HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOOM FILING FOUR - FDP240001 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORT
CTL|Thompson, Inc.
Denver, Fort Collins, Colorado Springs, Glenwood Springs, Pueblo, Summit County – Colorado
Cheyenne, Wyoming and Bozeman, Montana
Multi-Family Residential Buildings 2, 3, and 10
Bloom Filing 4 Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
Hartford Acquisitions
4801 Goodman Street
Timnath, Colorado 80547
Attention:
Dave Derbes
Director of Multi-Family Development
Project No. FC07733.016-120
January 24, 2024
SOIL AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
Table of Contents
Scope 1
Summary Of Conclusions 1
Site Description 2
Proposed Construction 2
Previous Investigations 2
Investigation 3
Subsurface Conditions 3
Native Soils 3
Groundwater 4
Geologic Hazards 4
Site Development 5
Fill Placement 5
Excavations 6
Foundations 6
Footings 7
Reinforced Concrete Mat 7
Post-Tensioned Slab-On-Grade (PT) 8
Floor Systems and Slab-On-Grade Floors 10
Slab Performance Risk 10
Structurally Supported Floors 12
Porches, Decks and Patios 13
Exterior Flatwork 14
Below-Grade Walls 14
Backfill Compaction 15
Subsurface Drainage 16
Pavements 16
Pavement Selection 17
Subgrade and Pavement Materials and Construction 17
Pavement Maintenance 18
Concrete 18
Excavations 19
Construction Observations 20
Geotechnical Risk 20
Limitations 20
APPENDIX A – RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTS
Table A-I – Summary of Laboratory Testing
APPENDIX B – PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX C – PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
EXHIBIT A – SLAB PERFORMANCE RISK EVALUATION, INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE
EXHIBIT B – SURFACE DRAINAGE, IRRIGATION AND MAINTENANCE
EXHIBIT C – EXAMPLE BACKFILL COMPACTION ALTERNATIVES
FIGURE 1 – LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 – SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
1
Scope
This report presents the results of our Soils and Foundation Investigation for proposed
apartment buildings 2, 3, and 10, located in the 4th Filing of the Bloom Subdivision in Fort Collins,
Colorado (Figure 1). The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions
to provide geotechnical design and construction recommendations for the proposed structures.
The scope was described in our Service Agreement (Proposal No. FC-23-0430) dated November
29, 2023.
This report was prepared from data developed during field exploration, laboratory testing,
engineering analysis, and experience with similar conditions. It includes our opinions and
recommendations for design criteria and construction details for foundations and floor systems,
slabs-on-grade, lateral earth loads, and drainage precautions. The report was prepared for the
exclusive use of Hartford Acquisitions in design and construction of multi-family residences in the
referenced subdivision. Other types of construction may require revision of this report and the
recommended design criteria. A brief summary of our conclusions and recommendations follows.
Detailed design criteria are presented within the report.
Summary Of Conclusions
1. Soils encountered in our borings generally consisted of sandy clay or clayey sand
and clean to slightly clayey, gravelly sand to the depths explored. Bedrock was
not encountered during this investigation. The soils were non-expansive to low
swelling.
2. Groundwater was measured at depths ranging from 9 to 14 feet in six borings
during drilling. When measured several days later, groundwater was encountered
at depths of 8½ to 14 feet in five borings. Existing groundwater levels are not
expected to significantly affect site development. We recommend a minimum 3-
foot separation between foundation elements and groundwater.
3. The presence of expansive soils constitutes a geologic hazard. There is risk that
slabs-on-grade and foundations will heave or settle and be damaged. We judge
the risk is low. We believe the recommendations presented in this report will help
to control risk of damage; they will not eliminate that risk. Slabs-on-grade and, in
some instances, foundations may be damaged.
4. Footing, post-tensioned slab (PT slab), or reinforced concrete mat foundations,
placed on natural, undisturbed soil and/or properly compacted fill are considered
appropriate for this site. Design and construction criteria for footing, post-tensioned
(PT) slab, and mat foundations are presented in the report.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
2
5. The risk of poor slab performance is rated low for the lots included. A slab-on-
grade floor can be used. Driveways and other exterior flatwork will be slabs-on-
grade and may heave or settle and crack.
6. Surface drainage should be designed, constructed, and maintained to provide
rapid removal of surface runoff away from the proposed structures. Conservative
irrigation practices should be followed to avoid excessive wetting.
7. The design and construction criteria for foundations and floor system alternatives
in this report were compiled with the expectation that all other recommendations
presented related to surface and subsurface drainage, landscaping irrigation,
backfill compaction, etc. will be incorporated into the project and that owners will
maintain the structures, use prudent irrigation practices, and maintain surface
drainage. It is critical that all recommendations in this report are followed.
Site Description
The proposed construction site is located between International Boulevard and Donella
Drive, west of Greenfields Drive in the Bloom Subdivision 4th Filing in Fort Collins, Colorado
(Figure 1). During the time of our investigation, overlot grading was complete. Utilities had not yet
been installed and the roads were not paved. The site is relatively flat. The Lake Canal runs on
the south side of the site. The Burlington Northern Railroad runs northeast of the site.
Proposed Construction
The three apartment buildings included in this investigation are part of a multi-family
residential development comprised of eleven, 3 to 4-story structures, a clubhouse, and pool.
Asphalt paved parking areas and access drives are also planned. The proposed structures are
anticipated to be wood or steel framed and may have partial brick or stone veneer on the exterior.
No basement level or crawlspace construction is planned. The 4-story units will have elevator
service pits that extend 4 to 5 feet below grade. Foundation loads are expected to vary between
1,000 and 3,000 pounds per lineal foot of foundation wall, with individual column loads of 25 kips
or less. We believe that minimal site grading will be needed for this area and that excavations will
take place at or near current grade.
Previous Investigations
CTL|Thompson has performed several geotechnical investigations at this site under CTL|T
Project No. FC07733. Data from the previous investigations were considered for this report.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
3
Investigation
The field investigation included drilling two borings for each structure and one boring in
one of the parking areas. The borings were drilled to depths of approximately 10 feet and 30 feet
using 4-inch diameter continuous-flight augers, and a truck-mounted drill. Drilling was observed
by our field representative who logged the soils. Summary logs of the borings, including results
of field penetration resistance tests, are presented on Figure 2.
Soil samples obtained during drilling were returned to our laboratory and visually
examined by our geotechnical engineer. Laboratory testing was assigned and included moisture
content, dry density, swell-consolidation, particle-size analysis, Atterberg limits, and water-soluble
sulfate tests. Swell-consolidation test samples were wetted at a confining pressure which
approximated the weight of overlying soils (overburden pressures). Results of the laboratory tests
are presented in Appendix A and summarized in Table A-I.
Subsurface Conditions
Soils encountered in our borings generally consisted of 10 to 30 feet of sandy clay or clayey
sand and clean to slightly clayey, gravelly sand. Bedrock was not encountered during this
investigation. The pertinent engineering characteristics of the soil encountered are described in
more detail in the following paragraphs. Further descriptions of the subsurface conditions are
presented on our boring logs and in our laboratory test results.
Native Soils
The native soils are comprised of interlayers of sandy clay and clayey sand and clean to
slightly clayey, gravelly sand. The granular materials were loose to very dense and the clays were
stiff to very stiff according to standard penetration test results. Samples contained 10 to 72 percent
silt and clay-size particles (passing the No. 200 sieve). Atterberg limit testing of one sample of
clay indicated a liquid index of 42 and a plastic index of 25. Samples of the clay tested for swell-
consolidation exhibited swells of nil to 1.4 percent. The granular materials are considered non-
expansive or low-swelling based on the results of laboratory testing and our experience.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
4
Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at depths of 9 to 14 feet in six borings during drilling. When
measured several days later, groundwater was at depths of 8½ to 14 feet in five borings.
Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate seasonally. Groundwater may develop on or near
low permeable soil or bedrock when a source of water not presently contributing becomes
available. Groundwater is not expected to affect the proposed construction.
Geologic Hazards
Colorado is a challenging location to practice geotechnical engineering. The climate is
relatively dry, and the near-surface soils are typically dry and relatively stiff. These soils and
related sedimentary bedrock formations tend to react to changes in moisture conditions. Some of
the soils and bedrock swell as they increase in moisture and are called expansive soils. Other
soils can settle significantly upon wetting and are referred to as collapsing soils. Most of the land
available for development east of the Front Range is underlain by expansive clay or claystone
bedrock near the surface. The soils that exhibit collapse are more likely west of the continental
divide; however, both types of soils occur all over the state.
Covering the ground with houses, streets, driveways, patios, etc., coupled with lawn
irrigation and changing drainage patterns, leads to an increase in subsurface moisture conditions.
As a result, some soil movement is inevitable. It is critical that all recommendations in this report
are followed to increase the chances that the foundations and slabs-on-grade will perform
satisfactorily. After construction, homeowners must assume responsibility for maintaining the
structure and use appropriate practices regarding drainage and landscaping.
