The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutINDIAN HILLS VILLAGE PUD PHASE 2 PRELIM AND FINAL - 81-93B - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORT.•I .01 'i TABLE D2 RECOMMENDED PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE POLICY FOR JOINTED CONCRETE PAVEMENTS Distress Distress Recommended Distress Distress Recommended Type Severity Maintenance Type Severity Maintenance Low None No Blow-up Polished Severity Groove Surface or Medium Full -Depth Concrete Patch/ Aggregate Levels Overlay High Slab Replacement Defined Low Seal Cracks No Comer Break Popouts Severity Levels None Medium Full -Depth High Concrete Patch Defined Low Seal Cracks No Underseal, Divided Severity Seal cracks/joints Slab Medium Slab Pumping Levels and Replacement Defined Restore High Load Transfer Low None Low Seal Cracks Medium Full -Depth Patch Medium Full -Depth Durability Punchout Cracking Concrete High Slab Replacement High Patch Low None Low No Faulting Railroad Crossing . Policy for this Medium Medium Grind High High Project Low . None Scaling Low None Medium Medium Slab Replacement, Joint Map Cracking Seal Reseal Crazing Full -depth Patch, High Joints High or Overlay Low Regrade and No Lane/Shoulder Medium Fill Shoulders Shrinkage Severity None Drop-off to Match Cracks Levels High Lane Height Defined Linear Cracking Low Clean & Low None Longitudinal, Transverse and Medium Seal all Cracks Spelling (Comer) Medium Partial -Depth High Full -Depth Patch High Diagonal Cracks Concrete Patch Low None Low None Large Patching Spelling and Medium Seal Cracks or (Joint) Medium Partial -Depth Patch High High Reconstruct Joint Utility Cuts Replace Patch Low None Medium Replace Small Patching Patch Empire Laboratories, Inc. High A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. r,,. TABLE D1 RECOMMENDED PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE POLICY FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENTS Distress Distress Recommended Distress Distress Recommended Type Severity Maintenance Type Severity Maintenance Low None Low None Alligator Cracking Patching & utility Cut Patching Medium Full -Depth Asphalt Concrete Patch Medium Full -Depth Asphalt Concrete Patch High High Low None Low Bleeding Polished Aggregate None Medium Surface Sanding Medium High Shallow AC Patch High Fog Seal Low None Low Shallow AC Patch Medium Clean & Seal Medium Full -Depth Asphalt Concrete Block Cracking Potholes High All Cracks High Patch Bumps & Sa s g Low None Railroad Crossing Low No Policy for This Project Medium Shallow AC Patch Medium High Full -Depth Patch High Low None Low None Medium Full -Depth Asphalt Concrete Medium Shallow AC Patch Corrugation Ring High Patch High Full -Depth Patch Low None Low None Medium Shallow AC Patch Medium Mill & Shallow AC Depression Shoving High Full -Depth Patch High Patch Low None Low None Medium Seal Cracks Medium Shallow Asphalt Concrete Edge Cracking Slippage Cracking High Full -Depth Patch High Patch Low Clean & Low None Joint Reflection Seal All Cracks Swell Medium Medium Shallow AC Patch High. Shallow AC Patch High Full -Depth Patch Low None Low Lane/Shoulder Drop -Off Weathering & Ravelling Fog Seal Medium Regrade Shoulder Medium High High Low None Longitudinal & Transverse Cracking Empire Laboratories, Inc. Medium Clean & Seal High All Cracks A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. N M .I I I Expansive Potential Finished Grade Footing Foundation Frost Depth Grade Beam Groundwater Heave Lithologic Native Grade Native Soil Optimum Moisture Content Perched Water Scarify Settlement Skin Friction (Side Shear) REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture. The final grade created as a part of the project. A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil. The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock. The depth of which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between other foundation elements such as drilled piers. Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils, or within fractures in bedrock. Upward movement. The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by observation. The naturally occuring ground surface. Naturally occurring on -site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil. The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a given compactive effort. Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuing stratum. To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure. Downward movement. The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of structure. such as a drilled pier or shaft. Soil (earth) Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic matter. Strain The change in length per unit of length in a given direction. Stress The force per unit area acting within a soil mass. Strip To remove from present location. Subbase A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course. Subgrade The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system. Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. l REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) Allowable Soil The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the Bearing Capacity foundation element and the supporting material. Alluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and subsequently deposited by sedimentation. Aggregate Base A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath Course slabs or pavements. Backfill A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. Bedrock A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for excavation. Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. Caisson (Drilled pier A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an or Shaft) enlarged base. Sometimes referred to as a cast -in -place pier or:.drilled shaft. Coefficient of A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding - Friction shear stress at which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Co/luvium Soil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a slope or cliff. Compaction The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation. Concrete Slab -on- A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and Grade typically used as a floor system. Differential Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of a Movement structure. Earth Pressure The pressure or force exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall. ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000 pound axle loads). Engineered Fill Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer: Equivalent Fluid A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the f actual soil. This simplified approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected. Existing Fill (or Materials deposited through the action of man prior to exploration of the site. man-made fill) Existing Grade . The ground surface at the time of field exploration. Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. — LABORATORY TESTS SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE California Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, subbase, Pavement Bearing and base course material, including recycled materials for use in Thickness Ratio road and airfield pavements. Design Consolidation Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of both Foundation differential and total settlement of a structure. Design Direct Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength of soil Bearing Capacity, Shear or rock. Foundation Design & Slope Stability Dry Used to determine the in -place density of natural, inorganic, fine- Index Property Density grained soils. Soil Behavior Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained soil and to Foundation & Slab provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of Soil particle sizes in soil. Classification Liquid & Used as an integral part of engineering classification systems to Soil Plastic Limit, characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, and to specify the Classification Plasticity Index fine-grained fraction of construction materials. Oxidation- Used to determine the tendency of the soil to donate or accept Corrosion Reduction electrons through a change of the oxidation state within the soil. Potential Potential Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a liquid Groundwater or gas. Flow Analysis pH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a soil. Corrosion Potential Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Corrosion electrical currents. Potential Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, subbase, Pavement R-Value and base course material, including recycled materials for use in Thickness road and airfield pavements. Design Soluble Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble sulfates Corrosion Sulphate within a soil mass. Potential Sulfide Content Used to determine the quantitative amounts of sulfides within a Corrosion soil mass. Potential Unconfined To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils that Bearing Capacity Compression possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the unconfined Analysis for state. Foundations Water Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil mass. Index Property Content Soil Behavior Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION. SYSTEM Clean Gravels Less Cu > 4 and 1 < Cc <3E than 5°% fines° Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E Gravels with Fines more than 12% fines° fines classify as ML or MH Fines classify as CL or CH Clean Sands Less Cu > 6 and 1 < Cc < 3E than 5% finesE Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH more than 12% fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A line' PI < 4 or plots below *A" line' organic - Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 Liquid limit - not dried inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line PI lots below "A" line organic Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 Liquid limit - not dried ABased on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve Elf field sample contained cobbles or s D`0�D10 Cc D1C x D10 boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. °Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual 'If soil contains > 15% sand, add "with symbols: sand" to group name. GW-GM well -graded gravel with silt 'If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay GC -GM, or SC-SM. GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt "If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay to group name. 'Sands with 5 to 12%9 fines require dual 'If soil contains > 15% gravel, add "with symbols: gravel" to group name. SW-SM well -graded sand with silt 'If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is SW -SC well -graded sand with clay a CL-ML, silty clay. SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay 60 Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Testd' Coarse -Grained Soils more than 50°% retained on No. 200 sieve Fine -Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Gravels more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid limit less than 50 Silts and Clays Liquid limit 50 or more Soil Classification Group Group Name' Group GW GP GM GC SW SP SM Well -graded gravel' Poorly graded gravt Silty gravel,G,H graded sand' y graded sand' sand°NJ SC Clayey sand°."' CL Lean c ML Silt L,LM Organi OL Po Organic silt`LM0 CH Fat clay4.L.M MH Elastic Silt"•`M ley Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat "If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add .with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. Elf soil contains > 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. 'if soil contains > 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. NPI > 4 and plots on or above "A" line. °PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. 'PI plots on or above "A" line. °PI plots below "A" line. siitK.L.M,° i for eldse�llce9en al Iln•-9,olned "ft and fln.