Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVILLAGE COOPERATIVE FORT COLLINS - PDP - PDP160036 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTGEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS HORSETOOTH AND STANFORD ROADS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1162088 Prepared for: Real Estate Equities Architecture, LLC 1400 Corporate Center Curve, Suite 100 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Attn: Mr. William A. Buesing (bbuesing@reearchitecture.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 October 21, 2016 Real Estate Equities Architecture, LLC 1400 Corporate Center Curve, Suite 100 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Attn: Mr. William A. Buesing (bbuesing@reearchitecture.com) Director of Architecture Re: Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Report Proposed Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Horsetooth and Stanford Roads Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project No. 1162088 Mr. Buesing: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) for the referenced project. For this exploration, EEC personnel completed thirty-three (33) soil borings to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below present site grade at pre-selected locations within the footprint of the building. Seven (7) additional borings were extended to approximate depths of 10 to 15 feet below present site grades in proposed pavement, sanitary sewer easement, and detention pond areas. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated September 2, 2016. In summary, the subsurface soils encountered beneath the surficial vegetation/topsoil layer generally consisted of varying strata or sandy lean clay and clayey sand, which extended to the bedrock formation below. Layered sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered in the borings at depths of approximately 7½ to 17 feet below existing site grades and extended to the maximum depths explored, approximately 15 to 25 feet. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test borings completed during our initial field exploration. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; therefore, subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings, as well as the anticipated maximum loading conditions provided to us by the project design team, we believe the proposed 3-story structure with one level of below grade parking, could be supported on footing foundations bearing on a minimum zone of 3 feet of imported granular structural fill material placed and compacted as described in the text of this report. An alternative foundation system GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS HORSETOOTH AND STANFORD ROADS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1162088 October 21, 2016 INTRODUCTION The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed multi-level, 3-story above grade with one level of below grade parking, Village Cooperative of Fort Collins project planned for construction at the northeast corner of Horsetooth and Stanford Roads in Fort Collins, Colorado, has been completed. For this exploration, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) advanced thirty-three (33) soil borings to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below present site grades at pre-selected locations within the new building footprint. Five (5) other borings extending to depths of approximately 10 feet were completed within proposed pavement areas with one (1) fifteen feet deep boring (i.e. Boring B-29) completed in each of a sanitary sewer easement and in the proposed retention/detention area (i.e. Boring B-40). This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated September 2, 2016. We understand the proposed Village Cooperative building will include 3-stories above grade and one level of below grade parking. The building footprint will occupy much of the site. The basement floor elevation will be at 5006.66 with a first floor elevation of 5016.66; site grades generally range from approximately 5004 to 5014. Foundation loads for the new structure are estimated to be moderate to high with maximum continuous wall loads of approximately 7 kips per linear foot (KLF) and maximum column loads on the order of 250 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light to moderate. The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings, analyze and evaluate the test data and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations and support of floor slabs for the new building and development of site pavements. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The boring locations were established in the field by representatives from EEC by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features. Those approximate boring locations are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. Photographs of the site taken at the time of drilling are included with this report. The test borings were completed using a truck mounted, CME-75 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 with 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. 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 samples. 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. Soluble sulfate tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate potential adverse reactions to site-cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by an engineer 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 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 3 system is included with this report. Classification of the bedrock was based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. Coring and/or petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The proposed Village Cooperative will be located at the northeast corner of Horsetooth Road and Stanford Road on a vacant in-fill parcel. The development lot is presently surfaced with sparse vegetation, predominately grasses and weeds. Site drainage is to the southwest with approximately 10 feet of fill across the site. Evidence of prior building construction was not observed on the site by EEC field personnel. Based on results of the field borings and laboratory testing, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. The subsurface soils encountered beneath surficial topsoil/vegetation generally consisted of varying strata of sandy lean clay and clayey fine sand. The cohesive soils were medium stiff to stiff and the granular soils were loose to medium dense. The overburden soils generally exhibited low to moderate expansive characteristics with one (1) near surface sample showing moderate to high expansive potential. Layered claystone/siltstone bedrock was encountered beneath the overburden soils at depths of approximately 7½ to 17 feet below existing site grades and extended to the maximum depths explored, approximately 15 to 25 feet. The bedrock formation was weathered nearer surface; however, became less weathered and more competent with depth. The bedrock exhibited moderate to high swell potential. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and bedrock 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, no free water was observed within the test borings. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 4 Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions, irrigation demands on and/or adjacent to the site 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. Zones of perched and/or trapped water can be encountered at times throughout the year in more permeable zones in the subgrade soils and perched water is commonly observed in subgrade soils immediately above lower permeability bedrock. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: General Considerations The overburden soils on this site include approximately 7 to 17 feet of varying sandy lean clay/clayey sand strata. Loose zones were observed in the clayey sand materials and the lean clay showed zones of moderately expansive materials. In one shallow pavement sample, a swell of 14% was measured with a dead load of 150 psf. The looser subgrade soils would be of concern for support of footing foundations; however, those soils would generally be suitable for support of floor slabs and pavements. The zones of moderately expansive subgrade soils would be a concern for support of lightly loaded floor slabs and pavement; however, the moderately expansive soils are generally sporadic at the parking garage floor level. Recommendations are provided in this report to reduce the effects of loose/soft subgrades and moderately expansive subgrades. Potential for movement will not be eliminated but any post- construction movement will be reduced as outlined in this report. Further reduction in movement potential can be accomplished with more extensive approaches. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 5 Site Preparation Although final site grades were not available at the time of our field exploration; information was provided to us at the time of this report. Based on our understanding of the proposed development, we anticipate up to 5 feet (+/-) of fill material may be necessary outside of the building area to achieve final design grades in the improvement areas. After stripping, completing all cuts, and removing all unacceptable materials/soils, and prior to placement of any fill or site improvements, we recommend the exposed soils 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. Fill soils required for developing the site subgrades, after the initial zone has been prepared or stabilized where necessary, should consist of approved, low-volume-change materials, which are free from organic matter and debris. It is our opinion the on-site cohesive sandy clay/clayey sand soils could be used as general site fill material, provided adequate moisture treatment and compaction procedures are followed. We recommend all fill materials and foundation wall backfill materials, be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick and adjusted in moisture content, +/- 2% for cohesive soils and +/- 3% for cohesionless soils of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 % of the materials maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard Proctor procedure. If the site’s sandy cohesive soils are used as fill material, care will be needed to maintain the recommended moisture content prior to and during construction of overlying improvements. Settlement of the backfill soils should be anticipated with total settlement estimated on the order of 1% of the backfill height. Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site structure can result in unacceptable performance. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 6 Foundation Systems – General Considerations The site appears suitable for the proposed construction based on the results of our field exploration and our understanding of the proposed development plans. The following foundation systems were evaluated for use on the site for the proposed building.  Footing foundations on a zone of over excavation/structural backfill.  Straight shaft drilled piers bearing into the underlying bedrock formation. Other alternative foundation systems could be considered and we would be pleased to provide additional alternatives upon request. Footing Foundations on Structural Fill We recommend at least 3-feet of the building subgrade below foundation bearing level be over- excavated and replaced with an approved imported granular structural fill material. The granular structural fill material should be similar to CDOT Class 5, 6 or 7 base course material with sufficient fines to prevent ponding of water in the fill. The over excavation should extend 8 inches beyond the edges of the structure for each 12 inches of over excavation depth below foundation bearing. The approved fill materials should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9-inches thick and adjusted in moisture content, +/- 3% of optimum moisture content for granular materials, and compacted to at least 98% of the materials maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D- 698, the standard Proctor procedure. Conventional footing foundations could be supported on the imported structural backfill material placed and compacted as outlined above. For design of footing foundations bearing on the structural fill compacted to at least 98% of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM Specification D698), we recommend using a net allowable total load soil bearing pressure not to exceed 2,500 psf. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load should include full dead and live loads. 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. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 7 Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located at least 30-inches below adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. We recommend formed continuous footings have a minimum width of 16-inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 30-inches. No unusual problems are anticipated in completing the excavations required for construction of the footing foundations. Care should be taken during construction to thoroughly evaluate the bearing soils prior to and during the fill placement to verify that the footing foundations are supported on suitable strength materials. Drilled Piers/Caissons Foundations Based on the subgrade conditions observed in the test borings and on the anticipated foundation loads, we believe the foundation loads could be supported on a grade beam and straight shaft drilled pier/caisson foundation system extending into the underlying bedrock formation. For axial compression loads, the drilled piers could be designed using a maximum end bearing pressure of 25,000 pounds per square foot (psf), along with a skin-friction of 2,500 psf for the portion of the pier extended into the underlying firm and/or harder bedrock formation. The piers should be designed with a minimum dead load of 5,000 psf. Straight shaft piers should be drilled a minimum of 15 feet into competent or harder bedrock with minimum pier length of at least 25 feet. Lower values may be appropriate for pier “groupings” depending on the pier diameters and spacing. Pile groups should be evaluated individually. Required pier penetration should be balanced against potential uplift forces due to expansion of the subsoils and bedrock on the site. For design purposes, the uplift force on each pier can be determined on the basis of the following equation: Up = 55 x D Where: Up = the uplift force in kips, and D = the pier diameter in feet Uplift forces on piers should be resisted by a combination of dead-load and pier penetration below a depth of about 15-feet and into the bearing strata. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 8 To satisfy forces in the horizontal direction, piers may be designed for lateral loads using a modulus of 50 tons per cubic foot (tcf) for the portion of the pier in native overburden soils, and 400 tcf in bedrock for a pier diameter of 12 inches. The coefficient of subgrade reaction for varying pier diameters is as follows: Pier Diameter (inches) Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction (tons/ft3) Site Soils Bedrock 18 33 267 24 25 200 30 20 160 36 17 133 When the lateral capacity of drilled piers is evaluated by the L-Pile (COM 624) computer program, we recommend that internally generated load-deformation (P-Y) curves be used. The following parameters may be used for the design of laterally loaded piers, using the L-Pile (COM 624) computer program: Parameters On-Site Overburden Soils Bedrock Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) 120(1) 125(1) Cohesion (psf) 200 5000 Angle of Internal Friction () (degrees) 25 20 Strain Corresponding to ½ Max. Principal Stress Difference 50 0.02 0.015 *Notes: 1) Reduce by 62.4 pcf below the water table To reduce potential uplift forces on piers, use of long grade beam spans to increase individual pier loading, and small diameter piers are recommended. For this project, use of 18 to 24-inch diameter piers could be considered. A minimum 4-inch void space should be provided beneath grade beams between piers. The void material should be of suitable strength to support the weight of fresh concrete used in grade beam construction and to avoid collapse when foundation backfill is placed. Drilling caissons to design depth should be possible with conventional heavy-duty single flight power augers equipped with rock teeth on the majority of the site. However, areas of well-cemented sandstone bedrock lenses may be encountered throughout the site at various depths where specialized drilling equipment and/or rock excavating equipment may be required. Excavation penetrating the well-cemented sandstone bedrock may require the use of specialized heavy-duty equipment, together Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 9 with rock augers and/or core barrels. Consideration should be given to obtaining a unit price for difficult caisson excavation in the contract documents for the project. We do not expect temporary casing will be required to maintain open boreholes although concrete should be placed as soon as practical after drilling each shaft to reduce the potential for sloughing of sidewalls. Groundwater encountered should be removed from each pier hole prior to concrete placement. Pier concrete should be placed immediately after completion of drilling and cleaning. A maximum 6-inch depth of groundwater is acceptable in each pier prior to concrete placement. If pier concrete cannot be placed in dry conditions, a tremie should be used for concrete placement. Due to potential sloughing and raveling, foundation concrete quantities may exceed calculated geometric volumes. Pier concrete with slump in the range of 6 to 8 inches is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. A representative of the geotechnical engineer should inspect the bearing surface and pier configuration. If the soil conditions encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations may be required. We estimate the long-term settlement of drilled pier foundations designed and constructed as outlined above would be less than 1-inch. Seismic Site Classification The site soil conditions consist of approximately 7 to 17 feet of overburden soils overlying moderately hard to hard bedrock. For those site conditions, the International Building Code indicates a Seismic Site Classification of C. Lateral Earth Pressures The new building will be constructed over one level of below grade parking. The below grade walls will be subjected to unbalanced lateral earth pressures. Any site retaining walls or similar structures would also be subject to lateral soil forces. Passive lateral earth pressures may help resist the driving forces for retaining wall or other similar site structures. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 10 Active lateral earth pressures could be used for design of structures where some movement of the structure is anticipated, such as retaining walls. The total deflection of structures for design with active earth pressure is estimated to be on the order of one half of one percent of the height of the down slope side of the structure. We recommend at-rest pressures be used for design of structures where rotation of the walls is restrained, including the below grade parking structure walls. Passive pressures and friction between the footing and bearing soils could be used for design of resistance to movement of retaining walls. Coefficient values for backfill with anticipated types of soils for calculation of active, at rest and passive earth pressures are provided in the table below. Equivalent fluid pressure is equal to the coefficient times the appropriate soil unit weight. Those coefficient values are based on horizontal backfill with backfill soils consisting of essentially granular materials with a friction angle of a 30 degrees or low volume change cohesive soils. For the at-rest and active earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure would result in reduced driving forces with slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30-inches of soil on the passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, it should not be used as a part of the passive resistance value. Frictional resistance is equal to the tangent of the friction angle times the normal force. Soil Type Low Plasticity Essential Cohesive Wet Unit Weight 120 Saturated Unit Weight 135 Friction Angle () – (assumed) 25° Active Pressure Coefficient 0.40 At-rest Pressure Coefficient 0.58 Passive Pressure Coefficient 2.46 Surcharge loads or point loads placed in the backfill can also create additional loads on below grade walls. Those situations should be designed on an individual basis. The outlined values do not include factors of safety nor allowances for hydrostatic loads and are based on assumed friction angles, which should be verified after potential material sources have been identified. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 11 Care should be taken to develop appropriate drainage systems behind below grade walls to eliminate potential for hydrostatic loads developing on the walls. Those systems should be designed as subsequently outlined in this report. Where necessary, appropriate hydrostatic load values should be used for design. Parking Garage Slab-On-Grade If structural fill is placed to support the new building on footing foundations, it is our opinion the building parking level floor slab could be directly supported by the placed structural fill soils. A modulus of subgrade reaction R-value of 200 pci could be used for design of the garage slab supported on granular structural fill. A granular leveling course could be used, if needed. Under slab vapor barrier should be used at the architect’s discretion. If the building is supported on drilled pier foundations, we recommend at least 2 feet of subgrade beneath the garage floors be over excavated and replaced as moisture conditioned/compacted fill materials. A k-value of 100 pci should be used for the pavement design with the reconditioned site soil subgrades. The subgrades should be prepared as subsequently outlined for the site pavement subgrades. Additional parking garage slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:  Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement.  