HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAPSTONE COTTAGES - PDP - PDP140004 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTGeotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins
Northeast of N. Lemay Avenue and E. Lincoln Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014
Terracon Project No. 20145005
Prepared for:
Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Fort Collins, Colorado
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................i
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 2
2.1 Project Description ...............................................................................................2
2.2 Site Location and Description...............................................................................2
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 3
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile ...................................................................................3
3.2 Laboratory Testing ...............................................................................................3
3.3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................3
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ...................................... 5
4.1 Geotechnical Considerations ...............................................................................5
4.1.1 Existing, Undocumented Fill .....................................................................5
4.1.2 Shallow Groundwater ...............................................................................5
4.1.3 Weak Soils near Foundation Elevations ...................................................5
4.1.4 Expansive Soils and Bedrock ...................................................................5
4.2 Earthwork.............................................................................................................6
4.2.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................6
4.2.2 Excavation ................................................................................................6
4.2.3 Subgrade Preparation ...............................................................................7
4.2.4 Fill Materials and Placement ......................................................................8
4.2.5 Compaction Requirements ........................................................................9
4.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill ................................................................................9
4.2.7 Grading and Drainage .............................................................................10
4.2.8 Exterior Slab Design and Construction ...................................................11
4.2.9 Corrosion Protection ...............................................................................11
4.3 Foundations .......................................................................................................11
4.3.1 Frost Protected Post-tensioned Slabs .....................................................12
4.3.2 Post-Tensioned Slabs – Design Recommendations ...............................12
4.3.3 Post-Tensioned Slabs – Construction Considerations ...............................13
4.3.4 Spread Footings - Design Recommendations .........................................14
4.3.5 Spread Footings - Construction Considerations ......................................15
4.4 Seismic Considerations......................................................................................16
4.5 Floor Systems ....................................................................................................16
4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures .....................................................................................16
4.8 Pavements .........................................................................................................18
4.8.1 Pavements – Subgrade Preparation .......................................................18
4.8.2 Pavements – Design Recommendations ................................................18
4.8.3 Pavements – Construction Considerations .............................................21
4.8.4 Pavements – Maintenance .....................................................................21
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 21
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Appendix A – FIELD EXPLORATION
Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map
Exhibit A-2 Exploration Plan
Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description
Exhibits A-4 to A-19 Boring Logs
Appendix B – LABORATORY TESTING
Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Description
Exhibit B-2 Atterberg Limits Test Results
Exhibits B-3 and B-4 Grain-size Distribution Test Results
Exhibits B-5 to B-9 Swell-consolidation Test Results
Exhibit B-10 Corrosivity Test Results
Appendix C – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Exhibit C-1 General Notes
Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System
Exhibit C-3 Description of Rock Properties
Exhibit C-4 Laboratory Test Significance and Purpose
Exhibits C-5 and C-6 Report Terminology
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A geotechnical investigation has been performed for the proposed Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins to be constructed northeast of North Lemay Avenue and East Lincoln Avenue in Fort
Collins, Colorado. Previously, Terracon prepared a Geotechnical Engineering Report (Project
No. 20045173; report dated November 17, 2004) for this site that included completion of five (5)
borings throughout the site. Boring logs for the previously completed borings are presented as
Exhibits A-4 through A-8 in Appendix A. Eleven (11) borings, presented as Exhibits A-9 through
A-19 and designated as Boring No. 6 through Boring No. 16, were performed to depths of
approximately 17 to 23 feet below existing site grades. This report specifically addresses the
recommendations for the proposed apartment buildings, cottage buildings, and associated
pavements. Borings performed in these areas are for informational purposes and will be utilized by
others.
Based on the information obtained from our previous and current subsurface explorations, the site
can be developed for the proposed project. However, the following geotechnical considerations
were identified and will need to be considered:
The proposed buildings may be supported on shallow, post-tensioned slab foundation
systems bearing on scarified, moisture conditioned, recompacted native soils or on
newly placed engineered fill. Spread footings constructed on stable subgrade or new,
properly placed engineered fill is also considered an appropriate foundation system for
support of the proposed buildings.
Unstable and/or nearly saturated to wet soils should be anticipated as excavations
approach the level of groundwater. Foundations extending below grade near the level of
groundwater will require stabilization of the subgrade and/or construction dewatering prior
to construction.
If the Owner selects a post-tensioned slab foundation system, the foundation will also
function as the floor system for the proposed buildings. If a conventional spread footing
foundation system is selected, we recommend a slab-on-grade floor system for the
proposed buildings.
The amount of movement of foundations, slabs, pavements, etc. will be related to the
wetting of underlying supporting soils. Therefore, it is imperative the recommendations
discussed in the 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage section of this report be followed to reduce
potential movement.
Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from about 1½ to 7 feet below the
existing ground surface during our field study. Shallow groundwater conditions will prohibit
basement construction, significantly impact installation of deep utilities buried below the site
as well as areas planned for cuts on the order of 2 feet or more.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable ii
Budget contingencies should be provided in the contract documents for stabilizing soft
subgrade soils expected below portions of the project site.
The 2012 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2 IBC seismic site classification for this
site is D.
Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in
achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be
retained to monitor this portion of the work.
This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It
should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the
report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained
herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the
report limitations.
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 1
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins
Northeast of N. Lemay Avenue and E. Lincoln Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
Terracon Project No. 20145005
March 28, 2014
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the
proposed Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins to be located at Northeast of N. Lemay Avenue and
E. Lincoln Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of these services is to provide
information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:
subsurface soil and bedrock conditions foundation design and construction
groundwater conditions floor slab design and construction
grading and drainage pavement construction
lateral earth pressures earthwork
seismic considerations
Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included review and compilation of
previously completed geotechnical data at the site, the initial site visit, the advancement of
eleven (11) supplemental test borings to depths ranging from approximately 17 to 23 feet below
existing site grades, laboratory testing for soil engineering properties and engineering analyses
to provide foundation, floor system, and pavement design and construction recommendations.
Logs of the borings along with an Exploration Plan (Exhibit A-2) are included in Appendix A.
The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil and bedrock samples obtained from the
site during the field exploration are included in Appendix B.
Previously, Terracon performed a geotechnical study at the project site, as presented in Report
No. 20045173 dated November 17, 2004. Information from the previous study was used in the
evaluation of the current project. Boring logs and laboratory test results from the previous study
are included in this report.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 2
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Description
Item Description
Site layout Refer to the Exploration Plan (Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A)
Structures
The project is a mix of two product types including three-story
“lodge” or apartment buildings and two-story “cottages” with
varying sizes. We anticipate the multi-family buildings will be
wood-framed structures constructed on cast-in-place concrete
foundations with no basements.
Grading
At the time this report was prepared, site grading plans were not
fully developed. We anticipate cuts and fills on the order of 10 feet
or less will be necessary for the proposed construction. Deeper
cuts may be necessary for the installation of buried utilities.
Traffic loading
We understand both city-maintained roadways and privately-
maintained roadways are planned for this site. Expected traffic
loading was not provided; however, we anticipate that traffic loads
will be produced primarily by automobile traffic, occasional delivery
and trash removal trucks, and occasional bus traffic.
