The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTHE QUARRY BY WATERMARK - PDP200019 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTGEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF HOBBIT STREET, EAST OF SOUTH SHIELDS STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1152075 Prepared for: Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc. 401 West Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Attn: Mr. Steve Schroyer (steve.schroyer@blueocean-inc.com) Director of Real Estate Prepared by: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE W INDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 224-1522 FAX (970) 663-0282 August 21, 2015 Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc. 401 West Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Attn: Mr. Steve Schroyer (steve.schroyer@blueocean-inc.com) Director of Real Estate Re: Geotechnical Exploration Report Shields Mixed Use Development South of Hobbit Street, East of South Shields Street Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project No. 1152075 Mr. Schroyer: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC personnel for the referenced project. For this study, a total of eighteen (18) soil borings were drilled on July 29 and August 5, 2015 at the approximate locations as indicated on the enclosed Test Boring Location Diagram. The borings were extended to depths of approximately twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) feet below existing site grades. Individual boring logs, including groundwater observations, depth to bedrock, and results of laboratory testing are included as a part of the attached report. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated July 14, 2015. We understand this project involves the development of a 21 acre parcel located east of South Shields Street and south of Hobbit Street in Fort Collins, Colorado. It is our understanding import materials from the proposed new Colorado State University (CSU) multipurpose stadium will be used to raise existing site grades by 3 to 5 feet. We understand this project involves the construction of multi-unit residential apartments with a small retail component, retail buildings, a townhome area and a clubhouse with pool. Foundation loads for the structures are expected to be light to moderate and floor loads are expected to be light. The site is currently vacant land with gentle slopes generally to the east. Based on results of the field borings and laboratory testing, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. A surficial layer of vegetation and topsoil was encountered at all boring locations underlain by native lean clay to clayey sand. The essentially cohesive materials were generally underlain by clayey/silty sand and gravel at depths of 5 to 15 feet below existing site Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 2 grades. The essentially granular materials were generally underlain by sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock at approximate depths of 13 to 19 feet below existing site grades to the depths explored, approximately 20 to 25 feet below existing grades. Bedrock was not encountered in borings B-9 and B-14. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and bedrock types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. At the time of drilling, free water was observed in all of the borings at depths of approximately 9 to 14-feet below site grades. The cohesive soils varied from medium stiff to very stiff / medium dense in consistency and generally exhibited low swell potential and low bearing capacity characteristics. The lower portion of the essentially cohesive zone encroaching into groundwater level, exhibited soft/compressible conditions with an increase in moisture content. The silty/clayey sand and gravel materials were generally medium dense with occasional loose zones observed. The sandstone/siltstone/claystone was generally moderately hard and exhibited moderate to high bearing characteristics. Based on the materials observed within the boring locations, the proposed fill materials to be imported from the proposed new CSU multipurpose stadium location and the anticipated foundation loads, we believe the apartment buildings, commercial/retail structures, and the clubhouse could be supported on PT slab-on-grade foundation/floor system or conventional type spread footings bearing on native materials or a zone of engineered fill material placed and compacted as described within this report. In general, it appears the in-situ site materials and proposed import materials could be used for support of interior slab-on-grades, exterior flatwork, and site pavements. Post-construction movement cannot be eliminated. Additionally the essentially cohesive subsoil materials may be subject to strength loss and instability when wetted. Close monitoring and evaluation during the construction phase should be performed to reduce post-construction movement. Geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundation systems, support of floor slabs and pavements, and swimming pool construction are provided within the text of the enclosed report. A final, more thorough subsurface exploration should be performed for the various buildings after final grades, loads and building footprint/layouts, etc. have been determined. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF HOBBIT STREET, EAST OF SOUTH SHIELDS STREET FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1152075 August 21, 2015 INTRODUCTION The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed Shields mixed use development located east of South Shields Street and south of Hobbit Street in Fort Collins, Colorado has been completed. This study was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated July 14, 2015. For this study, a total of eighteen (18) soil borings were drilled on July 29 and August 5, 2015 within the proposed building areas at the site. Those borings were extended to approximate depths of 20 to 25-feet below existing site grades. Based on the information provided to us from Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc., site grades are expected to be raised 3 to 5 feet and the proposed development will generally include the construction of multi-unit residential apartments with a small retail component, retail buildings, townhomes, and a clubhouse with pool. The multi-unit residential apartment buildings are anticipated to be three- story, wood-frame, post-tensioned (PT) slab-on-grade foundation (no basement) buildings, while the retail buildings are expected to be single-story and the townhomes to be one and two-story PT slab- on-grade or conventional spread footing buildings. Foundation loads for the structures are expected to be light to moderate with continuous wall loads less than 4 kips per lineal foot and individual column loads less than 150 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. As we understand, some of the apartment buildings will include tuck under parking. Paved drive and parking for the development is expected to carry light to moderate traffic consisting predominately of private autos and light trucks. The purpose of this report is to described the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings, analyze and evaluate the test data and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations, support of floor slabs, exterior flatwork, and pavements and development of other earth related features for the proposed site improvements. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The test borings were completed using a truck mounted, CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained using split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures. In the split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are advanced into the ground by means of a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the split barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure, relatively undisturbed samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to the laboratory for further examination, classification and testing. Moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. Atterberg Limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the quantity and plasticity of fines in the subgrade. Swell/consolidation tests were completed to evaluate the potential for the subgrade materials to change volume with variation in moisture and load. Soluble sulfate tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the quantity of soluble sulfates in the subgrades. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System, based on the soil’s texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with this report. Classification of the bedrock was based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. Coring and/or petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The Shields mixed use development project is located southeast of the intersection of South Shields Street and Hobbit Street in Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is currently vacant land sloping to the east with a relief of approximately 6 feet. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 3 Based on results of the field borings and laboratory testing, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. A surficial layer of vegetation and topsoil was encountered at all boring locations. Apparent native cohesive lean clay to clayey sand subsoils were encountered beneath the topsoil/vegetation and extended to silty/clayey sands and gravels at approximate depths of 5 to 15 feet below existing site grades or to sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock at approximate depths of 13 to 19 feet below existing site grades. Sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered in all boring except for B-9 and B-14 at approximate depths of 13½ to 20 feet below existing site grade and extended to the depths explored. Borings B-9 and B-14 were terminated at depths of approximately 20 feet in silty/clayey sand and gravel subsoils. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and bedrock types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. The upper essentially cohesive soils encountered beneath the surface topsoil/vegetation layer varied from medium stiff to very stiff / medium dense in consistency and exhibited low to moderate swell potential and typically low bearing capacity characteristics. The swell potentials of these soils are shown on the enclosed swell-consolidation curves presented in the Appendix of this report. The lower portion of the essentially cohesive zone encroaching into groundwater level, exhibited soft/compressible conditions with an increase in moisture content as evident on the enclosed boring logs and swell-consolidation curves in the Appendix of this report. The silty/clayey sand and gravel materials were generally medium dense with occasional loose zones observed. The sandstone/siltstone/claystone was brown/grey/rust in color, moderately hard and exhibited moderate to high bearing characteristics. The bedrock materials were highly weathered to weathered nearer surface; however, became less weathered and more competent with depth. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Observations were made while drilling and after completion of the borings to detect the presence and depth to hydrostatic groundwater. At the time of drilling, free water was observed in all of the borings at depths of approximately 9 to 14-feet below site grades. Field slotted PVC piezometers were placed in seven of the open boreholes drilled on July 29, 2015 prior to backfilling to allow for future water level measurements. The piezometers were registered with Colorado Department of Water Quality as temporary piezometers. A copy of that registration is Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 4 included with this report. Those piezometers will need to be removed within one year and an appropriate notification provided to the state upon removal. Groundwater levels were measured 7 days after drilling in the piezometers installed on July 29, 2015, with free water observed at depths of approximately 7½ to 10½-feet below existing site grades. All borings without piezometers were backfilled on August 5, 2015; therefore subsequent groundwater measurements are not available for those locations. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. Longer term monitoring of water levels in cased wells, which are sealed from the influence of surface water would be required to more accurately evaluate fluctuations in groundwater levels at the site. We have typically noted deepest groundwater levels in late winter and shallowest groundwater levels in mid to late summer ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Swell – Consolidation Test Results Swell/consolidation testing is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soil or bedrock to assist in determining/evaluating foundation, floor slab and/or pavement design criteria. In the swell/consolidation test, samples obtained directly from the California barrel sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a pre-established load. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse under the initial loading condition expressed as a percent of the sample’s initial thickness. After the initial monitoring period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate swell pressure and/or consolidation response. For this assessment, we conducted twelve (12) swell-consolidation tests at various intervals/depths throughout the site. The swell index values for the samples analyzed for pavement design criteria, (i.e., soil samples tested at the 150 psf-inundation pressure), revealed low to moderate swell characteristics ranging from approximately (+) 1.1 to (+) 6.5%. The swell index values for the upper level cohesive samples analyzed for foundation design criteria, (i.e., soil samples obtained within the upper 10-feet and evaluated at the 500 psf-inundation pressure), revealed low swell characteristics ranging from approximately (+) 0.3 to (+) 1.5% with one sample Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 5 exhibiting moderate swell characteristics of (+) 4.1%. The (-) test results indicate the tendency to consolidate upon inundation with water, while the (+) test results indicate the swell potential characteristics. Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information to provide uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of performance risk to measured swell. “The representative percent swell values are not necessarily measured values; rather, they are a judgment of the swell of the soil and/or bedrock profile likely to influence slab performance.” Geotechnical engineers use this information to also evaluate the swell potential risks for foundation performance based on the risk categories. TABLE I: Recommended Representative Swell Potential Descriptions and Corresponding Slab Performance Risk Categories Slab Performance Risk Category Representative Percent Swell (500 psf Surcharge) Representative Percent Swell (1000 psf Surcharge) Low 0 to < 3 0 < 2 Moderate 3 to < 5 2 to < 4 High 5 to < 8 4 to < 6 Very High > 8 > 6 Based on the laboratory test results, the samples analyzed for this project were within the low to moderate range. Site Preparation Based on our understanding of the proposed development, fills on the order of 3 to 5 feet may be completed to achieve design grades. EEC reviewed the Geotechnical Report for the proposed new Colorado State University (CSU) multipurpose stadium where materials are expected to be imported. Based on our review, the materials, in general, appear