-a .dlne0 frodllon of <odrw- pined , 4, -R V. H9 Zoot of Mon:ontal dt r» - to u • zs3 •J �) men N - 0.7 (LL - 20) ,-� 1 O , P E,ot. of -V - ine '!, vertko, d LL • 1I to N • Nen H 0.9'LL - s) j o� MH OR OH ML OR OL 1 0 0 10 16 20 30 40 M W 70 W 90 100 IIC LIQUID LIMIT (U) Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. DI...LING AND EXPLORATION I I E E I I I I I O I I DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: R : Ring Barrell - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted SS : Split Spoon - 1%" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS : Piston Sample ST : Thin -Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS : Wash Sample PA : Power Auger FT : Fish Tail Bit HA : Hand Auger RB : Rock Bit DB : Diamond Bit = 4", N, B BS : Bulk Sample AS : Auger Sample PM : Pressure Meter HS : Hollow Stem Auger DC : Dutch Cone WB : Wash Bore Penetration Test: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling WCI : Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling DCI : Dry Cave in BCR : Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR : After Casting Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location -of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with only short term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification system and the ASTM. Designations D-2487 and D-2488. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as: clays, if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in -place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff (CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM). CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS: Unconfined Compressive Strength, Qu, psf Consistency < 500 Very Soft 500 - 1,000 Soft 1,001 - 2,000 Medium 2,001 - 4,000 Stiff 4,001 - 8,000 Very Stiff 8,001-16,000 Very Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL Descriptive Term(s) (of Components Also Percent of Present in Sample) Dry Weight Trace < 15 With 15 - 29 Modifier > 30 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES Descriptive Term(s) (of Components Also Percent of Present in Sample) Dry Weight Trace < '5 With 5 - 12 Modifier > 12 RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS: N-Blows/ft. Relative Density 0-3 Very Loose 4-9 Loose 10-29 Medium Dense 30-49 Dense 50-80 Very Dense 80+ Extremely Dense GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Major Component of Sample Size Range Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. 1300mm to 75mm) Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75mm) Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. 1 r: L..-j L.. ; ",—i le— i 6--.--U S—.s SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS Depth Ft. Moisture % Dry Density (PCF) Compressive Strength (PSF) Swell Pressure (PSF) Soluble Sulfates % pH Liquid Limit % Plasticity Index % Group Index Classification AASHTO USCS Resistivity (OHM -CM) Penetration Blow/In. Boring No. 1 0-1 11.3 6/12 1-2 10.4 13/12 4-5 16.8 5/12 9-10 21.2 5/12 Comp. Samp. .5-4.0 28.0 14.5 5.7 A-6(6); CL 2 0-1 17.4 8/17 1-2 16.6 12/12 4-5 24.3 8/12 9-10 19.1 8/12 Comp. Samp. .5-4.0 33.1 14.0 6.0 A-6(6); CL 3 0-1 10.1 5/12 1 2 13/12 4-5 17.4 11/12 9-10 17.9 .0033 5/12 Comp. Samp. .5-4.0 29.3 13.4 4.5 A-6(5); CL RESISTANCE R-VALUE AND EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPRCTEI) SOIL REITH — D 2844 I -- Pl PA t 4Y LAGLINITR!� C11 F R Cl i E C T : INDIAN HILL':; LIE'-:'.T LOCAT10H OF SAMPLE: BORING 2 @ 0.5'-4.0' SAMPLE DATA TEST SPECIMEN 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE - PSI 0 0 0 DEN,:;ITY PCF 101.6 106.8 109.4 MCII3TIJR.E % 22.7 21.1 20. 1 EXPAW;lCit-1 F,F:E!,!:I-IRE PS'l 0.00 0.00 0.00 H0RIZCMTAL PRES':JJRE @ 160 rl--=.i 155 151 142 SAMPLE HEIGHT irt. 2.47 2.513 2. 6. G. EXUDATICItl PRESSURE PSI, 199 279 3 6 61. UHCORREC:TED P-VALUE 1.9 3.7 8. :3 CORRECTED R-VALUE I . 9 3.7 .8 . :4 F—VALLIE AT 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 4.5 ... .......... . ...... . .... ...... .... .. . .... ... . ......... ........ ... .. . ..... .. . ............ ............ ....... ............ . ......... ............. ............. . ............ . . .. . .............. - ............ ....... . ............. ......... ............. . ......... ........ ............. ............ ............ C, III 100 ............ . .............. ............. ............. ........... ............. ...... ............. . ............. . . ......... .............. ............. . ........... ............ ............ ............. .............. ........... ..................... ............. . ............. ............. . ............. . .. .... ..... ............. ............. . ............. ........... .............. ... ...... ...... ............ .............. ... .. .. .............. .. ..... ............. . ........... .............. ...... ............ ............ ...... . . ......... ............. . ............. ....... . . . ....................... ............ ............. . ........ ... ............ .......... ......... ...... ...... ....... . ... ....... .......... .............. ........ 200 3 Cl 0 .400 5 0171 600 EXUDATION PRESSURE — p::-. i EMPIRE LRBC)FATORIES INC. 81710 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 Page I of I ARCHITECT/ENGINEER CLIENT Lagunitas Company SITE Stuart Street PROJECT Indian Hills West Pavement Design Fort Collins, Colorado SAMPLE I TESTS J U. X } H W J DESCRIPTION N � Z \ W � z HF_ i N O H O ZZ H UQ CL 4: d W U W E aa.. U F- O } W n.J } L_ LL O WU ZF-(n O O Z F W tnm Z: Od (nd O 1 SS 12" 5 10.1 %� ^ 6" TOPSOIL " " 0.5 2 SS 12" 13 Composite sample @ 0.5 to 4 ft. FA 29/ 16/ 13 SANDY LEAN CLAY__ Brown/red, moist, medium 3 SS 12" 11 17.4 5 PA 4 SS 12" 5 17.9 10.0 10 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN -SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. STARTED 11-15-93 WATEFLEVEL OBSERVATIONSBORING A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-15-93 WL g NoW.D. = None Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN RLL WL Division of Terracon APPROVED NRS - JOB X 20935289 WL Checked 72 hrs. A.B. LOG OF BORING NO. 2 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lagunitas Company SITE Stuart Street PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Indian Hills West Pavement Design SAMPLES I TESTS J } L7 p F H— O O ca J DESCRIPTION w M w zLL w L~L L~D H x w =P I Ln o z z D_ 0- U d U HO H >LL U=LL W W > > w 0-J O Iru zt-cn o O =3 z H mm s oa xcnD- LD FILL -Sandy lean 1 SS 12" 8 17.4 clay with gravel Brown, moist 2 SS 12" 12 16.6 Composite sample @ 0.5 to 4 ft. 33/19/14 PA 3.0 SANDY LEAN CLAY Brown/red, moist, medium 3 SS 12" 8 24.3 5.0 5 PA POORLY GRADED GRAVEL 2 WITH CLAY AND SAND Brown, wet, loose = 4 SS 12" 8 19.1 10.0 10 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN -SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-15-93 BORING COMPLETED 11-15-93 Empire Laboratories W.D. A.B. wL g 6.2 6.8 RIG CME-55 FOREMAN RLL Incorporated WI Division of Terracon APPROVED NRS JOB N 20935289 "W- Checked 72 hrs.