Expansive soils are present at this site. The presence of expansive soils and bedrock,
collectively referred to as expansive or swelling soils, constitutes a geologic hazard. There is risk
that ground heave or settlement will damage slabs-on-grade and foundations. The risks
associated with swelling and compressible soils can be mitigated, but not eliminated by careful
design, construction and maintenance procedures.
We believe the recommendations in this report will help control risk of foundation and/or
slab damage; they will not eliminate that risk. The builder and homebuyers should understand
that slabs-on-grade and, in some instances, foundations may be affected. Homeowner
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
5
maintenance will be required to control risk. We recommend the builder provide a booklet to the
homebuyers that describes swelling soils and includes recommendations for care and
maintenance of homes constructed on expansive soils. Colorado Geological Survey Special
Publication 431 was designed to provide this information.
Site Development
Fill Placement
The existing on-site soils are generally suitable for re-use as new fill from a geotechnical
standpoint, provided debris or deleterious organic materials are removed. In general, import fill
should meet or exceed the engineering qualities of the onsite soils. In addition, particles larger
than 3 inches should be broken down or removed. If import material is used, it should be tested
and evaluated for approval by CTL|Thompson.
Prior to fill placement, debris, organics/vegetation, and deleterious materials should be
substantially removed from areas to receive fill. The surface should be scarified to a depth of at
least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to the criteria below. Subsequent fill should
be placed in thin (8 inches or less) loose lifts, moisture conditioned, and compacted. Fill should
be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density
(ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). Fill depths greater than 15 feet should be evaluated by CTL|T to
recommend appropriate compaction specifications. Sand soils used as fill should be moistened
to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Clay soils should be moistened between
optimum and 3 percent above optimum moisture content. The fill should be moisture-conditioned,
placed in thin, loose lifts (8 inches or less) and compacted as described above. Fill placement
and compaction should not be conducted when fill material is frozen. Soft soils were found in one
of our borings. If stabilization is necessary, it can likely be achieved by crowding 1½ to 3-inch
nominal size crushed rock into the subsoils until the base of the excavation does not deform by
more than about 1-inch when compactive effort is applied. CTL|Thompson should observe
placement and compaction of fill during construction. Site grading in areas of landscaping where
no future improvements are planned can be placed at a dry density of at least 90 percent of
standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99).
1“A Guide to Swelling Soils for Colorado Homebuyers and Homeowners,” Second Edition Revised and Updated by David
C. Noe, Colorado Geological Survey, Department of Natural Resources, Denver, Colorado, 2007.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
6
Water and sewer lines are often constructed beneath areas where improvements are
planned. Compaction of trench backfill can have a significant effect on the life and serviceability
overlying structures. We recommend trench backfill be moisture conditioned and compacted as
described above. Placement and compaction of backfill should be observed and tested by a
representative of our firm during construction.
Excavations
We believe the soil penetrated in our exploratory borings can generally be excavated
with conventional, heavy-duty excavation equipment. Excavations should be sloped or shored to
meet local, State, and Federal safety regulations. Excavation slopes specified by OSHA are
dependent upon types of soil and groundwater conditions encountered. The contractor’s
“competent person” is responsible to identify the soils and/or rock encountered in excavations
and refer to OSHA standards to determine appropriate slopes and safety measures. Based on
our investigation and OSHA standards, we believe the interlayered sandy clay and clayey sand
soils may classify as Type C soils. Excavations deeper than 20 feet should be braced, or a
professional engineer should design the slopes.
Wind and water erosion is more likely with disturbed conditions expected during
construction and may need to be addressed due to municipal regulation. The erosion potential
will decrease after construction if proper grading practices, surface drainage design and re-
vegetation efforts are implemented.
Foundations
Our investigation indicates predominantly low-swelling soils exist at depths likely to affect
foundation performance. Footing, reinforced concrete mat or post-tensioned slab foundations are
considered appropriate for the proposed construction. Design criteria for footing, mat, and post-
tensioned (PT) slab foundations developed from analysis of field and laboratory data and our
experience are presented below. The builder and structural engineer should also consider design
and construction details established by the structural warrantor (if any) that may impose additional
design and installation requirements.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
7
Footings
1. The footing foundation should bear on natural, undisturbed soils and/or on properly
compacted fill. Where soils are loosened during excavation or in the footing
forming process the soils should be removed or compacted to at least 95 percent
of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99) between
optimum and 3 percent above optimum moisture content, prior to placing concrete.
Excavation backfill placed below foundations should be compacted using the same
specifications.
2. Footings should be designed for a net allowable soil pressure of 2,000 pounds per
square foot (psf). The soil pressure can be increased 33 percent for transient loads
such as wind or seismic loads. We recommend a minimum 3-foot separation
between foundation elements and groundwater.
3. We anticipate footings designed using the soil pressure recommended above
could experience 1-inch of movement. Differential movement of ½-inch should be
considered in the design.
4. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches. Foundations for isolated
columns should have minimum dimensions of 16 inches by 16 inches. Larger
sizes may be required depending upon the loads and structural system used.
5. Foundation walls should be well reinforced both top and bottom. We recommend
reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at least 10 feet or the
distance between pads whichever is greater. Reinforcement should be designed
by the structural engineer considering the effects of large openings and lateral
loads on wall performance.
6. Exterior footings must be protected from frost action per local building codes.
Normally, 30 inches of cover over footings is assumed in the area for frost
protection.
7. The completed foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of
our firm prior to placing the forms to verify subsurface conditions are as anticipated
from our borings. Our representative should also observe the placement and test
compaction of new fill placed for foundation subgrade (if merited).
Reinforced Concrete Mat
1. Reinforced concrete mat foundations should be constructed on natural,
undisturbed soil and/or properly compacted fill or fill placed for an over-excavation
as described in the Site Development section of this report. The reinforced
concrete mat foundation should be designed for a net allowable soil pressure of
2,000 psf. The soil pressure can be increased 33 percent for transient loads such
as wind or seismic loads.
2. Reinforced slabs are typically designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction. We
recommend use of a modulus of 75 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection
(pci).
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
8
3. The soils beneath mat foundations can be assigned an ultimate coefficient of
friction of 0.4 to resist lateral loads. The ability of foundation backfill to resist lateral
loads can be calculated using a passive equivalent fluid pressure of 250 pcf. This
assumes the backfill is densely compacted and will not be removed. Backfill
should be placed and compacted to the criteria in the Fill Placement section of the
report. A moist unit weight of 120 pcf can be assumed for natural soils and
compacted fill. These values are considered ultimate values and appropriate
factors of safety should be used. Typically, a factor of safety of 1.5 is used for
sliding and 1.6 for lateral earth pressure.
4. The edges of the mats should be thickened or turned down for structural strength
and frost protection.
5. Materials beneath the mat foundation should be protected from frost action. We
believe 30 inches of frost cover is appropriate for this site.
6. We should be retained to observe the completed excavations to confirm whether
the subsurface conditions are similar to those found in our borings.
Post-Tensioned Slab-On-Grade (PT)
PT foundation design is based on a method developed by the Post-Tensioning Institute
(PTI) and is outlined in PTI’s third edition of Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-On-Ground (2004
with 2008 Supplement). Various climate and relevant soil factors are required to evaluate the PTI
design criteria. These include Thornthwaite Moisture Index (Im), suction compression index (γh),
unsaturated diffusion coefficient (α), depth of probable moisture variation, initial and final soil
suction profiles, and percent clay fraction and predominant clay mineral. In the project area, Im is
about -20.
The PT foundation design method is based on the potential differential movement of the
slab edges (ym) over a specified edge distance (em). Further, the PTI design method, evaluates
two mechanisms of soil movement (edge lift and center lift) based on assumptions that wetting
and drying of the foundation soils are primarily affected by seasonal climate changes. In the 2004
design manual, PTI recommends evaluating movements for a minimum depth of wetting of 9 feet
below the ground surface. This value can be reasonable for a seasonal moisture variation;
however, our experience indicates the foundation soils will normally undergo an increase in
moisture due to covering the ground surface with buildings and flatwork, coupled with the
introduction of landscape irrigation around the buildings. Based on our experience and the
subsurface conditions at the site, the depth of wetting can be about 24 feet or more below the
ground surface.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
9
The wetting may not penetrate this deep; however, we believe it is a reasonable design
assumption when evaluating the edge lift for this site. For the deeper depths of wetting, ground
movements can be estimated based on swell or suction profiles, or using a computer program
(such as “VOLFLO” by Geostructural Tool Kit, Inc.). The PTI design method does not predict soil
movement caused by site conditions such as excessive irrigation or poor surface drainage that
may lead to differential foundation movement in excess of the movements estimated by the PTI
design method. These conditions may also increase the edge moisture variation distance above
the design values provided in the PTI manual.