to be acceptable fill materials for the proposed Shields mixed use development. Occasional zones of higher plasticity fat clays were observed and should be avoided if possible. Existing fill materials were not identified during our field borings, however, close observations during construction is advised. After stripping the topsoil/vegetation cutting any undocumented fill materials, and prior to placement of any fill and/or site improvements, we recommend the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of 9-inches, adjusted in moisture content to within ±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 6 of the material's standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698. Fill soils to develop the building, pavement/flatwork and site subgrades should consist of approved, low-volume-change materials, which are free from organic matter and debris. It is our opinion the on-site cohesive soils or similar import soils from the proposed new CSU multipurpose stadium could be used as fill in these areas, provided adequate moisture treatment and compaction procedures are followed. We recommend the fill soils be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick and adjusted in moisture content and compacted as recommended for the scarified soils. If the site lean clay to clayey sand soils or similar import materials are used as fill material, care will be needed to maintain the recommended moisture content prior to and during construction of overlying improvements. Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavements to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site improvements can result in unacceptable performance. As presented on the enclosed boring logs and laboratory test results, low to moderate swelling soils are present on this site. This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage or expansion. Even if these procedures are followed, some movement and at least minor cracking in the structures should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and other cosmetic damage such as uneven floor slabs/exterior flatwork will probably increase if any modification of the site results in excessive wetting or drying of the site soils. Eliminating the risk of movement and cosmetic distress may not be feasible, but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during construction. We would be pleased to discuss other construction alternatives with you upon request. In areas where excavations will extend below existing groundwater table or the perched water surface level, such as utility excavation, placement of cleaner granular fill material would be desirable. Those materials should be placed in lifts and compacted to at least 70% relative density. Areas of deeper fills may experience settlement from within the placed fill materials. Settlement on the order of 1 to 1.5% of the fill depth would be estimated. The rate of settlement will be dependent Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 7 on the type of fill material placed and construction methods. Granular soils will consolidate essentially immediately upon placement of overlying loads. Cohesive soils will consolidate at a slower rate. Foundation Systems – General Considerations The site appears suitable for the proposed construction based on the results of our field exploration and review of the proposed development plans. The following foundation systems were evaluated for use on the site:  Conventional spread footings  Post-Tensioned Slab Foundation System Conventional Spread Footing Foundations The native undisturbed lean clay to clayey sand generally exhibited low swell potential and low bearing characteristics. The one (1) moderate swell observed appeared to be an anomaly although care should be taken to evaluate the subgrade soils during construction. To reduce to potential for post-construction heaving of the footings subsequent to construction, we recommend the existing site subgrades and proposed fill materials be worked and placed as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. Conventional type spread footings could be used to support the proposed slab on grade buildings provided the footings are placed on approved native subgrade material or moisture/density controlled fill material and the maximum anticipated wall and column loads do not exceed those presented herein. If actual design loads exceed the assumed values as previously presented, we should be consulted to provide supplemental design criteria, possibly including alternative foundations. Footings bearing on approved native subsoils or moisture/density conditioned soils could be designed for a maximum net allowable total load bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load should include full dead and live loads. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 8 Footings should be proportioned to reduce differential foundation movement. We estimate the total long term settlement of footings designed as outlined above would be less than one-inch. The backfill soils adjacent to the foundations should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, moisture conditioned to ± 2% of the material’s standard Proctor optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted to be at least 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density, ASTM D698. After placement of the fill materials, for foundation support, care should be taken to avoid wetting or drying of those materials. Bearing materials, which are loosened or disturbed by the construction activities, or materials which become dry and desiccated or wet and softened, should be removed and replaced or reworked in place prior to construction of the overlying improvements. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located at least 30 inches below adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. We recommend formed continuous footings have a minimum width of 12 inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 24 inches. Post-Tensioned Slab Foundation Systems The results of our field exploration and laboratory testing completed for this study indicate the upper cohesive clay subsoils exhibited low to moderate swell potential and low bearing capabilities. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the expected fill materials across the site, we expect the proposed apartment buildings and the townhome buildings/slab-on-grade structures could be supported by PT slab-on-grade foundations that are supported/bear on a zone of engineered/controlled fill materials placed and compacted as outlined in the “Site Preparation” section of this report or on acceptable underlying native soils. The design parameters provided below assume subgrade materials outlined under “Site Preparation”. Outlined below are the post tensioned slab (PTS) design criteria based on the subsurface conditions, the reviewed proposed import materials and information provided in the 3rd Edition of the Post- Tensioning Institutes design manual. Post-tensioned slabs, thickened or turn-down edges, and/or interior beams should be designed and constructed in accordance with the appropriate design criteria. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 9 Table II – Post-Tension Slab (PTS) Design Criteria Post-Tensioned Slab (PTS) – 3rd Edition Design Parameters Maximum Allowable Bearing Pressure, psf 1500 Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em Center Lift Condition, ft. 8.6 Edge Lift Condition, ft. 4.3 Differential Soil Movement, ym Center Lift Condition, Inches 0.4 Edge Lift Condition, Inches 0.8 Slab-Subgrade friction coefficient,  on polyethylene sheeting 0.75 on cohesionless soils – (sands) 1.0 on cohesive soils – (clays) 2.0 Seismic The site soil conditions consist of approximately 17 to greater than 20-feet of overburden soils overlying moderately hard/cemented bedrock. For those site conditions, the 2012 International Building Code indicates a Seismic Site Classification of D. Lateral Earth Pressures For any area of the proposed development having below grade construction, such as retaining walls, tuck under parking, etc., those portions will be subject to lateral earth pressures. Passive lateral earth pressures may help resist the driving forces for retaining wall or other similar site structures. Active lateral earth pressures could be used for design of structures where some movement of the structure is anticipated, such as retaining walls. The total deflection of structures for design with active earth pressure is estimated to be on the order of one half of one percent of the height of the down slope side of the structure. We recommend at-rest pressures be used for design of structures where rotation of the walls is restrained. Passive pressures and friction between the footing and bearing soils could be used for design of resistance to movement of retaining walls. Coefficient values for backfill with anticipated types of soils for calculation of active, at rest and passive earth pressures are provided in the table below. Equivalent fluid pressure is equal to the coefficient times the appropriate soil unit weight. Those coefficient values are based on horizontal backfill with backfill soils consisting of essentially on-site cohesive subsoils, similar CSU stadium import material, or approved imported granular materials with friction angles of 25 and 35 degrees respectively. For the at-rest and active earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 10 would result in reduced driving forces with slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30-inches of soil on the passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, should not be used as a part of the passive resistance value. Frictional resistance is equal to the tangent of the friction angle times the normal force. Table III – Lateral Earth Pressure Design Values Soil Type On-Site Low Plasticity Cohesive Imported Medium Dense Granular Wet Unit Weight 120 135 Saturated Unit Weight 135 140 Friction Angle () – (assumed) 25° 35° Active Pressure Coefficient 0.40 0.27 At-rest Pressure Coefficient 0.58 0.43 Passive Pressure Coefficient 2.46 3.70 Surcharge loads or point loads placed in the backfill can also create additional loads on below grade walls. Those situations should be designed on an individual basis. The outlined values do not include factors of safety nor allowances for hydrostatic loads and are based on assumed friction angles, which should be verified after potential material sources have been identified. Care should be taken to develop appropriate drainage systems behind below grade walls to eliminate potential for hydrostatic loads developing on the walls. Those systems would likely include perimeter drain systems extending to sump areas or free outfall where reverse flow cannot occur into the system. Where necessary, appropriate hydrostatic load values should be used for design. Floor Slabs Slab-on-grade construction is feasible for the site provided certain precautions are adhered to. To reduce floor slab movement, we recommend the proposed floor slab on grade bear upon a properly placed and compacted engineered fill material as outlined under “Site Preparation”. It is our opinion the on-site essentially cohesive soils or similar CSU multipurpose stadium import materials could be Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 11 used as fill in these areas, provided adequate moisture treatment and compaction procedures are followed. If the site lean clay to clayey sand soils or similar import materials are used as fill material, care will be needed to maintain the recommended moisture content prior to and during construction of overlying improvements. This procedure will not fully eliminate the possibilities of slab movement; but movements should be reduced and tend to be more uniform. We estimate the long-term movement of floor slabs with properly prepared subgrade subsoils as outlined above would be about one-inch or less. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on compacted on-site or similar import soils. A modulus of 200 pci could be used for floors supported on non-expansive imported granular structural fill material. 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 provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking.  Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in a similar manner as previously described for imported structural fill material.  Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.  Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1R are recommended. Pavements We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for low volume automobile traffic/parking and areas of heavier/higher volume traffic. For heavier traffic areas, we are using an Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 12 assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 25 and in automobile/parking areas we are using an EDLA of 10. Proof rolling and recompacting the subgrade is recommended immediately prior to placement of the aggregate road base section. Soft or weak areas delineated by the proof rolling operations should be undercut or stabilized in-place to achieve the appropriate subgrade support. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site, the subsurface conditions at the proposed new CSU multipurpose stadium and the laboratory test results, it is recommended the on-site private drives and parking areas be designed using an R-value of 10. Three to five feet of moisture conditioned/engineered fill material are expected across the site. Existing topsoil/vegetation should be stripped and site fill materials should be placed and compacted as presented in the “Site Preparation” section of this report. Pumping conditions could develop within a moisture treatment process of on-site or imported essentially cohesive soils. Subgrade stabilization may be needed to develop a stable subgrade for paving. A stabilized subgrade could also reduce the overlying pavement structure. Stabilization could include incorporating at least 12 percent, by weight Class C fly ash into the upper 12-inches of subgrade. Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) underlain by crushed aggregate base course with or without a fly ash treated subgrade, and non-reinforced concrete pavement are feasible alternatives for the proposed on-site paved sections. Eliminating the risk of movement within the proposed pavement section may not be feasible due to the characteristics of the subsurface materials; but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive subgrade stabilization measures are used during construction. We would be pleased to discuss other construction alternatives with you upon request. Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for shrink/swell movements of an expansive clay subgrade or consolidation of a wetted subgrade. Thus, the pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still experience cracking and deformation due to shrink/swell related movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce shrink/swell movements. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 13 Recommended pavement sections are provided below in TABLE II. The hot bituminous pavement (HBP) could be grading SX (75) or S (75) with PG 58-28 oil. The aggregate base should be Class 5 or Class 6 base. Portland cement concrete should be an exterior pavement mix with a minimum 28- day compressive strength of 4000 psi and should be air entrained. HMA pavements may show rutting and distress in truck loading and turning areas. Concrete pavements should be considered in those areas. TABLE IV – RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS Local Residential Roadways/Parking Minor Collectors / Heavy Duty Roadways EDLA – assume local residential roadways Reliability Resilient Modulus PSI Loss – (Initial 4.5, Terminal 2.0 and 2.3 respectively) 10 75% 3562 2.5 25 85% 3562 2.2 Design Structure Number 2.60 3.20 Composite Section without Fly Ash – Alternative A Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Grading S (75) PG 58-28 Aggregate Base Course ABC – CDOT Class 5 or 6 Design Structure Number 4ʺ 8ʺ (2.64) 5-1/2ʺ 8ʺ (3.30) Composite Section with Fly Ash – Alternative B Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Grading S (75) PG 58-28 Aggregate Base Course ABC – CDOT Class 5 or 6 Fly Ash Treated Subgrade Design Structure Number 4ʺ 6 ʺ 12″ (3.02) 4ʺ 8ʺ 12ʺ (3.24) PCC (Non-reinforced) – placed on an approved subgrade 5-1/2″ 7″ The recommended pavement sections are minimums and periodic maintenance should be expected. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut in accordance with current ACI criteria. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Since the cohesive soils on the site have some shrink/swell potential, pavements could crack in the future primarily because of the volume change of the soils when subjected to an increase in moisture Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 14 content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily constitute structural failure of the pavement. The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining subgrade moisture levels and providing for preventive maintenance. The following recommendations should be considered the minimum:  The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface drainage.  Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g. garden centers, wash racks)  Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately,  Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils;  Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and,  Placing curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils. Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for pavement construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully evaluated at the time of pavement Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 15 construction for signs of disturbance, such as but not limited to drying, or excessive rutting. If disturbance has occurred, pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving. Please note that if during or after placement of the stabilization or initial lift of pavement, the area is observed to be yielding under vehicle traffic or construction equipment, it is recommended that EEC be contacted for additional alternative methods of stabilization, or a change in the pavement section. Swimming Pool Design and Construction As currently planned, the proposed project will include construction of a swimming pool in conjunction with the clubhouse building. Swimming pool design concepts/plans were not available prior to preparation of this report, however, we assume similar to other recently completed development projects that the pool would range anywhere from 4 to 6-feet in depth for lap purposes. We believe the swimming pool can bear on approved native subgrade material or moisture/density controlled fill material as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. The construction and performance of the pool may be affected by the presence of low to moderately expansive overburden cohesive subsoils. Site soils generally exhibited low swell potential with one moderate swell observed. Therefore we recommend close observation of the subsoils beneath the proposed swimming during construction. The following paragraphs provide general geotechnical engineering recommendations based on the construction of a swimming pool in similar type subsoils. EEC can provide supplemental design recommendations based on a geotechnical engineering viewpoint when plans are made available. Consideration should be given to the use of reinforced gunnite concrete for pool construction. This material can normally withstand relatively large soil movements without cracking. However, because the bottom of the full-depth pool is expected to extend into low to moderate expansive clays, care should be taken during construction to waterproof the pool so that leakage will not occur. A drainage system should be provided around and beneath the pool according to general industry standards. The soils that will support pool deck slabs around the pool could expand with increasing moisture content. To reduce possible damage that could be caused by expansive soils, we recommend: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 16  deck slabs be supported on fill with no, or very low expansion potential  strict moisture-density control during placement of subgrade fills  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  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 placed in accordance with the recommendations 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. Other Considerations Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavement areas with a minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10-feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping, (if required), adjacent to the building to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the foundations or stemwalls. Placement of plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Irrigation systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the buildings and parking areas. Spray heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structures or site pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structures and away from the pavement areas. Excavations into the on-site clays and proposed import materials can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. However, if excavations extend into the underlying sand and gravel layers and/or underlying groundwater, caving soils may be encountered. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 17 Water Soluble Sulfates The water soluble sulfate (SO4) testing of the on-site overburden materials taken during our subsurface exploration at depths of approximately 4-feet are provided in Table V below. Based on the reported sulfate content test results, this report includes a recommendation for the CLASS of cement for use for contact in association with the on-site subsoils. TABLE V - Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Sample Location Description Soluble Sulfate Content (mg/kg) Soluble Sulfate Content (%) B-3, S-2 at 4’ Sandy Lean Clay/Clayey Sand 390 0.04 B-12, S-2 at 4’ Sandy Lean Clay/Clayey Sand 5,700 0.57 B-15, S-2 at 4’ Sandy Lean Clay/Clayey Sand 330 0.03 Based on the results as presented in Table IV above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site overburden soils have a low to high risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete. Therefore Class 2 cement and the use of fly ash and/or an equivalent approach to address the high sulfate results as presented herein should be used for concrete on and below site grade within the on-site overburden soils. With site grades expected to be raised 3-5 feet, the import materials should be evaluated to determine the Class of cement needed. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. These results are being compared to the following Table VI. TABLE VI - Requirements to Protect Against Damage to Concrete by Sulfate Attack from External Sources of Sulfate Severity of Sulfate exposure Water-soluble sulfate (SO4) in dry soil, percent Water-cement ratio, maximum Cementitious material Requirements Class 0 0.00 to 0.10% 0.45 Class 0 Class 1 0.11 to 0.20% 0.45 Class 1 Class 2 0.21 to 2.00% 0.45 Class 2 Class 3 2.01 of greater 0.45 Class 3 GENERAL COMMENTS The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect any variations, which may occur between borings or across the Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1152075 August 21, 2015 Page 18 site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled. Site-specific explorations should be completed to develop site- specific recommendations for each of the site buildings. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc., for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical engineer. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC DRILLING AND EXPLORATION DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon ‐ 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS: Piston Sample ST: Thin‐Walled Tube ‐ 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS: Wash Sample R: Ring Barrel Sampler ‐ 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D. unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger FT: Fish Tail Bit HA: Hand Auger RB: Rock Bit DB: Diamond Bit = 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample AS: Auger Sample PM: Pressure Meter HS: Hollow Stem Auger WB: Wash Bore Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2‐inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling WCI: Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR: After Casting Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of ground water. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of ground water levels is not possible with only short term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification system and the ASTM Designations D‐2488. Coarse Grained Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as : clays, if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non‐plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in‐ place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff (CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM). CONSISTENCY OF FINE‐GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Compressive Strength, Qu, psf Consistency < 500 Very Soft 500 ‐ 1,000 Soft 1,001 ‐ 2,000 Medium 2,001 ‐ 4,000 Stiff 4,001 ‐ 8,000 Very Stiff 8,001 ‐ 16,000 Very Hard RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE‐GRAINED SOILS: N‐Blows/ft Relative Density 0‐3 Very Loose 4‐9 Loose 10‐29 Medium Dense 30‐49 Dense 50‐80 Very Dense 80 + Extremely Dense PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK DEGREE OF WEATHERING: Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on joints. May be color change. Moderate Some decomposition and color change throughout. High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely broken. HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION: Limestone and Dolomite: Hard Difficult to scratch with knife. Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife. Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail. Soft Can be scratched with fingernail. Shale, Siltstone and Claystone: Hard Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot be scratched with fingernail. Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail. Hard Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with fingers. Sandstone and Conglomerate: Well Capable of scratching a knife blade. Cemented Cemented Can be scratched with knife. Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers. Cemented Group Symbol Group Name Cu≥4 and 1<Cc≤3E GW Well-graded gravel F Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E GP Poorly-graded gravel F Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel G,H Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel F,G,H Cu≥6 and 1<Cc≤3E SW Well-graded sand I Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E SP Poorly-graded sand I Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G,H,I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G,H,I inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above "A" Line CL Lean clay K,L,M PI<4 or plots below "A" Line ML Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,N Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O inorganic PI plots on or above "A" Line CH Fat clay K,L,M PI plots below "A" Line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,P Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O Highly organic soils PT Peat (D30)2 D10 x D60 GW-GM well graded gravel with silt NPI≥4 and plots on or above "A" line. GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay OPI≤4 or plots below "A" line. GP-GM poorly-graded gravel with silt PPI plots on or above "A" line. GP-GC poorly-graded gravel with clay QPI plots below "A" line. SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC IIf soil contains >15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name JIf Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a CL- ML, Silty clay Unified Soil Classification System Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Sands 50% or more coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Fine-Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve <0.75 OL Gravels with Fines more than 12% fines Clean Sands Less than 5% fines Sands with Fines more than 12% fines Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines Gravels more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Coarse - Grained Soils more than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve CGravels with 5 to 12% fines required dual symbols: Kif soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. <0.75 OH Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor ABased on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve ECu=D60/D10 Cc= HIf fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name LIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MIf soil contains ≥30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. DSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name.FIf soil contains ≥15% sand, add "with sand" to GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC- CM, or SC-SM. Silts and Clays Liquid Limit less than 50 Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 50 or more 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) LIQUID LIMIT (LL) ML OR OL MH OR OH For Classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils. Equation of "A"-line Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5 then PI-0.73 (LL-20) Equation of "U"-line Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7, then PI=0.9 (LL-8) CL-ML 12B-4(piezometer)B-5B-11B-18(piezometer)B-12B-10(piezometer)B-6B-3B-2B-1(piezometer)B-8B-9B-13(piezometer)B-14B-15(piezometer)B-16B-17B-7(piezometer)Boring Location DiagramShields Mixed Use DevelopmentFort Collins, ColoradoEEC Project Number: 1152075 Date: August 2015EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCApproximate BoringLocations1LegendSite Photos(Photos taken in approximatelocation, in direction of arrow) SHIELDS MIXED USE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1152075 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 1 brown / red _ _ stiff 2 mottled _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 13 9000+ 12.9 118.9 35 20 67.4 3000 psf 1.5% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 8 4000 21.4 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 18 3000 8.6 131.6 CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GC) _ _ brown / red 16 medium dense _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 20 2500 15.8 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND / SANDSTONE / 24 CLAYSTONE; brown _ _ very stiff / medium dense / soft; highly weathered CS 25 20 1000 22.2 105.3 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 10.4' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 14' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO LOG OF BORING B-1 (PIEZOMETER)PROJECT NO: 1152075 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 16 9000+ 10.7 117.5 34 19 75.7 2600 psf 1.9% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 6 1500 28.1 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 13 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 19 grey / brown / rust _ _ soft to moderately hard SS 20 31 3500 21.5 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-2 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 stiff to medium stiff / medium dense _ _% @ 150 psf CS 3 13 9000+ 8.2 113.3 29 15 55.9 1250 psf 2.8% _ _ 4 _ _ with calcareous deposits SS 5 11 9000+ 13.0 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 brown / red _ _ CS 10 4 1000 21.8 102.9 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 8 2000 20.4 _ _ SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 16 brown / red _ _ loose to medium dense 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 16 -- 15.3 114.9 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 24 grey _ _ moderately hard to hard SS 25 50/7" 3500 16.