HomeMy WebLinkAboutCROWNE AT SUNIGA - FDP230023 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Geotechnical (Soils) ReportGEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX DEVELOPMENT - GRAHAM PROPERTY
NORTHEAST CORNER OF 9TH STREET AND SUNIGA ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009
Prepared for:
Crowne Partners, Inc.
505 North 20th Street - Suite 1150
Birmingham, AL 35203
Attn: Mr. Cary Levow (clevow@crownepartners.com)
Prepared by:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
4396 Greenfield Drive
Windsor, Colorado 80550
4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE
W INDSOR, COLORADO 80550
(970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282
June 9, 2022
Crowne Partners, Inc.
505 North 20th Street - Suite 1150
Birmingham, AL 35203
Attn: Mr. Cary Levow (clevow@crownepartners.com)
Re: Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Report
Proposed Apartment Complex Development – Graham Property
Approximate 11-Acres Parcel – Northeast Corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road
Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1222009
Mr. Levow:
Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth
Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) for the proposed multi-family apartment complex planned
for construction in Fort Collins, Colorado. For this exploration, EEC personnel advanced twenty-
one (21) soil borings to depths of approximately 4 to 13 feet below present site grades at pre-
selected locations within the various proposed building footprints and associated on-site
pavement improvements. The limited depth of exploration was due to the required use of a
lightly loaded track mounted GEO-Probe drill rig, as requested by the current landowner, to
minimize damage to the existing crop. The GEO-Probe utilized did not have the torque capacity
to turn the hollow stem augers through the very dense cobble zones encountered across the site.
This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated January 17, 2022.
In summary, the subsurface conditions encountered beneath the surficial vegetation/fescue grass
generally consisted of cohesive to slightly cohesive lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils
extending to granular gravel/sand with silt/clay soils at depths of approximately ½ to 8 feet. The
cohesive soils were generally dry to moist and soft/very loose to stiff/dense and exhibited nil to
low with an occasional high swell potential (at boring B-15) and slight tendency to hydro-
compact at current moisture and density conditions. Gravel/sand with silt/clay soils were
encountered below the cohesive to slightly cohesive soils and extended to the depths explored at
approximately 4 to 13 feet below the site grades. Zones of larger cobbles were also encountered
in the gravel/sand soils. The gravel/sand soils were generally dry to moist and medium dense to
very dense. Groundwater was observed in the two deepest borings; B-14 and B-20 which
advanced to depths of approximately 13 and 10 feet below the site grades at depths of
GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX DEVELOPMENT - GRAHAM PROPERTY
NORTHEAST CORNER OF 9TH STREET AND SUNIGA ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009
June 9, 2022
INTRODUCTION
The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed multi-family apartment complex
development planned for construction on the approximately 11-acres parcel – Graham Property
located at the northeast corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road in Fort Collins, Colorado has been
completed. For this exploration, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) planned to advance
twenty-one (21) soil borings to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below present site grades at
pre-selected locations within the various building footprints and associated on-site pavement
improvement areas. However, due to auger refusal with the Geo-Probe drilling rig, which was
employed for drilling to minimize damage to the existing agricultural field as per the request of the
current landowner; drilling to the desired depths was not possible and test borings were advanced to
4½ to 13 feet below the site grades. Upon completion of the drilling operations, the deepest open
bore hole (B-14) was converted to temporary PVC cased piezometer. This exploration was
completed in general accordance with our proposal dated January 17, 2022.
We understand the proposed 11+ acre parcel is planned for development into a series of apartment
buildings (including garages), an amenity building, swimming pool, drive and parking areas, and
additional support infrastructure. The apartment buildings are expected to be four-story wood frame,
slab-on-grade structures (no basements). Foundation loads are estimated to be light with maximum
continuous wall loads on the order of approximately 1 to 3 kips per linear foot (KLF) and maximum
column loads on the order of approximately 25 to 50 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. If
actual loads exceed those assumed herein or if basement construction is being considered for the site,
we should be consulted to review and modify the recommendations accordingly, if necessary. The
pavements are expected to include areas for light duty automobile traffic as well as areas for heavier
duty traffic. Small grade changes, cuts and fills less than 5 feet (+/-), are expected to develop site
grades for the proposed development.
