HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE UNION ON ELIZABETH (FORMERLY 1208 W. ELIZABETH STREET) - PDP/FDP - FDP170024 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTElizabeth Street Project
Fort Collins, Colorado
November 18, 2016
Revised April 18, 2017
Terracon Project No. 20165099
Prepared for:
EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Fort Collins, Colorado
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
REPORT TOPICS*
Project Description
Site Conditions
Exploration and Testing Procedures
Field Exploration
Laboratory Testing
Geotechnical Model
Laboratory Testing
Corrosion Protection (Water-Soluble Sulfates)
Groundwater
Seismic Considerations
Geotechnical Overview
Existing, Undocumented Fill
Shallow Bedrock
Shallow Groundwater
Expansive Soils and Bedrock
Permanent Dewatering
Foundation and Floor System Recommendations
Site Preparations
Demolition
Excavation
Subgrade preparation
Fill Materials
Compaction Requirements
Utility Trench and Backfill
Grading and Drainage
Exterior Slab Design and Construction
Shallow Foundations
Spread Footings Design Recommendations
Spread Footings Construction Considerations
Deep Foundations
Drilled Piers Bottomed in Bedrock Design Recommendations
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Drilled Piers Bottomed in Bedrock Construction Considerations
Floor Systems
Floor Systems Design Recommendations
Floor Systems Construction Considerations
Below-Grade Structures
Design Parameters
Swimming Pool Recommendations
Pavements
Pavements Subgrade Preparation
Pavements Design Recommendations
Pavements Construction Considerations
Pavements Maintenance
General Comments
ATTACHMENTS
Site Locations
Exploration Plan
Exploration Results (Boring Logs and Laboratory Data)
Supporting Information (General Notes and USCS, etc.)
*This is a paper rendition of a web-based Geotechnical Engineering Report.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed in the
project planning stage and our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:
Item Description
Project location The project site is located at 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street in Fort
Collins, Colorado.
Proposed
construction
The project will include a multi-story building with a unit average of about 1,236
square feet. Portions of the first story are proposed retail space. An in-ground
swimming pool is proposed in between and near the center of the proposed
buildings.
Building
construction
The proposed buildings will be steel-framed with concrete exterior walls
(assumed).
Maximum loads
Columns: 1,000 kips maximum (assumed)
Walls: 10 kips per linear maximum (assumed)
Slabs: 150 pounds per square foot maximum (assumed)
Grading/slopes Minor grading is anticipated to complete the project.
Below-grade
construction
Other than the swimming pool, no below-grade areas are planned as part of this
project.
Pavements
Paved access drives and parking areas will be constructed on the northern
portion of the property
We assume that both rigid (concrete) and flexible (asphalt) pavement sections
should be considered. Please confirm this assumption.
Anticipated traffic is as follows:
Autos/Light Trucks: 1,000 vehicles per day
Light Delivery and Trash Collection Vehicles: 10 vehicles per week
Tractor-trailer trucks: Less than 1 vehicle per week.
The pavement design period is 20 years.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the
field exploration as well as our review of publically available geologic maps, topographic maps
and aerial photographs.
Item Description
Location
The proposed project is located at 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street in
Fort Collins, Colorado. The approximate latitude and longitude of the site is
40.57504°N / 105.09762°W
Existing
improvements
On the eastern portion of the site are t
Episcopal Church. Mature deciduous trees and landscaping are located
along the northern, eastern, and western perimeter of the site. A well
maintained grass-covered lawn comprises the southern half of the site and
is irrigated with a below-grade sprinkler system. There are a few shrubs, a
sprinkler main, and a fire hydrant along the southern boundary of the property
near the sidewalk. On the western portion of the site is a single-story multi-
company commercial development with associated paved parking area.
Current ground cover
The southern half of the property, as well as the eastern and western
perimeters, are covered with maintained landscaping. The western portion of
the site is covered with asphalt paving.
Existing topography The site gently slopes from north to the south.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Using our understanding of the project as noted in Project Understanding, we developed the
following scope of services for field exploration and laboratory testing for this project.
Our field exploration work included the drilling and sampling of exploratory soil borings consistent
with the following schedule. Proposed borings were completed to the planned depths below
existing site grades or to practical auger refusal, if shallower.
Number of Borings Boring Depth (ft) Planned Location
3 20 to 25 Building envelopes
3 35 Additional borings
1 25 Swimming pool
Locations of soil borings are provided on our Exploration Plan. The locations of exploration
points were -held GPS unit to
establish boring locations with reference to known points. The accuracy of the exploration points
is usually within 10 feet of the noted location. A ground surface elevation at each boring and test pit
location was -site benchmark.
The borings were drilled with CME-75 and CME-55 truck-mounted rotary drill rigs with hollow-
stem augers. Disturbed samples were obtained at selected intervals utilizing a 2-inch outside
diameter, split-spoon sampler and a 3-inch outside diameter, ring-barrel sampler. Penetration
resistance values were recorded in a manner similar to the standard penetration test (SPT). This
test consists of driving the sampler into the ground with a 140-pound hammer free-falling through
a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the ring-barrel sampler 12
inches (18 inches for standard split-spoon samplers, final 12 inches are recorded) or the interval
indicated, is recorded as a standard penetration resistance value (N-value). The blow count
values are indicated on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. Ring-barrel sample blow
counts are not considered N-values.
A CME automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the samplers in the borings performed on this
site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer compared to the
conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published correlations between the
SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency cathead and rope method. This
higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance blow count value by increasing the
penetration per hammer blow over what would be obtained using the cathead and rope method. The
effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of
the subsurface information for this report.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
The standard penetration test provides a reasonable indication of the in-place density of sandy
type materials, but only provides an indication of the relative stiffness of cohesive materials since
the blow count in these soils may be affected by the moisture content of the soil. In addition,
considerable care should be exercised in interpreting the N-values in gravelly soils, particularly
where the size of the gravel particle exceeds the inside diameter of the sampler.
Our exploration team prepared field boring logs as part of the drilling operations. These field logs
include visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of
the subsurface conditions between samples. Groundwater measurements were obtained in the
borings at the time of site exploration and approximately 1 day after drilling. Final boring logs
were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent the engineer's interpretation of
the field logs and include modifications based on observations and tests of the samples in the
laboratory.
All borings were backfilled after subsequent groundwater measurements were obtained with
auger cuttings, borings located on the asphalt pavement were patched with hot-mix asphalt.
Excess auger cuttings were disposed of on the site by spreading in the area of each exploration
point. Because backfill material often settles below the surface after a period of time, you should
observe the exploration points periodically for signs of depressions and backfill them if necessary.
The soil and bedrock samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory
for observation by the project geotechnical engineer. At that time, the field descriptions were
reviewed and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering
properties of the subsurface materials.
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil and bedrock samples. The results of these
tests are presented on the boring logs and in this appendix. The laboratory tests were performed
in general accordance with applicable locally accepted standards. Soil samples were classified
in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in the Supporting
Information section of this report. Rock samples were visually classified in general accordance
with the description of rock properties presented in our Supporting Information section of this
report. Procedural standards noted in this report are for reference to methodology in general. In
some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional
judgment.
Water content Plasticity index
Grain-size distribution
Consolidation/swell
Compressive strength
Dry density
Water-soluble sulfate content
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1
Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs.
Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil
types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can
be found in Exploration Results. A discussion of field sampling and laboratory testing procedures
and test results are presented in Exploration and Testing Procedures. Based on the results of
the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows:
Material Description Approximate Depth to
Bottom of Stratum Consistency/Density/Hardness
Fill materials consisting of lean
clay, sand, and gravel
About 3 to 3½ feet below
existing site grades. Only
encountered in Boring Nos. 1,
2, 3 and 4.
--
Lean clay with varying amounts of
sand and gravel
About 7 to 8 feet below
existing site grades. Only
encountered in Boring Nos. 5,
6 and 7.