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 11' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-3 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND / SANDY LEAN CLAY (SC/CL) _ _ brown 2 medium dense / stiff _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 11 3000 6.4 114.7 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 9 1000 23.2 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GC) 14 brown / red _ _ medium dense CS 15 18 -- 12.3 125.0 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 brown / grey / rust _ _ soft to moderately hard 19 _ _ SS 20 42 1500 18.6 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 hard _ _ CS 25 50/4" 9000+ 13.8 117.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 8.8' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 10' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-4 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 stiff to medium stiff _ _ mottled, with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 9 5500 18.8 106.8 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 brown / red _ _ SS 10 5 500 24.3 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 SILTY SAND & GRAVEL (SM/GM) _ _ medium dense CS 15 21 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ SANDSTONE / CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 grey / rust / brown _ _ soft to moderately hard 19 _ _ SS 20 38 9000+ 16.2 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-5 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 stiff _ _ mottled, with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 11 9000 11.0 109.9 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ very soft SS 10 1 -- 33.7 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ medium stiff CS 15 5 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 SANDSTONE _ _ grey / rust SS 20 29 2000 19.6 soft _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-6 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ _ CS 3 16 9000+ 11.9 112.3 39 23 90.1 6000 psf 4.1% _ _ 4 _ _ brown / tan SS 5 11 9000+ 12.5 mottled _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ dark brown CS 10 5 1500 25.4 97.9 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ SILTY/CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SM/SC/GM/GC) 14 brown _ _ medium dense SS 15 19 2000 21.2 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 36 9000 18.7 111.5 CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ grey / rust / brown 21 soft to moderately hard _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 moderately hard to hard _ _ SS 25 50/10" 9000+ 16.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 8.4' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 11' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-7 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 stiff to soft _ _ mottled 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 8 9000 12.2 118.9 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 3 1000 29.5 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 13 brown / red _ _ medium stiff 14 _ _ CS 15 17 -- 12.5 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE / SANDSTONE SS 20 32 5000 19.8 brown / olive / grey; soft; highly weathered _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-8 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 very stiff / medium dense _ _% @ 150 psf mottled CS 3 19 4500 4.7 111.9 26 12 44.7 320 psf 1.1% _ _ 4 _ _ CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GC) SS 5 16 9000 8.1 brown / red _ _ medium dense to dense 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CS 10 30 -- 3.6 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 41 1000 15.5 dense to medium dense _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 21 -- 17.8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.0' _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 10.5' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-9 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 stiff to medium stiff / loose _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 9 9000+ 9.2 113.1 33 18 52.5 1200 psf 0.7% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 5 500 31.8 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ SILTY/CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SM/SC/GM/GC) 13 brown / red _ _ medium dense 14 _ _ CS 15 23 -- 12.0 123.5 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 29 -- 9.4 _ _ SANDSTONE / CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE 21 brown / rust / grey _ _ moderately hard to hard 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 wet cave in; auger cuttings _ _ CS 25 50/7" -- 14.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 9.3' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-10 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to soft / medium dense to loose _ _% @ 150 psf with traces of gravel CS 3 19 9000 8.5 115.5 38 22 49.6 3800 psf 6.1% _ _ 4 _ _ brown / grey / rust SS 5 10 9000+ 15.6 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CS 10 4 1000 24.7 99.1 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ with sand & gravel seams SS 15 21 1000 23.3 _ _ 16 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 17 brown / grey / rust _ _ moderately hard to hard 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 50/7" 9000+ 15.0 118.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.0' _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-11 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to medium stiff / medium dense to loose _ _% @ 150 psf mottled with calcareous deposits CS 3 17 9000 4.7 115.3 30 13 34.5 850 psf 2.0% with traces of gravel _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 7 7500 18.8 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 dark brown _ _ CS 10 7 1000 26.6 95.7 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GC) 13 dark brown / red _ _ medium dense 14 _ _ SS 15 14 -- 14.4 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 brown / grey / rust _ _ moderately hard to hard 19 _ _ CS 20 50/7" 9000+ 14.2 120.1 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ SS 25 50/10" 9000+ 14.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 11' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-12 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) _ _ brown 2 stiff to medium stiff / moderately hard to loose _ _ mottled 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 11 9000+ 11.2 115.4 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ sand & gravel seams with depth SS 10 5 1000 25.0 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 13 3000 20.6 107.5 brown / rust _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 30 6500 19.6 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE / SANDSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust 21 highly weathered _ _ soft to moderately hard 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 brown / rust _ _ hard CS 25 50/3" 9000+ 16.