-A.B. .1 j 1 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lagunitas Company SITE Stuart Street PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Indian Hills West Pavement Design SAMPLES TESTS F- \ } H O Ur O J O J co W LL � z Hl�_ H DESCRIPTION fA 0: W z\ O W LL. U CL O 3 O W O' F=- O co U)O O- W U (AlO E O_ > U W H O O_J H O >- LL. WU U W LL ZHIn LD c� o � z F- W Cl) no C3a Z)cna_ FILL Sandy lean clay 1 SS 12" 6 11.3 Brown, moist 1.0 2 SS 12" 13 10.4 - Composite sample 0.5 to 4 ft. 28/14/14 PA SANDY LEAN CLAY Brown/red, moist, medium 3 SS 12' 5 16.8 5 PA , 4 SS 12" 5 21.2 10.0 10 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN -SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Empire Laboratories BORING STARTED 11-15-93 WL s None W.D. = None A.B. BORING COMPLETED 11-15-93 Incorporated Division of Tercacon WL RIG - CME-55 FOREMAN RLL WL Checked 72 hrs. A.B. APPROVED NRS JOB q 20935289 �.LI. �TE� IJo. 2�352a`1 I i v Iefu Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. ` Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 I J GENERAL COMMENTS It is recommended that the Geotechnical Engineer be retained to provide a general review of final design plans and specifications in order that grading and pavement recommendations may be Jinterpreted and implemented. In the event that any changes of the proposed project are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and the report modified or supplemented as necessary. The Geotechnical Engineer should also be retained to provide services during excavation, grading, and pavement phases of the work. Construction testing of fill placed on the site is considered part of continuing geotechnical engineering service for the project. Field and laboratory testing of concrete and asphalt should be performed to determine whether applicable requirements have been j met. It would be logical for Empire Laboratories, Inc. to provide these services since we are most J qualified to determine consistency of field conditions with those data used in our analyses. The analyses and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data obtained from the field exploration. The nature and extent of variations beyond the location of test borings may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to ._� reevaluate the recommendations of this report. _'I our professional services were performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made. We prepared the report as an aid in design of the proposed project. This report is not a bidding document. Any contractor reviewing this report must draw his own conclusions regarding site conditions and specific construction techniques to be used on this project. ;.� This report is for the exclusive purpose of providing geotechnical engineering and/or testing information and recommendations. The scope of services for this project does not include, either specifically or by implication, any environmental assessment of the site or identification of i contaminated or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, other studies should be undertaken. We are available to discuss the scope of such studies with you. 12 Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 Terracon • Utility Construction: Excavations into the on -site soils will encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the clays can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. However, caving soils may also be encountered. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Drainage: • Surface Drainage: 1 . Positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed pavement. Infiltration of water into utility or foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. 2. Backfill in utility line trenches should be well compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. • Subsurface Drainage: Where used, drain lines should be embedded in a uniformly graded filter material and provided with adequate clean -outs for periodic maintenance. An impervious soil should be used in the upper layer of backfill to reduce the potential for water infiltration. � Additional Design and Construction Considerations: • Corrosion Protection: Results of solub►e sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I Portland cement is suitable for all concrete on and below grade. However, if there is no, or minimal cost differential, use of ASTM Type II Portland cement is recommended for additional sulfate resistance of construction concrete. 11 Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 Terracon • Minimum "R"Value.................................... 5 4. Aggregate base should conform to City of Fort Collins Class 5 or 6 specifications. • Placement and Compaction: 1. Place and compact fill in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. 2. Uncompacted fill lifts should not exceed 10 inches loose thickness. . 3. No fill should be placed over frozen ground. 4. Materials should be compacted to the following: Material Minimum Percent Compaction (ASTM D698) On -site soils: Beneath pavements ................................... 95 Imported fill: Beneath pavements ................................... 95 Miscellaneous backfill....................................... 90 5. On -site clay soils should be compacted within a moisture content range of 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum. Imported granular soils should be compacted within a moisture range of 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum. • Compliance: Recommendations for pavement supported on compacted fills or prepared subgrade depend upon compliance with "Earthwork" recommendations. To assess compliance, observation and testing should be performed under the direction of the geotechnical engineer. 10 Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 2. Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. Pumping from sumps may be utilized to _. control water within excavations. • Pavement Subgrade Preparation: The subgrade should be scarified, moistened as required, and recompacted for a minimum depth of 6 to 8 inches prior to placement of fill and pavement materials. 1. On -site clay soils may pump or become unstable or unworkable at high water -! contents. Workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. O.verexcavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Use of lime, fly ash kiln dust, cement or geotextiles could also be considered as a stabilization technique. Adequate laboratory testing should be performed to evaluate the effectiveness of each chosen method of stabilization. Lightweight excavation equipment may be required to reduce subgrade pumping. • Fill Materials: 1. Clean on -site soils or imported materials may be used as fill material for the following: I • general site grading • pavement areas j 2. Frozen soils should not be used as fill or backfill. _i 3. Imported soils (if required) should conform to the following: • Gradation (ASTM C136): percent finer by weight 6................................................ 100 3............................................. 70-100 No. 4 Sieve ..................................... 50-100 No. 200 Sieve .................................. 25 (max) • Liquid Limit .................................... 35 (max) • Plasticity Index ................................... 15 (max) 9 y Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 Terracon Earthwork: • General Considerations: The conclusions contained in this report for the proposed construction are contingent upon compliance with recommendations presented in this section. Although fills or underground facilities, such as septic tanks, cesspools, basements, or utilities, were not observed during site reconnaissance, such features might be encountered during construction. • Site Clearing: 1 . Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris, and other deleterious materials from proposed building and pavement areas. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions which could prevent uniform compaction. 2. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered during site clearing, such features should be removed, the excavation thoroughly cleaned and backfilled. All excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer prior to backfill placement. i 3. Stripped materials consisting of organic materials should be wasted from the site, i or used to revegetate exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. If it is necessary to dispose of organic materials on -site, they should be placed in non- structural areas, and in fill sections not exceeding 5 feet in height. 4. The site should be initially graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed paved areas. I 5. All exposed areas which will receive fill, once properly cleared and benched where necessary, should be scarified to a minimum depth of twelve inches, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted. t • Excavation: I 1 . It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished iwith conventional earthmoving equipment. 8 i • Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 Terracon Colorado Department of Transportation Grading C or CX specifications is recommended. The mix design should be submitted prior to construction to verify its adequacy. The asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts, and should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Hveem density (ASTM D-1561)• Where rigid pavements are used the concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design with the following minimum properties: • Compressive Strength @ 28 days ................... 3750 psi minimum • Modulus of Rupture @ 28 days ..................... 650 psi minimum • Strength Requirements ............................... 'ASTM C-94 • Minimum Cement Content .....................I ..... 5.5 sacks/cu.yd. • Cement Type .................................... Type I Portland • Entrained Air Content ................................. 6% + 2% • Concrete Aggregate ................ ASTM C-33 and CDOT Section 703 • Aggregate Size ............................:.... 1 inch maximum • Maximum Water Content ....................... 0.49 lb/lb of cement • Maximum Allowable Slump ............................... 4 inches Concrete should be deposited by truck mixers or agitators and placed a maximum of 90 minutes from the time the water is added to the mix. Other specifications outlined by the Colorado Department of Transportation should be followed. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry and should be spaced (in feet), at roughly twice the slab thickness (in inches), on center in either direction. Sawed joints should be cut within 24-hours of concrete placement, and should be a minimum depth of 25% of slab thickness plus 1/4 inch. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Where dowels cannot be used at joints accessible to wheel loads, pavement thickness should be increased by 25 percent at the joints and tapered to regular thickness in 5 feet. Future performance of pavements constructed on the clay soils at this site will be dependent upon several factors, including: • Maintaining stable moisture content of the subgrade soils; and, • Providing for a planned program of preventative maintenance. 