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.  The concrete 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. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 12 Perimeter Drainage Systems We understand the below grade parking will extend to a depth of up to approximately 6 feet below present surface grades. The subsurface soils encountered in the test borings completed for this project included approximately layered sandy lean clay/clayey sand underlain by weathered bedrock. With potential infiltration of surface water adjacent to the building, we anticipate water could accumulate next to the below grade walls and result in hydrostatic loading on those walls and, potentially, infiltration of the surface water into the below grade areas. We suggest a perimeter drain system be installed to remove surface infiltration water from the area adjacent to the below grade walls and reduce the likelihood of development of hydrostatic loads on the walls and/or water infiltration into the below grade area. In general, a perimeter drain system would consist of perforated metal or plastic pipe placed at the approximate bottom of basement wall elevation and sloped to drain to a sump area where accumulated water can be removed without reverse flow into the system. The drain line should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of free draining granular fill with either the drain line or granular fill wrapped in an appropriate filter fabric to prevent the intrusions of fines in the system. Backfill above the drain line should consist of approved, low volume change material. Installation of the drain systems will reduce, not eliminate, the potential for infiltration of surface and/or groundwater into the below grade areas and development of hydrostatic loads on structure components. Pumps and other components require periodic inspections and maintenance to maintain the system in functioning condition. Water Soluble Sulfates (SO4) The water soluble sulfate (SO4) testing of the on-site overburden and bedrock materials taken during our subsurface exploration are provided in the table below. TABLE IV - Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Sample Location Description Soluble Sulfate Content (mg/kg) Soluble Sulfate Content (%) B-4, S-2 @ 9' Clayey Sand 210 0.02% B-19, S-3 @ 14' Claystone / Siltstone 470 0.05% B-25, S-1 @ 4' Sandy Lean Clay 150 0.02% Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 13 Based on the results as presented in the table above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site overburden soils and/or bedrock generally have a low risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete. Therefore, Class 0 could be used for concrete on and below site grade within the overburden soils and/or bedrock. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. These results are being compared to the following table. Table V - 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 Cementitious 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 Pavement Subgrade The anticipated subgrade soils for the site pavements show zones of moderately expansive lean clay. We recommend at least 2 feet of material be removed from beneath the pavement top of subgrade and that material be processed to increase moisture content and replaced as controlled fill material. After undercutting and prior to fill placement, the exposed subgrade should be scarified to a depth of at least 9-inches, adjusted in moisture to +2% of optimum and compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density. The replaced site soils should be placed in maximum 9-inch thick loos lifts and adjusted in moisture and compacted as recommended for the scarified subgrades. Proofrolling and recompacting the subgrade is recommended immediately prior to placement of the pavements. 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 results of the laboratory testing, it is recommended the on-site private drives and parking areas be designed using an R-value of 10. Pumping conditions could develop within a moisture treatment scarification/compactions process of on-site cohesive soils. Subgrade stabilization may be needed to develop a stable subgrade for paving. If needed, stabilization could include incorporating at least 12 percent (by weight) Class C fly ash into the upper 12 inches of subgrade. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 14 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 more extensive 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. Pavements We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for low volume automobile traffic/parking and areas of heavier/higher volume traffic. For heavier traffic areas, we are using an assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 15 and in automobile/parking areas we are using an EDLA of 5. Recommended pavement sections are provided below in Table VI. If selected, Portland cement concrete should be an exterior pavement design mix with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 psi and should be air entrained. Hot bituminous pavement should consist of S-75 or SX-75 with performance graded PG 58-28 binder, compacted to be within the range of 92 to 96% of maximum theoretical specific gravity (Rice). In areas subject to heavier truck loads or truck turning movements, (including trash truck routes and load/unload areas) consideration should be given to use of Portland cement concrete for the pavements. The recommended pavement sections are minimums and periodic maintenance should be expected. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 15 Table VI - Recommended Minimum Pavement Sections Automobile Parking Heavy Duty Areas 18-kip EDLA 18-kip ESAL’s Reliability Resilient Modulus PSI Loss 5 36,500 75% 3562 psi 2.5 15 109,500 85% 3562 psi 2.0 Design Structure Number 2.34 3.00 (A) Composite Hot Bituminous Pavement Aggregate Base (Design Structural Number) 4" 6" (2.42) 5" 8" (3.08) (B) Composite with Fly Ash Treated Subgrade Hot Bituminous Pavement Aggregate Base Fly Ash Treated Subgrade (Design Structure Number) 3" 6" 12" (2.58) 4" 6" 12" (3.02) (C) PCC (Non-reinforced) 5" 6" 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 accordance with ACPA or ACI recommendations. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled or tied where necessary and appropriate for load transfer. Since the cohesive soils on the site have some shrink/swell potential, pavements could crack in the future primarily because of the volume change of the soils when subjected to an increase in moisture content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily constitute structural failure of the pavement. 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 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 16  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, landscaped islands)  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.  Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and place curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils. Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for 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. 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. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 17 Other Considerations Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure with a minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10-feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Flatter slopes could be used in hardscapes areas although positive drainage should be maintained. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping adjacent to the building and parking and drive areas to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the pavement, 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. Excavations into the on-site soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the on- site clays can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. However, if excavations extend into the underlying granular strata, caving soils may be encountered. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Depending upon the depth of any lower level construction, a shoring plan will be necessary to protect the adjacent sidewall slopes. The project design team should use the subsurface information provided herein to properly design a mechanism for shoring protection. EEC is available to provide supplemental design criteria or details such as but not limited to secant piles or piers, soldier piers, or a tie-back/bracing concept. Retention Pond Soil boring B-40 was completed at the approximate location of the site retention pond. After 24 hours of presoaking, a field percolation test was completed in the borehole. A percolation rate of 18 min/inch was determined in the field testing. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1162088 October 21, 2016 Page 18 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 for Real Estate Equities Architecture, LLC 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-1 B-2 B-3 B-15 B-16 B-26 B-28 B-27 B-38 B-39 B-36 B-37 B-35 B-25 B-14 B-13 B-24 B-33 B-34 B-31 B-32 B-29 B-30 B-19 B-20 B-21 B-22 B-23 B-12 B-11 B-10 B-9 B-5 B-6 B-8 B-18 B-7 B-4 B-17 B-40 Boring Location Diagram Village Cooperative of Fort Collins - Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project Number: 1162088 October 2016 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Approximate Boring Locations 1 Legend Site Photos (Photos taken in approximate location, in direction of arrow) VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1162088 SEPTEMBER 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ % @ 150 psf with calcareous deposits CS 3 9 8000 12.5 91.4 36 22 59.7 2200 psf 4.3% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 10 9000+ 13.4 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ brown / red, medium dense SS 10 16 9000+ 11.5 36 16 75.8 with calcareous deposits _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits CS 3 11 9000+ 10.4 84.3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 12 -- 8.1 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 brown / red _ _ SS 10 13 9000+ 14.3 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ % @ 150 psf CS 3 9 9000+ 8.6 90.1 38 23 70.2 160 psf 0.1% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 15 9000+ 12.8 _ _ red / brown 6 with calcareous deposits _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 27 7000 7.9 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red / brown 2 medium dense _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ lower level garage slab 5006.7 CS 5 10 9000+ 8.7 108.8 29 15 47.0 <500 psf None _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 37 9000+ 8.4 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 11 highly weathered _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 41 9000+ 19.0 104.1 32 15 46.0 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 32 6000 19.0 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 27 6000 20.0 102.9 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ brown / red 2 loose _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ lower level garage slab 5006.7 SS 5 8 9000+ 7.6 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 46 9000+ 16.3 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) 1 brown / red _ _ very stiff / medium dense 2 with traces of gravel _ _ SS 3 16 9000+ 10.1 29 7 _ _ lower level garage slab 4 _ _ 5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 43 9000+ 13.4 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 11 with calcareous deposits _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ red / brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 29 9000+ 6.5 31 14 32.9 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 9 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 33 6000 20.6 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SPARSE VEGETATION 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 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) 1 brown / red _ _ medium dense 2 with calcareous deposits _ _ lower level garage slab 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 16 9000+ 6.8 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 9 highly weathered _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 42 9000+ 19.1 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown / red 2 loose _ _ with calcareous deposits & traces of light gravel 3 _ _ lower level garage slab 4 _ _ SS 5 9 9000+ 8.3 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 38 9000+ 17.8 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown / red 2 very stiff _ _ with traces of gravel 3 _ _ 4 lower level garage slab 5006.7 _ _ SS 5 8 9000+ 10.4 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 37 9000+ 16.9 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red 2 loose _ _ with gravel 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 6 6000 6.5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 31 9000+ 16.9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 11 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 12 with calcareous deposits _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 / red _ _ very stiff 2 with traces of gravel _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ lower level garage slab 5006.7 SS 5 6 9000+ 12.2 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 25 7500 22.7 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ red 2 very stiff _ _ SS 3 9 9000+ 10.9 _ _ 4 _ _ lower level garage slab 5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 27 9000+ 6.5 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 13 brown / grey / rust _ _ with calcareous deposits 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) 1 brown / red _ _ loose 2 _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ lower level garage slab 5006.7 SS 5 6 9000+ 10.9 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ CLAYSTONE 13 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 14 with calcareous deposits _ _ SS 15 34 9000+ 14.6 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits SS 3 14 9000+ 10.3 _ _ 4 _ _ 5 _ _ lower level garage slab 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) SS 10 18 9000+ 9.9 red / brown _ _ medium dense 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE / CLAYSTONE 14 weathered moderately hard _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 8 9000+ 14.1 94.1 39 21 87.6 0.9% _ _ lower level garage slab 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) SS 10 22 9000 8.6 red / brown _ _ medium dense 11 with calcareous deposits _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 25 9000+ 8.2 113.0 _ _ 16 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 17 with calcareous deposits _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 38 9000+ 20.8 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ % @ 1000 psf CS 25 40 9000+ 19.3 105.9 4000 psf 2.0% _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ % @ 150 psf with calcareous deposits CS 3 14 9000+ 9.6 102.6 41 25 76.4 5500 psf 14.0% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 14 9000+ 12.2 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red, medium dense SS 10 29 9000+ 11.0 with calcareous deposits _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 / red _ _ very stiff 2 mottled _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 12 9000+ 14.3 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 11 moderately hard to hard with increased depths _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 40 8000 20.4 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SURFACE ELEV 5008 24 HOUR N/A DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION 5006.7 D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ _ lower level 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) garage slab _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 14 9000+ 11.4 108.8 80.9 3500 psf 3.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE SS 10 24 8500 19.6 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 35 9000+ 19.1 109.0 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 48 9000+ 18.9 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 38 9000+ 17.4 109.3 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 SPARSE VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits SS 3 13 9000+ 12.1 _ _ 4 _ _ 5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 8 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 9 _ _ SS 10 26 8500 18.2 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SURFACE ELEV 5007.2 24 HOUR N/A 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY/CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown / red 2 very stiff / medium dense to dense _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 18 9000+ 7.7 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 9 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 38 9000+ 18.2 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ red / brown 2 very stiff _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 12 9000+ 6.2 107.8 700 psf 0.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE SS 10 22 9000+ 15.6 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ % @ 1000 psf CS 15 50 9000+ 16.9 115.6 4.5% _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 50/11" 9000+ 16.6 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 50/9" 9000+ 16.8 114.6 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ brown / red 2 loose _ _ with calcareous deposits lower level 5006.7 SS 3 9 9000+ 8.6 with traces of gravel garage slab _ _ 4 _ _ 5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ SS 10 38 9000+ 8.7 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 11 with calcareous deposits & traces of gravel _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) 1 red _ _ loose to medium dense 2 with traces of gravel _ _ 3 _ _ lower level garage slab 4 _ _ CS 5 9 8500 8.6 102.0 41.7 2000 psf 0.8% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 brown, with calcareous deposits _ _ SS 10 29 9000+ 9.8 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 11 brown / grey / rust _ _ with calcareous deposits 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ % @ 1000 psf CS 15 37 9000+ 19.4 107.4 64 42 76.0 5000 psf 2.7% _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 37 9000+ 19.2 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 50/6" 9000+ 17.4 113.4 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND / SANDY LEAN CLAY (SC/CL) _ _ brown / red 2 loose to dense / very stiff _ _ 3 _ _ 4 lower level garage slab 5006.7 _ _ SS 5 9 9000+ 11.5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 14 brown / grey / rust _ _ highly weathered SS 15 30 9000+ 19.1 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red / brown 2 loose _ _ 3 _ _ 4 lower level garage slab 5006.7 _ _ SS 5 7 9000+ 10.5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE SS 15 31 9000+ 17.7 brown / grey / rust, highly weathered _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red 2 medium dense _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ lower level garage slab 5006.7 4 _ _ SS 5 14 -- 6.5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE SS 15 20 7500 21.2 brown / grey / rust _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 lower level garage slab 5006.7 _ _ CS 5 11 9000+ 15.2 104.0 2600 psf 1.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) SS 10 23 9000+ 7.4 red / brown _ _ very stiff / medium dense 11 with calcareous deposits _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) CS 15 30 9000+ 8.5 115.0 brown _ _ very stiff / dense 16 with calcareous deposits _ _ 17 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 brown / grey / rust _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 30 8000 20.5 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 44 9000+ 21.1 105.8 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 SPARSE VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 11 9000+ 17.7 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE / SANDSTONE 14 brown / grey / rust _ _ SS 15 32 8500 19.6 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC 5006.7 SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 11 9000+ 13.7 111.3 39 23 75.8 3600 psf 2.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE / SANDSTONE SS 10 19 9000+ 20.4 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ % @ 1000 psf CS 15 38 9000+ 19.8 108.9 54 36 91.7 7000 psf 3.9% _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 44 9000+ 18.9 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 50/7" 9000+ 17.6 111.5 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 SPARSE VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown / red 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 25 9000+ 9.3 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 38 9000+ 19.0 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SURFACE ELEV 5006.9 24 HOUR N/A 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown / red 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 23 9000+ 9.3 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 36 8500 19.1 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red / brown 2 medium dense _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 26 9000+ 6.5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 10 brown / grey / rust _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 43 8500 20.4 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red 2 medium dense 5006.7 _ _ with traces of gravel lower level SS 3 12 9000+ 9.0 garage slab _ _ 4 _ _ 5 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 38 9000+ 14.0 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 11 with calcareous deposits _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) 1 red / brown _ _ medium dense 2 with traces of gravel _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 22 9000+ 4.4 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 14 brown / grey / rust _ _ SS 15 36 9000+ 19.3 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SURFACE ELEV 5008.8 24 HOUR N/A 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 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) 1 red _ _ medium dense 2 with calcareous deposits & trace gravel _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 14 4000 5.5 108.1 53.7 650 psf 0.