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 8.7' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-13 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to stiff _ _% @ 150 psf mottled, with calcareous deposits CS 3 23 9000+ 9.1 125.4 35 20 65.1 4200 psf 5.2% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 12 9000+ 17.2 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CS 10 10 4000 22.5 102.1 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ SILTY/CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SM/SC/GM/GC) 14 brown / red _ _ medium dense to dense SS 15 18 -- 12.6 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 41 -- 8.7 133.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.0' _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 10' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-14 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC)) 1 brown _ _ very stiff to stiff / medium dense to loose 2 mottled with gravel _ _% @ 150 psf CS 3 16 9000 4.4 123.7 26 13 25.1 1000 psf 1.5% _ _ 4 _ _ brown / red SS 5 8 9000+ 13.8 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CS 10 9 2500 23.0 102.3 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ SILTY/CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SM/SC/GM/GC) 14 brown / red _ _ medium dense SS 15 15 -- 14.7 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 brown / olive / grey / rust _ _ moderately hard to hard 19 _ _ CS 20 50/8" 9000+ 14.8 118.4 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 grey _ _ SS 25 50/4" 9000+ 12.4 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 7.4' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 11' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-15 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 stiff to medium stiff _ _ mottled 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 12 9000+ 12.6 116.9 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 dark brown _ _ SS 10 6 3500 28.7 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GC) CS 15 17 1500 20.2 111.8 brown / red _ _ medium dense 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ SS 20 36 8500 15.8 CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE _ _ brown / olive / grey 21 moderately hard to hard _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ CS 25 50/3.5" 9000+ 12.7 122.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 10' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-16 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 LEAN CLAY / SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ _ with calcareous deposits 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 18 9000+ 19.1 109.1 44 26 95.8 1000 psf 0.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 dark brown / brown _ _ SS 10 5 1500 28.1 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CS 15 15 4500 14.7 123.0 brown / grey / rust _ _ with calcareous deposits 16 _ _ 17 _ _ CLAYSTONE / SANDSTONE / SILTSTONE 18 soft to moderately hard _ _ highly weathered 19 wet cave in; no recovery _ _ SS 20 60 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 N/A FINISH DATE 8/5/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 8/5/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-17 AUGUST 2015 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF TOPSOIL & VEGETATION _ _ 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND / SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) _ _ brown 2 very stiff to stiff _ _% @ 150 psf mottled, with calcareous deposits CS 3 19 9000+ 7.6 116.0 33 18 69.5 3000 psf 6.5% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 15 9000+ 16.0 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 dark brown / red _ _ CS 10 6 2500 28.6 94.6 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 CLAYSTONE / SILTSTONE / SANDSTONE _ _ brown / grey / rust SS 15 14 2000 23.0 highly weathered _ _ soft to hard 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 50/9" 9000 15.7 118.3 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ SS 25 50/9" 9000+ 15.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL SURFACE ELEV N/A 8/5/2015 7.8' FINISH DATE 7/29/2015 AFTER DRILLING N/A SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 7/29/2015 WHILE DRILLING 9' SHIELDS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1152075 LOG OF BORING B-18 (PIEZOMETER) AUGUST 2015 Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown / Red Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 35 Plasticity Index: 20 % Passing #200: 67.4% Beginning Moisture: 12.9% Dry Density: 122.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 13.8% Swell Pressure: 3000 psf % Swell @ 500: 1.5% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 34 Plasticity Index: 19 % Passing #200: 75.7% Beginning Moisture: 10.7% Dry Density: 121.8 pcf Ending Moisture: 14.6% Swell Pressure: 2600 psf % Swell @ 500: 1.9% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 55.9% Beginning Moisture: 8.2% Dry Density: 107.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.5% Swell Pressure: 1250 psf % Swell @ 150: 2.8% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 39 Plasticity Index: 23 % Passing #200: 90.1% Beginning Moisture: 11.9% Dry Density: Ending Moisture: 15.9% Swell Pressure: 6000 psf % Swell @ 500: 4.1% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 26 Plasticity Index: 12 % Passing #200: 44.7% Beginning Moisture: 4.7% Dry Density: 105.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 20.4% Swell Pressure: 320 psf % Swell @ 150: 1.1% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 33 Plasticity Index: 18 % Passing #200: 52.5% Beginning Moisture: 9.2% Dry Density: 122.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 14.8% Swell Pressure: 1200 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.7% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Clayey Sand (CL / SC) Sample Location: Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 38 Plasticity Index: 22 % Passing #200: 49.6% Beginning Moisture: 8.5% Dry Density: 122.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 14.7% Swell Pressure: 3800 psf % Swell @ 150: 6.1% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location: Boring 12, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 30 Plasticity Index: 13 % Passing #200: 34.5% Beginning Moisture: 4.7% Dry Density: 109.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 18.3% Swell Pressure: 850 psf % Swell @ 150: 2.0% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 35 Plasticity Index: 20 % Passing #200: 65.1% Beginning Moisture: 9.1% Dry Density: 124.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 13.0% Swell Pressure: 4200 psf % Swell @ 150: 5.2% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Clayey Gravel (GC) Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 26 Plasticity Index: 13 % Passing #200: 25.1% Beginning Moisture: 4.4% Dry Density: 120.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 13.8% Swell Pressure: 1000 psf % Swell @ 150: 1.5% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 17, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 44 Plasticity Index: 26 % Passing #200: 95.8% Beginning Moisture: 19.1% Dry Density: 107.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 17.8% Swell Pressure: 1000 psf % Swell @ 500: 0.3% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location: Boring 18, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 33 Plasticity Index: 18 % Passing #200: 69.5% Beginning Moisture: 7.6% Dry Density: 115.5 pcf Ending Moisture: 17.4% Swell Pressure: 3200 psf % Swell @ 150: 6.5% Shields Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado 1152075 August 2015 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidatioWater Added