0 I Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 soil was determined by correlation to the laboratory test results. A Modulus of Rupture of 650 psi (working stress 488 psi) was used for pavement concrete. The rigid pavement thicknesses for each traffic category were determined on the basis of the AASHTO design equation. Recommended alternatives for flexible and rigid pavements, summarized for each traffic area, are as follows: Recommended Pavement Section Thickness (Inches) Traffic Area Alterna- tive Asphalt Aggregate Plant Mix Portland Concrete Base Bituminous Cement TOTAL Surface Course Base Course Concrete A 3" 7" 10" B 2" 3'/2" 5'/2" Driveway Lanes C 6" 6" A 3" 8" 11" Low Volume Local City B 2" 4" 6" C 6" 6" Streets Each alternative should be investigated with respect to current material availability and economic i conditions. In view of the subgrade soil conditions and projected traffic, either full -depth asphalt or rigid concrete pavement sections should be considered in areas of main traffic corridors, drive bays or truck access. Rigid concrete pavement is recommended at the location of dumpsters where trash trucks will park and load. Aggregate base course (if used on the site) should consist of a blend of sand and gravel which meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting City of Fort Collins Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding six inches and should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Standard Proctor density (ASTM D-698), within a moisture content range of 2 percent below, to 2 percent above optimum. Where base course thickness exceeds 8 inches, the material should be placed and compacted in two or more lifts of equal thickness. Asphalt concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design stating the Hveem properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula, and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. iAggregate used in asphalt concrete should meet a particular gradation. Use of materials meeting go Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Site Development Considerations: The site appears suitable for the proposed construction. Plastic clay soils with low subgrade strengths will require particular attention in the design and construction. i Pavement Design and Construction: Design of pavements for the project have been based on the _. procedures outlined in the 1986 Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Traffic criteria was not available for the proposed City streets at the time of writing this report. Pavement sections for driveway lanes and low traffic volume local streets are provided. Revisions, if necessary, will be made to the pavement design when the traffic data becomes available. Traffic criteria provided for pavement thickness designs include Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL's) of 21,900 for driveway lanes and 36,500 for low traffic volume local City streets. Based upon AASHTO criteria, Colorado is located within Climatic Region VI of the United States. j This region is characterized as being dry, with hard ground freeze and spring thaw. The spring thaw condition typically results in saturated or near -saturated subgrade soil moisture conditions. i The AASHTO criteria suggests that these moisture conditions are prevalent for approximately 12.5% of the annual moisture variation cycle. Local drainage characteristics of proposed pavements areas are considered to vary from fair to — good depending upon location on the site. For purposes of this design analysis, fair drainage _ characteristics are considered to control the design. These characteristics, coupled with the approximate duration of saturated subgrade conditions, results in a design drainage coefficient of 1.0 when applying the AASHTO criteria for design. f For flexible pavement design, a terminal serviceability index of 2.0 was utilized along with an inherit reliability of 70%. Using the correlated design R-value, appropriate ESAL/day, environmental criteria and other factors, the structural numbers (SN) of the pavement sections were determined on the basis of the 1986 AASHTO design equation. In addition to the flexible pavement design analyses, a rigid pavement design analysis was completed, based upon AASHTO design procedures. Rigid pavement design is based on an evaluation of the Modulus of Subgrade Reaction of the soils (K-Value), the Modulus of Rupture of the concrete, and other factors previously outlined. The design K-value of 100 for the subgrade 4 A, I -J Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 SITE CONDITIONS Terracon The site consists of a vacant tract of land vegetated with grass and weeds. The site slopes moderately to the north toward Stuart Street and has positive drainage in this direction. The property is bordered on the south, east and west by existing residential developments. Deciduous trees are located in the northwest and northeast portions of the site. A detention pond is located in the southwest corner of the site., Water and sewer lines have been constructed below the proposed streets. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil Conditions: As presented on Logs of Borings, the subsurface soils encountered at the site are described in order of increasing depths: • Fill Material and Silty Topsoil: A 1 to 3 foot layer of fill material was encountered at the surface of Borings 1 and 2. The fill consists of sandy lean clay and gravel, is brown and moist in situ. A 6-inch layer of silty topsoil was encountered at the surface of Boring 3. The topsoil has been penetrated by root growth and organic matter. ® Sandy Lean Clay: This stratum underlies the topsoil and/or fill and extends to depths of 5 to greater than 10 feet below the surface. The clay contains varying amounts of sand, is brown, plastic and moist and medium in situ. • Poorly Graded Gravel with Clay and Sand: This stratum was encountered in Boring 2 at a depth of 5 feet and extends beyond the depths explored. The gavel contains varying amounts of clay and sand, is brown, wet and loose in its natural condition. Laboratory Test Results: Laboratory test results indicate that clay subsoils at shallow depth exhibit low "R" value and subgrade strength characteristics and are moderately plastic. Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6 feet in Boring 2 at the time of field exploration. When checked 72 hours after drilling, groundwater in Boring 2 was measured at a depth of 6'/2 feet below the surface. Groundwater was not encountered in Borings 1 and 3 at the time of the field exploration nor when checked 72 hours after drilling. These observations represent only current groundwater conditions, and may not be indicative of other times, or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and.weather conditions and irrigation demands on and adjacent to the site. 3 CI Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 Field Exploration: A total of three test borings were drilled to depths of 10 feet at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The borings were drilled within the street rights -of -way. All I borings were advanced with a truck -mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-inch diameter solid stem auger. J The location of borings were positioned in the field by measurements from property lines and J existing site features. The accuracy of boring locations should only be assumed to the level implied by the methods used to determine each. Continuous lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by the engineering geologist during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by means of driving split -spoon samplers. Representative bulk samples of subsurface materials were obtained from the borings. J i J Penetration resistance measurements were taken with each sampling with the split -spoon by driving the sampler with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. When properly interpreted, the penetration resistance is a useful index to the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. Groundwater conditions were evaluated in each boring at the time of.site exploration, and three days after drilling. Laboratory Testing: All samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for evaluation by the project geotechnical engineer, and were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil) Classification system described in Appendix C. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary, final boring logs prepared, and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Boring Logs for the project are presented in Appendix A. Selected soil samples were tested for the following engineering properties: • Water content • Soluble sulphate content • Plasticity • R-Value The significance and purpose of each laboratory test is described in Appendix C. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B, and were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. All laboratory test were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. 2 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Terracon INDIAN HILLS WEST PAVEMENT STUART STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ELI PROJECT NO. 20935289 NOVEMBER 29, 1993 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed project located on Stuart Street at Spring Creek in east -central Fort Collins, Colorado. The site • is located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. j The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: 0 subsurface soil conditions • groundwater conditions -• • pavement design and construction 0 earthwork • drainage The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil and structural conditions. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION It is our understanding the proposed construction will consist of local City streets and private driveway lanes. At the time this report was prepared, traffic data was not available to provide adequate information for the City street pavement design. SITE EXPLORATION _ The scope of the services performed for this project included site reconnaissance by an engineering geologist, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. 3 Lagunitas Company Terracon ELI Project No. 20935289 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) APPENDIX B Page No. Laboratory Test Data: Hveem Stabilometer Test .................................... B1 Summary of Test Results .................................... B2 APPENDIX C: GENERAL NOTES Drilling & Exploration ............................................ C1 Unified Soil Classification ......................................... C2 Laboratory Testing, Significance and Purpose .................... C3 Report Terminology ............................................. C4 APPENDIX D Recommended Preventative Maintenance -Asphalt Concrete Pavements ......... D1 Recommended Preventative Maintenance -Jointed Concrete Pavements ......... D2 v u Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 TABLE OF CONTENTS Terracon Page No. Letter of Transmittal................................................... i INTRODUCTION..................................................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ........................................... 1 SITE EXPLORATION .................................................. 1 Field Exploration ............................................... 2 Laboratory Testing .................. .... .................... 2 SITECONDITIONS ................................................... 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................. 3 Soil Conditions ................................................. 3 Laboratory Test Results .......................................... 3 Groundwater Conditions .......................................... 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 4 Site Development Considerations .................................... 4 Pavement Design and. Construction .................................. 4 Earthwork.................................................... 7 General Considerations ................................ 8 Site Clearing .............................................. 8 Excavation .............................................. 8 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ................................ 9 Fill Materials ............................................. 9 Placement and Compaction .................................. 10 Compliance............................................. 10 Utility Construction ....................................... 11 Drainage.................................................... 11 Surface Drainage ......................................... 11 Subsurface Drainage ....................................... 11 Additional Design and Construction Considerations ...................... 11 Corrosion Protection ....................................... 11 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................... 12 APPENDIX A Figure No. SITEPLAN ......................................................... 