Stiff to very stiff
Sand with silt, clay, and gravel About 6 to 9 feet below existing
site grades. Medium dense to dense
Bedrock consisting of sandstone
and claystone
To the maximum depth of
exploration of about 25½ feet. Hard to very hard
Representative soil samples were selected for swell-consolidation testing and 2.2 percent swell
to 0.1 percent compression when wetted. A sample of weathered bedrock soil exhibited an
unconfined compressive strength of approximately 6,500 pounds per square foot (psf) and a
sample of lean clay soils exhibited an unconfined compressive strength of approximately 5,100
pounds per square foot (psf). Samples of site soils and bedrock selected for plasticity testing
exhibited moderate plasticity with liquid limits ranging from non-plastic to 42 and plasticity indices
ranging from non-plastic to 24. Laboratory test results are presented in the Exploration Results
section of this report.
Results of water-soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type II, portland cement should be
specified for all project concrete on and below grade. Foundation concrete should be designed
for low to moderate sulfate exposure in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual,
Section 318, Chapter 4.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 2
The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of
groundwater. In addition, delayed water levels were also obtained in some borings. The water levels
observed in the boreholes are noted on the attached boring logs, and are summarized below:
Boring Number Depth to groundwater
while drilling, ft.
Depth to groundwater 24
hours after drilling, ft.
Elevation of
groundwater 24 hours
after drilling, ft.
1 Not encountered Not encountered NA
2 Not encountered 10.2 5016.7
3 Not encountered 15.8 5011.7
4 Not encountered 20.9 5006.3
Boring Number Depth to groundwater
while drilling, ft.
Depth to groundwater
immediately after drilling,
ft.
Elevation of
groundwater
immediately after
drilling, ft.
5 11 13.6 5013.9
6 Not encountered Not encountered NA
7 Not encountered Not encountered NA
These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may
not be indicative of other times or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to
fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions, and other factors.
Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations, amount of rainfall, runoff and
other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels
during construction or at other times in the life of the proposed project may be higher or lower
than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations
should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project.
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater
monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater piezometers, and periodic
measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Code Used Site Classification
2015 International Building Code (IBC) 1 C 2
1. In general accordance with the 2015 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2.
2. The 2015 International Building Code (IBC) requires a site soil profile determination extending a
depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope requested does not include the
required 100 foot soil profile determination. The borings completed for this project extended to a
maximum depth of about 34½ feet and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil and
bedrock conditions exist below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional
exploration to deeper depths could be performed to confirm the conditions below the current depth of
exploration. Alternatively, a geophysical exploration could be utilized in order to attempt to justify a
more favorable seismic site class.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Based on subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, the site appears suitable for the
proposed construction from a geotechnical point of view provided certain precautions and design
and construction recommendations described in this report are followed. We have identified
several geotechnical conditions that could impact design, construction and performance of the
proposed structures, pavements, and other site improvements. These included existing,
undocumented fill, shallow bedrock, shallow groundwater, and potentially expansive soils. These
conditions will require particular attention in Project Planning, design and during construction and
discussed in greater detail in the following sections.
The near surface soils are predominantly undocumented fills consisting of clayey sands with
gravel or lean clay material with varying amounts of sand. Underlying the fill and lean clays are
medium dense to dense silty/clayey sands with gravel soils. Interbedded sandstone and claystone
bedrock underlying the site ranges from 6 to 9 feet below the ground surface, based on the limited
number of borings completed. Additional site preparation recommendations, including subgrade
improvement, fill placement, and excavations are provided in the Site Preparation section.
The Shallow Foundation section addresses support of the building bearing on native soils. The
Floor Systems section addresses slab-on-grade support of the building.
Based on our experience with similar projects, a rigid pavement system is recommended for this
site and is addressed in the Pavements section of this report.
Existing, undocumented fill was encountered to depths up to about 3½ feet in the borings drilled
on the eastern portion of the site. We do not possess any information regarding whether the fill
was placed under the observation of a geotechnical engineer.
Support of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements on or above existing fill soils is discussed in
this report. There is an inherent risk for the owner that compressible fill or unsuitable material
within or buried by the fill will not be discovered. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be
eliminated without completely removing the existing fill, but can be reduced by performing
additional testing and evaluation.
Bedrock was encountered in all of our test borings at the site, ranging from about 6 to 9 feet below
existing site grades. We understand a swimming pool is proposed in between and near the center
of the proposed building area planned at this site and is the only below-grade structure planned
at the site. Excavation penetrating the bedrock may require the use of specialized heavy-duty
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
equipment, together with ripping or jack-hammering to advance the excavation and facilitate rock
break-up and removal.
As previously stated, groundwater was measured at depths ranging from about 10.2 to 20.9 feet
below existing site grades. We understand a swimming pool is proposed in between and near
the center of the proposed building areas planned at this site. Terracon recommends maintaining
a separation of at least 3 feet between the bottom of proposed below-grade foundations and
measured groundwater levels. It is also possible and likely that groundwater levels below this
site due to seasonal variation.
Expansive soils and bedrock was identified in the borings completed on this site. This report
provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and expansion. However,
even if these procedures are followed, some movement and cracking in the structures,
pavements, pools, and flatwork should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and other damage
such as uneven floor slabs and flat work will probably increase if modification of the site results in
excessive wetting or drying of the expansive clays and/or claystone bedrock. Eliminating the risk
of movement and cosmetic distress is generally not feasible, but it may be possible to further
reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during
construction. It is imperative the recommendations described in section Grading and Drainage
of this report be followed to reduce movement.
Preliminary site concepts indicate the proposed swimming pool may extend below the observed
groundwater levels. Thus, permanent dewatering may be needed to lower groundwater levels
below permanent excavations. We recommend that on a long term basis, groundwater levels be
maintained at least 3 feet below base of the pool.
If a permanent dewatering system is judged necessary by the project team, we suggest the
dewatering system consist of a combination of drains and sumps. The configuration of the system
will depend on the size of the pool. The locations of the drains and/or sumps must consider
maintenance accessibility.
A possible configuration would be a subsurface drain around the exterior of the pool perimeter
wall. The drain pipe should be properly sized, perforated PVC or other type of hard pipe
embedded in properly graded drainage gravel. The invert of the drain pipe should be at least 4
feet below the bottom of the pool. The drain pipe should discharge into a sump(s) accessible
within the base of the pool area.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
The drainage gravel should extend vertically over the drain pipes to at least 2 feet above the
highest groundwater levels observed in the soil borings. Thus, the drain gravel will extend into
the pool foundation wall backfill. The foundation walls adjacent to the drain gravel should be
properly water-proofed.
Provision must be made to prevent migration or piping of the native soils into the drainage gravel.
Ideally this would be by a properly graded sand filter. Alternatively, a filter fabric could be used.
If a filter fabric is used, we strongly recommend that installation be in the dry. That is, the
Contractor should dewater the excavation so that it is free of standing water during installation of
the drain components.
Other issues to be considered include:
Disposition of the developed water, which could be to a storm water detention basin.
Evaluation of the amount of water likely to be discharged from a permanent dewatering
system was not included in our scope of services for this study but should be evaluated,
if a permanent dewatering system is selected.
Possible permitting requirements. If the dewatering system is considered to be a well,
the State of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permits, should
they be needed, will require regular reporting of discharge water quality. Adequate time
should be included in the project schedule to obtain the permits.
Maintenance. All permanent dewatering systems require regular maintenance to assure
the drains and pumps are in proper operating condition. Underground drains associated
with the system should have cleanouts so that the system can be flushed/ cleaned
periodically as underground dewatering systems can become clogged with anaerobic
microbial and other growth. The cleanout locations should be readily accessible and a
source of high pressure (water main pressure) water available to flush the drains.
Monitoring. By their nature, permanent dewatering system
maintenance personnel if the pumps have failed and water levels are rising in the sumps.
The proposed buildings can be supported by a shallow, spread footing foundation system. Design
recommendations for foundations for the proposed structure and related structural elements are
presented in the following paragraphs. We recommend a slab-on-grade floor system for the
proposed building development. In addition, we recommend the upper 1 foot, below the proposed
slab, be replaced with imported granular meeting Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Class 1 structure backfill specifications. Even when bearing on properly prepared soils, movement
of the floor system is possible should the subgrade soils undergo an increase in moisture content.
We estimate movement of less than 1 inch is possible.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
These specifications include critical quality criteria as necessary to render the site in the state
anticipated by our geotechnical engineering for foundations, slopes and pavements.