Considering the limitations of the current PTI design method, we believe a conservative
approach with reasonable engineering judgement is merited in PT foundation design. Design
criteria for PT foundations are presented below. Criteria were developed from analysis of field
and laboratory data, the PT design method outlined in PTI’s third edition of Design and
Construction of Post-Tensioned Slabs-On-Ground (2004 with 2008 Supplement), VOLFLO by
Geostructural Tool Kit, Inc., and our experience.
1. PT foundations should be constructed on new moisture-conditioned and
compacted fill or directly on native soils. If fill/backfill or soft/loose soils or relatively
dry soils are exposed in footing excavations or are the result of the
excavation/forming process, these soils should be removed and recompacted.
2. PT foundations should be designed for a maximum allowable soil pressure of
2,000 psf.
3. For design of uniform thickness PT foundations or point loads, a modulus of
subgrade reaction (Ks) of 75 pci can be used.
4. A differential soil movement (ym) of 1.13 inches for the edge lift condition and -0.85
inches for the center lift condition can be used.
5. An edge moisture variation distance (em) of 4.8 feet for the edge lift condition and
9 feet for the center lift condition can be used.
6. The above-grade construction, such as framing, drywall, brick, and stucco should
be considered when determining the appropriate slab stiffness. We are aware of
situations where minor differential slab movement has caused distress to finish
materials. One way to enhance performance would be to place reinforcing steel in
the bottoms of stiffening beams. The structural engineer should evaluate the merits
of this approach, as well as other potential alternatives to reduce damage to finish
materials. The slab stiffness should be evaluated per section 6.10 of the PTI 2008
Supplement as it relates to different superstructure materials.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
10
7. Stiffening beams and edge beams may be poured “neat” into excavated trenches.
Soil may cave or slough during trench excavation for the stiffening beams.
Disturbed soil should be removed from trench bottoms prior to placement of
concrete. Formwork or other methods may be required for proper stiffening beam
installation.
8. Exterior stiffening beams should be protected from frost action. Normally 2½ feet
of frost cover is assumed in the area. If exterior patios are incorporated into the
PT, we believe the stiffening beams around the patios should be as deep as those
around the building exterior to increase the likelihood they will perform similarly to
the rest of the PT.
9. For slab tensioning design, a coefficient of friction value of 0.75 or 1.0 can be
assumed for slabs on polyethylene sheeting or a sand layer, respectively. A
coefficient of friction of 2.0 should be used for slabs on clay soils. We believe use
of polyethylene is preferable because it serves as a vapor retarder which helps to
control moisture migration up through the slabs.
10. A representative of our firm should observe the completed excavations. A
representative of the structural engineer or our firm should observe the placement
of the reinforcing tendons and any mild reinforcement prior to pouring the slabs
and beams, and observe the tendon stressing.
Floor Systems and Slab-On-Grade Floors
Slab Performance Risk
We conducted swell-consolidation testing to provide a basis for calculating potential soil
heave at this site. We estimate potential heave of 1-inch or less for the structures included. Based
on our heave calculations, the subsurface conditions found in our borings, and our experience
with residential construction and performance, we judge that the risk of poor slab-on-grade
performance at this site is low. Our experience indicates that slab performance is generally
satisfactory on low risk sites. Slab heave of 1 to 2 inches is considered “normal” for these sites;
more or less heave can occur. If floor movements cannot be tolerated, a structurally supported
floor system should be considered. A more detailed discussion of slab-on-grade performance risk
and construction recommendations is provided in Exhibit A.
If the owner elects to use slab-on-grade construction and accepts the risk of movement
and associated damage, we recommend the following precautions for slab-on-grade construction
at this site. These precautions can help reduce, but not eliminate, damage or distress due to slab
movement.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
11
1. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior load bearing members
with a slip joint that allows free vertical movement of the slabs. This can reduce
cracking if some movement of the slab occurs.
2. We understand that thickened, interior load bearing slabs may be desired for this
site. We believe this to be acceptable, for the units included in this investigation,
provided the risk of movement of up to 1-inch is acceptable to the owner. To reduce
the risk of movement we recommend saw cutting at the thickened edge for isolation
(see image below).
3. Slabs should be placed directly on properly moisture conditioned, well-compacted
fill. The 2021 International Building Code (IBC) requires a vapor retarder between
the base course or subgrade soils and the concrete slab-on-grade floor, including
PT slabs. The merits of installation of a vapor retarder below floor slabs depend on
the sensitivity of floor coverings and building use to moisture. A properly installed
vapor retarder (10 mil minimum) is more beneficial below concrete slab-on-grade
floors where floor coverings, painted floor surfaces or products stored on the floor
will be sensitive to moisture. The vapor retarder is most effective when concrete is
placed directly on top of it, rather than placing a sand or gravel leveling course
between the vapor retarder and the floor slab. The placement of concrete on the
vapor retarder may increase the risk of shrinkage cracking and curling. Use of
concrete with reduced shrinkage characteristics including minimized water content,
maximized coarse aggregate content, and reasonably low slump will reduce the risk
of shrinkage cracking and curling. Considerations and recommendations for the
installation of vapor retarders below concrete slabs are outlined in Section 5.2.3.2 of
the 2018 report of American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 302, “Guide for
Concrete Floor and Slab Construction (ACI 302.1R-15)”.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
12
4. Use of slab-bearing partitions should be minimized. If used, they should be designed
and constructed with a minimum 1½-inch space to allow for slab movement.
Differential slab movements may cause cracking of partition walls. Differential
movement of ½-inch should be considered in the design. If the void is provided at
the top of partitions, the connection between the slab-supported partition and
foundation-supported walls should be detailed to allow differential movement.
Doorways, in-wall utility connections, wall partitions perpendicular to the exterior wall
or walls supported by foundations should be detailed to allow for vertical movement.
Interior perimeter framing and finishing should not extend onto slabs-on-grade, or if
necessary, should be detailed to allow for movement.
5. Underslab plumbing should be eliminated where feasible. Where such plumbing is
unavoidable it should be thoroughly pressure tested for leaks prior to slab
construction and be provided with flexible couplings. Pressurized water supply lines
should be brought above the floors as quickly as possible.
6. Plumbing and utilities that pass through the slabs should be isolated from the slabs
and constructed with flexible couplings. Utilities, as well as electrical and mechanical
equipment should be constructed with sufficient flexibility to allow for movement.
7. HVAC or other mechanical systems supported by the slabs (if any) should be
provided with flexible connections capable of withstanding at least 3 inches of
movement.
8. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) recommends frequent control joints in slabs
to reduce problems associated with shrinkage cracking and curling. To reduce
curling, the concrete mix should have a high aggregate content and a low slump. If
desired, a shrinkage compensating admixture could be added to the concrete to
reduce the risk of shrinkage cracking. We can perform a mix design or assist the
design team in selecting a pre-existing mix.
Structurally Supported Floors
Structural floors should be used if floor movement and cracking are unacceptable. A
structural floor is supported by the foundation system. There are design and construction issues
associated with structural floors that must be considered, such as ventilation and lateral loads.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
13
Where structurally supported floors are installed, the required air space depends on the materials
used to construct the floor and the expansion potential of the underlying soils. Building codes
require a clear space of 18 inches above exposed earth if untreated wood floor components are
used. Where other floor support materials are used, a minimum clear space of 8 inches should
be maintained. This minimum clear space should be maintained between any point on the
underside of the floor system (including beams and floor drain traps) and the surface of the
exposed earth.
Where structurally supported floors are used, utility connections, including water, gas, air
duct and exhaust stack connections to floor supported appliances, should be capable of absorbing
some deflection of the floor. Plumbing that passes through the floor should ideally be hung from
the underside of the structural floor and not lain on the bottom of the excavation. This configuration
may not be achievable for some parts of the installation. It is prudent to maintain the minimum
clear space below all plumbing lines. If trenching below the lines is necessary, we recommend
sloping these trenches so they discharge to the foundation drains.
Control of humidity in crawlspaces is important for indoor air quality and performance of
wood floor systems. We believe the best current practices to control humidity involve the use of
a vapor retarder (10-mil minimum), placed on the exposed soils below accessible sub-floor areas.
The vapor retarder should be sealed at joints and attached to concrete foundation elements. If
desired, we can provide designs for ventilation systems that can be installed in association with
a vapor retarder, to improve control of humidity in crawlspace areas. The Moisture Management
Task Force of Metro Denver2 has compiled additional discussion and recommendations regarding
best practices for the control of humidity in below-grade, under-floor spaces.
Porches, Decks, and Patios
Porches or decks with overhanging roofs that are integral with the structure such that
excessive foundation movement cannot be tolerated, should be constructed with the same
foundation type as the building. Simple decks, that are not integral with the structure and can
tolerate foundation movement, can be constructed with less substantial foundations. A short pier
or footing bottomed at least 3 feet below grade can be used if movement is acceptable. Use of
2 “Guidelines for Design and Construction of New Homes with Below-Grade Under-Floor Spaces,” Moisture Management Task
Force, October 30, 2003.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
14
8-foot to 10-foot piers can reduce potential movement. Footings or short piers should not be
bottomed in wall backfill or undocumented fill due to risk of settlement. The inner edge of the
deck may be constructed on haunches or steel angles bolted to the foundation walls and detailed
such that movement of the deck foundation will not cause distress to the structures. We suggest
use of adjustable bracket-type connections or other details between foundations and deck posts
so the posts can be trimmed or adjusted if movement occurs.