Based on the information provided to us on a Conceptual Site Plan,
the proposed Duff Drive will be a collector road and the proposed
International Boulevard will be a 2-lane arterial road. We have
assumed Duff Drive will be classified as an industrial/commercial
collector according to the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (LCUASS). LCUASS indicates a design Equivalent
Single Axel Load (ESAL) of 730,000 should be used for an
industrial/commercial collector and two-lane arterial roadways.
2.2 Site Location and Description
Item Description
Location The project site is located northeast of North Lemay Avenue and
East Lincoln Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado.
Existing site features
The site is currently undeveloped land with Bank of Colorado
located to the southwest, Buffalo Run Student Housing to the
south, and irrigated farmland to the north. The site is bordered to
the east by industrial and commercial properties.
Current ground cover The site is covered with native grasses and weeds.
Existing topography The site is relatively flat gently sloping from the northwest to the
southeast.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 3
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile
Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring
logs included in Appendix A. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the
approximate location of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be
gradual. Based on the results of the previously completed and supplemental borings,
subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows:
Material Description Approximate Depth to
Bottom of Stratum (feet) Consistency/Density/Hardness
Lean clay with varying amounts of
sand
About 1 to 7 feet below existing
site grades.
Soft to very stiff
Sand with varying amounts of silt
and gravel
About 14½ to 22 feet below
existing site grades.
Loose to very dense
Siltstone/claystone bedrock
To the maximum depth of
exploration of about 24½ feet.
Weathered to very hard
The upper ½ to 1 foot of the siltstone and/or siltstone/claystone bedrock was weathered.
3.2 Laboratory Testing
Representative soil samples were selected for swell-consolidation testing and exhibited slight
compression to 0.1 percent swell when wetted. The siltstone bedrock is also considered to
have low expansive potential or be non-expansive. Samples of site soils and bedrock selected
for plasticity testing exhibited medium to high plasticity with liquid limits ranging from non-plastic
to 49 and plasticity indices ranging from 5 to 29. Laboratory test results are presented in
Appendix B.
3.3 Groundwater
The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of
groundwater. In addition, delayed water levels were also obtained in some borings. The water
levels observed in the boreholes are noted on the attached boring logs, and are summarized
below:
Boring Number Depth to groundwater
while drilling, ft.
Depth to groundwater
several days after
drilling, ft.
Elevation of
groundwater several
days after drilling, ft.
1 3 Backfilled --
2 3 Backfilled --
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 4
Boring Number Depth to groundwater
while drilling, ft.
Depth to groundwater
several days after
drilling, ft.
Elevation of
groundwater several
days after drilling, ft.
3 3 Backfilled --
4 3 Backfilled --
5 6 Backfilled --
6 6 Backfilled --
7 6 Backfilled --
8 6 Backfilled --
9 7 2.5 93.3
10 2 1.5 94.3
11 6 Backfilled --
12 3 Backfilled --
13 3 2.2 91.8
14 4 Backfilled --
15 4 Backfilled --
16 5 Backfilled --
These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, 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 other factors.
Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in amount of rainfall, runoff and
other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels
during construction or at other times in the life of the structures may be higher or lower than the
levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be
considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project.
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater
monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater piezometers, and periodic
measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time.
Terracon has provided a proposal to install five (5) temporary piezometers at the site to facilitate
groundwater monitoring.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 5
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
4.1 Geotechnical Considerations
Based on subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, the site appears suitable for the
proposed construction from a geotechnical point of view provided certain precautions and
design and construction recommendations described in this report are followed. We have
identified geotechnical conditions that could impact design and construction of the proposed
structures, pavements, and other site improvements.
4.1.1 Existing, Undocumented Fill
Existing fill materials were not encountered in any of our borings on this site. However, mounds
of soil and/or deleterious materials were observed during our field investigation. We do not
possess any information regarding the source of the soil and/or deleterious materials. We are
uncertain what is contained within the stockpiles; our scope of services did not include
exploration of these materials. We recommend the existing mounds of fill and deleterious
materials be thoroughly inspected prior to consideration for use as on-site fill materials.
Support of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements on or above existing fill soils is discussed in
this report. However, even with the recommended construction testing services, there is an
inherent risk for the owner that compressible fill or unsuitable material within or buried by the fill
will not be discovered. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without
completely removing the existing fill, but can be reduced by performing additional testing and
evaluation.
4.1.2 Shallow Groundwater
As previously stated, groundwater was measured at depths ranging from about 1½ to 7 feet
below existing site grades. Terracon recommends maintaining a separation of at least 3 feet
between the bottom of proposed foundations and/or pavement subgrade and measured
groundwater levels. It is also possible and likely that groundwater levels below this site may
rise.
4.1.3 Weak Soils near Foundation Elevations
Unstable and/or nearly saturated soils should be anticipated as excavations approach the level of
groundwater. Foundations extending below grade to the groundwater depth will require
stabilization of the subgrade and/or construction dewatering prior to construction.
Recommendations for stabilization of foundation subgrade are presented in subsequent sections of
this report.
4.1.4 Expansive Soils and Bedrock
Laboratory testing indicates the native clay soils and siltstone bedrock exhibited slight
compression to 0.1 percent swell at the samples in-situ moisture content. However, it is our
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 6
opinion these materials will exhibit a higher expansive potential if the clays undergo a significant
loss of moisture.
This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and
expansion. However, even if these procedures are followed, some movement and cracking in
the structures, pavements, and flatwork should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and
other damage such as uneven floor slabs will probably increase if any modification of the site
results in excessive wetting or drying of the expansive clays. Eliminating the risk of movement
and distress is generally not feasible, but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of
movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during construction. It is
imperative the recommendations described in section 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage of this
report be followed to reduce movement.
4.2 Earthwork
The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation
and placement of engineered fills on the project. All earthwork on the project should be
observed and evaluated by Terracon on a full-time basis. The evaluation of earthwork should
include observation of over-excavation operations, testing of engineered fills, subgrade
preparation, subgrade stabilization, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the
construction of the project.
4.2.1 Site Preparation
Prior to placing any fill, strip and remove existing vegetation and any other deleterious materials
from the proposed construction areas.
Stripped organic materials should be wasted from the site or used to re-vegetate landscaped
areas or exposed slopes (if any) after completion of grading operations. Prior to the placement of
fills, the site should be graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to provide for a
relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed structures.
If fill is placed in areas of the site where existing slopes are steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical),
the area should be benched to reduce the potential for slippage between existing slopes and fills.
Benches should be wide enough to accommodate compaction and earth moving equipment, and
to allow placement of horizontal lifts of fill.
4.2.2 Excavation
It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with
conventional earthmoving equipment. Excavations into the on-site soils may encounter weak
and/or saturated soil conditions with possible caving conditions.
Excavation penetrating the bedrock may require the use of specialized heavy-duty equipment,
together with ripping or jack-hammering to advance the excavation and facilitate rock break-up
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 7
and removal. Consideration should be given to obtaining a unit price for difficult excavation in the
contract documents for the project if excavations will extend into bedrock.
The soils to be excavated can vary significantly across the site as their classifications are based
solely on the materials encountered in widely-spaced exploratory test borings. The contractor
should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the proposed area of excavation. If different
subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, the actual conditions should be
evaluated to determine any excavation modifications necessary to maintain safe conditions.
Although evidence of underground facilities such as septic tanks, vaults, basements, and utilities
was not observed during the site reconnaissance, such features could be encountered during
construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should
be removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction.
Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, surface water infiltration and/or
groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. It is anticipated that pumping from
sumps may be utilized to control water within excavations. Well points may be required for
significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater to a significant depth.
The subgrade soil conditions should be evaluated during the excavation process and the stability
of the soils determined at that time by the contractors’ Competent Person. Slope inclinations
flatter than the OSHA maximum values may have to be used. 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. If any excavation, including a utility trench, is extended to
a depth of more than 20 feet, it will be necessary to have the side slopes and/or shoring system
designed by a professional engineer.
As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept a minimum lateral
distance from the crest of the slope equal to the slope height. The exposed slope face should be
protected against the elements
4.2.3 Subgrade Preparation
After the deleterious materials have been removed from the construction areas, the top 10
inches of the exposed ground surface should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and
recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM
D698 before any new fill, foundation, or pavement is placed.
In addition, large cobbles may be encountered beneath foundation areas. Such conditions
could create point loads on the bottom of foundations, increasing the potential for differential
foundation movement. If such conditions are encountered in the foundation excavations, the
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 8
cobbles should be removed and be replaced with engineered fill, conditioned to near optimum
moisture content and compacted.
After the bottom of the excavation has been compacted, engineered fill can be placed to bring
the building pads and pavement subgrade to the desired grade. Engineered fill should be
placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in subsequent sections of this
report.
The stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or
other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and
drying. Alternatively, over-excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials
may be used, or crushed gravel and/or rock can be tracked or “crowded” into the unstable
surface soil until a stable working surface is attained. Lightweight excavation equipment may
also be used to reduce subgrade pumping. Budget contingencies should be provided in the
contract documents for stabilizing soft subgrade soils expected below portions of the project
site.
4.2.4 Fill Materials and Placement
The on-site soils or approved granular and low plasticity cohesive imported materials may be used
as fill material. The soil removed from this site that is free of organic or objectionable materials,
as defined by a field technician who is qualified in soil material identification and compaction
procedures, can be re-used as fill for the building pads and pavement subgrade. It should be
noted that on-site soils may require reworking to adjust the moisture content to meet the
compaction criteria.
Imported soils (if required) should meet the following material property requirements:
Gradation Percent finer by weight (ASTM C136)
4” 100
3” 70-100
No. 4 Sieve 50-100
No. 200 Sieve 10-50
Soil Properties Value
Liquid Limit 30 (max.)
Plastic Limit 15 (max.)
Maximum Expansive Potential (%) Non-expansive1
1. Measured on a sample compacted to approximately 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as
determined by ASTM D698 at optimum moisture content. The sample is confined under a 100 psf
surcharge and submerged.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 9
4.2.5 Compaction Requirements
Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and
procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift.
Item Description
Fill lift thickness
9 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-
propelled compaction equipment is used
4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided
equipment (i.e. jumping jack or plate compactor) is used
Minimum compaction requirements 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined
by ASTM D698
Moisture content cohesive soil (clay) -1 to +3 % of the optimum moisture content
Moisture content cohesionless soil
(sand)
-3 to +2 % of the optimum moisture content
1. We recommend engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement.
Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits
have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required
until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.
2. Specifically, moisture levels should be maintained low enough to allow for satisfactory compaction
to be achieved without the fill material pumping when proofrolled.
3. Moisture conditioned clay materials should not be allowed to dry out. A loss of moisture within
these materials could result in an increase in the material’s expansive potential. Subsequent
wetting of these materials could result in undesirable movement.
4.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill
All trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit construction
including backfill placement and compaction.
All underground piping within or near the proposed structures should be designed with flexible
couplings, so minor deviations in alignment do not result in breakage or distress. Utility knockouts
in foundation walls should be oversized to accommodate differential movements. It is imperative
that utility trenches be properly backfilled with relatively clean materials. If utility trenches are
backfilled with relatively clean granular material, they should be capped with at least 18 inches of
cohesive fill in non-pavement areas to reduce the infiltration and conveyance of surface water
through the trench backfill.
Utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. All utility trenches that
penetrate beneath the buildings should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow
through the trenches that could migrate below the buildings. We recommend constructing an
effective clay “trench plug” that extends at least 5 feet out from the face of the building exteriors.
The plug material should consist of clay compacted at a water content at or above the soil’s
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 10
optimum water content. The clay fill should be placed to completely surround the utility line and be
compacted in accordance with recommendations in this report.
It is strongly recommended that a representative of Terracon provide full-time observation and
compaction testing of trench backfill within building and pavement areas.
4.2.7 Grading and Drainage
All grades must be adjusted to provide effective drainage away from the proposed buildings and
pavements during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project.
Infiltration of water into foundation excavations must be prevented during construction.
Landscape irrigation adjacent to foundations should be minimized or eliminated. Water
permitted to pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of the structures (either during or post-
construction) can result in significantly higher soil movements than those discussed in this
report. As a result, any estimations of potential movement described in this report cannot be
relied upon if positive drainage is not obtained and maintained, and water is allowed to infiltrate
the fill and/or subgrade.
Exposed ground (if any) should be sloped at a minimum of 10 percent grade for at least 10 feet
beyond the perimeter of the proposed buildings, where possible. The use of swales, chases
and/or area drains may be required to facilitate drainage in unpaved areas around the perimeter
of the buildings. Backfill against foundations and exterior walls should be properly compacted
and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. After
construction of the proposed buildings and prior to project completion, we recommend
verification of final grading be performed to document positive drainage, as described above,
has been achieved.
Flatwork and pavements will be subject to post-construction movement. Maximum grades
practical should be used for paving and flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond. In
addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post-construction movement
of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the
structures, care should be taken that joints are properly sealed and maintained to prevent the
infiltration of surface water.
Planters located adjacent to structures should preferably be self-contained. Sprinkler mains and
spray heads should be located a minimum of 5 feet away from the building line(s). Low-volume,
drip style landscaped irrigation should not be used near the building. Roof drains should
discharge on to pavements or be extended away from the structures a minimum of 10 feet
through the use of splash blocks or downspout extensions. A preferred alternative is to have
the roof drains discharge by solid pipe to storm sewers or to a detention pond or other
appropriate outfall.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 11
4.2.8 Exterior Slab Design and Construction
Exterior slabs on-grade, exterior architectural features, and utilities founded on, or in backfill or
the site soils will likely experience some movement due to the volume change of the material.
Potential movement could be reduced by:
Minimizing moisture increases in the backfill;
Controlling moisture-density during placement of the backfill;
Using designs which allow vertical movement between the exterior features
and adjoining structural elements; and
Placing control joints on relatively close centers.
4.2.9 Corrosion Protection
Results of water-soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type V portland cement or approved
substitute should be specified for all project concrete on and below grade. Foundation concrete
should be designed for very severe sulfate exposure in accordance with the provisions of the
ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4.
4.3 Foundations
Terracon considered several foundation alternatives for support of the proposed structures
including:
Traditional post-tensioned slabs
Frost protected post-tensioned slabs
Spread footings
Drilled piers or helical piles
There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each of the foundation alternatives
we believe are suitable for this project site. Shallow groundwater conditions encountered below
this site will likely impact spread footing and traditional post-tensioned slab foundations.