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) SS 10 22 8000 15.7 brown / grey / rust _ _ very stiff 11 with calcareous deposits _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 14 brown / grey / rust _ _ CS 15 21 9000+ 24.3 92.7 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 50 9000+ 18.4 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 50 9000+ 19.5 110.0 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SURFACE ELEV 5008.2 24 HOUR N/A 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 _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ red / brown 2 loose _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 9 9000+ 9.6 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust SS 15 24 8000 22.8 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ red 2 very stiff / medium dense _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ % @ 1000 psf CS 5 18 5500 6.3 99.2 1100 psf 0.9% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 27 9000+ 8.5 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 28 9000+ 20.2 108.0 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 39 9000+ 18.8 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 45 9000+ 21.4 107.2 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 / red _ _ medium stiff to very stiff 2 with calcareous deposits _ _ % @ 150 psf CS 3 8 2000 7.8 39 19 55.3 1500 psf 5.5% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 12 -- 7.0 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 red _ _ with traces of gravel SS 10 10 7000 9.1 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL 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 _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown / red 2 very stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits & traces of gravel 3 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 20 9000+ 8.7 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) SS 10 8 9000+ 8.3 24 9 45.6 brown / red _ _ loose 11 with traces of gravel _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown, stiff SS 15 8 3000 19.0 with calcareous deposits _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL Project: Location: Project #: Date: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 12.5% Dry Density: 94 pcf Ending Moisture: 26.0% Swell Pressure: 2200 psf % Swell @ 150: 4.3% Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 36 Plasticity Index: 22 % Passing #200: 59.7% 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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 8.6% Dry Density: 83.8 pcf Ending Moisture: 33.5% Swell Pressure: 160 psf % Swell @ 150: 0.1% Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 38 Plasticity Index: 23 % Passing #200: 70.2% 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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 104.9% Dry Density: 59.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.1% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 47.0% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red / Brown Clayey Sand (SC) -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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 14.1% Dry Density: 97.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 26.1% Swell Pressure: % Swell @ 500: 0.9% Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 39 Plasticity Index: 21 % Passing #200: 87.6% 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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 19.3% Dry Density: 112.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 22.8% Swell Pressure: 4000 psf % Swell @ 1000: 2.0% Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 5, Depth 24' Liquid Limit: Plasticity Index: % Passing #200: 72.7% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown / Grey / Rust Claystone / Siltstone (Lean Clay with Sand) -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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 9.6% Dry Density: 121.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.3% Swell Pressure: 5500 psf % Swell @ 150: 14.0% Sample Location: Boring 17, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 41 Plasticity Index: 25 % Passing #200: 76.4% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 11.4% Dry Density: 105.7 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.9% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf % Swell @ 500: 3.3% Sample Location: Boring 19, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: Plasticity Index: % Passing #200: 80.9% 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: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 6.2% Dry Density: 118.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.8% Swell Pressure: 700 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.3% Sample Location: Boring 22, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red / 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: Sandstone / Siltstone / Claystone Bedrock Sample Location: Boring 22, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 16.9% Dry Density: 114.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.8% Swell Pressure: 9500 psf % Swell @ 1000: 4.5% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 2016 Beginning Moisture: 8.6% Dry Density: 116.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.7% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.8% Sample Location: Boring 24, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: 41.7% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Clayey Sand (SC) -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 / Grey / Rust Claystone / Siltstone (Lean Clay with Sand) Sample Location: Boring 24, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: 64 Plasticity Index: 42 % Passing #200: 76.0% Beginning Moisture: 19.4% Dry Density: 116.9 pcf Ending Moisture: 22.8% Swell Pressure: 5000 psf % Swell @ 1000: 2.7% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 28, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 15.2% Dry Density: 110 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.7% Swell Pressure: 2600 psf % Swell @ 500: 1.3% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 30, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 39 Plasticity Index: 23 % Passing #200: 75.8% Beginning Moisture: 13.7% Dry Density: 110.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 18.8% Swell Pressure: 3600 psf % Swell @ 500: 2.3% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown / Grey / Rust Claystone / Siltstone / Sandstone (Fat Clay) Sample Location: Boring 30, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: 54 Plasticity Index: 36 % Passing #200: 91.7% Beginning Moisture: 19.8% Dry Density: 110.8 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.7% Swell Pressure: 7000 psf % Swell @ 1000: 3.9% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 36, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: Plasticity Index: % Passing #200: 53.7% Beginning Moisture: 5.5% Dry Density: 109.