Prior to placing any fill, strip and remove existing vegetation and any other deleterious materials
from the proposed construction areas. Stripped organic materials should be wasted from the site
or used to re-vegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations.
Prior to the placement of fills, the site should be graded to create a relatively level surface to receive
fill, and to provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed structures.
The following presents recommendations for site demolition, excavation, subgrade preparation
and placement of engineered fills on the project. All earthwork on the project should be observed
and evaluated by Terracon on a full-time basis. The evaluation of earthwork should include
observation of over-excavation operations, testing of engineered fills, subgrade preparation,
subgrade stabilization, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the
project.
Demolition of the existing church, shopping center and associated buildings should include
complete removal of all foundation systems, below-grade structural elements, pavements, and
exterior flat work within the proposed construction area. This should include removal of any utilities
to be abandoned along with any loose utility trench backfill or loose backfill found adjacent to
existing foundations. All materials derived from the demolition of existing structures and pavements
should be removed from the site. The types of foundation systems supporting the existing buildings
are not known. If some or all of the existing buildings are supported by drilled piers, the existing
piers should be truncated a minimum depth of 3 feet below areas of planned new construction.
Consideration could be given to re-using the asphalt and concrete provided the materials are
processed and uniformly blended with the on-site soils. Asphalt and/or concrete materials should
be processed to a maximum size of 2-inches and blended at a ratio of 30 percent asphalt/concrete
to 70 percent of on-site soils.
It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with
conventional earthmoving equipment. Excavation penetrating the bedrock may require the use of
specialized heavy-duty equipment, together with ripping or jack-hammering drilling and blasting to
advance the excavation and facilitate rock break-up and removal. Consideration should be given
to obtaining a unit price for difficult excavation in the contract documents for the project.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
The soils to be excavated can vary significantly across the site as their classifications are based
solely on the materials encountered in widely-spaced exploratory test borings. The contractor
should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the proposed area of excavation. If different
subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, the actual conditions should be
evaluated to determine any excavation modifications necessary to maintain safe conditions.
Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, vaults, basements, and
utilities was not observed during the site reconnaissance, such features could be encountered
during construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features
should be removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or
construction.
Any over-excavation that extends below the bottom of foundation elevation should extend laterally
beyond all edges of the foundations at least 8 inches per foot of over-excavation depth below the
foundation base elevation. The over-excavation should be backfilled to the foundation base
elevation in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report.
Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, surface water infiltration and/or
groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. It is anticipated that pumping from
sumps may be utilized to control water within excavations.
The subgrade soil conditions should be evaluated during the excavation process and the stability
than the OSHA maximum values may have to be used. The individual contractor(s) should be
made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to
maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or
shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA
excavation and trench safety standards
As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept a minimum lateral
distance from the crest of the slope equal to the slope height. The exposed slope face should be
protected against the elements
After the undocumented existing fill and other deleterious materials have been removed from the
building and pavement areas, the top 8 inches of the exposed ground surface should be scarified,
moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as
determined by ASTM D698 before any new fill or foundation or pavement is placed.
If pockets of soft, loose, or otherwise unsuitable materials are encountered at the bottom of the
foundation excavations and it is inconvenient to lower the foundations, the proposed foundation
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
elevations may be reestablished by over-excavating the unsuitable soils and backfilling with
compacted engineered fill or lean concrete.
After the bottom of the excavation has been compacted, engineered fill can be placed to bring the
building pad and pavement subgrade to the desired grade. Engineered fill should be placed in
accordance with the recommendations presented in subsequent sections of this report.
The stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or
other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and
drying. Alternatively, over-excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may
until a stable working surface is attained. Lightweight excavation equipment may also be used to
reduce subgrade pumping.
The on-site soils or approved granular and low plasticity cohesive imported materials may be used
as fill material. Granular fill placed below the floor system should meet the specifications of the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 1 structure backfill, presented in the following
table:
CDOT Class 1 structure backfill should meet the following material property requirements:
Gradation Percent finer by weight (ASTM C136)
100
No. 4 Sieve 30-100
No. 50 Sieve 10-60
No 200 Sieve 5-20
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Soil Properties Values
Liquid Limit 35 (max.)
Plastic Limit 6 (max.)
The soil removed from this site that is free of organic or objectionable materials, as defined by a
field technician who is qualified in soil material identification and compaction procedures, can be
re-used as fill for the building pad and pavement subgrade. It should be noted that on-site soils
will require reworking to adjust the moisture content to meet the compaction criteria.
Imported soils (if required) should meet the following material property requirements:
Gradation Percent finer by weight (ASTM C136)
100
70-100
No. 4 Sieve 50-100
No. 200 Sieve 50 (max.)
Soil Properties Values
Liquid Limit 35 (max.)
Plastic Limit 6 (max.)
Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures
that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift.
Item Description
Fill lift thickness
9 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-
propelled compaction equipment is used
4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided
equipment (i.e. jumping jack or plate compactor) is used
Minimum compaction requirements 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined
by ASTM D698
Moisture content cohesive soil (clay) -1 to +3 % of the optimum moisture content
Moisture content cohesionless soil (sand) -3 to +3 % of the optimum moisture content
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Item Description
1. We recommend engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement.
Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits
have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required
until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.
2. Specifically, moisture levels should be maintained low enough to allow for satisfactory compaction to
be achieved without the fill material pumping when proofrolled.
3. Moisture conditioned clay materials should not be allowed to dry out. A loss of moisture within these
potential. Subsequent wetting of these
materials could result in undesirable movement.
All trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit construction including
backfill placement and compaction.
All underground piping within or near the proposed structures should be designed with flexible
couplings, so minor deviations in alignment do not result in breakage or distress. Utility knockouts
in foundation walls should be oversized to accommodate differential movements. It is imperative
that utility trenches be properly backfilled with relatively clean materials. If utility trenches are
backfilled with relatively clean granular material, they should be capped with at least 18 inches of
cohesive fill in non-pavement areas to reduce the infiltration and conveyance of surface water
through the trench backfill.
Utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. All utility trenches that
penetrate beneath the buildings should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow
through the trenches that could migrate below the buildings. We recommend constructing an
The plug m
water content. The clay fill should be placed to completely surround the utility line and be compacted
in accordance with recommendations in this report.
It is strongly recommended that a representative of Terracon provide full-time observation and
compaction testing of trench backfill within building and pavement areas.
All grades must be adjusted to provide effective drainage away from the proposed building(s) and
existing buildings during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project.
Infiltration of water into foundation excavations must be prevented during construction.
Landscape irrigation adjacent to foundations should be minimized or eliminated. Water permitted
to pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of the structures (either during or post-construction) can
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
result in significantly higher soil movements than those discussed in this report. As a result, any
estimations of potential movement described in this report cannot be relied upon if positive
drainage is not obtained and maintained, and water is allowed to infiltrate the fill and/or subgrade.
Exposed ground (if any) should be sloped at a minimum of 10 percent grade for at least 10 feet
beyond the perimeter of the proposed buildings, where possible. The use of swales, chases
and/or area drains may be required to facilitate drainage in unpaved areas around the perimeter
of the buildings. Backfill against foundations and exterior walls should be properly compacted and
free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. After construction
of the proposed buildings and prior to project completion, we recommend verification of final
grading be performed to document positive drainage, as described above, has been achieved.
Flatwork and pavements will be subject to post-construction movement. Maximum grades
practical should be used for paving and flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond. In
addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post-construction movement
of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the
structures, care should be taken that joints are properly sealed and maintained to prevent the
infiltration of surface water.
Planters located adjacent to structures should preferably be self-contained. Sprinkler mains and
spray heads should be located a minimum of 5 feet away from the building line(s). Low-volume,
drip style landscaped irrigation should not be used near the building. Roof drains should
discharge on to pavements or be extended away from the structures a minimum of 10 feet through
the use of splash blocks or downspout extensions. A preferred alternative is to have the roof
drains discharge by solid pipe to storm sewers or to a detention pond or other appropriate outfall.
Exterior slabs on-grade, exterior architectural features, and utilities founded on, or in backfill or
the site soils will likely experience some movement due to the volume change of the material.
Potential movement could be reduced by:
Minimizing moisture increases in the backfill;
Controlling moisture-density during placement of the backfill;
Using designs which allow vertical movement between the exterior features and
adjoining structural elements; and
Placing control joints on relatively close centers.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Description Values
Bearing material Properly prepared on-site native soil, or new,
properly placed engineered fill.
Maximum allowable bearing pressure1 2,500 psf
Sliding coefficient2 µ = 0.5
Moist soil unit weight = 125 pcf
Minimum embedment depth below finished
grade 3 30 inches
Estimated total movement 4 About 1 inch
Estimated differential movement 4 About ½ to ¾ of total movement
1. The recommended maximum allowable bearing pressure assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils,
if encountered, will be over-excavated and replaced with properly compacted engineered fill. The
design bearing pressure applies to a dead load plus design live load condition. The design bearing
pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic
conditions.
2. The sliding coefficients are ultimate values and do not include a factor of safety. The foundation
designer should include the appropriate factors of safety.
3. For frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils.
The minimum embedment depth is for perimeter footings beneath unheated areas and is relative
to lowest adjacent finished grade, typically exterior grade.
4. The estimated movements presented above are based on the assumption that the maximum
footing size is 4 feet for column footings and 3 feet for continuous footings.
Footings should be proportioned to reduce differential foundation movement. As discussed, total
movement resulting from the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on the order of about 1
inch. Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the
foundation soils; therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during
construction and throughout the life of the structure. Failure to maintain the proper drainage as
recommended in the Grading and Drainage section of this report will nullify the movement
estimates provided above.
Spread footing construction should only be considered if the estimated foundation movement can
be tolerated. Subgrade soils beneath footings should be moisture conditioned and compacted as
described in the Site Preparation section of this report. The moisture content and compaction of
subgrade soils should be maintained until foundation construction.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Footings and foundation walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress
caused by differential foundation movement.
Unstable surfaces will need to be stabilized prior to backfilling excavations and/or constructing
the building foundation, floor slab and/or project pavements. The use of angular rock, recycled
means of stabilizing the subgrade. The use of geogrid materials in conjunction with gravel could
also be considered and could be more cost effective.
Unstable subgrade conditions should be observed by Terracon to assess the subgrade and
provide suitable alternatives for stabilization. Stabilized areas should be proof-rolled prior to
continuing construction to assess the stability of the subgrade.
Foundation excavations should be observed by Terracon. If the soil conditions encountered differ
significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required.
.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
DEEP FOUNDATIONS
Description Value
Estimated pier length 15 to 20 feet
Minimum pier diameter 18 inches
Minimum bedrock embedment 1 10 feet
Maximum allowable end-bearing pressure 25,000 psf
Allowable skin friction (for portion of pier embedded into bedrock) 2,500 psf
1. Drilled piers should be embedded into hard or very hard bedrock materials. Actual structural
loads and pier diameters may dictate embedment deeper than the recommended minimum
penetration.
Site grading details were not fully understood at the time we prepared this report. If significant
fills are planned in the proposed building areas, longer drilled pier lengths may be required. Piers
should be considered to work in group action if the horizontal spacing is less than three pier
diameters. A minimum practical horizontal clear spacing between piers of at least three diameters
should be maintained, and adjacent piers should bear at the same elevation. The capacity of
individual piers must be reduced when considering the effects of group action. Capacity reduction
is a function of pier spacing and the number of piers within a group. If group action analyses are
necessary, capacity reduction factors can be provided for the analyses.
To satisfy forces in the horizontal direction using LPILE, piers may be designed for the following
lateral load criteria:
Parameters Clay Sand and
Gravel
Claystone
Bedrock
LPILE soil type Soft clay Sand Stiff clay
Effective unit weight (pcf) above groundwater 120 125 135
Effective unit weight (pcf) below groundwater 60 65 75
Average undrained shear strength (psf) 500 N/A 9,000
Average angle of internal friction, (degrees) N/A 35 N/A
Coefficient of subgrade reaction, k (pci)* 100 - static
30 - cyclic
60 2,000- static
800 cyclic
Strain, 50 (%) 0.010 N/A 0.004
For purposes of LPILE analysis, assume a groundwater depth of about 10 feet below existing ground
surface (approximately Elev. 5019 feet).
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Drilling to design depth should be possible with conventional single-flight power augers on the
majority of the site; however, specialized drilling equipment may be required for very hard bedrock
layers.
Groundwater/caving soil conditions indicate that temporary steel casing may be required to
properly drill and clean piers prior to concrete placement. Groundwater should be removed from
each pier hole prior to concrete placement. Pier concrete should be placed immediately after
completion of drilling and cleaning. If pier concrete cannot be placed in dry conditions, a tremie
should be used for concrete placement. Free-fall concrete placement in piers will only be
acceptable if provisions are taken to avoid striking the concrete on the sides of the hole or
reinforcing steel. The use of a bottom-dump hopper, or an elephant's trunk discharging near the
bottom of the hole where concrete segregation will be minimized, is recommended. Due to
potential sloughing and raveling, foundation concrete quantities may exceed calculated geometric
volumes.
Casing should be withdrawn in a slow continuous manner maintaining a sufficient head of
concrete to prevent infiltration of water or caving soils or the creation of voids in pier concrete.
Pier concrete should have a relatively high fluidity when placed in cased pier holes or through a
tremie. Pier concrete with slump in the range of 5 to 7 inches is recommended.
We recommend the sides of each pier should be mechanically roughened in the claystone bearing
strata. This should be accomplished by a roughening tooth placed on the auger. Shaft bearing
surfaces must be cleaned prior to concrete placement. A representative of Terracon should
observe the bearing surface and shaft configuration.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
A slab-on-grade may be utilized for the interior floor system for the proposed buildings provided
the on-site soils are over-excavated to a depth of at least 2 feet, moisture conditioned, and
compacted on-site soils. The bottom of the excavation should be scarified, moisture conditioned
and recompacted as described in Site Preparation. Properly compacted and moisture
conditioned on-site soils can be used as a portion of the backfill beneath the floor system, provided
at least 1 foot of imported granular fill (CDOT Class 1 structure backfill), properly moisture
conditioned, compacted, is placed directly beneath the slab.
Subgrade soils beneath interior and exterior slabs as well as below the recommended 2 feet of
engineered fill below floor slabs should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture
conditioned and compacted. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be
maintained until slab construction.
Even when bearing on properly prepared soils, movement of the slab-on-grade floor system is
possible should the subgrade soils undergo an increase in moisture content. We estimate
movement of about 1 inch is possible. If the owner cannot accept the risk of slab movement, a
structural floor should be used. If conventional slab-on-grade is utilized, the subgrade soils should
be over-excavated and prepared as presented in the Site Preparation section of this report.
For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade subjected to point loadings, a modulus of 200
pci may be used for floors supported on at least 1 foot of CDOT Class 1 structure backfill.
Additional floor 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 saw-cut in slabs in accordance with ACI Design Manual, Section
302.1R-37 8.3.12 (tooled control joints are not recommended) to control the location and
extent of cracking.
Interior utility trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance
with the recommendations presented in the Site Preparation section of this report.
Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs that will be
covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious floor coverings,
or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant
the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI
302 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.
Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual,
Section 302.1R are recommended.
Movements of slabs-on-grade using the recommendations discussed in previous sections of this
report will likely be reduced and tend to be more uniform. The estimates discussed above assume
that the other recommendations in this report are followed. Additional movement could occur
should the subsurface soils become wetted to significant depths, which could result in potential
excessive movement causing uneven floor slabs and severe cracking. This could be due to over
watering of landscaping, poor drainage, improperly functioning drain systems, and/or broken utility
lines. Therefore, it is imperative that the recommendations presented in this report be followed.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
BELOW-GRADE STRUCTURES
Below-grade structures or reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite
sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following
table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall
restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being
restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for
design of free-standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at-rest"
condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not
include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls.