Porches, patio slabs, and other exterior flatwork should be isolated from the structures.
Porch slabs can be constructed to reduce the likelihood that settlement or heave will affect the
slabs. One approach is to place loose backfill under a structurally supported slab. This fill will
more likely settle than swell, and can thus accommodate some heave of the underlying soils. A
lower risk approach is to construct the porch slab over void-forming materials. Conditions should
allow the void-forming materials to soften quickly after construction to reduce the risk of
transmitting ground heave to the porch slab. Wax or plastic-coated void boxes should not be used
unless provisions are made to allow water to penetrate into the boxes.
Exterior Flatwork
Exterior flatwork (driveways, sidewalks, etc.) are normally constructed as slabs-on-grade.
Various properties of the soils and environmental conditions influence magnitude of movement
and other performance. Increases in the moisture content in these soils will cause heaving and
may result in cracking of slabs-on-grade. Backfill below slabs should be moisture conditioned
and compacted to reduce settlement, as discussed in Backfill Compaction. Exterior slabs founded
on the backfill may settle and crack if the backfill is not properly moisture treated and compacted.
Where slabs-on-grade are used, we recommend adherence to the precautions for slab-on-grade
construction that are included in Exhibit A.
Below-Grade Walls
Foundation walls, elevator pits, and grade beams that extend below grade should be
designed for lateral earth pressures where backfill is not present to about the same extent on both
sides of the wall. Many factors affect the value of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors
include, but are not limited to, the type, compaction, slope and drainage of the backfill, and the
rigidity of the wall against rotation and deflection. For a very rigid wall where negligible or very
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
15
little deflection will occur, an "at-rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. For walls
that can deflect or rotate 0.5 to 1 percent of the wall height (depending upon the backfill types),
lower "active" lateral earth pressures are appropriate. Our experience indicates walls can deflect
or rotate slightly under normal design loads and that this deflection results in satisfactory wall
performance. Thus, the earth pressure on the walls will likely be between the "active" and "at -
rest" conditions.
If on-site soils are used as backfill and the backfill is not saturated, we recommend design
of walls at this site using an equivalent fluid density of at least 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This
value assumes deflection; some minor cracking of walls may occur. If very little wall deflection is
desired, higher design density may be appropriate. The structural engineer should also consider
site-specific grade restrictions and the effects of large openings on the behavior of the walls.
Backfill Compaction
Settlement of foundation wall and utility trench backfill can cause damage to concrete
flatwork and/or result in poor drainage conditions. Compaction of backfill can reduce settlement.
Attempts to compact backfill near foundations to a high degree can damage foundation walls and
may increase lateral pressures on the foundation walls. The potential for cracking of a foundation
wall can vary widely based on many factors including the degree of compaction achieved, the
weight and type of compaction equipment utilized, the structural design of the wall, the strength
of the concrete at the time of backfill compaction, and the presence of temporary or permanent
bracing.
Proper moisture conditioning of backfill is as important as compaction because settlement
commonly occurs in response to wetting. The addition of water complicates the backfill process,
especially during cold weather. Frozen soils are not considered suitable for use as backfill
because excessive settlement can result when the frozen materials thaw. Exhibit C describes
four alternative methods to place, moisture condition, and compact backfill along with a range of
possible settlements, and advantages and disadvantages of each approach, all based upon our
experience. These are just a few of the possible techniques, and represent a range for your
evaluation. We recommend Alternatives C or D if you wish to control potential settlement.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
16
Precautions should be taken when backfilling against a wall. Temporary bracing of
comparatively long, straight sections of foundation walls should be used to limit damage to walls
during the compaction process. Waiting at least seven days after the walls are placed to allow the
concrete to gain strength can also reduce the risk of damage. Compaction of fill placed beneath
and next to counterforts, and grade beams may be difficult to achieve without damaging these
building elements. Proper moisture conditioning of the fill prior to placement in these areas will
help reduce potential settlement.
Ideally, drainage swales should not be located over the backfill zone (including excavation
ramps), as this can increase the amount of water infiltration into the backfill and cause excessive
settlement. Swales should be designed to be a minimum of at least 5 feet from the foundation to
help reduce water infiltration. Irrigated vegetation, sump pump discharge pipes, sprinkler valve
boxes, and roof downspout terminations should also be at least 5 feet from the foundation.
Subsurface Drainage
No below grade areas are planned for the buildings. For this condition, perimeter drains
are not usually constructed. If any portion of a floor will be below exterior grade, or if a crawl
space is planned, we should be contacted to provide recommendations for foundation drains.
Proper design, construction, and maintenance of surface drainage are critical to the satisfactory
performance of foundations, slabs-on-grade, and other improvements. Landscaping and
irrigation practices will also affect performance. Exhibit B contains our recommendations for
surface drainage, irrigation, and maintenance.
Pavements
The project will include paved parking areas and access drives. The performance of
pavements is dependent upon the characteristics of the subgrade soil, traffic loading and
frequency, climatic conditions, drainage, and pavement materials. We used samples from our
exploratory borings and conducted laboratory tests to characterize the subgrade soils, which
generally consisted of sandy clay and clayey sand. The insitu subgrade soils generally classified
as A-7-6 soils in accordance with AASHTO procedures. The subgrade soil will likely provide poor
to fair support for new pavement. If fill is needed, we have assumed it will be soils with similar or
better characteristics.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
17
Flexible hot mix asphalt (HMA) over aggregate base course (ABC) is likely planned for
interior pavement areas. Rigid Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement should be used for
trash enclosure areas and where the pavement will be subjected to frequent turning of heavy
vehicles. Our designs are based on the AASHTO design method and our experience. Using the
criteria discussed above we recommend the minimum pavement sections provided in the
following table.
MINIMUM PAVEMENT SECTIONS
Classification
Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) +
Aggregate Base Course
(ABC)
Portland Cement
Concrete (PCC)
Parking Area 4" HMA
+ 6" ABC 5" PCC
Access Drives /
Heavy Traffic Areas
5" HMA
+ 6" ABC 6" PCC
Trash Enclosures - 6" PCC
Pavement Selection
Composite HMA/ABC pavement over a compacted subgrade is expected to perform well
at this site based on the recommendations provided. HMA provides a stiff, stable pavement to
withstand heavy loading and will provide a good fatigue resistant pavement. However, HMA does
not perform well when subjected to point loads in areas where heavy trucks turn and maneuver
at slow speeds. PCC pavement is expected to perform well in this area; PCC pavement has
better performance in freeze-thaw conditions and should require less long-term maintenance than
HMA pavement. The PCC pavement for trash enclosures should extend out to areas where trash
trucks park to lift and empty dumpsters.
Subgrade and Pavement Materials and Construction
The design of a pavement system is as much a function of the quality of the paving
materials and construction as the support characteristics of the subgrade. The construction
materials are assumed to possess sufficient quality as reflected by the strength factors used in
our design calculations. Moisture treatment criteria and additional criteria for materials and
construction requirements are presented in Appendix B.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
18
Pavement Maintenance
Routine maintenance, such as sealing and repair of cracks, is necessary to achieve the
long-term life of a pavement system. We recommend a preventive maintenance program be
developed and followed for all pavement systems to assure the design life can be realized.
Choosing to defer maintenance usually results in accelerated deterioration leading to higher future
maintenance costs, and/or repair. A recommended maintenance program is outlined in Appendix
C.
Excavation of completed pavement for utility construction or repair can destroy the
integrity of the pavement and result in a severe decrease in serviceability. To restore the
pavement top original serviceability, careful backfill compaction before repaving is necessary.
Concrete
Concrete in contact with soil can be subject to sulfate attack. We measured water-soluble
sulfate concentrations in four samples at or below 0.04 percent. As indicated in our tests and ACI
332-20, the sulfate exposure class is Not Applicable or RS0.
SULFATE EXPOSURE CLASSES PER ACI 332-20
Exposure Classes
Water-Soluble Sulfate (SO4)
in Soil A
(%)
Not Applicable RS0 < 0.10
Moderate RS1 0.10 to 0.20
Severe RS2 0.20 to 2.00
Very Severe RS3 > 2.00
A) Percent sulfate by mass in soil determined by ASTM C1580
For this level of sulfate concentration, ACI 332-20 Code Requirements for Residential
Concrete indicates there are no cement type requirements for sulfate resistance as indicated in
the table below.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
19
CONCRETE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR SULFATE EXPOSURE PER ACI 332-20
Exposure
Class
Maximum
Water/
Cement
Ratio
Minimum
Compressive
Strength A
(psi)
Cementitious Material Types B Calcium
Chloride
Admixtures
ASTM
C150/
C150M
ASTM
C595/
C595M
ASTM
C1157/
C1157M
RS0 N/A 2500 No Type
Restrictions
No Type
Restrictions
No
Type
Restrictions
No
Restrictions
RS1 0.50 2500 II Type with (MS)
Designation MS No
Restrictions
RS2 0.45 3000 V C Type with (HS)
Designation HS Not
Permitted
RS3 0.45 3000
V +
Pozzolan or
Slag
Cement D
Type with (HS)
Designation plus
Pozzolan or Slag
Cement E
HS + Pozzolan or
Slag Cement E
Not
Permitted
A) Concrete compressive strength specified shall be based on 28-day tests per ASTM C39/C39M
B) Alternate combinations of cementitious materials of those listed in ACI 332 -20 Table 5.4.2 shall be permitted
when tested for sulfate resistance meeting the criteria in section 5.5.
C) Other available types of cement such as Type III or Type I are permitted in Exposure Classes RS1 or RS2 if
the C3A contents are less than 8 or 5 percent, respectively.
D) The amount of the specific source of pozzolan or slag to be used shall not be less than the amount that has
been determined by service record to improve sulfate resistance when used in concrete containing Type V
cement. Alternatively, the amount of the specific source of the pozzolan or slab to be used shall not be less
than the amount tested in accordance with ASTM C1012/C1012M and meeting the criteria in section 5.5.1 of
ACI 332-20.
E) Water-soluble chloride ion content that is contributed from the ingredients including water aggregates,
cementitious materials, and admixtures shall be determined on the concrete mixture ASTM C1218/C1218M
between 29 and 42 days.
Superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly permeable concrete,
even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze-thaw
deterioration, the water-to-cementitious materials ratio should not exceed 0.50 for concrete in
contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or high-water tables.
Concrete should have a total air content of 6 percent ± 1.5 percent. We advocate damp-proofing
of all foundation walls and grade beams in contact with the subsoils (including the inside and
outside faces of garage and crawl space grade beams).
Excavations
Excavations made at this site, including those for foundations and utilities, may be governed
by local, state, or federal guidelines or regulations. Subcontractors should be familiar with these
regulations and take whatever precautions they deem necessary to comply with the requirements
and thereby protect the safety of their employees and that of the general public.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
20
Construction Observations
We recommend that CTL|Thompson, Inc. provide construction observation services to allow
us the opportunity to verify whether soil conditions are consistent with those found during this
investigation. Other observations are recommended to review general conformance with design
plans. If others perform these observations, they must accept responsibility to judge whether the
recommendations in this report remain appropriate.
Geotechnical Risk
The concept of risk is an important aspect with any geotechnical evaluation primarily
because the methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact
science. We never have complete knowledge of subsurface conditions. Our analysis must be
tempered with engineering judgment and experience. Therefore, the recommendations presented
in any geotechnical evaluation should not be considered risk-free. Our recommendations
represent our judgment of those measures that are necessary to increase the chances that the
structures will perform satisfactorily. It is critical that all recommendations in this report are
followed during construction. Homeowners must assume responsibility for maintaining the
structures and use appropriate practices regarding drainage and landscaping. Improvements
performed by homeowners after construction, such as construction of additions, retaining walls,
decks, patios, landscaping, and exterior flatwork, should be completed in accordance with
recommendations in this report.
Limitations
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Hartford Acquisitions for the
purpose of providing geotechnical design and construction criteria for the proposed project. The
information, conclusions, and recommendations presented herein are based upon consideration
of many factors including, but not limited to, the type of structures proposed, the geologic setting,
and the subsurface conditions encountered. The conclusions and recommendations contained in
the report are not valid for use by others. Standards of practice evolve in the area of geotechnical
engineering. The recommendations provided are appropriate for about three years. If the
proposed structures are not constructed within about three years, we should be contacted to
determine if we should update this report.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
21
Seven borings were drilled during this investigation to obtain a reasonably accurate picture
of the subsurface conditions. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our borings
are possible. A representative of our firm should observe foundation excavations to confirm the
exposed materials are as anticipated from our borings.
We believe this investigation was conducted with that level of skill and care ordinarily used
by geotechnical engineers practicing in this area at this time. No warranty, express or implied, is
made. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report or in the analysis of
the influence of subsurface conditions on design of the structures, please call.
CTLTHOMPSON, INC.
Trace Krausse, PE R.B. “Chip” Leadbetter, III, PE
Geotechnical Project Manager Senior Engineer
LEGEND:
INDICATES APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY
BORING
INDICATES BUILDING NUMBER
GIVEN TO US BY THE CLIENT
TH-1
1
TI
M
B
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
D
.
I-
2
5
E. MULBERRY ST.
E. VINE DR.
SITE
FIGURE 1
Locations of
Exploratory Borings
0 125'62.5'
APPROXIMATE
SCALE: 1"=125'
VICINITY MAP
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
NOT TO SCALE
TH-1
TH-2
TH-3
TH-4
TH-6
TH-7
TH-5
1
2 1
4 356
8 710
9
11
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
4,905
4,910
4,915
4,920
4,925
4,930
4,935
4,940
4,945
4,950
4,905
4,910
4,915
4,920
4,925
4,930
4,935
4,940
4,945
4,950
18/12
50/12
31/12
11/12
WC=12.3DD=118SW=0.5
TH-1
El. 4938.7
8/12
4/12
25/12
5/12
WC=14.8DD=114SW=0.0SS=0.040
WC=4.7-200=10
TH-2
El. 4939.3
20/12
36/12
22/12
15/12
WC=12.2DD=122SW=0.1
WC=24.1DD=103-200=72
TH-3
El. 4942.3
18/12
9/12
8/12
WC=10.3DD=123SW=0.2SS=<0.01
WC=8.9DD=117SW=0.0
WC=18.9DD=104-200=62
TH-4
El. 4945.3
17/12
12/12
28/12
WC=12.7DD=120SW=0.6SS=<0.01
TH-5
El. 4937.1
28/12
43/12
27/12
6/12
WC=8.9DD=126SW=1.4
WC=5.1-200=16
TH-6
El. 4937.5
11/12
12/12
4/12
WC=14.9DD=114SW=0.4SS=<0.01
WC=18.2DD=107LL=42 PI=25-200=71
TH-7
El. 4936.5
DRIVE SAMPLE. THE SYMBOL 18/12 INDICATES 18 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER
FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2.5-INCH O.D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
EL
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
-
F
E
E
T
FIGURE 2
EL
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
-
F
E
E
T
WATER LEVEL MEASURED ON DECEMBER 6, 2023.
SAND, GRAVELLY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY, MOIST, LOOSE TO VERY DENSE,
BROWN, (SP, SP-SC)
2.
3.
CLAY, SANDY, MOIST, STIFF TO VERY STIFF, BROWN (CL)
THE BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON DECEMBER 4, 2023 USING 4-INCH DIAMETER
CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT AUGERS AND A TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILL RIG.
1.
LEGEND:
NOTES:
SAND, CLAYEY, VERY MOIST TO WET, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, BROWN (SC)
WATER LEVEL MEASURED AT TIME OF DRILLING.
BORING ELEVATIONS WERE SURVEYED BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CLIENT.
THESE LOGS ARE SUBJECT TO THE EXPLANATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS IN
THIS REPORT.
4.
Summary Logs of
Exploratory Borings
WC
DD
SW
-200
LL
PI
SS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
INDICATES MOISTURE CONTENT (%).
INDICATES DRY DENSITY (PCF).
INDICATES SWELL WHEN WETTED UNDER OVERBURDEN PRESSURE (%).
INDICATES PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (%).
INDICATES LIQUID LIMIT.
INDICATES PLASTICITY INDEX.
INDICATES SOLUBLE SULFATE CONTENT (%).
GROUNDWATER READING.