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.1% Swell Pressure: 650 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.3% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Sandy Lean Clay / Clayey Sand (CL/SC) Sample Location: Boring 38, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 6.3% Dry Density: 103 pcf Ending Moisture: 24.0% Swell Pressure: 1100 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.9% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Sandstone / Siltstone / Claystone Bedrock Sample Location: Boring 38, Sample 5, Depth 24' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 21.4% Dry Density: 115.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 23.4% Swell Pressure: 10000 psf % Swell @ 1000: 4.7% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown / Red Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 39, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 39 Plasticity Index: 19 % Passing #200: 55.3% Beginning Moisture: 7.8% Dry Density: 90.9 pcf Ending Moisture: 25.3% Swell Pressure: 1500 psf % Swell @ 150: 5.5% Village Cooperative of Fort Collins Fort Collins, Colorado 1162088 October 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 FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5010.9 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-40 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5010.0 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-39 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE SURFACE ELEV 5009.6 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-38 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' 5006.7 lower level garage slab SURFACE ELEV 5008.3 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-37 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 lower level garage slab FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-36 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' 5006.7 garage slab lower level VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-35 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 garage slab lower level VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5009.0 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-34 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5008.2 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-33 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' SPARSE VEGETATION 5006.7 garage slab lower level SURFACE ELEV 5007.4 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-32 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 lower level garage slab FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-31 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 lower level garage slab VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5005.8 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' lower level garage slab VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-30 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5004.2 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-29 OCTOBER 2016 5006.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' lower level garage slab FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5011.3 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-28 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5010.5 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' SPARSE VEGETATION VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-27 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5011.0 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-26 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5011.2 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' SPARSE VEGETATION VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-25 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5010.7 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' 5006.7 VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-24 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5009.7 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-23 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5008.5 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-22 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' 5006.7 lower level garage slab SURFACE ELEV 5007.6 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-21 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 lower level garage slab FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-20 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' 5006.7 lower level garage slab VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5006.5 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-19 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-18 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 lowr level garage slab VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5012.5 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-17 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5012.5 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' 5006.7 VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-16 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5012.6 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' SPARSE VEGETATION 5006.7 VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-15 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5011.8 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-14 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE SURFACE ELEV 5011.8 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' 5006.7 VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-13 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5011.9 24 HOUR N/A 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-12 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE SURFACE ELEV 5010.1 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-11 OCTOBER 2016 SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' lower level 5006.7 garage slab FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 5010.9 24 HOUR N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-10 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH SURFACE ELEV 5010.8 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None SPARSE VEGETATION BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 5006.7 VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-9 OCTOBER 2016 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH A-LIMITS SWELL 5006.7 SURFACE ELEV 5010.0 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-8 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' A-LIMITS SWELL 5006.7 garage slab lower level SURFACE ELEV 5008.9 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-7 OCTOBER 2016 A-LIMITS SWELL 5006.7 SURFACE ELEV 5010.5 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-6 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5011.9 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-5 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5011.5 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-4 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5013.3 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-3 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5013.2 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-2 OCTOBER 2016 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV 5014.3 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 9/28/2016 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 9/28/2016 WHILE DRILLING None VILLAGE COOPERATIVE OF FORT COLLINS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1162088 LOG OF BORING B-1 OCTOBER 2016 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 recommendations should be considered the minimum: