HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIMBERLINE STORAGE - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA160003 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTGEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED MIDPOINT SELF-STORAGE FACILITY
MIDPOINT DRIVE AND SPECHT POINT ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1162049
Prepared for:
Mr. Brandon Grebe (bgrebe85@gmail.com)
Prepared by:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
4396 Greenfield Drive
Windsor, Colorado 80550
4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE
WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550
(970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282
www.earth-engineering.com
May 31, 2016
Mr. Brandon Grebe (bgrebe85@gmail.com)
Re: Geotechnical Exploration Report
Proposed Midpoint Self-Storage Facility
Midpoint Drive and Specht Point Road
Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1162049
Mr. Grebe:
Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering
Consultants, LLC for the referenced project. For this exploration, twelve (12) soil borings were
extended within proposed building footprint areas to depths of approximately 10 to 20 feet below
existing site grades. One (1) additional boring was completed to an approximate depth of 1-foot
in the existing pavement area to evaluate the in-place pavement section, and two (2) soil
percolation tests were completed within existing landscaped areas adjacent to the existing
pavement area to determine infiltration characteristics/rates for possible permeable pavement
design. This subsurface exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal
dated March 11, 2016.
In summary, the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings generally consisted of
silty/clayey sand, sandy lean clay and/or lean clay subsoils underlain by cleaner and coarser
granular materials, which extended to the depths explored. The near surface soils exhibited
generally low swell potential characteristics. Groundwater was observed in the test borings at
the time of drilling at approximate depths of 6 to 11 feet below existing site grades. The borings
were backfield upon completion of the drilling operations; therefore subsequent groundwater
level measurements were not obtained.
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings and the anticipated loading
conditions, we believe the proposed single story slab-on-grade, self-storage buildings could be
supported on conventional type spread footings bearing on approved in-situ medium dense,
essentially granular to granular subgrade soils or on a zone of reconditioned engineered fill. As
an alternative, the lightly loaded buildings could be supported on shallow frost protected footings
such as monolithic slabs with “thickened edges”. It is our opinion floor slabs, exterior flatwork,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED MIDPOINT SELF-STORAGE FACILITY
MIDPOINT DRIVE AND SPECHT POINT ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1162049
May 31, 2016
INTRODUCTION
The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed self-storage facility planned for
construction northwest of the intersection of Midpoint Drive and Specht Point Road in Fort Collins,
Colorado has been completed. As a part of this exploration, a total of twelve (12) soil borings were
drilled on May 16, 2016 at the approximate locations shown on the boring location diagram included
with this report. The soil borings were extended to approximate depths of 10 to 20 feet below
existing site grades. One (1) core within an existing pavement area was extended to approximately
1-foot. Two (2) field percolation test were completed near the pavement core location to develop
infiltration information for design of permeable pavement area(s). A preliminary site plan showing
the approximate plan locations of the proposed storage buildings in relation to our boring locations
is provided with this report. Individual boring logs are provided along with site photographs of the
property, taken at the time of our exploration.
We understand the proposed self-storage facility will include two (2) climate controlled self-storage
buildings and eleven (11) non-conditioned storage buildings along with associated pavements for
building access. The storage buildings are expected to be single-story, slab-on-grade structures.
Foundation loads for the structures are expected to be light with continuous wall loads less than 3
kips per lineal foot and individual column loads less than 50 kips. Floor loads are expected to be
light. The paved drives are expected to carry light traffic volume consisting predominately of
automobiles and light trucks. Small grade changes, cuts and fills less than 3 feet, are expected to
develop site grades for the facility.
The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings,
analyze and evaluate the field and laboratory test data and provide geotechnical recommendations
concerning design and construction of foundations and support of floor slabs, exterior flatwork, and
pavements for the proposed development.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 2
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The boring locations were established in the field by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC)
personnel by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features. The approximate locations
of the borings are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The locations of the site
borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the
field measurements.
The test borings were completed using a truck mounted, CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic
head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch
nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were
obtained using split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with
ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively.
In the split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are advanced
into the ground by means of a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of
blows required to advance the split barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to
estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the
consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling
procedure, relatively intact samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in
the field were sealed and returned to our laboratory for further examination, classification and
testing.