INDICATES DEPTH WHERE HOLE CAVED PRIOR TO SECONDARY
Building 2 Building 3 Building 10
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
APPENDIX A
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTS
TABLE A-I – SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=118 PCF
From TH - 1 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=12.3 %
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=114 PCF
From TH - 2 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=14.8 %
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
Swell Consolidation
FIGURE A-1
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNTAONSER CION UNDSNAPXE
GINETTTO WRE DUESSUERP
0.1 10 1001.0
0.1 1.0 10 100APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
GNTIEWETOTUEDEMENTMOVON
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=122 PCF
From TH - 3 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=12.2 %
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=123 PCF
From TH - 4 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=10.3 %
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
Swell Consolidation
FIGURE A-2
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNTAONSER CION UNDSNAPXE
GINETTTO WRE DUESSUERP
0.1 10 1001.0
0.1 1.0 10 100APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNSTAONER CION UNDANSPXE
GINTETWTORE DUESSUERP
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=117 PCF
From TH - 4 AT 9 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=8.9 %
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=120 PCF
From TH - 5 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=12.7 %
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
Swell Consolidation
FIGURE A-3
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
GNTIETO WUE TDEMENTMOVON
0.1 10 1001.0
0.1 1.0 10 100APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNSTAONER CION UNDANSXE P
GINTETWTORE DUESSURP E
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=126 PCF
From TH - 6 AT 4 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=8.9 %
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT=114 PCF
From TH - 7 AT 2 FEET MOISTURE CONTENT=14.9 %
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
Swell Consolidation
FIGURE A-4
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
N
%
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNTAONSER CION UNDSNAPXE
GINETTTO WRE DUESSUERP
0.1 10 1001.0
0.1 1.0 10 100APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
TNSTAONER CION UNDANSPXE
GINTETWTORE DUESSUERP
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
Sample of SAND, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY, GRAVELLY (SP-SC)GRAVEL 33 %SAND 57 %
From TH - 2 AT 14 FEET SILT & CLAY 10 %LIQUID LIMIT %
PLASTICITY INDEX %
Sample of SAND, CLAYEY, GRAVELLY (SC)GRAVEL 22 %SAND 62 %
From TH - 6 AT 9 FEET SILT & CLAY 16 %LIQUID LIMIT %
PLASTICITY INDEX %
FIGURE A-5
Gradation
Test Results
0.002
15 MIN.
.005
60 MIN.
.009
19 MIN.
.019
4 MIN.
.037
1 MIN.
.074
*200
.149
*100
.297
*50
0.42
*40
.590
*30
1.19
*16
2.0
*10
2.38
*8
4.76
*4
9.52
3/8"
19.1
3/4"
36.1
1½"
76.2
3"
127
5"
152
6"
200
8"
.001
45 MIN.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC)SANDS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE
GRAVEL
FINE COARSE COBBLES
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
25 HR.7 HR.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
PE
R
C
E
N
T
P
A
S
S
I
N
G
0
10
20
30
50
60
70
80
90
100
PE
R
C
E
N
T
R
E
T
A
I
N
E
D
40
0.002
15 MIN.
.005
60 MIN.
.009
19 MIN.
.019
4 MIN.
.037
1 MIN.
.074
*200
.149
*100
.297
*50
0.42
*40
.590
*30
1.19
*16
2.0
*10
2.38
*8
4.76
*4
9.52
3/8"
19.1
3/4"
36.1
1½"
76.2
3"
127
5"
152
6"
200
8"
.001
45 MIN.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC)SANDS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE
GRAVEL
FINE COARSE COBBLES
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
25 HR.7 HR.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
PE
R
C
E
N
T
P
A
S
S
I
N
G
PE
R
C
E
N
T
R
E
T
A
I
N
E
D
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL)GRAVEL 2 %SAND 27 %
From TH - 7 AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 71 %LIQUID LIMIT 42 %
PLASTICITY INDEX 25 %
Sample of GRAVEL %SAND %
From SILT & CLAY %LIQUID LIMIT %
PLASTICITY INDEX %
FIGURE A-6
Gradation
Test Results
0.002
15 MIN.
.005
60 MIN.
.009
19 MIN.
.019
4 MIN.
.037
1 MIN.
.074
*200
.149
*100
.297
*50
0.42
*40
.590
*30
1.19
*16
2.0
*10
2.38
*8
4.76
*4
9.52
3/8"
19.1
3/4"
36.1
1½"
76.2
3"
127
5"
152
6"
200
8"
.001
45 MIN.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC)SANDS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE
GRAVEL
FINE COARSE COBBLES
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
25 HR.7 HR.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
PE
R
C
E
N
T
P
A
S
S
I
N
G
0
10
20
30
50
60
70
80
90
100
PE
R
C
E
N
T
R
E
T
A
I
N
E
D
40
0.002
15 MIN.
.005
60 MIN.
.009
19 MIN.
.019
4 MIN.
.037
1 MIN.
.074
*200
.149
*100
.297
*50
0.42
*40
.590
*30
1.19
*16
2.0
*10
2.38
*8
4.76
*4
9.52
3/8"
19.1
3/4"
36.1
1½"
76.2
3"
127
5"
152
6"
200
8"
.001
45 MIN.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC)SANDS
FINE MEDIUM COARSE
GRAVEL
FINE COARSE COBBLES
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
25 HR.7 HR.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
PE
R
C
E
N
T
P
A
S
S
I
N
G
PERCEN
T
RETAINED
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
PASSING WATER-
MOISTURE DRY LIQUID PLASTICITY APPLIED NO. 200 SOLUBLE
DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY LIMIT INDEX SWELL*PRESSURE SIEVE SULFATES
BORING (FEET)(%)(PCF)(%)(PSF)(%)(%)DESCRIPTION
TH-1 2 12.3 118 0.5 500 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-2 4 14.8 114 0.0 500 0.04 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-2 14 4.7 10 SAND, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY, (SP-SC)
TH-3 4 12.2 122 0.1 500 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-3 19 24.1 103 72 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-4 2 10.3 123 0.2 500 <0.01 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-4 9 8.9 117 0.0 1,100 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-4 14 18.9 104 62 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-5 2 12.7 120 0.6 500 <0.01 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-6 4 8.9 126 1.4 500 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-6 9 5.1 16 SAND, CLAYEY, GRAVELLY (SC)
TH-7 2 14.9 114 0.4 500 <0.01 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
TH-7 4 18.2 107 42 25 71 CLAY, SANDY (CL)
SWELL TEST RESULTS*
TABLE A-I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Page 1 of 1
* NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
APPENDIX B
PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
B -1
SUBGRADE PREPARATION
Moisture Treated Subgrade (MTS)
1. The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter, scarified, moisture treated
and compacted to the specifications stated below in Item 2. The compacted
subgrade should extend at least 3 feet beyond the edge of the pavement where
no edge support, such as curb and gutter, are to be constructed.
2. Sandy and gravelly soils (A-1-a, A-1-b, A-3, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7) should be
moisture conditioned near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least
95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T
99). Clayey soils (A-6, A-7-5, A-7-6) should be moisture conditioned between
optimum and 3 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at
least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698,
AASHTO T 99).
3. Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and
tested prior to paving. As a minimum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of
standard Proctor maximum dry density.
4. Final grading of the subgrade should be carefully controlled so the design cross-
slope is maintained and low spots in the subgrade that could trap water are
eliminated.
5. Once final subgrade elevation has been compacted and tested to compliance
and shaped to the required cross-section, the area should be proof-rolled using a
minimum axle load of 18 kips per axle. The proof-roll should be performed while
moisture contents of the subgrade are still within the recommended limits. Drying
of the subgrade prior to proof-roll or paving should be avoided.
6. Areas that are observed by the Engineer that have soft spots in the subgrade, or
where deflection is not uniform of soft or wet subgrade shall be ripped, scarified,
dried or wetted as necessary and recompacted to the requirements for the
density and moisture. As an alternative, those areas may be sub-excavated and
replaced with properly compacted structural backfill. Where extensively soft,
yielding subgrade is encountered; we recommend a representative of our office
observe the excavation.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
B -2
PAVEMENT MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION
Aggregate Base Course (ABC)
1. A Class 5 or 6 Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) specified ABC
should be used. Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) or reclaimed concrete
pavement (RCP) alternative which meets the Class 5 or 6 designation and
design R-value/strength coefficient is also acceptable.
2. Bases should have a minimum Hveem stabilometer value of 78, or greater. ABC,
RAP, and RCP must be moisture stable. The change in R-value from 300-psi to
100-psi exudation pressure should be 12 points or less.
3. ABC, RAP or RCP bases should be placed in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches and
moisture treated to near optimum moisture content. Bases should be moisture
treated to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent
of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99).
4. Placement and compaction of ABC, RAP, or RCP should be observed and tested
by a representative of our firm. Placement should not commence until the
underlying subgrade is properly prepared and tested.
Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)
1. HMA should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler, hydrated lime and
asphalt cement. Some mixes may require polymer modified asphalt cement, or
make use of up to 20 percent reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP). A job mix
design is recommended and periodic checks on the job site should be made to
verify compliance with specifications.
2. HMA should be relatively impermeable to moisture and should be designed with
crushed aggregates that have a minimum of 80 percent of the aggregate retained
on the No. 4 sieve with two mechanically fractured faces.
3. Gradations that approach the maximum density line (within 5 percent between
the No. 4 and 50 sieves) should be avoided. A gradation with a nominal
maximum size of 1 or 2 inches developed on the fine side of the maximum
density line should be used.
4. Total void content, voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) and voids filled should
be considered in the selection of the optimum asphalt cement content. The
optimum asphalt content should be selected at a total air void content of
approximately 4 percent. The mixture should have a minimum VMA of 14
percent and between 65 percent and 80 percent of voids filled.
5. Asphalt cement should meet the requirements of the Superpave Performance
Graded (PG) Binders. The minimum performing asphalt cement should conform
to the requirements of the governing agency.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
B -3
6. Hydrated lime should be added at the rate of 1 percent by dry weight of the
aggregate and should be included in the amount passing the No. 200 sieve.