Foundation excavations approaching the level of groundwater will likely encounter soft to very
loose and nearly saturated to wet soil conditions. Stabilization of foundation subgrade soils will
be required prior to spread footing or traditional post-tensioned slab foundation construction.
Drilled pier foundations bottomed in bedrock will require temporary casing, concrete placement
using tremie methods and rock coring bits to achieve penetration in the very hard bedrock below
the site. Helical pile foundations may be comparatively costly and achieving torque in the sand
and gravel below the site may be difficult.
We believe constructing the proposed buildings on frost protected post-tensioned slabs is a
suitable foundation alternative that will reduce impacts of shallow groundwater and limit areas
where subgrade stabilization will be required. The bearing depth for frost protected post-
tensioned slabs will be significantly less than the bearing depth for other conventional shallow
foundations systems such as spread footings and traditional post-tensioned slab foundations.
However, there will be requirements to protect the foundation bearing soils from frost action that
will include placement of insulation adjacent to the perimeter edges of foundations.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 12
Design recommendations for the recommended foundation alternatives for the proposed
structures and related structural elements are presented in the following sections.
4.3.1 Frost Protected Post-tensioned Slabs
A frost protected shallow foundation is a foundation that does not extend below the design frost
depth, but is protected against effects of frost. Protection from frost heave is achieved by
insulating to retard frost penetration below the foundation and to retard heat flow from beneath
the foundation. Installation of insulation will allow shallower foundation bearing depths to be
possible with significantly reduced risk of frost damage. Recommendations for design and
construction of frost protected shallow foundations are presented in Design and Construction of
Frost-Protected Shallow Foundations prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE 32-01).
4.3.2 Post-Tensioned Slabs – Design Recommendations
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered, use of post-tensioned slabs is feasible for
support of the structures provided some foundation movement can be tolerated and:
The post-tensioned slab foundations are properly designed and constructed.
Approved materials supporting the foundation are properly placed and compacted.
Proper surface drainage is maintained throughout the life of the structures.
Prudent landscaping measures are used.
In our opinion, total foundation movements on the order of about 1 inch should be expected.
Provided foundations are properly designed, foundation movements could result in periodic, and
possibly seasonal, cosmetic distress to drywall, window frames, door frames and other features.
We would anticipate that the frequency of distress and amount of movement would generally
diminish with time provided proper drainage is established and/or maintained. We believe
potential total foundation movements can be reduced to ½ to ¾ inch or less if at least 3 feet of
imported granular engineered fill is placed directly below the post-tensioned slab foundations.
The granular fill should consist of materials within the specified limits presented in the 4.2.4 Fill
Materials and Placement section of this report.
Based on the subsurface conditions, post-tensioned slabs should be designed using criteria
outlined by the Post-Tensioning Institute1 based on the following:
1 (2004, Third Edition), Design (and Construction) of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on-Ground, Post-
Tensioning Institute.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 13
Post-tensioned Slab Design Parameter PTI, Third Edition
2012 IBC/IRC
Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em (feet)
Center Lift Condition 7½
Edge Lift Condition 4
Differential Soil Movement, ym (inches)
Center Lift Condition ¼
Edge Lift Condition ¾
Maximum Allowable Net Bearing Pressure ............................................................... 2,000 psf
Slab-Subgrade Friction Coefficient, P
x on polyethylene sheeting ................................................................................ 0.75
x on cohesionless soils ...................................................................................... 1.00
x on cohesive soils............................................................................................. 2.00
The maximum allowable net bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 for transient wind or
seismic loading.
It should be noted that ym is the estimated vertical movement at the edges of a uniformly loaded
slab. These are theoretical values that are used in the design of post-tensioned slabs-on-grade
and do not represent the movements that would be expected from the actual loading conditions.
As previously discussed, the use of post-tensioned slabs assumes that some potential
movement is considered acceptable.
4.3.3 Post-Tensioned Slabs – Construction Considerations
Post-tensioned slabs, thickened or turndown edges and/or interior beams should be designed
and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the PTI and the American Concrete
Institute (ACI).
As previously discussed, foundations should be protected from frost heave using insulation. If
traditional post-tensioned slab foundations are selected, exterior slab edges should be placed a
minimum of 30 inches below finished grade for frost protection. Finished grade is the lowest
adjacent grade for perimeter beams. Extending exterior slab edges to depths of at least 30
inches will likely encroach upon soft to very loose and nearly saturated to wet soils requiring
stabilization of subgrade prior to construction.
If portions of the building floor slab will be unheated, such as patios and entryways,
consideration should be given to structurally separating these areas of the slab from the
remaining interior portion of the slab. Exterior slab areas may be cantilevered portions of the
slab which are subject to uplift from frost heave and swelling of the expansive soils, sometimes
beyond those used for design, due to over watering of adjacent to landscaped areas. Such
movement in the exterior slabs can result in change in slab grade to the point where negative
grade results and water ponds adjacent to the interior areas of the slab. Repairs of such
conditions are difficult and costly, particularly if the floor slabs are post-tensioned slabs.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 14
Exterior slabs in unheated areas are subject to frost heave beneath the slab. Therefore, in
design of the exterior slabs, potential movement from frost heave should be considered in the
design.
It should be noted that the presences of 1 to 2-foot steps within long spans of post-tensioned
slabs could create a situation where the slabs at different elevations perform independently of
one another unless the steps are properly reinforced and designed to tie the slabs together to
act as one rigid structure. We strongly recommend that joints be designed within the full height
of the structure of the building over each step in order to help the structure be capable of
withstanding movements on the order of 1 inch.
The estimated movement should also be considered as the potential amount of tilting of the
structure, which could be caused by non-uniform, significant wetting of the subsurface materials
below the post-tensioned slab, resulting in potential movement. Failure to maintain soil water
content below the slab and to maintain proper drainage around the structure will nullify the
movement estimates provided above.
4.3.4 Spread Footings - Design Recommendations
Description Value
Bearing material Stabilized subgrade or new, properly placed
engineered fill.
Maximum allowable bearing pressure 1 2,000 psf
Lateral earth pressure coefficients 2
On-site soils:
Active, Ka = 0.41
Passive, Kp = 2.46
At-rest, Ko = 0.58
Imported fill:
Active, Ka = 0.27
Passive, Kp = 3.69
At-Rest, Ko = 0.43
Sliding coefficient 2
On-site soils:
µ = 0.37
Import material:
µ = 0.56
Moist soil unit weight
On-site soils:
ܵ = 120 pcf
Import material:
ܵ = 135 pcf
Minimum embedment depth below finished
grade 3
30 inches
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 15
Description Value
Estimated total movement About 1 inch
1. The recommended maximum allowable bearing pressure assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils,
if encountered, will be stabilized as described in this report. The design bearing pressure
applies to a dead load plus ½ design live load condition. The design bearing pressure may be
increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions.
2. The lateral earth pressure and sliding coefficients are ultimate values and do not include a factor
of safety. The foundation designer should include the appropriate factors of safety.
3. For frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade
soils. The minimum embedment depth is for perimeter footings beneath unheated areas and is
relative to lowest adjacent finished grade, typically exterior grade.
Footings should be proportioned on the basis of equal total dead load pressure to reduce
differential movement between adjacent footings. As discussed, total movement resulting from
the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on the order of about 1 inch. Additional
foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils;
therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction and
throughout the life of the structure. Failure to maintain the proper drainage as recommended in
the 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage section of this report will nullify the movement estimates
provided above.