The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings,
analyze and evaluate the test data and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning design and
construction of foundations, support of floor slabs and exterior flatwork, and design of pavements
for the proposed development.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 2
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The boring locations were established in the field by representatives from EEC by pacing and
estimating angles from identifiable site features with the aid of a hand-held GPS unit using
appropriate Google Earth coordinates. Those approximate boring locations are indicated on the
attached boring location diagram. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to
the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. Photographs of the site
taken at the time of drilling are included with this report.
The twenty-one (21) test borings, as requested by our client, were completed using a track mounted
limited access Geo-Probe 7822DT drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and
sampling operations and were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers. The primary
purpose of using the Geo-Probe rig was to minimize damage to the existing agricultural field as
requested by the current landowner. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained
using split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM
Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively.
In the split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are advanced
into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows
required to advance the split-barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate
the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency
of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure,
relatively intact samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field
were sealed and returned to our laboratory for further examination, classification, and testing.
Laboratory moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. Atterberg
limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed on select samples to evaluate the quantity and
plasticity of fines in the subgrade samples. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected
samples to evaluate the potential for the subgrade materials to change volume with variation in
moisture and load. Soluble sulfate tests were completed on select samples to evaluate potential
adverse reactions to site-cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached
boring logs and summary sheets.
As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by an engineer and
classified in general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification
System, based on the soil’s texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 3
Classification System is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification
system is included with this report.
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed development lot is located at the northeast corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road in Fort
Collins, Colorado. The project site is surfaced with fescue grass. The site is relatively flat with
approximately 3 (±) feet of relief from north to south.
EEC field personnel were on site during drilling to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered
and direct the drilling activities. Field logs prepared by EEC site personnel were based on visual and
tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The final boring logs included with this
report may contain modifications to the field logs based on results of laboratory testing and
evaluation. Based on results of the field borings and laboratory testing, subsurface conditions can be
generalized as follows.
The subsurface soils encountered beneath surficial vegetation, generally consisted of cohesive to
slightly cohesive lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils extending to granular gravel/sand with
silt/clay soils at depths of approximately ½ to 8 feet. The cohesive soils were generally dry to moist
and soft/very loose to stiff/dense and exhibited nil to low with an occasional high swell potential (at
boring B-15) and slight tendency to hydro-compact at current moisture and density conditions.
Gravel/sand with silt/clay soils were encountered below the cohesive to slightly cohesive soils and
extended to the depths explored at approximately 4 to 13 feet below the site grades. Zones of larger
cobbles were also encountered in the gravel/sand soils. The gravel/sand soils were generally dry to
moist and medium dense to very dense. Maximum nominal size gravel/aggregate particles as
determined by the grain-size distribution analyses ranged from approximate ½-inch to 1-inch.
Intermittent larger size gravel particles and apparent cobbles were encountered at increased depths
within the granular zone at various boring locations. Although larger size particles were apparently
encountered during the drilling, the actual size of the larger materials cannot be determined from
auger drilling.
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 4
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/after completion of drilling and on May 19,
2022, groundwater was observed in the two deepest borings; B-14 and B-20 which advanced to
depths of approximately 13 and 10 feet below the site grades at depths of approximately 7 to 9 feet,
respectively. Groundwater was not observed in the rest of the borings advanced to maximum depths
of 7 feet below the ground surface at the time of drilling. The borings were backfilled upon
completion of the drilling operations/follow up reading; therefore, subsequent groundwater
measurements were not obtained.
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic
conditions, irrigation demands on and/or adjacent to the site and other conditions not apparent at the
time of this report. Longer term monitoring of water levels in cased wells, which are sealed from the
influence of surface water would be required to more accurately evaluate fluctuations in groundwater
levels at the site. We have typically noted deepest groundwater levels in late winter and shallowest
groundwater levels in mid to late summer. Zones of perched and/or trapped water can be encountered
at times throughout the year in more permeable zones in the subgrade soils and perched water is
commonly observed in subgrade soils immediately above lower permeability bedrock.