Earth Pressure Coefficients
Earth Pressure
Conditions
Coefficient for
Backfill Type
Equivalent Fluid
Density (pcf)
Surcharge
Pressure, p1 (psf)
Earth Pressure,
p2 (psf)
Active (Ka) Granular - 0.36
Lean Clay - 0.42
40
50
(0.36)S
(0.42)S
(40)H
(50)H
At-Rest (Ko) Granular - 0.44
Lean Clay - 0.58
57
70
(0.44)S
(0.58)S
(57)H
(70)H
Passive (Kp) Granular 3.5
Lean Clay - 2.4
360
290
---
---
---
---
Applicable conditions to the above include:
For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about
0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height
For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance
Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure
In-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 130 pcf for granular materials and 120 for clay soils.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and 98 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry
density
Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included
No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall
No dynamic loading
No safety factor included
Ignore passive pressure in frost zone
Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils or low plasticity cohesive soils.
For the granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out and up from the base of
the wall at an angle of at least 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active and passive cases,
respectively. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.32 should be used as the ultimate
coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil.
A perforated rigid plastic or metal drain line installed behind the base of walls that extend below
adjacent grade is recommended to prevent hydrostatic loading on the walls. The invert of a drain
line around a below-grade building area or exterior retaining wall should be placed near
foundation bearing level. The drain line should be sloped to provide positive gravity drainage or
to a sump pit and pump. The drain line should be surrounded by clean, free-draining granular
material having less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The free-draining aggregate
should be encapsulated in a filter fabric. The granular fill should extend to within 2 feet of final
grade, where it should be capped with compacted cohesive fill to reduce infiltration of surface
water into the drain system.
As an alternative to free-draining granular fill, a pre-fabricated drainage structure may be used.
A pre-fabricated drainage structure is a plastic drainage core or mesh which is covered with filter
fabric to prevent soil intrusion, and is fastened to the wall prior to placing backfill.
To control hydrostatic pressure behind the wall we recommend that a drain be installed at the
foundation wall with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If this is not possible, then
combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for lean clay backfill using
an equivalent fluid weighing 90 and 100 pcf for active and at-rest conditions, respectively. For
granular backfill, an equivalent fluid weighing 85 and 90 pcf should be used for active and at-rest,
respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor
loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer
than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided.
We understand a swimming pool is conceptually planned near the center portion of the project
site. The construction and performance of the pool will be highly affected by the presence of
shallow bedrock and groundwater below existing site grades. Specialized excavation equipment
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
may be required to excavate bedrock found 6 to 9 feet below site grades. In addition, construction
and/or permanent dewatering may be required for swimming pool construction and service.
Excavation of the pool area by conventional rubber-tired equipment may encounter soft or very
loose soils and/or severe pumping when nearing groundwater level. It may be necessary to
excavate the deep portion of the pool with a backhoe or power shovel.
If the excavation extends into the groundwater, a one-piece fiberglass or similar pool should be
installed. As a precaution, pressure relief valves should be placed in the deep end of any pool
constructed to prevent flotation should groundwater rise when the pool is empty. We recommend
coordination with a qualified swimming pool specialty contractor to discuss alternatives to address
the effects of shallow groundwater on the proposed swimming pool.
If groundwater levels rise above the bottom of the pool when the pool is empty, uplift loads could
be imposed on the pool bottom slab and hydrostatic pressure could be imposed on the pool walls,
which could cause heaving, cracking, or other damage to the pool bottom slab and walls. The
pool design is conceptual at this point, and the pool designs should include pressure relief valves
that will allow backflow of groundwater into the empty pool in order to help reduce the potential
for hydrostatic loading and subsequent heaving, cracking, or other damage.
A drainage system should be provided around and beneath the pool. The drain should consist of
a minimum 6-inch layer of clean gravel (minimum 3/4-inch size) beneath and along the sides of
the pool. The top of the drain layer should be sealed with 18 inches of relatively impermeable soil
at the surface. The gravel layer beneath the pool should be sloped so that it will drain into tiles
or perforated drainpipe. The layout of the perforated pipe should include at least one pipe running
down the center of the pool lengthwise. Cross-connecting pipes, spanning with the pool, should
be placed at 6-foot centers. The cross-connecting pipes should be joined to the center pipe with
or sloped to a sump located in the equipment room, permitting pump discharge.
The bottom of the excavation beneath the gravel layer and the pipe should be lined with an
impervious membrane (polyethylene film or equal) to reduce potential moisture fluctuations in the
subgrade soils. Pressure relief valves should be provided in the base of the pool to prevent
excessive uplift pressures from developing in the event of drain system failure.
The soils that will support deck slabs around the pool could expand with increasing moisture
content. To reduce possible damage that could be caused by expansive soils, we recommend:
Deck slabs be supported on fill with no, or very low, expansion potential;
Strict moisture-density control during placement of subgrade fill;
Placement of effective control joints on relatively close centers and isolation joints between
slabs and other structural elements;
Provision for adequate drainage in areas adjoining the slabs; and
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Use of designs which allow vertical movement between the deck slabs and adjoining
structural elements.
Fill, backfill, and surface drainage in the pool area should be place in accordance with the
recommendations presented in the Site Preparation section of this report. Grading should be
provided for diversion of deck surface runoff away from the pool area. In no case should water be
allowed to pond around the slab perimeter.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase.
Fills are typically placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However as construction proceeds,
the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or
rainfall/snow melt. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for pavement
construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully evaluated
at the time of pavement construction for signs of disturbance or instability. We recommend the
pavement subgrade be thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem-axle dump truck prior to final
grading and paving. All pavement areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted
to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.
Design of new privately-maintained pavements for the project has been based on the procedures
described by the National Asphalt Pavement Associations (NAPA) and the American Concrete
Institute (ACI).
We assumed the following design parameters for NAPA flexible pavement thickness design:
Automobile Parking Areas
Class I - Parking stalls and parking lots for cars and pick-up trucks, with
Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) up to 7,000 over 20 years
Main Traffic Corridors
Class II Parking lots with a maximum of 10 trucks per day with Equivalent
Single Axle Load (ESAL) up to 27,000 over 20 years (Including trash trucks)
Subgrade Soil Characteristics
USCS Classification SC, classified by NAPA as medium
We assumed the following design parameters for ACI rigid pavement thickness design based
upon the average daily truck traffic (ADTT):
Automobile Parking Areas
ACI Category A: Automobile parking with an ADTT of 1 over 20 years
Main Traffic Corridors
ACI Category A: Automobile parking area and service lanes with an ADTT of
up to 10 over 20 years
Subgrade Soil Characteristics
USCS Classification SC
Concrete modulus of rupture value of 600 psi
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
We should be contacted to confirm and/or modify the recommendations contained herein if actual
traffic volumes differ from the assumed values shown above.
Recommended alternatives for flexible and rigid pavements are summarized for each traffic area
as follows:
Traffic Area Alternative
Recommended Pavement Thicknesses (Inches)
Asphaltic
Concrete
Surface
Aggregate
Base Course
Portland
Cement
Concrete
Total
Automobile Parking
(NAPA Class I and
ACI Category A)
A 3½ 6 - 9½
B - - 4½ 4½
Service Lanes
(NAPA Class II and
ACI Category A)
A 4½ 6 - 10½
B - - 5 5
Aggregate base course (if used on the site) should consist of a blend of sand and gravel which
meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for aggregate
base course. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches and
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM
D698.
Asphaltic concrete should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler and additives (if required)
and approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix
designs stating the Superpave properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and
recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in asphalt concrete should
meet particular gradations. Material meeting CDOT Grading S or SX specifications or equivalent
is recommended for asphalt concrete. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to
verify their adequacy. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and compacted
within a range of 92 to 96 percent of the theoretical maximum (Rice) density (ASTM D2041).
Where rigid pavements are used, the concrete should be produced from an approved mix design
with the following minimum properties:
Properties Value
Compressive strength 4,000 psi
Cement type Type I or II portland cement
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Properties Value
Entrained air content (%) 5 to 8
Concrete aggregate ASTM C33 and CDOT section 703
Concrete should be deposited by truck mixers or agitators and placed a maximum of 90 minutes
from the time the water is added to the mix. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided
as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation per ACI 325. The
location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry.
Although not required for structural support, a minimum 4-inch thick aggregate base course layer
is recommended for the PCC pavements to help reduce the potential for slab curl, shrinkage
PCC pavements to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be
sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer.