4.3.5 Spread Footings - Construction Considerations
To reduce the potential of “pumping” and softening of the foundation soils at the foundation
bearing level and the requirement for corrective work, we suggest the foundation excavation for
the proposed buildings be completed remotely with a track-hoe operating outside of the
excavation limits.
Footings and foundation walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for
distress caused by differential foundation movement.
Unstable subgrade conditions are anticipated as excavations approach the groundwater
surface. Unstable surfaces will need to be stabilized prior to backfilling excavations and/or
constructing the building foundations. The use of angular rock, recycled concrete and/or gravel
pushed or “crowded” into the yielding subgrade is considered suitable means of stabilizing the
subgrade. The use of bi-axial or tri-axial geogrid materials in conjunction with gravel or
aggregate base course could also be considered and could be more cost effective. Unstable
subgrade conditions should be observed by Terracon to assess the subgrade and provide
suitable alternatives for stabilization.
Foundation excavations should be observed by Terracon. If the soil conditions encountered
differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be
required.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 16
4.4 Seismic Considerations
Code Used Site Classification
2012 International Building Code (IBC) 1 D 2
1. In general accordance with the 2012 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2.
2. The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) requires a site soil profile determination extending a
depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope requested does not include the
required 100 foot soil profile determination. The borings completed for this project extended to a
maximum depth of about 23 feet and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil and
bedrock conditions exist below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional
exploration to deeper depths could be performed to confirm the conditions below the current depth of
exploration. Alternatively, a geophysical exploration could be utilized in order to attempt to justify a
more favorable seismic site class; however, we believe this is unlikely.
4.5 Floor Systems
If a post-tensioned slab foundation system is selected by the Owner, the foundation system will
also function as the floor system for the proposed buildings. If a spread footing foundation
system is selected by the Owner, we recommend a slab-on-grade for the floor system for the
proposed buildings. If a slab-on-grade floor system is planned as part of the proposed
construction, we can provide recommendations for floor slabs.
4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures
Reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed
for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will
be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of
construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall
restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of
free-standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at-rest" condition
assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a
factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 17
EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS
Earth Pressure
Conditions
Coefficient for
Backfill Type
Equivalent Fluid
Density (pcf)
Surcharge
Pressure,
p1 (psf)
Earth
Pressure,
p2 (psf)
Active (Ka)
Granular - 0.27
Lean Clay - 0.41
37
49
(0.27)S
(0.41)S
(37)H
(49)H
At-Rest (Ko)
Granular - 0.43
Lean Clay - 0.58
58
70
(0.43)S
(0.58)S
(58)H
(70)H
Passive (Kp)
Granular - 3.69
Lean Clay - 2.46
375
255
---
---
---
---
Applicable conditions to the above include:
For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about
0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height;
For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance;
Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure;
In-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 125 pcf;
Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and 98 percent of maximum dry unit weight as
determined by ASTM D698;
Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included;
No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall;
No dynamic loading;
No safety factor included in soil parameters; and
Ignore passive pressure in frost zone.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 18
To control hydrostatic pressure behind the walls we recommend that a drain be installed at the
foundation walls with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If this is not possible,
then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for lean clay backfill
using an equivalent fluid weighing 90 and 100 pcf for active and at-rest conditions, respectively.
For granular backfill, an equivalent fluid weighing 85 and 90 pcf should be used for active and
at-rest, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or
floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance
closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those
provided.
4.8 Pavements
4.8.1 Pavements – Subgrade Preparation
On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase.
Fills are typically placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However as construction
proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic,
desiccation, or rainfall/snow melt. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for
pavement construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully
evaluated at the time of pavement construction for signs of disturbance or instability. We
recommend the pavement subgrade be thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem-axle dump
truck prior to final grading and paving. All pavement areas should be moisture conditioned and
properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.
4.8.2 Pavements – Design Recommendations
Design of pavements for the project have been based on the procedures outlined in the 1993
Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures prepared by the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (LCUASS). The recommended pavement thicknesses provided in this report are
appropriate for the privately-maintained roadways. As required by LCUASS, the Final
Pavement Design Report for city-maintained roadways should occur after grading for roadways
and utility installation is complete. Terracon can assist with final design of city-maintained
roadways following roadway grading and utility installation, upon your request.
Samples of the upper clay soils obtained from our borings selected for swell-consolidation testing
exhibited slight compression or low swell. Therefore, swell-mitigation of the subgrade materials
prior to pavement operations is not required. However, depending upon final grading plans we
anticipate stabilization of pavement subgrade will be necessary for this project.
Water-soluble sulfate concentrations measured on samples of soils obtained from our borings at
this site ranged from 550 to 21,540 parts per million (ppm). These concentrations are above
typical acceptable limits to allow for chemical stabilization of subgrade soils. In order to stabilize
the subgrade below the proposed pavements planned as part of this project, we recommend
utilizing a layer of geogrid below the aggregate base course. Prior to placing a layer of geogrid,
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 19
the roadway should be rough graded and the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of at least
10 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted in-place. Once the subgrade is properly
prepared, we recommend placing a single layer of geogrid (Hanes Geo Components TerraGrid®
RX 1200 or engineered approved equivalent) over the entire subgrade from back of curb to back
of curb.
Traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available at the time that this report
was prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by
automobile traffic, occasional delivery and trash removal trucks, and occasional bus traffic. We
understand Duff Drive will be classified as an industrial/commercial collector and International
Boulevard will be classified as a two-lane arterial road according to the Larimer County Urban
Area Street Standards (LCUASS). LCUASS indicates a design Equivalent Single Axel Load
(ESAL) of 730,000 should be used for an industrial/commercial collector and a two-lane arterial
road. Minimum flexible pavement sections are presented in Table 10-1 of LCUASS. If heavier
traffic loading is expected, Terracon should be provided with the information and allowed to review
these pavement sections.
Asphaltic cement concrete (ACC) pavements can be used for pavements such as drive lanes
and parking areas. We recommend portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements for entrance
aprons, trash container pads, loading areas, and in any other areas subjected to heavy wheel
loads and/or turning traffic. Recommended minimum pavement sections are provided in the
table below.
Recommended Pavement Thickness (inches) 1
Traffic Area Alternative
Asphalt Concrete Portland
Cement
Concrete
Aggregate
Base
Course
Total
Surface Thickness
Course
Base
Course
Light-Duty
(car parking)
PCC -- -- 5 12 17
ACC 4 -- -- 12 16
Medium-Duty
(drives and loading
areas)
PCC -- -- 6 12 18
ACC 2 3 -- 12 17
Trash Container
Pad PCC -- -- 7
12 19
1 Each pavement section below includes a single layer of geogrid placed below the composite section as
described above.
Aggregate base course should consist of a blend of sand and gravel which meets strict
specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for base course. Aggregate
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 20
base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95
percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698.
Asphalt concrete should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler and additives (if required)
and approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix
designs stating the Superpave properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and
recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in asphalt concrete should
meet particular gradations. Material meeting CDOT Grading S or SX specifications or equivalent
is recommended for asphalt concrete. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to
verify their adequacy. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and compacted
within a range of 92 to 96 percent of the theoretical maximum density (ASTM D2041).