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Swell – Consolidation Test Results
The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils or bedrock
to help determine foundation, floor slab, and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively intact
samples obtained directly from the California barrel sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and
inundated with water under a predetermined load. All inundated samples are monitored for swell and
consolidation. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse after inundation, expressed
as a percent of the sample’s initial thickness. After the initial inundation period, additional incremental
loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and consolidation.
For this assessment, we conducted thirteen (13) swell-consolidation tests on samples recovered from
various intervals/depths. The swell index values for the in-situ soil samples analyzed revealed low
to moderate swell characteristics as indicated on the attached swell test summaries. The (+) test
results indicate the soil materials swell potential characteristics while the (-) test results indicate the
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 5
soils materials collapse potential characteristics when inundated with water. The following table
summarizes the swell-consolidation laboratory test results for samples obtained during our field
explorations for the subject site.
Table I – Laboratory Swell-Consolidation Test Results
No of
Samples
Tested
Pre-Load /
Inundation
Pressure,
PSF
Description of Material
In-Situ Characteristics Range of Swell – Index
Test Results Range of Moisture
Contents, %
Range of Dry Densities,
PCF
Low
End, %
High
End, %
Low End,
PCF
High
End, PCF
Low End
(+/-) %
High End,
(+/-) %
13 500 Lean Clay to Silty/clayey sand
or Sand/Gravel with silt/clay 2.3 24.2 99.3 137.1 (-) 2.40 (+) 5.9
Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information presented
below 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 II - 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 swell samples analyzed for this project at current moisture
contents and dry densities conditions were generally within nil to low with and occasional high
(boring B-15) swell range and showed slight tendency to hydro-compact when inundated with water.
General Considerations
The geotechnical recommendations provided herein are based on our subsurface exploration to
depths of approximately 7 feet below the site grades within the proposed development area.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 6
Further/supplemental exploration for completing/improving the accuracy of the recommendation,
when possible, may be necessary.
Based on the available field and laboratory testing information, the overburden soils on this lot
include approximately ½ to 8 feet of lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils overlying
gravel/sand soils. Low to an occasional high swell potential was exhibited by a near surface clay
sample. In our opinion this is likely due to the dry and very stiff conditions of the lean clay with sand
soils. In general, clay soils tend to swell when inundated with water when in-situ moisture contents
are less than -2% dry of optimum moisture content. When moisture conditioned and re-compacted to
near optimum moisture and density conditions, the swell potential of clay soils can be significantly
reduced. The site preparation section of this report includes recommendations for an over
excavation moisture treatment, and re-compaction procedure to reduce the risk of movement for the
soils underlying the proposed site improvements. Although these methods reduce the overall risk of
potential movement, that risk cannot be completely eliminated.
Groundwater was observed at depths of 7 and 9 feet in the two borings which advance to greatest
depths of 10 and 13 feet below the site grades. Further exploration to establish the more accurate
depth to groundwater is recommended. We suggest that floor slab subgrade(s) be placed a minimum
of 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels. If final site grading consists of
cuts extending floor slabs to less than 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater,
consideration could be given to designing and installing a perimeter drainage system or to
elevating/raising the site grades to establish the minimum required 4-foot separation to the maximum
anticipated rise in groundwater.
The drainage system should be constructed around the exterior perimeter of the foundation and
sloped at a minimum 1/8 inch per foot to a suitable outlet, such as a sump and pump system or
daylighted away from the building. The drainage system should consist of a properly sized
perforated pipe, embedded in free-draining gravel, placed in a trench at least 12 inches in width.
Gravel should extend a minimum of 3 inches beneath the bottom of the pipe, and at least 1 to 1-1/2
feet above the bottom of the foundation wall. The system should be underlain with a polyethylene
moisture barrier, sealed to the foundation walls, and extending at least to the edge of the backfill
zone. The gravel should be covered with drainage fabric prior to placement of foundation backfill.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 7
Site Preparation
Prior to placement of any fill and/or improvements, we recommend any existing topsoil, vegetation,
and undocumented fill, and any unsuitable materials be removed from the planned development
areas.