Hydrated lime for aggregate pretreatment should conform to the requirements of
ASTM C 207, Type N.
7. Paving should be performed on properly prepared, unfrozen surfaces that are
free of water, snow, and ice. Paving should only be performed when both air and
surface temperatures equal, or exceed, the temperatures specified in Table 401-
3 of the 2023 Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for
Road and Bridge Construction.
8. HMA should not be placed at a temperature lower than 245oF for mixes
containing PG 64-22 asphalt, and 290oF for mixes containing polymer-modified
asphalt. The breakdown compaction should be completed before the HMA
temperature drops 20oF.
9. Wearing surface course shall be Grading S or SX for residential roadway
classifications and Grading S for collector, arterial, industrial, and commercial
roadway classifications.
10. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade SX shall be 1½ inches/2½
inches. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade S shall be 2 inches/3½
inches. The minimum/maximum lift thicknesses for Grade SG shall be 3 inches/5
inches.
11. Joints should be staggered. No joints should be placed within wheel paths.
12. HMA should be compacted to between 92 and 96 percent of Maximum
Theoretical Density. The surface shall be sealed with a finish roller prior to the
mix cooling to 185oF.
13. Placement and compaction of HMA should be observed and tested by a
representative of our firm. Placement should not commence until approval of the
proof rolling as discussed in the Subgrade Preparation section of this report.
Sub-base, base course or initial pavement course shall be placed within 48 hours
of approval of the proof rolling. If the Contractor fails to place the sub-base, base
course or initial pavement course within 48 hours or the condition of the subgrade
changes due to weather or other conditions, proof rolling and correction shall be
performed again.
Portland Cement Concrete (PCC)
1. Portland cement concrete should consist of Class P of the 2023 CDOT -
Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction specifications for
normal placement. PCC should have a minimum compressive strength of 4,500
psi at 28 days and a minimum modulus of rupture (flexural strength) of 600 psi.
Job mix designs are recommended and periodic checks on the job site should be
made to verify compliance with specifications.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
B -4
Portland cement should be Type II “low alkali” and should conform to ASTM C2.
150.
Portland cement concrete should not be placed when the subgrade or air3.
temperature is below 40°F.
Concrete should not be placed during warm weather if the mixed concrete has a4.
temperature of 90°F, or higher.
Mixed concrete temperature placed during cold weather should have a5.
temperature between 50°F and 90°F.
Free water should not be finished into the concrete surface. Atomizing nozzle6.
pressure sprayers for applying finishing compounds are recommended whenever
the concrete surface becomes difficult to finish.
Curing of the Portland cement concrete should be accomplished by the use of a7.
curing compound. The curing compound should be applied in accordance with
manufacturer recommendations.
Curing procedures should be implemented, as necessary, to protect the8.
pavement against moisture loss, rapid temperature change, freezing, and
mechanical injury.
Construction joints, including longitudinal joints and transverse joints, should be9.
formed during construction, or sawed after the concrete has begun to set, but
prior to uncontrolled cracking.
All joints should be properly sealed using a rod back-up and approved epoxy10.
sealant.
Traffic should not be allowed on the pavement until it has properly cured and11.
achieved at least 80 percent of the design strength, with saw joints already cut.
Placement of Portland cement concrete should be observed and tested by a12.
representative of our firm. Placement should not commence until the subgrade is
properly prepared and tested.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
APPENDIX C
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
C-1
MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
A primary cause for deterioration of pavements is oxidative aging resulting in brittle
pavements. Tire loads from traffic are necessary to "work" or knead the asphalt concrete to
keep it flexible and rejuvenated. Preventive maintenance treatments will typically preserve the
original or existing pavement by providing a protective seal or rejuvenating the asphalt binder to
extend pavement life.
1. Annual Preventive Maintenance
a. Visual pavement evaluations should be performed each spring or fall.
b. Reports documenting the progress of distress should be kept current to
provide information on effective times to apply preventive maintenance
treatments.
c. Crack sealing should be performed annually as new cracks appear.
2. 3 to 5 Year Preventive Maintenance
a. The owner should budget for a preventive treatment at approximate intervals
of 3 to 5 years to reduce oxidative embrittlement problems.
b. Typical preventive maintenance treatments include chip seals, fog seals,
slurry seals and crack sealing.
3. 5 to 10 Year Corrective Maintenance
a. Corrective maintenance may be necessary, as dictated by the pavement
condition, to correct rutting, cracking, and structurally failed areas.
b. Corrective maintenance may include full depth patching, milling and overlays.
c. In order for the pavement to provide a 20-year service life, at least one major
corrective overlay should be expected.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
C-2
MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RIGID PAVEMENTS
High traffic volumes create pavement rutting and smooth, polished surfaces.
Preventive maintenance treatments will typically preserve the original or existing pavement by
providing a protective seal and improving skid resistance through a new wearing course.
1. Annual Preventive Maintenance
a. Visual pavement evaluations should be performed each spring or fall.
b. Reports documenting the progress of distress should be kept current to
provide information of effective times to apply preventive maintenance.
c. Crack sealing should be performed annually as new cracks appear.
2. 4 to 8 Year Preventive Maintenance
a. The owner should budget for a preventive treatment at approximate intervals
of 4 to 8 years to reduce joint deterioration.
b. Typical preventive maintenance for rigid pavements includes patching, crack
sealing and joint cleaning and sealing.
c. Where joint sealants are missing or distressed, resealing is mandatory.
3. 15 to 20 Year Corrective Maintenance
a. Corrective maintenance for rigid pavements includes patching and slab
replacement to correct subgrade failures, edge damage and material failure.
b. Asphalt concrete overlays may be required at 15-to-20-year intervals to
improve the structural capacity of the pavement.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS - BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTL|T PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120 EXHIBIT A-1
EXHIBIT A
SLAB PERFORMANCE RISK EVALUATION,
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE
As part of our evaluation of the subsoils and bedrock, samples were tested in the
laboratory using a swell test. In the test procedure, a relatively undisturbed sample obtained
during drilling is first loaded and then flooded with water and allowed to swell. The pressure
applied prior to wetting can approximate the weight of soil above the sample depth or be some
standard load. The measured percent swell is not the sole criteria in assessing potential
movement of slabs-on-grade and the risk of poor slab performance. The results of a swell test on
an individual lot are tempered with data from surrounding lots, depth of tests, depth of excavation,
soil profile, and other tests. This judgment has been described by the Colorado Association of
Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE, 1996) as it relates to basement slab-on-grade floors. It can also
be used to help judge performance risk for other slabs-on-grade such as garage floors, driveways,
and sidewalks. CTL Thompson also performs potential heave calculations to aid in our judgment.
The risk evaluation is considered when we evaluate appropriate foundation systems for a given
site. In general, more conservative foundation designs are used for higher risk sites to control the
likelihood of excessive foundation movement.
As a result of the Slab Performance Risk Evaluation, sites are categorized as low,
moderate, high, or very high risk. This is a judgment of the swelling characteristics of the soils
and bedrock likely to influence slab performance.
REPRESENTATIVE MEASURED SWELL 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 to <2
Moderate 3 to <5 2 to <4
High 5 to <8 4 to <6
Very High > 8 > 6
*Note: The representative percent swell values presented are not necessarily measured values; rather, they are
a judgment of the swelling characteristics of the soil and bedrock likely to influence slab performance.
The rating of slab performance risk on a site as low or high is not absolute. Rather, this
rating represents a judgment. Movement of slabs may occur with time in low, moderate, high, and
very high-risk areas as the expansive soils respond to increases in moisture content. Overall, the
severity and frequency of slab damage usually is greater in high and very high rated areas. Heave
of slabs-on-grade of 3 to 5 inches is not uncommon in areas rated as high or very high risk. On
low and moderate risk sites, slab heave of 1 to 2 inches is considered normal and we believe in
the majority of instances, movements of this magnitude constitute reasonable slab performance;
more heave can occur. Slabs can be affected on all sites. On lots rated as high or very high risk,
there is more likelihood of need to repair, maintain, or replace basement and garage floors and
exterior flatwork.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120 EXHIBIT A-2
For portions of the houses where conventional slabs-on-grade are used, we recommend
the following precautions. These measures will not keep slabs-on-grade from heaving; they tend
to mitigate damages due to slab heave.
1. Slab-on-grade floor construction should be limited to areas such as garages and
basements where slab movement and cracking are acceptable to the builder and
homebuyer.
2. The 2021 International Residential Code (IRC R506) states that a 4-inch base
course layer consisting of clean graded sand, gravel, crushed stone, or crushed
blast furnace slag shall be placed beneath below grade floors (unless the
underlying soils are free-draining), along with a vapor retarder. Installation of the
base course and vapor retarder is not common in this area. Historically, there has
been some concern that installation of clean base course could allow wetting of
expansive soils to spread from an isolated source.
