine side of the maximum density line should be used. 4. Total void content, voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) and voids filled should be considered in the selection of the optimum asphalt cement content. The optimum asphalt content should be selected at a total air void content of approximately 4 percent. The mixture should have a minimum VMA of 14 percent and between 65 per- cent and 80 percent of voids filled. 5. Asphalt cement should meet the requirements of the Superpave Performance Graded (PG) Binders. The minimum performing as- phalt cement should conform to the requirements of the governing agency. 6. Hydrated lime should be added at the rate of 1 percent by dry weight of the aggregate and should be included in the amount pass- ing the No. 200 sieve. Hydrated lime for aggregate pretreatment should conform to the requirements of ASTM C 207, Type N. 7. Paving should be performed on properly prepared, unfrozen sur- faces that are free of water, snow and ice. Paving should only be performed when both air and surface temperatures equal, or ex- ceed, the temperatures specified in Table 401-3 of the 2006 Colo- rado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 8. HMA should not be placed at a temperature lower than 245o F for mixes containing PG 64-22 asphalt, and 290o F for mixes containing polymer-modified asphalt. The breakdown compaction should be completed before the HMA temperature drops 20o F. 9. Wearing surface course shall be Grading S or SX for residential roadway classifications and Grading S for collector, arterial, indus- trial, and commercial roadway classifications. 10. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade SX shall be 1½ inches/2½ inches. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade S shall be 2 inches/3½ inches. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade SG shall be 3 inches/5 inches. 11. Joints should be staggered. No joints should be placed within wheel paths. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-3 12. HMA should be compacted to between 92 and 96 percent of Maxi- mum Theoretical Density. The surface shall be sealed with a finish roller prior to the mix cooling to 185o F. 13. Placement and compaction of HMA should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm. Placement should not commence until approval of the proof rolling as discussed in the Subgrade Preparation section of this report. Sub base, base course or initial pavement course shall be placed within 48 hours of approval of the proof rolling. If the Contractor fails to place the sub base, base course or initial pavement course within 48 hours or the condition of the subgrade changes due to weather or other conditions, proof roll- ing and correction shall be performed again. Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) 1. Portland cement concrete should consist of Class P of the 2005 CDOT - Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction specifications for normal placement or Class E for fast-track pro- jects. PCC should have a minimum compressive strength of 4,200 psi at 28 days and a minimum modulus of rupture (flexural strength) of 650 psi. Job mix designs are recommended and periodic checks on the job site should be made to verify compliance with specifica- tions. 2. Portland cement should be Type II “low alkali” and should conform to ASTM C 150. 3. Portland cement concrete should not be placed when the subgrade or air temperature is below 40°F. 4. Concrete should not be placed during warm weather if the mixed concrete has a temperature of 90°F, or higher. 5. Mixed concrete temperature placed during cold weather should have a temperature between 50°F and 90°F. 6. Free water should not be finished into the concrete surface. Atom- izing nozzle pressure sprayers for applying finishing compounds are recommended whenever the concrete surface becomes difficult to finish. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 B-4 7. Curing of the portland cement concrete should be accomplished by the use of a curing compound. The curing compound should be applied in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. 8. Curing procedures should be implemented, as necessary, to pro- tect the pavement against moisture loss, rapid temperature change, freezing, and mechanical injury. 9. Construction joints, including longitudinal joints and transverse joints, should be formed during construction or sawed after the concrete has begun to set, but prior to uncontrolled cracking. 10. All joints should be properly sealed using a rod back-up and ap- proved epoxy sealant. 11. Traffic should not be allowed on the pavement until it has properly cured and achieved at least 80 percent of the design strength, with saw joints already cut. 12. Placement of portland cement concrete should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm. Placement should not com- mence until the subgrade is properly prepared and tested. APPENDIX C MAINTENANCE PROGRAM LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 C-1 MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS A primary cause for deterioration of pavements is oxidative aging resulting in brittle pavements. Tire loads from traffic are necessary to "work" or knead the asphalt concrete to keep it flexible and rejuvenated. Preventive maintenance treatments will typically preserve the original or existing pavement by providing a protective seal or rejuvenating the asphalt binder to extend pavement life. 1. Annual Preventive Maintenance a. Visual pavement evaluations should be performed each spring or fall. b. Reports documenting the progress of distress should be kept current to pro- vide information on effective times to apply preventive maintenance treat- ments. c. Crack sealing should be performed annually as new cracks appear. 2. 3 to 5 Year Preventive Maintenance a. The owner should budget for a preventive treatment at approximate intervals of 3 to 5 years to reduce oxidative embrittlement problems. b. Typical preventive maintenance treatments include chip seals, fog seals, slur- ry seals and crack sealing. 3. 5 to 10 Year Corrective Maintenance a. Corrective maintenance may be necessary, as dictated by the pavement con- dition, to correct rutting, cracking and structurally failed areas. b. Corrective maintenance may include full depth patching, milling and overlays. c. In order for the pavement to provide a 20-year service life, at least one major corrective overlay should be expected. LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL  T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 C-2 MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RIGID PAVEMENTS High traffic volumes create pavement rutting and smooth, polished surfaces. Preventive maintenance treatments will typically preserve the original or existing pavement by providing a protective seal and improving skid resistance through a new wearing course. 1. Annual Preventive Maintenance a. Visual pavement evaluations should be performed each spring or fall. b. Reports documenting the progress of distress should be kept current to pro- vide information of effective times to apply preventive maintenance. c. Crack sealing should be performed annually as new cracks appear. 2. 4 to 8 Year Preventive Maintenance a. The owner should budget for a preventive treatment at approximate intervals of 4 to 8 years to reduce joint deterioration. b. Typical preventive maintenance for rigid pavements includes patching, crack sealing and joint cleaning and sealing. c. Where joint sealants are missing or distressed, resealing is mandatory. 3. 15 to 20 Year Corrective Maintenance a. Corrective maintenance for rigid pavements includes patching and slab re- placement to correct subgrade failures, edge damage and material failure. b. Asphalt concrete overlays may be required at 15 to 20 year intervals to im- prove the structural capacity of the pavement. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING 0 10 20 30 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT RETAINED 40 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING PERCENT RETAINED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING 0 10 20 30 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT RETAINED 40 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING PERCENT RETAINED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING 0 10 20 30 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT RETAINED 40 0.002 15 MIN. .005 60 MIN. .009 19 MIN. .019 4 MIN. .037 1 MIN. .074 *200 .149 *100 .297 *50 0.42 *40 .590 *30 1.19 *16 2.0 *10 2.38 *8 4.76 *4 9.52 3/8" 19.1 3/4" 36.1 1½" 76.2 3" 127 5" 152 6" 200 8" .001 45 MIN. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE GRAVEL FINE COARSE COBBLES DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 25 HR. 7 HR. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS PERCENT PASSING PERCENT RETAINED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 24/12 WC=9.4 DD=122 SW=8.4 SS=0.010 WC=9.3 DD=125 LL=28 PI=15 -200=38 WC=9.4 DD=122 SW=8.4 SS=0.010 WC=9.3 DD=125 LL=28 PI=15 -200=38 TH-7 10/12 16/12 30/12 WC=11.4 DD=116 SW=0.5 SS=0.010 WC=10.2 DD=112 SW=0.0 WC=11.4 DD=116 SW=0.5 SS=0.010 WC=10.2 DD=112 SW=0.0 TH-8 BULK SAMPLE FROM AUGER CUTTINGS. DEPTH - FEET DRIVE SAMPLE. THE SYMBOL 13/12 INDICATES 13 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2.5-INCH O.D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES. FILL, SAND, CLAY, MOIST, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MEDIUM STIFF TO VERY STIFF, BROWN, DARK BROWN 1. NOTES: SAND AND GRAVEL, MOIST, LOOSE TO DENSE, BROWN (SP, SP-SC, GP, GW-GC) 3. LEGEND: DEPTH - FEET WATER LEVEL MEASURED AT TIME OF DRILLING. Summary Logs of Exploratory Borings THE BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JULY 28, 2017 USING 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT AUGERS AND A TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILL RIG. FIGURE 3 WC DD SW -200 LL PI UC SS - - - - - - - - INDICATES MOISTURE CONTENT (%). INDICATES DRY DENSITY (PCF). INDICATES SWELL WHEN WETTED UNDER OVERBURDEN PRESSURE (%). INDICATES PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (%). INDICATES LIQUID LIMIT. INDICATES PLASTICITY INDEX. INDICATES UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (PSF). INDICATES SOLUBLE SULFATE CONTENT (%). LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135 2. THESE LOGS ARE SUBJECT TO THE EXPLANATIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS IN THIS REPORT. DD=123 SW=0.3 SS=<0.01 WC=7.4 DD=119 SW=0.1 WC=9.6 DD=123 SW=0.3 SS=<0.01 WC=7.4 DD=119 SW=0.1 TH-3 6/12 7/12 22/12 WC=17.1 DD=110 SW=0.3 SS=<0.01 WC=4.0 -200=7 WC=17.1 DD=110 SW=0.3 SS=<0.01 WC=4.0 -200=7 TH-4 Summary Logs of Exploratory Borings FIGURE 2 DEPTH - FEET DEPTH - FEET LC HOMES AT FOX GROVE, LLC FOX GROVE SUBDIVISION CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07952-135