In areas such as the location of the boring B-15 where high swell potential was identified/will
possibly be identified in the future, we recommend a minimum of 4 feet of over excavation below
the building floor slab and a minimum 2 feet of over excavation and replacement below all spread
footings.
Due to the shallower ground water table, if the over excavation below footings nears the
groundwater table and soft/compressible soils are encountered, consideration could be given to
ground modification of the subgrades prior to placement of the over excavation backfill soils.
Ground modification would consist of completing the 2-foot over excavation below spread footings
as described above. At the bottom of the 2-foot over excavation zone, to create a working platform
and stabilized zone below the fill materials, we recommend a minimum 6 to 8-inch zone of an
interlocking coarse granular, fractured face 3 to 1½ inch minus aggregate material, such as recycled
concrete or equivalent be placed and incorporated/pushed into the soft subgrade soils to create a
stable platform. Fill materials placed above the stabilized zone should consist of structural fill in
these areas. In general, over excavations should not be extended all the way into the groundwater
table. If the proposed over excavations are expected to extend into groundwater, we should be
consulted to review the recommended over excavation depth and provide revised recommendations.
After stripping, completing all cuts, over excavation, and removing all unacceptable materials/soils,
and prior to placement of any fill or site improvements, we recommend the exposed soils be scarified
to a minimum depth of 9-inches, adjusted in moisture content to within ±2% of standard Proctor
optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's standard Proctor
maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698.
Fill materials used to develop site grades, and for foundation backfill should consist of an approved
low volume change material. In our opinion, soils similar to the site lean clay with sand to
clayey/silty sand materials or imported granular structural fill material could be used. Imported
granular materials should be graded similarly to a CDOT Class 5, 6 or 7 aggregate base. Fill
materials should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted in moisture content to
within ±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 8
material's standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM
Specification D698.
Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade
materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure to avoid wetting of
subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site structure
can result in unacceptable performance.
Foundation Systems
Based on the soils observed at the test boring locations, we believe the building could be supported
on conventional footing foundations bearing on approved in-situ site soils or on a zone of approved
placed and compacted fill material prepared as outlined above. Footings bearing on approved in-situ
native soils or on approved engineered fill material placed and compacted as described above could
be designed for a maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. A minimum
dead load pressure would not be required. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at
foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load
includes full dead load and live load conditions.
Cobble sized materials may be encountered beneath foundation areas. Such conditions could create
point loads on the bottom of footings, increasing the potential for differential foundation movement.
If such conditions are encountered in the footing/post-tension-slab trench excavations, the cobbles
should be removed and be replaced with engineered fill, conditioned to near optimum moisture
content, and compacted.
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 16 inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 30 inches
We estimate the total long-term settlement of footings designed as outlined above would be about 1-
inch.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 9
Post Tensioned Slab (PTS) Foundation System
It is our opinion that the proposed apartment and auxiliary/garage buildings could be supported on
post-tension slab foundations bearing on either natural undisturbed soils or on a zone of over
excavated and replaced subgrades as outlined in section titled Site Preparation of this report. In
addition to the over excavation and replacement procedures where necessary to establish a uniform
bearing zone, the post-tension foundation system should reduce cracking and differential movement
of the slab due to potential movement of the underlying subgrades. Care should still be taken to
ensure the PT foundations are placed on uniform materials for each building.
Outlined in Table III are post-tension slab design criteria based on the subsurface conditions
observed and the above recommendations for subgrade preparation below the site structures. The
subject site, in our opinion, does not exhibit extensive swell potential or compressible characteristics;
therefore, would be suitable for a BRAB Type I or II slab design in general accordance with the 3rd
Edition of the Post-Tensioning Institute design manual. Post-tension slab foundations should be
designed and constructed in accordance with the appropriate design criteria below.