For areas subject to concentrated and repetitive loading conditions (if any) such as dumpster
pads, truck delivery docks and ingress/egress aprons, we recommend using a portland cement
concrete pavement with a thickness of at least 6 inches underlain by at least 4 inches of granular
base. Prior to placement of the granular base, the areas should be thoroughly proofrolled. For
dumpster pads, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the container and
tipping axle of the refuse truck.
Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive
maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and
layout of pavements:
Site grades should slope a minimum of 2 percent away from the pavements;
The subgrade and the pavement surface have a minimum 2 percent slope to promote proper
surface drainage;
Consider appropriate edge drainage and pavement under drain systems;
Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting;
Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately;
Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to
subgrade soils; and
Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.
Openings in pavement, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration into
surrounding pavements. Water collects in the islands and migrates into the surrounding subgrade
soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for islands with
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near-surface soils. The civil design
for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or to collect and
discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drains connected to the
storm water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeable barriers preventing lateral
migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below the pavement structure.
Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an ongoing pavement
management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventive
maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching)
and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first
priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest
return on investment for pavements.
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
April 18, 2017 Terracon Project No. 20165099 (revised)
Responsive Resourceful Reliable
Our work is conducted with the understanding of the project as described in the proposal, and will
incorporate collaboration with the design team prior to completing our services. Terracon has
requested verification of all stated assumptions. Revision of our understanding to reflect actual
conditions important to our work will be based on these verifications and will be reflected in the
final report. The design team should collaborate with Terracon to confirm these assumptions.
The design team should also collaborate with Terracon to prepare the final design plans and
specifications. This facilitates the incorporation of our opinions related to implementation of our
geotechnical recommendations.
Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the geotechnical conditions in
the area, the data obtained from the site exploration performed and from our understanding of the
project. Variations will occur between exploration point locations, across the site, or due to the
modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not
become evident until during or after construction. So, Terracon should be retained to provide
observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other
earth-related construction phases of the project. If variations appear, we can provide further
evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our
observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified so that we can provide
evaluation and supplemental recommendations.
Our scope of services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or
biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of
pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for
such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
Our services and any correspondence are intended for the exclusive use of our client for specific
application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or
made.
Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any
use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there
may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact
excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site
characterization for that specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for
costing. Site safety, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewatering
requirements/design are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature,
design, or location of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be
considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in
writing.
SITE LOCATION
Elizabeth Street Project
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Fort Collins, CO
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: FORT COLLINS, CO (1984).
20165099
MGH
EDB
EDB 4/10/2017
EDB
SITE
EXPLORATION PLAN
Elizabeth Street Project
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Fort Collins, CO
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS
NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
20165099
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED
BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS
MGH
EDB
EDB
AS SHOWN
4/10/2017
EDB
9-50
7-6-10
N=16
20
50/5"
26-50
31
50/4"
3.5
9.0
19.8
FILL: CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine to coarse
grained, brown, on cobble at 2 feet
SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to coarse grained,
reddish-brown to yellowish-brown, medium dense, up to
1/2 inch gravel
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, fine grained, yellowish-brown to
greenish-brown, hard to very hard
Boring Terminated at 19.8 Feet
14
12
15
13
12
119
5024.5
5019
5008
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57509° Longitude: -105.09798°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
3.25 (ID) Hollow-stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 11/3/2016
BORING LOG NO. 1
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: R. Geary
Boring Completed: 11/3/2016
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
Referenced City of Fort Collins BM 19-97 (El.
5025.74 NAVD88)
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
6-8-12
N=20
12-17-10
N=27
31
50/5"
21-25-45
N=70
23-37-48
N=85
50/5"
3.0
9.0
24.4
FILL: CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC), fine to
coarse grained, brown
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to coarse
grained, reddish-brown to yellowish-brown, medium
dense
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, fine grained, yellowish-brown to
greenish-brown, hard to very hard
Boring Terminated at 24.4 Feet
10 31
6
14
16
10
5024 37-17-20
5018
5002.5
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.5748° Longitude: -105.09799°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
3.25 (ID) Hollow-stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 11/3/2016
BORING LOG NO. 2
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: R. Geary
Boring Completed: 11/3/2016
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
Referenced City of Fort Collins BM 19-97 (El.
5025.74 NAVD88)
10-11
13-15-22
N=37
35
50/5"
13-37
50/4"
33-50
15
50/3"
3.5
9.0
24.8
FILL: CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine to coarse
grained, brown
SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM), fine to coarse
grained, reddish-brown to yellowish-brown, dense
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE (CL), fine grained, yellowish-brown to
greenish-brown, hard to very hard, trace of iron
oxidation
Boring Terminated at 24.8 Feet
16
65
18
5
13
12
8
11
109
121
NP
40-18-22
5024
5018.5
5002.5
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57495° Longitude: -105.09783°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
3.25 (ID) Hollow-stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 11/3/2016
BORING LOG NO. 3
CLIENT: EdR
5-6-8
N=14
13-26
12-24
20-50
30-41-44
N=85
18-29-47
N=76
3.5
6.0
25.5
FILL: CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine to coarse
grained, brown
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL, fine to coarse
grained, reddish-brown to yellowish-brown, medium
dense
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, fine grained, yellowish-brown to
greenish-brown, hard to very hard
Boring Terminated at 25.5 Feet
UC 6492 4.6
12
17
17
12
13
14
111
110
5023.5
5021
5001.5
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57493° Longitude: -105.0976°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
3.25 (ID) Hollow-stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-75
Boring Started: 11/3/2016
BORING LOG NO. 4
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: R. Geary
Boring Completed: 11/3/2016
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
5-10
6-10
10-12-15
N=27
45-50/2"
50/6"
50/5"
50/5"
50/5"
0.3
0.6
8.0
12.0
34.4
ASPHALT, approximately 4 inches
BASE COURSE, approximately 3 inches
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, stiff
SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM), brown to to red
brown, medium dense
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, light brown to yellow/orange brown,
very hard
Boring Terminated at 34.4 Feet
UC 5113 7.9
21
21
17
11
14
17
15
15
13
105
107
NP
5027
5027
5019.5
5015.5
4993
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57549° Longitude: -105.09822°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4-inch solid-stem augers
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled immediately after drilling with soil cuttings
and patched with hot mix asphalt
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
5-12
6-8-9
N=17
10-35
39-50/4"
50/4"
50/5"
50/5"
50/6"
0.3
0.7
4.5
8.0
34.5
ASPHALT, approximately 4 inches
BASE COURSE, approximately 4 inches
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), dark brown, stiff to very
stiff
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, with gravel, light brown,
stiff to very stiff
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, light brown to yellow/orange brown,
firm to very hard, approximately 2 feet of weathered
bedrock
Boring Terminated at 34.5 Feet
53
23
19
14
11
10
11
11
10
100
118
42-18-24
5028.5
5028
5024
5020.5
4994
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57525° Longitude: -105.09813°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4-inch solid-stem augers
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled immediately after drilling with soil cuttings
and patched with hot mix asphalt
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
6-5-7
N=12
6-15
10-12-20
N=32
26-50/5"
30-50/5"
50/6"
39-50/3"
50/5"
0.3
0.6
7.0
34.4
ASPHALT, approximately 3 inches
BASE COURSE, approximately 4 inches
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), with gravel, red brown,
stiff to very stiff
BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and
CLAYSTONE, brown to light brown and orange
brown, medium hard to very hard, approximately 3 feet
of weathered bedrock
Boring Terminated at 34.4 Feet
18 53
13
13
13
11
11
10
10
114
32-18-14
5029
5029
5022.5
4995
GRAPHIC LOG
StratificationAutomatic lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type:
THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
STRENGTH TEST
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
DEPTH
LOCATION
Latitude: 40.57494° Longitude: -105.09815°
See Exploration Plan
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:
4-inch solid-stem auger
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled immediately after drilling with soil cuttings
and patched with hot mix asphalt
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-55
Boring Started: 3/16/2017
BORING LOG NO. 7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 20 40 60 80 100
CL or OL CH or OH
ML or OL
MH or OH
Boring ID Depth PL PI Description
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL
SANDY LEAN CLAY
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL
SANDY LEAN CLAY
SANDY LEAN CLAY
SC
SM
CL
SM
CL
CL
Fines
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
I
T
Y
I
N
D
E
X
LIQUID LIMIT
"U" Line
"A" Line
37
NP
40
NP
42
32
17
NP
18
NP
18
18
31
16
65
21
53
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
2
3
3
5
6
37
NP
40
NP
42
0.45
0.197
0.525
2.392
1.515
0.139
12.5
19
4.75
19
12.5
6 16
20 30
40 50
1.5 6 200
810
15.3
25.5
0.0
22.7
1.7
14
LL PL PI
1 4
3/4 1/2
60
fine
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
7 32
19 0.144
6 16
20 30
40 50
1.5 6 200
810
9.9
14
LL PL PI
1 4
3/4 1/2
60
fine
7
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
coarse fine
U.HYDROMETERS. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
18 14
D100
Cc Cu
SILT OR CLAY
4
D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand
2 - 3.5
3/8 3 100
3 2 140
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND
37.2
D60
coarse medium
Boring ID Depth
Boring ID Depth
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
2 - 3.5
ASTM D422 / ASTM C136
WC (%)
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
100 1,000 10,000
AXIAL STRAIN, %
PRESSURE, psf
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D4546
NOTES: Sample exhibited 0.1 percent compression at an applied pressure of 500 psf.