Near core location B-13 and further south, (B-14 as shown on the enclosed site diagram) additional
“shallow” borings were augured to allow for subsequent percolation testing. The percolation tests in
the pavement area were completed at a depth of approximately 3 feet below site grades. Results of
the field percolation tests are included with this report and presented on the enclosed boring logs.
Laboratory moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. Atterberg
Limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the quantity
and plasticity of fines in the subgrade. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected
samples to evaluate the potential for the subgrade materials to change volume with variation in
moisture and load. Water soluble sulfate was determined to estimate the potential for sulfate attack
on site-cast Portland cement concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached
boring logs and summary sheets.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 3
As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in general
accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System, based on the
soil’s texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System
is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with
this report.
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed self-storage facility will be located north of Midpoint Drive and west of Specht Point
Road in Fort Collins. The development parcel is presently an undeveloped lot with
topsoil/vegetation surfacing. Ground surface in this area is relatively flat with less than 5 feet of
grade change across the site. No evidence of prior building construction was observed in the field
by EEC personnel.
The near surface materials in the test borings generally consisted of sandy lean clay, lean clay with
sand, and/or silty to clayey sand. The near surface clayey soils were generally soft to stiff/loose to
medium dense. The essentially granular to cohesive subsoils showed low swells in laboratory
testing at in-situ moisture and density. The sandy lean clay to silty/clayey sands were underlain by
sands and gravels with apparent cobbles at approximate depths of 5 to 11 feet below existing grades.
The coarse granular soils extended to the depths explored, approximately 10 to 20 feet. The sand
and gravel strata was generally medium dense to dense.
The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of
changes in soil types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct.
GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Observations were made while drilling and after completion of the borings to detect the presence and
depth to hydrostatic groundwater. At the time of drilling, free groundwater was observed in the
borings, generally at depths of approximately 6 to 11 feet. Water level observations at the time of
drilling are indicated in the upper right hand corner of the individual boring logs. The borings were
backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; therefore subsequent groundwater
measurements were not performed.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 4
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic
conditions and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. Longer term monitoring of
water levels in cased wells, which are sealed from the influence of surface water, would be required
to more accurately evaluate fluctuations in groundwater levels at the site. We have typically noted
deepest groundwater levels in late winter and shallowest groundwater levels in mid to late summer.
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Swell – Consolidation Test Results
The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of subgrade soils to
help determine foundation, floor slab, and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively intact
samples obtained directly from the California barrel sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and
inundated with water under a predetermined load. All inundated samples are monitored for swell and
consolidation. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse during inundation,
expressed as a percent of the sample’s initial thickness. After the initial inundation period, additional
incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and consolidation.
For this assessment, we conducted swell-consolidation tests on seven (7) relatively intact samples
recovered during the field exploration. The swell index values for the samples analyzed revealed
generally low swell characteristics. Specific swell test results are shown on the swell test data sheets
provided with this report.
Site Preparation
Prior to placement of any fill and/or site improvements, we recommend any existing
vegetation/topsoil be removed from the planned improvement areas. After stripping, the exposed
subgrades should be proofrolled to help locate any soft or loose zones in the in-place subgrades.
After removal of all topsoil/vegetation within the planned development areas, as well as removal of
unacceptable or unsuitable subsoils observed after stripping or identified during proofrolling, and
prior to placement of any fill, floor slabs or pavements, the exposed soils should be scarified to a
minimum depth of 9 inches, adjusted in moisture content to within (+/-) 2% of standard Proctor
optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's standard Proctor
maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 5
Fill materials used to establish grades in the building areas and pavement/flatwork areas, after the
initial zone has been prepared as recommended above, should consist of approved on-site sandy lean
clay and/or clayey/silty sand subsoils or approved structural fill material which is free from organic
matter and debris. If on-site clayey soils are used as engineered fill, they should be placed in
maximum 9-inch loose lifts, and be moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended for the
scarified soils.
If structural fill materials are used they should be graded similarly to a CDOT Class 5, 6 or 7
aggregate base with sufficient fines to prevent ponding of water within the fill. Structural fill
material should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted to a workable moisture
content and compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined by
ASTM Specification D698.
Care should be taken to establish relatively uniform fills across the building areas and avoid placing
pockets of clean granular material within the fills. Interbedded clean granular zones would promote
ponding of trapped groundwater and tend to lead to premature failure of overlying improvements to
include the potential for frost heaving in the subgrades.
Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade
materials. The sandy lean clay and clayey/silty sands may become unstable at higher moisture
contents. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavements to avoid
wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the
site improvements can result in unacceptable performance.
Relatively soft/loose in-situ soils were observed in the area of the west conditioned storage building.
Those soils show high in-situ moisture and low density. We recommend the soft, wet subgrade soils be
removed from the building area and replaced with acceptable fill soils as outlined above. We expect
the soft area could be identified by proofrolling the subgrades prior to subgrade preparation. Any
additional soft/loose zones should be corrected as a part of the subgrade preparation process.
Conventional Footing Foundations
It is our opinion the proposed storage unit structures could be supported on conventional footing
foundations bearing on approved on-site native subgrade soils or a zone of engineered fill. For design
of footing foundations supported on properly placed and compacted engineered fill as outlined above
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 6
or in the section “Site Preparation” or on approved native subgrade soils, we recommend using a
maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. The net bearing pressure refers to
the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure.
Total load would include full dead and live loads.
Exterior foundations and foundation in unheated areas should be located at least 30 inches below
adjacent exterior grades to provide frost protection. Formed continuous footings should have a
minimum width of 16 inches and isolated column foundations should have a minimum width of 30
inches.
Care should be taken to avoid disturbing the bearing soils. Silty or clayey soils near the water table
may be easily disturbed by construction activity. Disturbed materials should be removed and replaced
before placement of the footing foundations.
We estimate the long term settlement of footings designed and constructed as outlined would be less
than 1-inch.
Shallow Frost-Protected Foundations
As an alternative, the proposed storage buildings could be supported on shallow frost protected
footings (i.e., monolithic slabs with frost protected thickened edges) bearing in the near surface
sandy lean clay / clayey sand soils. We understand the storage units will be constructed with metal
interior partition walls allowing for potential movement greater than that allowed by drywall. For
design of foundations bearing on approved in-situ materials or properly placed and compacted fill as
outlined under the Site Preparation section of this report, we recommend using a net allowable total
load soil bearing pressure not to exceed 1,500 psf. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at
foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total loads
should include full dead and live loads.
No unusual problems are anticipated in completing excavations required for construction of the
footing foundations. Care should be taken at the time of construction to avoid disturbing the in-
place bearing materials. Care should also be taken to avoid excessive wetting or drying of those
materials. Materials which are loosened or disturbed by the construction activities or materials
which become dry and desiccated or wet and softened should be removed and replaced or reworked
in-place to develop foundation bearing support. We estimate the long-term settlement of footing
foundations designed and constructed as outlined above would be less than 1-inch.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 7
Floor Slabs, Flatwork and Pavement Subgrades
Subgrades for floor slabs, flatwork and site pavements should be prepared as outlined in the “Site
Preparation” section of this report. We estimate the long-term movement of floor slabs with
properly prepared subgrade subsoils as outlined above would be about one-inch or less. Excessive
moisture accumulation from any source can result in additional movements.
For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per
cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on a zone of reconditioned engineered fill.
Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:
Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of
cracking.
Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in a similar manner
as previously described for imported structural fill material.
Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual,
Section 302.1R are recommended.
Pavements
We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for low volume automobile and light
truck traffic. We are using an assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 10.
Proofrolling and recompacting the subgrade is recommended immediately prior to placement of the
aggregate road base section. Soft or weak areas delineated by the proofrolling operations should be
undercut or stabilized in-place to achieve the appropriate subgrade support. Based on the subsurface
conditions encountered at the site, and the laboratory test results, it is recommended the on-site
private drives and parking areas be designed using an R-value of 10.
Pumping conditions could develop within higher moisture content in the sandy lean clay and/or
silty/clayey sand soils. Subgrade stabilization could be needed to develop a stable subgrade for paving.
A stabilized subgrade could also reduce the overlying pavement structure. Stabilization, if needed,
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 8
would include incorporating approximately 12 percent, by weight, Class C fly ash into the upper 12-
inches of subgrade.
Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) underlain by crushed aggregate base course with or without a fly ash treated
subgrade, and non-reinforced concrete pavement could be considered for the proposed on-site paved
sections. Eliminating the risk of movement within the proposed pavement section may not be feasible
due to the characteristics of the subsurface materials; but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of
movement if significantly more expensive subgrade stabilization measures are used during
construction. We would be pleased to discuss other construction alternatives with you upon request.
Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a
particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The
support characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for shrink/swell
movements of an expansive clay subgrade or consolidation of a wetted subgrade. Thus, the
pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still experience cracking and
deformation due to shrink/swell related movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to
minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce shrink/swell movements.
The existing roadway pavement section (please refer to boring location B-13) included
approximately 4½ inches of hot bituminous pavement (HBP) over approximately 2½ inches of
aggregate base. Classifying that roadway/pavement area as a local collector suggests a design
EDLA of 10 with a resultant design structural number of 2.60 required for the pavement. A
minimum asphalt overlay of 2 inches would be required to meet the calculated design structural
number.
Recommended on-site pavement sections are provided below in TABLE I. The hot bituminous
pavement (HBP) could be grading SX (75) or S (75) with PG 58-28 oil. The aggregate base should
be Class 5 or Class 6 base. Portland cement concrete for pavements should be a pavement design
mix with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi and should be air entrained.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 9
TABLE I - RECOMMENDED MINIMUM PAVEMENT SECTIONS
18-kip EDLA
18-kip ESAL
Reliability
Resilient Modulus (R-Value = 10)
PSI Loss
10
73,000
75%
3562
2.5
Design Structure Number 2.60
Composite:
Hot Mix Asphalt
Aggregate Base Course
Structure Number
4" @ 0.44 = 1.76
8" @ 0.11 = 0.88
(2.64)
Composite with Fly Ash Treated Subgrade
Hot Bituminous Pavement
Aggregate Base
Fly Ash Treated Subgrade
Structure Number
3½" @ 0.44 = 1.54
6" @ 0.11 = 0.66
10" @ 0.05 = 0.50
(2.70)
PCC (Non-reinforced) – placed on a stable subgrade 5-1/2"
The recommended pavement sections are minimums and periodic maintenance should be expected.
Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for
expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final
pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut in general accordance with ACI recommendations.
All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load
transfer.
The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory
performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved
areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils. Long-term pavement
performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining subgrade moisture levels
and providing for preventive maintenance. The following recommendations should be considered
the minimum:
The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface
drainage.
Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g. garden centers,
wash racks)
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 10
Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately,
Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration
to subgrade soils;
Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and,
Placing curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils.
Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement
management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement
deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both
localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface
sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement
maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to
implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the
type and extent of preventive maintenance.
Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction
proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or
rainfall. 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, such as but not limited to drying, or excessive rutting. If
disturbance has occurred, pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and
properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.
Please note that if during or after placement of the stabilization or initial lift of pavement, the area is
observed to be yielding under vehicle traffic or construction equipment, it is recommended that EEC be
contacted for additional alternative methods of stabilization, or a change in the pavement section.
Soil Percolation/Infiltration
Results of the percolation testing on the near surface silty/clayey sands and lean clay with sand subsoils
in the pavement areas indicates poor to moderate percolation/infiltration rates. The measured
percolation rates are indicated below in Table II. Reworking of the subgrade soils, especially the near
surface silty/clayey sand, could change the percolation rates of the site materials.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 11
TABLE II – Field Soil Percolation / Infiltration Test Results
Test Boring No.
Approximate Depth of
Soil Boring, ft.
Soil Description
Soil Percolation Rate after 90
Minutes, Min/Inch
P-13 (North) 3 Lean Clay with Sand (CL) 180
P-14 (South) 3 Clayey Sand 20
Average 100
The on-site more cohesive lean clay with sand and/or sandy lean clay subsoils have poor soil
percolation characteristics; while the fine granular clayey sand subsoils have moderate soil
percolation characteristics. Consideration could be given to ground modifying the more cohesive
subsoils to accommodate a more suitable and consistent infiltration rate for the site.