Table III - Recommended post-tension slab design criteria.
Maximum Net Allowable Bearing Pressure, psf 2,000 psf
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) 200 pci
Young’s Modulus (E) Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) 290 psi/in
Slab-Subgrade friction coefficient,
on polyethylene sheeting 0.75
on cohesionless soils (sands) 1.0
on cohesive soils (clays) 2.0
Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork
Subgrades for floor slabs, flatwork and site pavements should be prepared as outlined in the section
Site Preparation. Any over excavations should be completed, and fill materials should be placed as
described in the section Site Preparation. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a
modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) or 200 pci could be used for floors
supported on controlled/engineered fill materials or imported structural fill materials, respectively.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 10
Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:
Interior partition walls should be separated/floated from floor slabs to allow for
independent movement.
Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all
foundations, columns, and utility lines to allow for 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
should be followed.
For interior floor slabs, depending on the type of floor covering and adhesive used, those material
manufacturers may require that specific subgrade, capillary break, and/or vapor barrier requirements
be met. The project architect and/or material manufacturers should be consulted with for specific
under slab requirements. We estimate the long-term movement of floor slabs designed and
constructed as outlined above would be 1 inch or less.
Care should be exercised after development of the floor slab and exterior flatwork subgrades to
prevent disturbance of the in-place materials. Subgrade soils which are loosened or disturbed by
construction activities or soils which become wet and softened or dry and desiccated should be
removed and replaced or reworked in place prior to placement of the overlying slabs.
Lateral Earth Pressures
Portions of the new structures or site improvements which are constructed below grade may 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, such as below
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 11
grade walls for a building. 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 Table IV 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 on-site essentially cohesive subsoils. For at-rest and active
earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure would result in reduced driving forces with
slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive
resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30 inches of soil on the
passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, 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. 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.
Table IV - Lateral Earth Pressures
Soil Type On-Site Overburden Cohesive Soils Medium Dense Granular Material
Wet Unit Weight (psf) 125 135
Saturated Unit Weight (psf) 135 140
Friction Angle () – (assumed) 20° 35°
Active Pressure Coefficient 0.49 0.27
At-rest Pressure Coefficient 0.66 0.43
Passive Pressure Coefficient 2.04 3.69
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 12
Seismic Site Classification
The site soil conditions consist of lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils underlain by
gravel/sand soils. For those site conditions, the International Building Code indicates a Seismic Site
Classification of C.
Pavements
Pavement subgrades should be prepared as outlined in the section Site Preparation. If fly ash or
Portland cement treatment is chosen, we recommend the addition of at least 13% Class C fly ash or
approximately 4% of Portland cement, to the in-place subgrade materials, based on dry weights. The
Class C fly ash r Portland cement should be thoroughly blended with the in-place soils to a depth of
12 inches below the top of subgrade. The blended materials should be adjusted to be within ±2% of
standard Proctor optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the materials maximum dry
density as determined in accordance with the standard Proctor procedure for stabilized materials
(ASTM Specification D558).
We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for light-duty automobile traffic as well
as some areas for heavier automobile and heavy-duty truck traffic. For design purposes, an assumed
equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 7 is used in the light-duty pavement areas and an EDLA
of 15 is used in the heavy-duty pavement areas. An assumed R-Value of 10 is being used for the
pavement design, based off of the observed subsurface conditions and soil classification. Note that
Larimer County requires a minimum 5 inches of asphalt for minor collector roadways and a
minimum ABC thickness of 6 inches for all roadways.
Hot mix asphalt (HMA) underlain by aggregate base course or a non-reinforced concrete pavement
may be feasible options for the proposed on-site paved sections. HMA pavements may show rutting
and distress in areas of heavy truck traffic or in truck loading and turning areas. Concrete pavements
should be considered in those areas. Suggested pavement sections are provided in the table below.