Where rigid pavements are used, the concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design
with the following minimum properties:
Properties Value
Compressive strength at 28 days 4,000 psi (minimum)
Cement type Type I or Type II
Entrained air content (%) 5 to 8
Concrete aggregate ASTM C33 and CDOT Section 703
Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for
expansion/contraction and isolation per ACI 325. The location and extent of joints should be
based upon the final pavement geometry. Joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign
material and doweled where necessary for load transfer. We understand others will utilize the
information presented in this report to design pavement reinforcement for the proposed concrete
pavements. Proper joint spacing will also be required for PCC pavements to prevent excessive
slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign
material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer.
For areas subject to concentrated and repetitive loading conditions such as dumpster pads,
truck delivery docks and ingress/egress aprons, we recommend using a portland cement
concrete pavement with a thickness of at least 7 inches underlain by at least 6 inches of
granular base. Prior to placement of the granular base the areas should be thoroughly proof
rolled. For dumpster pads, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the
container and tipping axle of the refuse truck.
Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive
maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design
and layout of pavements:
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 21
Site grades should slope a minimum of 2 percent away from the pavements;
The subgrade and the pavement surface have a minimum 2 percent slope to promote proper
surface drainage;
Consider appropriate edge drainage and pavement under drain systems;
Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting;
Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately;
Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to
subgrade soils; and
Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.
4.8.3 Pavements – Construction Considerations
The placement of a partial pavement thickness for use during construction is not suggested
without a detailed pavement analysis incorporating construction traffic.
Openings in pavement, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration into
surrounding pavements. Water collects in the islands and migrates into the surrounding
subgrade soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for
islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near-surface soils. The
civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or to
collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drains
connected to the storm water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeable
barriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below the
pavement structure.
4.8.4 Pavements – Maintenance
Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an ongoing pavement
management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventive
maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching)
and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first
priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest
return on investment for pavements.
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS
Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments
can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations
in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and
testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth-related
construction phases of the project.
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in
this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable 22
site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such
variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we
should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations
can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any
environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, and bacteria) assessment of the site or
identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is
concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be
undertaken.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site
safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the
event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as described in this report are
planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered
valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this
report in writing.
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
SITE LOCATION MAP
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins
Northeast of N. Lemay Ave. and E. Lincoln Ave.
Fort Collins, CO
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: FORT COLLINS, CO (1/1/1984).
1901 Sharp Point Dr Suite C
Ft. Collins, CO
20145005
Project Manager:
Drawn by:
Checked by:
Approved by:
BCR
EDB
EDB
1:24,000
3/24/2014
Project No.
Scale:
File Name:
Date: A-1
EDB Exhibit
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT
INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
A-2
Project Manager: EXPLORATION PLAN EXHIBIT
Drawn By:
Check By:
Approved By:
EDB
BCR
EDB
EDB
Project No.
Scale:
File Name:
Date:
20145005
AS SHOWN
3/24/2014
LEGEND
Approximate boring location for current
study
6
1
Approximate boring location for Previous
study (Project No. 20045173)
TBM
Approximate temporary benchmark
location (center of manhole cover)
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins
Northeast of N. Lemay Ave. and E. Lincoln Ave.
Fort Collins, CO
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED
BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS
1901 Sharp Point Dr Suite C
Ft. Collins, CO
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable Exhibit A-3
Field Exploration Description
The locations of the supplemental borings were based upon the proposed development shown
on the provided site plan and were selected in areas to supplement previously completed
subsurface exploration. The supplemental borings were located in the field by measuring from
property lines and existing site features. The ground surface elevation was surveyed at each
supplemental boring location referencing the temporary benchmark shown on Exhibit A-2 using
an engineer’s level.
The supplemental borings were drilled with a CME-75 truck-mounted rotary drill rig with hollow-
stem augers. During the drilling operations, lithologic logs of the borings were recorded by the
field engineer. Disturbed samples were obtained at selected intervals utilizing a 2-inch outside
diameter split-spoon sampler and a 3-inch outside diameter ring-barrel sampler. Penetration
resistance values were recorded in a manner similar to the standard penetration test (SPT).
This test consists of driving the sampler into the ground with a 140-pound hammer free-falling
through a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the ring-barrel
sampler 12 inches (18 inches for standard split-spoon samplers, final 12 inches are recorded) or
the interval indicated, is recorded as a standard penetration resistance value (N-value). The
blow count values are indicated on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. Ring-barrel
sample blow counts are not considered N-values.
A CME automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the samplers in the supplemental borings
performed on this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer
compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published
correlations between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency cathead
and rope method. This higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance blow count
value by increasing the penetration per hammer blow over what would be obtained using the
cathead and rope method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in
the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface information for this report.
The standard penetration test provides a reasonable indication of the in-place density of sandy
type materials, but only provides an indication of the relative stiffness of cohesive materials
since the blow count in these soils may be affected by the moisture content of the soil. In
addition, considerable care should be exercised in interpreting the N-values in gravelly soils,
particularly where the size of the gravel particle exceeds the inside diameter of the sampler.
Groundwater measurements were obtained in the borings at the time of site exploration, and
several days after drilling in some of the borings. After completion of drilling, the borings were
backfilled with auger cuttings. Some settlement of the backfill may occur and should be
repaired as soon as possible.