IRC states that the vapor retarder can be omitted where approved by the building
official. The merits of installation of a vapor retarder below floor slabs depend on
the sensitivity of floor coverings and building use to moisture. A properly installed
vapor retarder is more beneficial below concrete slab-on-grade floors where floor
coverings, painted floor surfaces, or products stored on the floor will be sensitive
to moisture. The vapor retarder is most effective when concrete is placed directly
on top of it, rather than placing a sand or gravel leveling course between the vapor
retarder and the floor slab. Placement of concrete on the vapor retarder may
increase the risk of shrinkage cracking and curling. Use of concrete with reduced
shrinkage characteristics including minimized water content, maximized coarse
aggregate content, and reasonably low slump will reduce the risk of shrinkage
cracking and curling. Considerations and recommendations for the installation of
vapor retarders below concrete slabs are outlined in Section 3.2.3 of the 2015
American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 302, “Guide for Concrete Floor and
Slab Construction (ACI 302.R-96)”.
3. Conventional slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing
members with a slip joint that allows free vertical movement of the slabs. These
joints must be maintained by the homebuyer to avoid transfer of movement.
4. Underslab plumbing should be thoroughly pressure tested during construction for
leaks and be provided with flexible couplings. Gas and waterlines leading to slab-
supported appliances should be constructed with flexibility. The homebuyer must
maintain these connections.
5. Use of slab bearing partitions should be minimized. Where such partitions are
necessary, a slip joint (or float) allowing at least 2 inches of free vertical slab
movement should be used. Doorways should also be designed to allow vertical
movement of slabs. To limit damage in the event of movement, sheetrock should
not extend to the floor. The homebuyer should monitor partition voids and other
connections and re-establish the voids before they close to less than 1/2-inch.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120 EXHIBIT A-3
6. Plumbing and utilities that pass through slabs should be isolated from the slabs.
Heating and air conditioning systems constructed on slabs should be provided with
flexible connections capable of at least 2 inches of vertical movement so slab
movement is not transmitted to the ductwork. These connections must be
maintained by the homebuyer.
7. Roofs that overhang a patio or porch should be constructed on the same
foundation as the structure. Isolated piers or pads may be installed beneath a roof
overhang provided the slab is independent of the foundation elements. Patio or
porch roof columns may be positioned on the slab, directly above the foundation
system, provided the slab is structural and supported by the foundation system.
Structural porch or patio slabs should be constructed to reduce the likelihood that
settlement or heave will affect the slab by placing loose backfill under the
structurally supported slab or constructing the slab over void-forming materials.
8. Patio and porch slabs without roofs and other exterior flatwork should be isolated
from the foundation. Movements of slabs should not be transmitted to the
foundation. Decks are more flexible and more easily adjusted in the event of
movement.
9. Frequent control joints should be provided in conventional slabs-on-grade to
reduce problems associated with shrinkage cracking and curling. Panels that are
approximately square generally perform better than rectangular areas. We suggest
an additional joint about 3 feet away from and parallel to foundation walls.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
EXHIBIT B-1
EXHIBIT B
SURFACE DRAINAGE,
IRRIGATION AND MAINTENANCE
Performance of foundations and concrete flatwork is influenced by the moisture conditions
existing within the foundation soils. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid runoff
of surface water away from proposed residences. Proper surface drainage and irrigation practices
can help control the amount of surface water that penetrates to foundation levels and contributes
to settlement or heave of soils and bedrock that support foundations and slabs-on-grade. Positive
drainage away from the foundation and avoidance of irrigation near the foundation also help to
avoid excessive wetting of backfill soils, which can lead to increased backfill settlement and
possibly to higher lateral earth pressures, due to increased weight and reduced strength of the
backfill. CTL | Thompson, Inc. recommends the following precautions. The homebuyer should
maintain surface drainage and, if an irrigation system is installed, it should substantially conform
to these recommendations.
1. Wetting or drying of the open foundation excavations should be avoided.
2. Excessive wetting of foundation soils before, during and after construction can
cause heave or softening of foundation soils and result in foundation and slab
movements. Proper surface drainage around the residence and between lots is
critical to control wetting.
3. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of each residence should be sloped
to drain away from the building in all directions. We recommend a minimum
constructed slope of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet (10 percent) in
landscaped areas around each residence, where practical. The recommended
slope is for the soil surface slope, not surface of landscaping rock.
4. We do not view the recommendation to provide a 10 percent slope away from the
foundation as an absolute. It is desirable to create this slope where practical
because we know that backfill will likely settle to some degree. By starting with
sufficient slope, positive drainage can be maintained for most settlement
conditions. There are many situations around a residence where a 10 percent
slope cannot be achieved practically, such as around patios, at inside foundation
corners, and between a house and nearby sidewalk. In these areas, we believe it
is desirable to establish as much slope as practical and to avoid irrigation. We
believe it is acceptable to use a slope on the order of 5 percent perpendicular to
the foundation in these limited areas.
5. For lots graded to direct drainage from the rear yard to the front, it is difficult to
achieve 10 percent slope at the high point behind the house. We believe it is
acceptable to use a slope of about 6 inches in the first 10 feet (5 percent) at this
location.
6. Between houses that are separated by a distance of less than 20 feet, the
constructed slope should generally be at least 10 percent to the swale used to
convey water out of this area. For lots that are graded to drain to the front and
back, we believe it is acceptable to install a slope of 5 to 8 percent at the high point
(aka “break point”) between houses.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
EXHIBIT B-2
7. Construction of retaining walls and decks adjacent to the residence should not alter
the recommended slopes and surface drainage around the residence. The ground
surface under decks should be compacted and slope away from the residence. 10-
mil plastic sheeting and landscaping rock may be placed under decks to soil
erosion and/or formation of depressions under the deck. The plastic sheeting
should direct water away from the residence. Retaining walls should not flatten the
surface drainage around the residence or impede surface runoff.
8. Swales used to convey water across yards and between houses should be sloped
so that water moves quickly and does not pond for extended periods of time. We
suggest minimum slopes of about 2 to 2.5 percent in grassed areas and about 2
percent where landscaping rock or other materials are present. If slopes less than
about 2 percent are necessary, concrete-lined channels or plastic pipe should be
used. Fence posts, trees, and retaining walls should not impede runoff in the
swales.
9. Backfill around the foundation walls should be moistened and compacted.
10. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.
Splash blocks and/or extensions should be provided at all downspouts so water
discharges onto the ground beyond the backfill. We generally recommend against
burial of downspout discharge. Where it is necessary to bury downspout discharge,
solid, rigid pipe should be used and it should slope to an open gravity outlet.
Downspout extensions, splash blocks and buried outlets must be maintained by
the homeowner.
11. The importance of proper irrigation and drainage practices and maintenance
cannot be over-emphasized. Irrigation should be limited to the minimum amount
sufficient to maintain vegetation; application of more water will increase likelihood
of slab and foundation movements. Landscaping should be carefully designed and
maintained to minimize irrigation. Plants placed close to foundations, particularly
within 5 feet of the foundation, should be limited to those with low moisture
requirements and utilize only sub-surface irrigation such as standard low volume
drip emitters or in-line drip irrigation. Irrigated grass, irrigation mainlines, above-
surface spray heads, rotors, and other above-surface irrigation spray devices
should not be located or discharge above the ground surface within 5 feet of the
foundation.
12. Plastic sheeting should not be placed beneath landscaped areas adjacent to
foundation walls or grade beams. Geotextile fabric will inhibit weed growth yet still
allow natural evaporation to occur.
HARTFORD ACQUISITIONS
BLOOM FILING 4 APARTMENTS – BLDGS. 2, 3, & 10
CTLT PROJECT NO. FC07733.016-120
EXHIBIT C-1
EXHIBIT C
EXAMPLE BACKFILL COMPACTION ALTERNATIVES
Alt. Description Possible
Settlement Pros (+) / Cons (-)
A
Place in 18 to 24-inch lifts, without
moisture conditioning. Compact
lift surface to about 85 percent of
maximum standard Proctor
(ASTM D698) dry density.
5 to 15
percent of
depth
(for 8 feet of
backfill, 5 to
15 inches)
+ Fast
+ Water not required
- Excessive Settlement
- Highest water penetration
- Highest probability of
warranty repair
B
Moisture condition within 2
percent of optimum, place in 12 to
18-inch lifts. Compact lift surface
to about 85 to 90 percent.
5 to 10
percent of
depth
+ Relatively Fast
- Moderate water penetration
- Excessive settlement
- Need for water
- Warranty repairs probable
C
Moisture condition to within 2
percent of optimum and place in 8
to 12-inch lifts. Compact lift
surface to 90 to 95 percent.
2 to 5
percent of
depth
+ Reduced warranty
+ Reduced water infiltration
+ Reduced settlement
- Possible higher lateral pressure
- Slower
- Need for water
- Potential damage to walls
D
Moisture condition and place as in
C. Compact lift surface to at least
95 percent
1 to 2
percent of
depth
+ Reduced warranty
+ Reduced water infiltration
+ Lowest comparative settlement
- Possible higher lateral pressure
- Slower
- Need for water
- Potential damage to walls