The outlined pavement sections are minimums and thus, periodic maintenance should be expected.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 13
Table V - Minimum Pavement Thickness Recommendations
Light Duty Areas Heavy Duty Areas
18-kip EDLA
18-kip ESAL
Reliability
Resilient Modulus (Based on R-Value=10)
PSI Loss
7
51,100
75%
3562
2.5
15
109,500
80%
3562
2.2
Design Structure Number 2.47 2.88
Composite Section – Option A (assume Stable Subgrade)
Hot Mix Asphalt
Aggregate Base Course
Structure Number
4"
7"
(2.53)
5"
7"
(2.97)
Composite Section with Fly Ash Treated Subgrade
Hot Mix Asphalt
Aggregate Base Course
Fly Ash or Cement Treated Subgrade (assume half-credit)
Structure Number
3-1/2"
6"
12"
(2.80)
4"
6"
12"
(3.02)
PCC (Non-reinforced) – placed on a stable subgrade 5½" 6"
We recommend aggregate base be graded to meet a Class 5 or Class 6 aggregate base. Aggregate base
should be adjusted to a workable moisture content and compacted to achieve a minimum of 95% of
standard Proctor maximum dry density.
HMA should be graded to meet a S (75) or SX (75) with PG 58-28 or 64-22 binder. HMA should be
compacted to achieve 92 to 96% of the mix's theoretical maximum specific gravity (Rice Value).
Portland cement concrete should be an acceptable exterior pavement mix with a minimum 28-day
compressive strength of 4,500 psi and should be air entrained.
The recommended pavement sections are minimums; thus, 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 ACI recommendations. All joints
should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer.
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 14
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.
Place and compact 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
without the use of base course materials.
If during or after placement of the 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 methods of
stabilization, or a change in the pavement section.
Swimming Pool Design and Construction
Current plans for the proposed swimming pool were not provided to us prior to preparation of this
subsurface exploration report; however, we would assume the swimming pool would be on the order
of approximately 4 to 8 feet in depth. The construction and performance of the pool may be affected
by the presence of groundwater, which was encountered at depths as shallow as 7 to 9 feet below
existing site grades. Consideration should be given to the use of reinforced gunnite concrete/shotcrete
for pool construction. This material can normally withstand relatively large soil movements without
cracking. Consideration should also be given to designing and installing a drainage system around and
beneath the pool. If elected to design and install a drainage system, the drain should consist of a
minimum six-inch layer of clean gravel (minimum 3/4-inch size) beneath, and along the sides of the
pool. The top of the drain layer should be sealed with 18 inches of relatively impermeable soil at the
surface. The gravel layer beneath the pool should be sloped so that it will drain into tiles or perforated
drainpipes. The layout of the perforated pipe should include at least one pipe running down the center
of the pool lengthwise. Cross-connecting pipes, spanning with the pool, should be placed at
approximate six-foot centers. The cross-connecting pipes should be joined to the center pipe with solid
"tees" or "cross" connections. The center pipes should be sloped to a positive gravity outlet or sloped
to a sump located in the equipment room, permitting pump discharge. If the ownership group has
successful previous experience of constructing a pool without the suggested drainage system, and
accepts the risk of potential damage, the drainage system could be eliminated.
The swimming pool should be bedded in a layer of well compacted free-draining granular material to
provide a solid base for construction. A clean material with a maximum 1-1/2-inch size and a
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 15
minimum 3/8-inch size is recommended. A reinforced gunnite/shotcrete pool is acceptable for the site
provided that the groundwater is not penetrated during construction. If the excavation extends into the
groundwater, a one piece fiberglass or similar pool could be considered. As a precaution, pressure
relieve valves should be placed in the deep end of any pool constructed to prevent flotation should
groundwater rise when the pool is empty.
The bottom of the excavation beneath the gravel layer and the pipe should be lined with an impervious
membrane (polyethylene film or equal) in order to reduce potential moisture fluctuations in the
subgrade soils. Pressure relieve valves could be considered in the base of the pool to prevent excessive
uplift pressures from developing in the event of failure of the drain system.
The soils that will support pool deck slabs around the pool could experience movement with increasing
moisture content. To reduce possible damage that could be caused by the underlying subgrade section,
we recommend:
deck slabs be supported on approved engineered/controlled fill material 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 Earthwork section of the appended GEO-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.