1 Logs of Borings .......................................... Al thru A2 Lagunitas Company ELI Project No. 20935289 Terracon We have appreciated being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. If you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, y EMPIRE LABORATORIES, INC. A Division of The Ter ac Companies, Inc. Nei Sher'rod W Senior Engineering Geologist Reviewed by: - Chester C. Smith, P.E. Division Manager NRS/CCS/cic Copies to: Addressee (3) �PgOR4lO 9� � U1 a 2 November 29, 1993 - Lagunitas Company 3307 South College Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Attn: Mr. Jon Prouty Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. — Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report, Indian Hills West Pavement Stuart Street Fort Collins, Colorado ELI Project No. 20935289 P.O. Box 503 • 301 No. Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303) 484-0359 FAX No. (303) 484-0454 Chester C, Smith, PE. Neil R. Sherrod, C.PG, Empire Laboratories, Inc. (ELI) has completed a geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed pavement for Indian Hills West located east of Stuart Street in east -central Fort Collins, Colorado. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposal number D2093179 dated November 12, 1993. The results of our engineering study, including the boring location diagram, laboratory test results, test boring records, and the geotechnical recommendations needed to aid in the design and construction of foundations and other earth connected phases of this project are attached. The subsurface exploration indicated soil conditions which are typical of soils commonly found in _ the east -central portion of the Fort Collins area. The subsurface soils at the site consisted of sandy clay fill and lean topsoil underlain by sandy lean clay and poorly graded gravel. The information obtained by the results of field exploration and laboratory testing completed for this study indicates that the clay soils at the site exhibit low subgrade strength characteristics. Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses, subsurface exploration and laboratory test results, we recommend that the proposed pavement consist of asphalt concrete underlain by aggregate base course, asphalt concrete underlain by plant mix bituminous base course or nonreinforced concrete. Other design and construction details, based upon geotechnical conditions, are presented in the report. Offices of The Terracon Companies, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Engineers Arizona: Tucson ■ Colorado: Colorado Springs, Denver, Ft. Collins, Greeley, Longmont ■ Idaho: Boise E Illinois: Bloomington, Chicago, Rock Island ■ Iowa: Cedar Falls, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines, Storm Lake fit Kansan, Lenexa, Topeka. Wichita ■ Minnesota: St. Paul 0 Missouri: Kansas City ■ Nebraska. Lincoln, Omaha 0 Nevada: Las Vegas ■ Oklahoma: Oklahoma City. Tulsa ■ Texas: Dallas ■ Utah: Salt Lake City 0 Wyoming: Cheyenne QUALITY ENGINEERING SINCE 1965 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT INDIAN HILLS WEST PAVEMENT STUART STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ELI PROJECT NO. 20935289 Prepared for: LAGUNITAS COMPANY 3307 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE, SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 ATTN: MR. JON PROUTY Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. 01 Terracon Lagunitas Company Page 2 March 30, 1994 The recommendations for pavement subgrade preparation and pavement construction are included in our November 29 report. If you have any questions concerning this addendum or if we can be of further service to you, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, EMPIRE LABORATORIES, INC. ' A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. Neil R. She' rod Senior Engineering Geologist Reviewed by: ySTC-�70 16G� v /'�'✓ 4R cb �S i Cv' a Chester C. Smith, P.E. Division Manager fir;-, 6 NRS/CCS/cic J �PB0R4 6 �L 2 � n March 30, 1994 Lagunitas Company 3307 South College Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Attn: Mr. John Prouty Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Indian Hills West Pavement - Stuart Street Fort Collins, Colorado Project No. 20935289 Gentlemen: Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. P.O Box 503 • 301 No. Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303) 484-0359 FAX No. (303) 484-0454 Chester C Smith. PE. Nell R. Sherrod, C.PG We recently received traffic data for the above -referenced project. This letter serves as an addendum to our geotechnical report for the project dated November 29, 1993. The purpose of this addendum is to provide additional recommended pavement types and thicknesses for the entrance street at the intersection with Stuart Street. All other pavement recommendations set forth in our original report dated November 29, 1993 are adequate for the proposed streets. Pavement types and thicknesses for the pavement design based on an ESAL of 5 along with overall recommendations for pavement subgrade preparation and pavement construction were addressed in our geotechnical report. Traffic information provided by the City of Fort Collins for the street at the entrance to the project consists of an ESAL of 73,000. Based on this and the criteria presented in our original report, the following pavement section is recommended for the entrance portion of the street. Recommended Pavement Section Thickness (inches) Asphalt Concrete Aggregate Base Plant Mix Bituminous Portland Cement Total Traffic Area Alternative Surface Course Base Concrete A 4" 7" B 2" 5" 7" Entrance Road C 6t/:" 6y:;r Offices of The Terracon Companies, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Engineers Arizona. Tucson ■ Colorado: Colorado Springs, Denver, Ft. Collins, Greeley, Longmont ■ Idaho: Boise ■ Illinois. Bloomington. Chicago, Rock Island ■ Iowa. Cedar Falls, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines, Storm Lake ■ Kansas. Lenexa, Topeka. Wichita ■ Minnesota: St. Paul ■ Missouri: Kansas City ■ Nebraska: Lincoln, Omaha ■ Nevada: Las Vegas ■ Oklahoma: Oklahoma City, Tulsa ■ Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth ■ Utah', Salt Lake City ■ Wyoming: Cheyenne QUALITY ENGINEERING SINCE 1965