0.8
3.0
20.0
20.5
23.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel and
cobbles, dark brown, very stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL (SP-SM), trace cobbles, brown, very
dense
WEATHERED SILTSTONE, rust and light
brown
SILTSTONE, gray to dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 23 Feet
28-50/5"
20-37-50/5"
N=87/11"
18-34-41
N=75
45-50/2"
N=95/8"
28-34-41
N=75
8
5
2
9
10
17
135
27-22-5
100
97.5
80.5
80
77.5
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.59152° Longitude: -105.056213°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
0.8
4.0
20.0
22.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
SILT WITH SAND (ML), trace gravel, brown,
stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, coarse to medium
grained, brown, medium dense to very dense
SILTSTONE, gray to dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 22 Feet
11-7
8-5-6
N=11
30-23-22
N=45
45-50/2"
N=95/8"
50/6"
N=50/6"
-1.9 11 71
2
9
10
11
114 27-22-5
100
96.5
80.5
78.5
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.590868° Longitude: -105.056762°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/13/2014
BORING LOG NO. 7
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/13/2014
0.8
4.0
20.0
20.3
22.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, dark
brown, stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, brown, dense to very
dense
WEATHERED SILTSTONE, rust and light
brown
SILTSTONE, dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 22 Feet
7-6
22-21-17
N=38
16-44-38
N=82
13-22-28
N=50
32-36-50/3"
N=86/9"
14
3
13
13
15
98
97.5
94.5
78.5
78
76.5
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.590257° Longitude: -105.055976°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/13/2014
BORING LOG NO. 8
0.8
7.0
15.0
19.5
19.8
22.5
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY, trace gravel, dark brown, medium
stiff to stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, brown, medium
dense
SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, brown,
medium dense
WEATHERED SILTSTONE, rust and light
brown
SILTSTONE, dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 22.5 Feet
6-7
4-3-3
N=6
20-13-9
N=22
5-10-13
N=23
12-21-50
N=71
27
15
21
18
95
89
81
76.5
76
73.5
2.154
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.589551° Longitude: -105.055967°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
2/19/14
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
0.8
2.0
5.0
20.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), trace gravel,
dark brown
SILTY SAND (SM), brown, medium dense
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, brown, dense to very
dense
Auger refusal at 20 Feet
4-4
2-6-9
N=15
25-47-47
N=94
16-21-27
N=48
41-50/3"
N=91/9"
0.01 74
7
24
20
9
11
21
98 37-15-22
NP
95
94
91
76
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.589013° Longitude: -105.056462°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
2/19/14
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 10
0.8
7.0
19.3
20.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, dark brown, stiff to
very stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, brown, dense to very
dense
SILTSTONE, dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 20 Feet
6-5
3-6-17
N=23
10-10-22
N=32
36-50/3"
N=86/9"
27-50/6"
N=77
17
17
15
11
16
103
98.5
92
80
79
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.590774° Longitude: -105.054798°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/13/2014
BORING LOG NO. 11
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/13/2014
0.8
4.0
14.5
15.0
17.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), dark brown,
stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL (SP-SM), brown, medium dense to
dense
WEATHERED SILTSTONE, rust and light
brown
SILTSTONE, dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 17 Feet
6-4
7-15-14
N=29
14-14-24
N=38
42-20-50
N=70
0.1 72
7
29
8
12
19
93 49-20-29
NP
93
90
79.5
79
77
0.467
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.590068° Longitude: -105.053983°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
0.8
4.0
16.0
21.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, dark
brown, soft
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, coarse to medium
grained, brown, medium dense to dense
SILTSTONE, gray to dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 21 Feet
1-2
10-11-16
N=27
10-12-10
N=22
9-20-28
N=48
50/6"
N=50/6"
24
9
17
13
18
95
93
90
78
73
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.589281° Longitude: -105.054169°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
2/19/14
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 13
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
0.8
3.0
14.5
19.5
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, dark brown,
medium stiff
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL (SP-SM), trace cobbles, coarse to
medium grained, brown, medium dense to very
dense
SILTSTONE, dark gray, hard to very hard
Auger refusal at 19.5 Feet
3-2
12-14-15
N=29
21-28-37
N=65
11-38-50/4"
N=88/10"
50/6"
N=50/6"
6 5
9
15
18
NP
91.5
89.5
78
73
0
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.589179° Longitude: -105.052875°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 14
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
0.8
2.0
19.0
22.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, dark
brown
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, brown, medium
dense to very dense
SILTSTONE, dark gray, hard to very hard
Auger refusal at 22 Feet
12-13
17-22-15
N=37
17-28-27
N=55
30-50/4"
N=80/10"
13-50/5"
N=63/11"
1
7
9
11
16
92
93
92
75
72
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.588176° Longitude: -105.053513°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 15
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
0.8
2.0
17.0
18.0
VEGETATIVE LAYER - 9 inches
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, dark
brown
POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND
GRAVEL, trace cobbles, fine to coarse
grained, brown, dense to very dense
SILTSTONE, dark gray, very hard
Auger refusal at 18 Feet
47-50/5"
23-22-14
N=36
20-19-35
N=54
25-50/6"
N=75
1
5
9
12
125
94.5
93
78
77
0.055
See Exhibit A-2
Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
LOCATION
DEPTH
Latitude: 40.588655° Longitude: -105.054737°
GRAPHIC LOG
NE of South Lemay and E Lincoln
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
PROJECT: Capstone Cottages of Fort
Collins
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4.25-inch hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C
Fort Collins, Colorado
Notes:
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 16
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-19
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Capstone Cottages of Fort Collins Ŷ Fort Collins, Colorado
March 28, 2014 Ŷ Terracon Project No. 20145005
Responsive Ŷ Resourceful Ŷ Reliable Exhibit B-1
Laboratory Testing Description
The soil and bedrock samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the
laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer. At that time, the field
descriptions were reviewed and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to
determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials.
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil and bedrock samples. The results of these
tests are presented on the boring logs and in this appendix. The test results were used for the
geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork
recommendations. The laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with applicable
locally accepted standards. Soil samples were classified in general accordance with the Unified
Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Rock samples were visually classified in
general accordance with the description of rock properties presented in Appendix C.
Water content Plasticity index
Grain-size distribution
Consolidation/swell
Water-soluble sulfate content
Dry density
pH
APPENDIX C
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Exhibit: C-1
Unconfined
Compressive
Strength
Qu, (tsf)
0.25 to 0.50
1.00 to 2.00
> 4.00
less than 0.25
0.50 to 1.00
2.00 to 4.00
Non-plastic
Low
Medium
High
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Hand Penetrometer
Torvane
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
Photo-Ionization Detector
Organic Vapor Analyzer
SAMPLING
WATER LEVEL
FIELD TESTS
(HP)
(T)
(DCP)
(PID)
(OVA)
GENERAL NOTES
Over 12 in. (300 mm)
12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)
3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)
#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm
Passing #200 sieve (0.075mm)
Particle Size
< 5
5 - 12
> 12
Percent of
Dry Weight
Descriptive Term(s)
of other constituents
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
0
1 - 10
11 - 30
> 30
Plasticity Index
Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry
weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have
less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally 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 in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES
Percent of
Dry Weight
Major Component
of Sample
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Exhibit C-2
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A
Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name B
Coarse Grained Soils:
More than 50% retained
on No. 200 sieve
Gravels:
More than 50% of
coarse fraction retained
on No. 4 sieve
Clean Gravels:
Less than 5% fines C
Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F
Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F
Gravels with Fines:
More than 12% fines C
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,G,H
Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,G,H
Sands:
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes No. 4
sieve
Clean Sands:
Less than 5% fines D
Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 E SW Well-graded sand I
Cu 6 and/or 1 Cc 3 E SP Poorly graded sand I
Sands with Fines:
More than 12% fines D
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G,H,I
Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G,H,I
Fine-Grained Soils:
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit less than 50
Inorganic:
PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line J CL Lean clay K,L,M
PI 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K,L,M
Organic:
Liquid limit - oven dried
0.75 OL
Organic clay K,L,M,N
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit 50 or more
Inorganic:
PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K,L,M
PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M
Organic:
Liquid limit - oven dried
0.75 OH
Organic clay K,L,M,P
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,Q
Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles
or boulders, or both” to group name.
DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES
Exhibit C-3
WEATHERING
Fresh Rock fresh, crystals bright, few joints may show slight staining. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Very slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, some joints may show thin clay coatings, crystals in broken face show
bright. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, and discoloration extends into rock up to 1 in. Joints may contain clay. In
granitoid rocks some occasional feldspar crystals are dull and discolored. Crystalline rocks ring under hammer.
Moderate Significant portions of rock show discoloration and weathering effects. In granitoid rocks, most feldspars are dull
and discolored; some show clayey. Rock has dull sound under hammer and shows significant loss of strength
as compared with fresh rock.
Moderately severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars dull and discolored and majority
show kaolinization. Rock shows severe loss of strength and can be excavated with geologist’s pick.
Severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock “fabric” clear and evident, but reduced in strength to strong
soil. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars kaolinized to some extent. Some fragments of strong rock usually left.
Very severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock “fabric” discernible, but mass effectively reduced to “soil” with
only fragments of strong rock remaining.
Complete Rock reduced to ”soil”. Rock “fabric” not discernible or discernible only in small, scattered locations. Quartz may
be present as dikes or stringers.
HARDNESS (for engineering description of rock – not to be confused with Moh’s scale for minerals)
Very hard Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick. Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard blows of
geologist’s pick.
Hard Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen.
Moderately hard Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to ¼ in. deep can be excavated by hard blow of point of
a geologist’s pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow.
Medium Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in. deep by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small
chips to pieces about 1-in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist’s pick.
Soft Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point. Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches in
size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Very soft Can be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with point of pick. Pieces 1-in. or more in thickness can be
broken with finger pressure. Can be scratched readily by fingernail.
Joint, Bedding, and Foliation Spacing in Rock
a
Spacing Joints Bedding/Foliation
Less than 2 in. Very close Very thin
2 in. – 1 ft. Close Thin
1 ft. – 3 ft. Moderately close Medium
3 ft. – 10 ft. Wide Thick
More than 10 ft. Very wide Very thick
a. Spacing refers to the distance normal to the planes, of the described feature, which are parallel to each other or nearly so.
Rock Quality Designator (RQD) a Joint Openness Descriptors
RQD, as a percentage Diagnostic description Openness Descriptor
Exceeding 90 Excellent No Visible Separation Tight
90 – 75 Good Less than 1/32 in. Slightly Open
75 – 50 Fair 1/32 to 1/8 in. Moderately Open
50 – 25 Poor 1/8 to 3/8 in. Open
Less than 25 Very poor 3/8 in. to 0.1 ft. Moderately Wide
a. RQD (given as a percentage) = length of core in pieces Greater than 0.1 ft. Wide
4 in. and longer/length of run.
References: American Society of Civil Engineers. Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice - No. 56. Subsurface Investigation for
Design and Construction of Foundations of Buildings. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1976. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering Geology Field Manual.
Exhibit C-4
LABORATORY TEST
SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE
Test Significance Purpose
California Bearing
Ratio
Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil,
subbase, and base course material, including recycled
materials for use in road and airfield pavements.
Pavement Thickness
Design
Consolidation
Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of
both differential and total settlement of a structure. Foundation Design
Direct Shear
Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength
of soil or rock.
Bearing Capacity,
Foundation Design,
and Slope Stability
Dry Density
Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic,
fine-grained soils.
Index Property Soil
Behavior
Expansion
Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained
soil and to provide a basis for swell potential classification.
Foundation and Slab
Design
Gradation
Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of
particle sizes in soil. Soil Classification
Liquid & Plastic Limit,
Plasticity Index
Used as an integral part of engineering classification
systems to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils,
and to specify the fine-grained fraction of construction
materials.
Soil Classification
Permeability
Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a
liquid or gas.
Groundwater 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
electrical currents. Corrosion Potential
R-Value
Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil,
subbase, and base course material, including recycled
materials for use in road and airfield pavements.
Pavement Thickness
Design
Soluble Sulfate
Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble
sulfates within a soil mass. Corrosion Potential
Exhibit C-5
REPORT TERMINOLOGY
(Based on ASTM D653)
Allowable Soil
Bearing Capacity
The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the 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
Course
A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath 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 or Shaft)
A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an enlarged
base. Sometimes referred to as a cast-in-place pier or drilled shaft.
Coefficient of
Friction
A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding shear stress
at which sliding starts between the two surfaces.
Colluvium
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-
Grade
A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and typically used
as a floor system.
Differential
Movement Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of structure.
Earth Pressure The pressure 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 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
Man-Made Fill) Materials deposited throughout the action of man prior to exploration of the site.
Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration.
Exhibit C-6
REPORT TERMINOLOGY
(Based on ASTM D653)
Expansive Potential The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture.
Finished Grade The final grade created as a part of the project.
Footing A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil.
Foundation The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock.
Frost Depth The depth at which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season.
Grade Beam
A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span
between other foundation elements such as drilled piers.
Groundwater Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils or within fractures in bedrock.
Heave Upward movement.
Lithologic
The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by
observation.
Native Grade The naturally occurring ground surface.
Native Soil Naturally occurring on-site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil.
Optimum Moisture
Content
The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a given
compactive effort.
Perched Water
Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the
presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuous stratum.
Scarify To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure.
Settlement Downward movement.
Skin Friction (Side
Shear)
The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of the structure such as a
drilled pier.
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.
Unconfined
Compression
To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils
that possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the
unconfined state.
Bearing Capacity
Analysis for
Foundations
Water Content
Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil
mass.
Index Property Soil
Behavior
C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =
10 60
2
30
D x D
(D )
F If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.
G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.
I If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.
J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,”
whichever is predominant.
L If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to
group name.
M If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
“gravelly” to group name.
N PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
O PI 4 or plots below “A” line.
P PI plots on or above “A” line.
Q PI plots below “A” line.
Trace
With
Modifier
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Trace
With
Modifier
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Boulders
Cobbles
Gravel
Sand
Silt or Clay
Descriptive Term(s)
of other constituents
< 15
15 - 29
> 30
Term
PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Water levels indicated on the soil boring
logs are the levels measured in the
borehole at the times indicated.
Groundwater level variations will occur
over time. In low permeability soils,
accurate determination of groundwater
levels is not possible with short term
water level observations.
Water Level After
a Specified Period of Time
Water Level After a
Specified Period of Time
Water Initially
Encountered
Modified
Dames &
Moore Ring
Sampler
Standard
Penetration
Test
Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracy
of such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey was
conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic
maps of the area.
STRENGTH TERMS
BEDROCK
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
0 - 3
4 - 9
10 - 29
30 - 50
7 - 18
19 - 58
Very Soft
Soft
Medium-Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
Standard
Penetration or
N-Value
Blows/Ft.
2 - 4
4 - 8
8 - 15
< 3
5 - 9
19 - 42
> 42
30 - 49
50 - 89
20 - 29
Medium Hard
Very Dense
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED
SOILS
Descriptive
Term
(Density)
Very Loose
> 50
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
0 - 6
59 - 98
> 99
Descriptive
Term
(Consistency)
Hard
0 - 1
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
3 - 4
10 - 18
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
< 30
90 - 119
Standard
Penetration or
N-Value
Blows/Ft.
Descriptive
Term
(Consistency)
Weathered
Firm
Very Hard
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)
Density determined by
Standard Penetration Resistance
(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)
Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field
visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance
Standard
Penetration or
N-Value
Blows/Ft.
_ 15 - 30
> 30
> 119
< 20
30 - 49
50 - 79
>79
Hard
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 95.1 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Exhibit: A-18
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 93.9 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-17
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 92.5 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-16
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 94 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
BORING LOG NO. 12
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-15
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 93.9 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Exhibit: A-14
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 99.2 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-13
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 95.8 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Project No.: 20145005
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 2/12/2014
BORING LOG NO. 9
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/12/2014
Exhibit: A-12
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 95.8 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/13/2014
Exhibit: A-11
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 98.5 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Exhibit: A-10
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 100.7 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)
Boring Started: 2/13/2014
BORING LOG NO. 6
CLIENT: Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC
Birmingham, Alabama
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 2/13/2014
Exhibit: A-9
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
procedures.
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
abbreviations.
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20145005.GPJ TERRACON2012.GDT 3/28/14
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
SWELL (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 100.7 (Ft.)
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
RECOVERY (In.)
SULFATES (%)