Water Soluble Sulfates (SO4)
The water-soluble sulfate (SO4) content of the on-site overburden subsoils, taken during our
subsurface exploration at random locations and intervals are provided below. Based on reported
sulfate content test results, the Class/severity of sulfate exposure for concrete in contact with the on-
site subsoils is provided in this report.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 16
Table VI - Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results
Sample Location Description % of Soil by Weight
B-4 S-1 2' Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC) 0.33
B-12 S-1 2' Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC) 0.18
B-16 S-1 4' Clayey Sand (SC) 0.05
B-20 S-3 9' Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM) 0.03
Based on the results as presented above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site soils have a low to
severe risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete, therefore, ACI Class S2 requirements
should be followed for concrete placed in the overburden soils. Foundation concrete should be
designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4.
Other Considerations
Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure with a minimum slope of 1-inch per
foot for the first 10 feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Flatter slopes could be
used in hardscapes areas although positive drainage should be maintained. Care should be taken in
planning of landscaping adjacent to the building, parking, and drive areas to avoid features which
would pond water adjacent to the pavements, foundations, or stem walls. Placement of plants which
require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the subgrade
material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements.
Excavations into the on-site soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the on-site
lean clay soils can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction
while excavations extending to the gravel/sand soils may experience caving/sloughing. 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.
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. 1222009
June 9, 2022
Page 17
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.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use for Crowne Partners, Inc. for specific application
to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in
the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions
and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are
reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical
engineer.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
DRILLING AND EXPLORATION
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon ‐ 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS: Piston Sample
ST: Thin‐Walled Tube ‐ 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS: Wash Sample
R: Ring Barrel Sampler ‐ 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D. unless otherwise noted
PA: Power Auger FT: Fish Tail Bit
HA: Hand Auger RB: Rock Bit
DB: Diamond Bit = 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample
AS: Auger Sample PM: Pressure Meter
HS: Hollow Stem Auger WB: Wash Bore
Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2‐inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling
WCI: Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling
DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal
AB : After Boring ACR: After Casting Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated
levels may reflect the location of ground water. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of ground water levels is not
possible with only short term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification
system and the ASTM Designations D‐2488. Coarse Grained
Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a
#200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or
sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight
retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as : clays, if they
are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non‐plastic.
Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor
constituents may be added according to the relative
proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation,
coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in‐
place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their
consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff
(CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM).
CONSISTENCY OF FINE‐GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Compressive
Strength, Qu, psf Consistency
< 500 Very Soft
500 ‐ 1,000 Soft
1,001 ‐ 2,000 Medium
2,001 ‐ 4,000 Stiff
4,001 ‐ 8,000 Very Stiff
8,001 ‐ 16,000 Very Hard
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE‐GRAINED SOILS:
N‐Blows/ft Relative Density
0‐3 Very Loose
4‐9 Loose
10‐29 Medium Dense
30‐49 Dense
50‐80 Very Dense
80 + Extremely Dense
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK
DEGREE OF WEATHERING:
Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on
joints. May be color change.
Moderate Some decomposition and color change
throughout.
High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely
broken.