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Specimen Identification Classification , pcf
4 111 17
WC, %
6 - 7 ft BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and CLAYSTONE
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
100 1,000 10,000
AXIAL STRAIN, %
PRESSURE, psf
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D4546
NOTES: Sample exhibited 1.6 percent swell upon wetting under an applied pressure of 150 psf.
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Specimen Identification Classification , pcf
5 105 21
WC, %
2 - 3 ft SANDY LEAN CLAY
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
100 1,000 10,000
AXIAL STRAIN, %
PRESSURE, psf
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D4546
NOTES: Sample exhibited 2.2 percent swell upon wetting under an applied pressure of 500 psf.
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Specimen Identification Classification , pcf
6 118 14
WC, %
9 - 10 ft BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and CLAYSTONE
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
100 1,000 10,000
AXIAL STRAIN, %
PRESSURE, psf
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST
ASTM D4546
NOTES: Sample exhibited 0.1 percent compression upon wetting under an applied pressure of 500 psf.
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth
Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
Specimen Identification Classification , pcf
7 114 13
WC, %
4 - 5 ft SANDY LEAN CLAY
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
0 2 4 6 8 10
2.40
4.82
6492
Assumed Specific Gravity:
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf)
Undrained Shear Strength: (psf)
Calculated Void Ratio:
Height / Diameter Ratio:
SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE SPECIMEN TEST DATA
2.01
4.57
Moisture Content: %
Dry Density: pcf
COMPRESSIVE STRESS - psf
DESCRIPTION: BEDROCK: INTERBEDDED SANDSTONE and CLAYSTONE
17
3246
LL PL PI Percent < #200 Sieve
AXIAL STRAIN - %
Remarks:
ASTM D2166
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
Failure Mode: Shear (dashed)
Diameter: in.
Height: in.
Calculated Saturation: %
Failure Strain: %
Strain Rate: in/min
115
SAMPLE TYPE: D&M RING SAMPLE LOCATION: 4 @ 6 - 7 feet
PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. UNCONFINED 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
0 2 4 6 8 10
2.39
6.05
5113
Assumed Specific Gravity:
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf)
Undrained Shear Strength: (psf)
Calculated Void Ratio:
Height / Diameter Ratio:
SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE SPECIMEN TEST DATA
2.53
7.93
Moisture Content: %
Dry Density: pcf
COMPRESSIVE STRESS - psf
DESCRIPTION:
17
2557
LL PL PI Percent < #200 Sieve
AXIAL STRAIN - %
Remarks:
ASTM D2166
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
Failure Mode: Shear (dashed)
Diameter: in.
Height: in.
Calculated Saturation: %
Failure Strain: %
Strain Rate: in/min
107
SAMPLE TYPE: D&M RING SAMPLE LOCATION: 5 @ 4 - 5 feet
PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. UNCONFINED 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
TASK NO: 161107023
Analytical Results
Terracon, Inc. - Fort Collins
Kurt F. Stauder
Company:
Report To:
Company:
Bill To:
1901 Sharp Point Drive
Suite C
Fort Collins CO 80525
Accounts Payable
Terracon, Inc. - A/P
18001 W. 106th St
Suite 300
Olathe KS 66061
Date Reported: 11/9/16
Task No.: 161107023
Matrix: Soil - Geotech
Date Received: 11/7/16
Client Project:
Client PO:
Customer Sample ID 2016 B3 @ 9ft
Test Method
Lab Number: 161107023-01
Result
Sulfate - Water Soluble 0.006 % AASHTO T290-91/ ASTM D4327
Customer Sample ID 2016 B1 @ 2ft
Test Method
Lab Number: 161107023-02
Result
Sulfate - Water Soluble 0.018 % AASHTO T290-91/ ASTM D4327
240 South Main Street / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / 303-659-2313
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 507 / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / Fax: 303-659-2315
DATA APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY
Abbreviations/ References:
161107023
AASHTO - American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials.
ASA - American Society of Agronomy.
DIPRA - Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association Handbook of Ductile Iron Pipe.
TASK NO: 170327012
Analytical Results
Terracon, Inc. - Fort Collins
Eric D. Bernhardt
Company:
Report To:
Company:
Bill To:
1901 Sharp Point Drive
Suite C
Fort Collins CO 80525
Accounts Payable
Terracon, Inc. - A/P
18001 W. 106th St
Suite 300
Olathe KS 66061
20165099
Date Reported: 4/3/17
Task No.: 170327012
Matrix: Soil - Geotech
Date Received: 3/27/17
Client Project:
Client PO:
Customer Sample ID 6 @ 4-5.5
Test Method
Lab Number: 170327012-01
Result
Sulfate - Water Soluble 0.027 % AASHTO T290-91/ ASTM D4327
240 South Main Street / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / 303-659-2313
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 507 / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / Fax: 303-659-2315
DATA APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY
Abbreviations/ References:
170327012
AASHTO - American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials.
ASA - American Society of Agronomy.
DIPRA - Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association Handbook of Ductile Iron Pipe.
11/11/2016 20165099
Elizabeth Street Project Fort Collins, Colorado
2,000 to 4,000
Unconfined
Compressive
Strength
Qu, (psf)
less than 500
500 to 1,000
1,000 to 2,000
4,000 to 8,000
> 8,000
Modified
Dames &
Moore Ring
Sampler
Standard
Penetration
Test
Trace
PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs are
the levels measured in the borehole at the times
indicated. Groundwater level variations will occur
over time. In low permeability soils, accurate
determination of groundwater levels is not possible
with short term water level observations.
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
GENERAL NOTES
> 30
11 - 30
Low 1 - 10
Non-plastic
Plasticity Index
#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm
Boulders
Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)
Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)
Sand
Silt or Clay Passing #200 sieve (0.075mm)
Particle Size
Water Level After
a Specified Period of Time
Water Level After a
Specified Period of Time
Water Initially
Encountered
Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry
weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less
than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they
are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added
according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis
of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracy of
such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no ctual topographical survey was conducted
to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the
area.
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Exhibit C-2
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A
Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name B
Coarse Grained Soils:
More than 50% retained
on No. 200 sieve
Gravels:
More than 50% of
coarse fraction retained
on No. 4 sieve
Clean Gravels:
Less than 5% fines C
Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F
Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F
Gravels with Fines:
More than 12% fines C
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,G,H
Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,G,H
Sands:
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes No. 4
sieve
Clean Sands:
Less than 5% fines D
Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 E SW Well-graded sand I
Cu 6 and/or 1 Cc 3 E SP Poorly graded sand I
Sands with Fines:
More than 12% fines D
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G,H,I
Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G,H,I
Fine-Grained Soils:
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit less than 50
Inorganic:
PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line J CL Lean clay K,L,M
PI 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K,L,M
Organic:
Liquid limit - oven dried
0.75 OL
Organic clay K,L,M,N
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit 50 or more
Inorganic:
PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K,L,M
PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M
Organic:
Liquid limit - oven dried
0.75 OH
Organic clay K,L,M,P
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,Q
Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles
or boulders, or both” to group name.
DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES
Exhibit C-3
WEATHERING
Fresh Rock fresh, crystals bright, few joints may show slight staining. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Very slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, some joints may show thin clay coatings, crystals in broken face show
bright. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, and discoloration extends into rock up to 1 in. Joints may contain clay. In
granitoid rocks some occasional feldspar crystals are dull and discolored. Crystalline rocks ring under hammer.
Moderate Significant portions of rock show discoloration and weathering effects. In granitoid rocks, most feldspars are dull
and discolored; some show clayey. Rock has dull sound under hammer and shows significant loss of strength
as compared with fresh rock.
Moderately severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars dull and discolored and majority
show kaolinization. Rock shows severe loss of strength and can be excavated with geologist’s pick.
Severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock “fabric” clear and evident, but reduced in strength to strong
soil. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars kaolinized to some extent. Some fragments of strong rock usually left.
Very severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock “fabric” discernible, but mass effectively reduced to “soil” with
only fragments of strong rock remaining.
Complete Rock reduced to ”soil”. Rock “fabric” not discernible or discernible only in small, scattered locations. Quartz may
be present as dikes or stringers.
HARDNESS (for engineering description of rock – not to be confused with Moh’s scale for minerals)
Very hard Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick. Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard blows of
geologist’s pick.
Hard Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen.
Moderately hard Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to ¼ in. deep can be excavated by hard blow of point of
a geologist’s pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow.
Medium Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in. deep by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small
chips to pieces about 1-in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist’s pick.
Soft Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point. Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches in
size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Very soft Can be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with point of pick. Pieces 1-in. or more in thickness can be
broken with finger pressure. Can be scratched readily by fingernail.
Joint, Bedding, and Foliation Spacing in Rock
a
Spacing Joints Bedding/Foliation
Less than 2 in. Very close Very thin
2 in. – 1 ft. Close Thin
1 ft. – 3 ft. Moderately close Medium
3 ft. – 10 ft. Wide Thick
More than 10 ft. Very wide Very thick
a. Spacing refers to the distance normal to the planes, of the described feature, which are parallel to each other or nearly so.
Rock Quality Designator (RQD) a Joint Openness Descriptors
RQD, as a percentage Diagnostic description Openness Descriptor
Exceeding 90 Excellent No Visible Separation Tight
90 – 75 Good Less than 1/32 in. Slightly Open
75 – 50 Fair 1/32 to 1/8 in. Moderately Open
50 – 25 Poor 1/8 to 3/8 in. Open
Less than 25 Very poor 3/8 in. to 0.1 ft. Moderately Wide
a. RQD (given as a percentage) = length of core in pieces Greater than 0.1 ft. Wide
4 in. and longer/length of run.
References: American Society of Civil Engineers. Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice - No. 56. Subsurface Investigation for
Design and Construction of Foundations of Buildings. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1976. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering Geology Field Manual.
C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =
10 60
2
30
D x D
(D )
F If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.
G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.
I If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.
J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,”
whichever is predominant.
L If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to
group name.
M If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
“gravelly” to group name.
N PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
O PI 4 or plots below “A” line.
P PI plots on or above “A” line.
Q PI plots below “A” line.
LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES
SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS
N
(HP)
(T)
(DCP)
UC
(PID)
(OVA)
Standard Penetration Test
Resistance (Blows/Ft.)
Hand Penetrometer
Torvane
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
Unconfined Compressive
Strength
Photo-Ionization Detector
Organic Vapor Analyzer
Medium
Over 12 in. (300 mm) 0
>12
5-12
<5
Percent of
Dry Weight
Major Component of Sample Term
Modifier
With
Trace
Descriptive Term(s) of
other constituents
Modifier >30
<15
Percent of
Dry Weight
Descriptive Term(s) of
other constituents
With 15-29
High
2 - 4
BEDROCK
Standard
Penetration
or N-Value
Blows/Ft.
Very Loose 0 - 3
STRENGTH TERMS
Very Soft
(More than 50% retained on No. 200
sieve.)
Density determined by Standard
Penetration Resistance
(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)
Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing,
field visual-manual procedures or standard penetration
resistance
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS
30 - 49
50 - 79
>79
Descriptive
Term
(Consistency)
Firm
< 20 Weathered
Hard
Very Hard
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
30 - 50
> 50
5 - 9
10 - 18
Descriptive
Term
(Consistency)
8 - 15
> 30
Ring
Sampler
Blows/Ft.
10 - 29
> 99
Medium Hard
< 3
3 - 4
19 - 42
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Standard
Penetration
or N-Value
Blows/Ft.
> 42
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
7 - 18
19 - 58
Descriptive Term
(Density)
0 - 6
4 - 9
59 - 98
_
20 - 29
< 30
30 - 49
50 - 89
90 - 119
15 - 30 > 119
Standard
Penetration or
N-Value
Blows/Ft.
18
USCS Classification
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
%Silt %Fines
52.9
%Clay
PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GRAIN SIZE: USCS-2 20165099.GPJ TERRACON2015.GDT 4/18/17
3
3
5
6
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
coarse fine
U.HYDROMETERS. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
17
NP
18
NP
18
20
NP
22
NP
24
D100
Cc Cu
SILT OR CLAY
4
D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand
2 - 3.5
4 - 5.5
14 - 15.4
9 - 10.5
4 - 5.5
3/8 3 100
3 2 140
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND
53.4
58.0
35.3
56.5
45.7
D60
coarse medium
Boring ID Depth
Boring ID Depth
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
2 - 3.5
4 - 5.5
14 - 15.4
9 - 10.5
4 - 5.5
ASTM D422 / ASTM C136
WC (%)
10
5
12
11
19
USCS Classification
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC)
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
%Silt %Fines
31.4
16.5
64.7
20.8
52.7
%Clay
PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GRAIN SIZE: USCS-2 20165099.GPJ TERRACON2015.GDT 4/18/17
53
LL USCS
2
3
3
5
6
7
ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS
ASTM D4318
2 - 3.5
4 - 5.5
14 - 15.4
9 - 10.5
4 - 5.5
2 - 3.5
20
NP
22
NP
24
14
PROJECT NUMBER: 20165099
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
SITE: 1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
1901 Sharp Point Dr Ste C
Fort Collins, CO
LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. ATTERBERG LIMITS 20165099.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 4/18/17
CL-ML
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: Drilling Engineers Inc.
Boring Completed: 3/16/2017
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
or immediately after drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5029.5 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
25
30
SAMPLE TYPE
Notes:
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-55
Boring Started: 3/16/2017
BORING LOG NO. 6
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 3/16/2017
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
or immediately after drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5028.6 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
25
30
SAMPLE TYPE
Project No.: 20165099
Drill Rig: CME-55
Boring Started: 3/16/2017
BORING LOG NO. 5
CLIENT: EdR
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: Drilling Engineers, Inc.
Boring Completed: 3/16/2017
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
11' while drilling
13.6' immediately after drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5027.5 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
25
30
SAMPLE TYPE
Referenced City of Fort Collins BM 19-97 (El.
5025.74 NAVD88)
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
20.9 feet after 24 hours
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5027.2 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
25
SAMPLE TYPE
Memphis, Tennessee
Driller: R. Geary
Boring Completed: 11/3/2016
PROJECT: Elizabeth Street Project
Referenced City of Fort Collins BM 19-97 (El.
5025.74 NAVD88)
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
15.8 feet after 24 hours
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5027.5 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
SAMPLE TYPE
1208 and 1220 West Elizabeth Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
10.2 feet after 24 hours
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5026.9 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
20
SAMPLE TYPE
SITE:
No free water observed during drilling
No free water observed after 24 hours
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
TEST TYPE
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)
STRAIN (%)
PERCENT FINES
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pcf)
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-PL-PI
ELEVATION (Ft.)
Surface Elev.: 5028.0 (Ft.)
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
DEPTH (Ft.)
5
10
15
SAMPLE TYPE