Pervious/Permeable Pavement Considerations
Permeable pavers, are a paving alternative to more traditional types of hard surfacing materials,
where water is allowed to filter through the surface and into the underlying subsoils. Storm water
brings with it pollutants, chemicals, fertilizers, sediment and oils, impacting the quality of water
flowing into the various catchment areas. Permeable pavers permit rainwater to be absorbed by the
ground underneath, while still managing to provide a stable enough surface for vehicles. Permeable
pavers preserve the quality of the water, and also increase the quantity of “good quality” water.
Permeable Pavers can be made from many different types of materials. At this point, the type or
manufacturer of the permeable pavers has not yet been determined. The purpose of this study was to
evaluate the subsurface soils to assist the design team in determining if permeable pavers are feasible
for this project. As previous mentioned, soil percolation/infiltration characteristics of the upper 3
feet of the existing subsoils was evaluated in the general vicinity of Boring Nos. B-13 and B-14.
According to various pervious/permeable paving documents, “as a general rule, soils with a
percolation rate of ½ to 1 inch/hour (or 60 to 120 minutes per inch), would be considered suitable for
subgrade under pervious/permeable pavements.” Cohesive soils and/or other impermeable layers,
which may exist which can hinder the performance of pervious/permeable pavements and may need
to be modified to allow proper retention and percolation of precipitation. Design concepts to
consider for accommodating the presence of cohesive soils and/or unsuitable subsoils would be to
over-excavate and replace the relatively unsuitable soils with a more porous material, thicken the
underlying granular subbase, install edge drains and/or a network of pipes/under pavement drainage
system beneath the granular base, or install dry wells or drainage channels. EEC can provide
supplemental design criteria and recommendations upon request after design details and concepts
have been determined.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 12
Soil Corrosivity
The water soluble sulfate (SO4) testing of the near surface on-site overburden material taken during
our subsurface exploration is provided in Table III below.
TABLE III - Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results
Sample Location Description
Soluble Sulfate Content
(mg/kg)
Soluble Sulfate
Content (%)
B-1, S-2 @ 4' Sandy Lean Clay 430 0.04
B-6, S-2 @ 4' Sandy Lean Clay 90 0.01
P-8, S-1 @ 2' Sandy Lean Clay 10,560 1.06
Based on the results as presented in Table III above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site
overburden soils have a low to high risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete. Class 0
and/or Type I/II cement could be used for concrete on and below site grade within the low sulfate
overburden soils. Sulfate resistant cement should be used in areas of high sulfate. Foundation
concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section
318, and Chapter 4. These results are being compared to the following Table IV.
Table IV - Requirements to Protect Against Damage to Concrete by Sulfate Attack from External Sources of Sulfate
Severity of Sulfate
exposure
Water-soluble sulfate (SO4)
in dry soil, percent
Water-cement ratio,
maximum
Cementatious material
Requirements
Class 0 0.00 to 0.10% 0.45 Class 0
Class 1 0.11 to 0.20% 0.45 Class 1
Class 2 0.21 to 2.00% 0.45 Class 2
Class 3 2.01 of greater 0.45 Class 3
Other Considerations
Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavement areas with a
minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10-feet away from the improvements in landscape
areas. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping, (if required), adjacent to the buildings to
avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the foundations or stemwalls. Placement of
plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the
subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Irrigation systems should not be
placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the buildings and parking areas. Spray heads should be
designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structures or site pavements. Roof
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1162049
May 31, 2016
Page 13
drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structures and away from the
pavement areas.
Excavations into the on-site essentially granular and granular soils would not be expected to
maintain relatively steep, temporary slopes during construction. 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.
Excavations extending below the water table in the granular soils would be expected to require
shoring or sloping to establish stable excavations. Additionally, the granular soils contain apparent
cobble deposits which could create difficult excavating conditions.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from
the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this
report. This report does not reflect any variations, which may occur between borings or across the
site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If
variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report.
It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications
so comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical
recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical
engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork phases to help determine that the
design requirements are fulfilled. Site-specific explorations should be completed to develop site-
specific recommendations for each of the site buildings.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Brandon Grebe for specific application to
the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in
the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions
and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are
reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical
engineer.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
DRILLING AND EXPLORATION
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon ‐ 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS: Piston Sample
ST: Thin‐Walled Tube ‐ 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS: Wash Sample
R: Ring Barrel Sampler ‐ 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D. unless otherwise noted
PA: Power Auger FT: Fish Tail Bit
HA: Hand Auger RB: Rock Bit
DB: Diamond Bit = 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample
AS: Auger Sample PM: Pressure Meter
HS: Hollow Stem Auger WB: Wash Bore
Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2‐inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling
WCI: Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling
DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal
AB : After Boring ACR: After Casting Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated
levels may reflect the location of ground water. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of ground water levels is not
possible with only short term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification
system and the ASTM Designations D‐2488. Coarse Grained
Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a
#200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or
sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight
retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as : clays, if they
are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non‐plastic.
Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor
constituents may be added according to the relative
proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation,
coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in‐
place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their
consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff
(CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM).
CONSISTENCY OF FINE‐GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Compressive
Strength, Qu, psf Consistency
< 500 Very Soft
500 ‐ 1,000 Soft
1,001 ‐ 2,000 Medium
2,001 ‐ 4,000 Stiff
4,001 ‐ 8,000 Very Stiff
8,001 ‐ 16,000 Very Hard
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE‐GRAINED SOILS:
N‐Blows/ft Relative Density
0‐3 Very Loose
4‐9 Loose
10‐29 Medium Dense
30‐49 Dense
50‐80 Very Dense
80 + Extremely Dense
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK
DEGREE OF WEATHERING:
Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on
joints. May be color change.
Moderate Some decomposition and color change
throughout.
High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely
broken.
Group
Symbol
Group Name
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
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel
G,H
Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel
F,G,H
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
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand
G,H,I
Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand
G,H,I
inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above "A" Line CL Lean clay
K,L,M
PI<4 or plots below "A" Line ML Silt
K,L,M
organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clay
K,L,M,N
Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt
K,L,M,O
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 Organic clay
K,L,M,P
Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt
K,L,M,O
Highly organic soils PT Peat
(D30)2
D10 x D60
GW-GM well graded gravel with silt NPI≥4 and plots on or above "A" line.
GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay OPI≤4 or plots below "A" line.
GP-GM poorly-graded gravel with silt PPI plots on or above "A" line.
GP-GC poorly-graded gravel with clay QPI plots below "A" line.
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
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
IIf soil contains >15% gravel, add "with gravel" to
group name
JIf Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a CL-
ML, Silty clay
Unified Soil Classification System
1
2
B-5
B-6
B-10
B-12
B-11
B-9
B-7
B-8
B-4
B-3
B-1
B-2
B-13A
B-14
B-13P
Boring Location Diagram
Midpoint Self-Storage - Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project Number: 1162049
May 2016
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Approximate Boring
Locations
1
Legend
Site Photos
(Photos taken in approximate
location, in direction of arrow)
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1162049
MAY 2016
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
soft to medium stiff to stiff _ _
CS 3 3 1500 29.1 90.5 37 22 88.6 <500 psf None
_ _
4
_ _
with silty sand seams SS 5 4 2000 23.8
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 10 1500 22.4
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
medium stiff _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 6 2000 8.3 97.7 <500 psf None
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 45 1500 8.2
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) _ _
medium dense to dense 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 25 -- 13.0 16.3
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
SS 20 50 -- 8.7
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown, medium dense 2
_ _
with traces of gravel CS 3 6 4500 19.4 102.0
_ _
4
SILTY CLAYEY SAND (SM/SC) _ _
brown SS 5 7 -- 5.4
loose to medium dense _ _
6
_ _
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 7
dense _ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 50 -- 4.0
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) _ _
brown 2
very stiff _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 12 5500 23.2 101.3 46 28 79.5 1100 psf 0.5%
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 11 -- 25.2
SILTY SAND (SM) _ _
brown, medium dense 11
_ _
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 12
very dense _ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 50/8" -- 7.5
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
CLAYEY SAND (SC) / SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
stiff to medium stiff _ _
CS 3 5 3500 15.5 109.0 25 10 49.9 <500 psf None
_ _
4
with silty sand seams _ _
SS 5 4 1500 23.4
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 14 -- 22.5
_ _
11
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) _ _
dense 12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 50/11" -- 11.4
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
GRAVEL - 8" _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
very stiff _ _
with calcareous deposits CS 3 16 8500 12.6 98.7 <500 psf None
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 27 -- 6.1
_ _
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 6
dense to very dense _ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 35 -- 6.0
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 50/9" -- 7.8
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
SS 20 50/11" -- 6.5
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
very stiff _ _
CS 3 15 9000+ 9.7 100.3 34 21 58.1 <500 psf None
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 9 9000+ 10.8
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 36 -- 13.8
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
_ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 1
brown _ _
stiff to medium stiff 2
with calcareous deposits _ _
CS 3 9 5500 16.2
_ _
4
_ _
with silty sand seams SS 5 5 4500 18.8
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
CS 10 8 -- 18.7
_ _
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 11
dense _ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 42 -- 8.0
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _
brown 2
stiff to medium stiff _ _
with traces of gravel CS 3 9 7000 9.6 96.7 1000 (+) 1.3%
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 5 2000 22.4
_ _
SILTY SAND (SM) 6
brown _ _
loose to medium dense 7
_ _
8
_ _
9
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) _ _
loose to medium dense SS 10 8 -- 16.3
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SILTY CLAYEY SAND / SANDY LEAN CLAY (SM/SC/CL) _ _
brown 2
medium dense / very stiff _ _
CS 3 17 9000+ 6.1 96.5
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 10 9000+ 2.2
_ _
SAND (SP) 6
medium dense _ _
7
_ _
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 8
dense _ _
9
_ _
SS 10 45 -- 11.6
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _
brown 2
very stiff to medium stiff / loose to medium dense _ _
CS 3 9 5500 12.4
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 5 1500 19.5
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 14 -- 19.9
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _
1
SILTY CLAYEY SAND / SANDY LEAN CLAY (SM/SC/CL) _ _
brown 2
medium dense / very stiff _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 12 8000 9.2 105.1 23 10 45.2
SAND (SP) _ _
6
SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) _ _
dense to very dense 7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
SS 10 48 -- 11.0
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
SS 15 50 -- 10.0
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: CME55
FOREMAN: DG
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200
TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%)
Existing HMA / ASPHALT SECTION = 4.5" _ _
Existing ABC / Base Course Section = 2.5" 1
_ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY - Subgrade below 2
brown moist, medium stiff _ _
3
NOTE: B-13 positioned within existing pavement section _ _
was to determine existing pavement thickness. 4
_ _
5
NOTE: B-13 and B-14 SOIIL PERCOLORATION, See _ _
site diagram, were conducted within landscaped area to 6
in the design of a possible pervious pavement section _ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
Minutes /Inch
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 29.1% Dry Density: 91.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 28.8%
Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None
Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 37 Plasticity Index: 22 % Passing #200: 88.6%
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 8.3% Dry Density: 104.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 26.6%
Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None
Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: Plasticity Index: % Passing #200:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 23.2% Dry Density: 105.9 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.8%
Swell Pressure: 1100 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.5%
Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 46 Plasticity Index: 28 % Passing #200: 79.5%
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 15.5% Dry Density: 111.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.7%
Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None
Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 25 Plasticity Index: 10 % Passing #200: 49.9%
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: brown Clayey Sand (SC) / Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 12.6% Dry Density: 104.8 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.7%
Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None
Sample Location: Boring 6, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - -
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
Beginning Moisture: 9.7% Dry Density: 99.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.9%
Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None
Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 34 Plasticity Index: 21 % Passing #200: 58.1%
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 9.6% Dry Density: 105.7 pcf Ending Moisture: 20.3%
Swell Pressure: 1000 psf % Swell @ 500: 1.3%
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
May 2016
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Percent Movement
Load (TSF)
Consolidatio Swell
Water Added
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Midpoint Self Storage
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1162049
Sample ID: B-2, S-3, 14'
Sample Desc.: Sand & Gravel (SP/GP)
Date: May 2016
56
50
43
27
16.3
86
78
71
70
64
100
100
100
93
90
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Sample Desc.:
Cobble Silt or Clay
Gravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2016
25.00 0.89 0.42
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
B-2, S-3, 14'
Sand & Gravel (SP/GP)
D100 D
60 D50
0.18 ‐‐‐
Fine
‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
D30 D
10 Cu
CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Midpoint Self Storage
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1162049
Sample ID: B-6, S-3, 9'
Sample Desc.: Sand & Gravel (SP/GP)
Date: May 2016
12
8
6
3
1.8
55
42
32
30
22
100
100
77
67
59
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Sample Desc.:
Cobble Silt or Clay
Gravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2016
37.50 13.19 7.74
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
B-6, S-3, 9'
Sand & Gravel (SP/GP)
D100 D
60 D50
2.02 0.50
Fine
26.43 0.62
D30 D
10 Cu
CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Midpoint Self Storage
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1162049
Sample ID: B-12, S-2, 9'
Sample Desc.: Silty Sand with Gravel (SP/GP)
Date: May 2016
22
18
13
8
5.1
63
50
40
38
32
100
100
91
80
69
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Sample Desc.:
Cobble Silt or Clay
Gravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2016
37.50 8.26 4.69
Midpoint Self Storage
Fort Collins, Colorado
1162049
B-12, S-2, 9'
Silty Sand with Gravel (SP/GP)
D100 D
60 D50
1.08 0.21
Fine
39.92 0.69
D30 D
10 Cu
CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Finer by Weight (%)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
Finer by Weight (%)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
Finer by Weight (%)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
Soil Percolation Rate for
upper 3' Boring No. 13 =
180 Minutes/Inch
Soil Percolation Rate for
upper 3' Boring No. 14 =
20 Minutes/Inch
MIDPOINT SELF STORAGE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-13 & B-14 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS Soil Percolation Rate
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-12 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 6'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-11 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 5.5'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-10 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 6'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-9 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 6'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-8 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 8'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-7 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 7'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-6 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 6'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-5 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 9'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-4 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 8'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-3 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-2 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 11'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1162049 LOG OF BORING B-1 MAY 2016
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/16/2016 WHILE DRILLING 11'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/16/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A
A-LIMITS SWELL
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests
Sands 50% or more
coarse fraction
passes No. 4 sieve
Fine-Grained Soils
50% or more passes
the No. 200 sieve
<0.75 OL
Gravels with Fines
more than 12%
fines
Clean Sands Less
than 5% fines
Sands with Fines
more than 12%
fines
Clean Gravels Less
than 5% fines
Gravels more than
50% of coarse
fraction retained on
No. 4 sieve
Coarse - Grained Soils
more than 50%
retained on No. 200
sieve
CGravels with 5 to 12% fines required dual symbols:
Kif soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand"
or "with gravel", whichever is predominant.
<0.75 OH
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor
ABased on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm)
sieve
ECu=D60/D10 Cc=
HIf fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to
group name
LIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand,
add "sandy" to group name.
MIf soil contains ≥30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel,
add "gravelly" to group name.
DSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or
both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to
group name. FIf soil contains ≥15% sand, add "with sand" to
GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-
CM, or SC-SM.
Silts and Clays
Liquid Limit less
than 50
Silts and Clays
Liquid Limit 50 or
more
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
ML OR OL
MH OR OH
For Classification of fine-grained soils and
fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained
soils.
Equation of "A"-line
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5
then PI-0.73 (LL-20)
Equation of "U"-line
Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7,
then PI=0.9 (LL-8)
CL-ML
HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION:
Limestone and Dolomite:
Hard Difficult to scratch with knife.
Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife.
Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail.
Soft Can be scratched with fingernail.
Shale, Siltstone and Claystone:
Hard Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot be
scratched with fingernail.
Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail.
Hard
Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with
fingers.
Sandstone and Conglomerate:
Well Capable of scratching a knife blade.
Cemented
Cemented Can be scratched with knife.
Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers.
Cemented