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 90 100 110
PL
A
S
T
I
C
I
T
Y
I
N
D
E
X
(
P
I
)
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
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4 B-5
B-6
B-7 B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
B-15
B-16 B-17
B-18
B-19
B-20
B-21
1
2
Boring Location Diagram
Graham Property - Apartment Complex
Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project #: 1222009 Date: May 2022
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Approximate Boring
Locations
1
Legend
Site Photos
Photos taNen in approximate
location, in direction oI arroZ
GRAHAM PROPERTY APARTMENT COMPLEX
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009
MAY 2022
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
_ _
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)3
brown / red, moist _ _
very dense 4
_ _
CS 5 50/10"4.5 92.5 24 9 30.3 None -1.1%
_ _
6
_ _
7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
LOG OF BORING B-1PROJECT NO: 1222009 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (SC)_ _
reddish brown, moist 2
soft _ _
CS 3 2 3000 16.2 108.4 28 15 80 None -0.1%
_ _
4
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, moist SS 5 30 7.5 26.3
dense _ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
A-LIMITS SWELL
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-2 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _
reddish brown, moist 2
very loose to loose _ _
CS 3 3 2000 14.4 114.6
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 7 1500 13.7
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)_ _
brown / red, moist 6
_ _
7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
A-LIMITS SWELL
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-3 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
brown, dry 2
dense _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.33
CS 3 50 2.6
_ _
4
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SW-SC)_ _
brown / red, dry SS 5 50/6"1.9 9
very dense _ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-4 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _
brown, dry 2
medium dense _ _
CS 3 10 6.5 100.4 29 14 8.1 None -0.1%
_ _
4
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry SS 5 50/11 3.1
very dense _ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-5 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM/SC)_ _
brown, dry 2
_ _
3
_ _
4
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry CS 5 33 1.6
dense _ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-6 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
_ _
3
_ _
4
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry CS 5 10 2.7 101.3 24 11 33.9 2000 PSF 0.7%
medium dense _ _
6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-7 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
_ _
3
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry 4
very dense _ _
CS 5 50/6"1.0 117.2
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-8 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
_ _
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SW-SC)3
brown / red, dry _ _
very dense 4
_ _
CS 5 50/6"1.4
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 4.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-9 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM)_ _
brown / red, dry CS 3 29 2.3 108.9 NL NP 18 None -0.3%
medium dense to very dense _ _
4
_ _
SS 5 50/6"1.3
_ _
6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-10 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)1
_ _
SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM)2
brown / red, dry _ _
medium dense to very dense CS 3 12 4000 3.6 122.0 NL NP 11.5 None None
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 35 1.7
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-11 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
brown, moist 2
loose _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.18
CS 3 4 500 13.1 116.0 None -1.7%
_ _
4
_ _
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)SS 5 40 8.4
brown / red, moist, dense _ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-12 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
2
_ _
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)3
brown / red, dry _ _
very dense 4
_ _
CS 5 50/7"4.5
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5'_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-13 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)_ _
brown, moist 2
medium stiff _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 5 4500 15.4 113.2 31 18 61.4 None -0.3%
_ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
GRAVEL WITH CLAY (GP-GC)9
brown / red, dry _ _
dense 10 42 7.7
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
rock and cobbles 13
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 13'_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-14 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING 8'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 5/19/2022 7'
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)_ _
brown, moist 2
stiff _ _
CS 3 10 9000+10.5 108.0 6000 PSF 5.9%
_ _
4
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry SS 5 29 3.0
medium dense _ _
6
_ _
7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 13'_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-15 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _
brown, moist 2
loose _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.05
CS 5 5 1000 13.7 102.1 25 12 39.8 None -1.2%
_ _
6
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-16 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _
brown, moist 2
very loose to loose _ _
CS 3 2 500 24.2 101.0 None -2.4%
_ _
4
_ _
SS 5 4 11.6
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-17 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)1
_ _
2
_ _
CS 3 28 9000+9.6
CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _
brown / red, dry 4
medium dense to very dense _ _
SS 5 50/5"4.0
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-18 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)1
_ _
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)2
reddish brown, dry _ _
dense 3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 34 4.0
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-19 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SILTY SAND (SM)_ _
brown, dry 2
dense _ _
CS 3 33 5500 6.0 79.0 21 6 40.5 900 PSF 0.7%
_ _
4
SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (SP-SM)_ _
brown / red, dry SS 5 50/6"1.0
very dense _ _
6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.03
CS 10 50/8"10.1
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10'_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-20 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING 9'
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
DATE:
RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE
FOREMAN: AKH
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
FESCUE GRASS _ _
1
SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)_ _
brown, moist 2
very dense _ _
3
_ _
4
_ _
CS 5 50/5.5"17.7
_ _
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6
_ _
7
_ _
8
_ _
9
_ _
10
_ _
11
_ _
12
_ _
13
_ _
14
_ _
15
_ _
16
_ _
17
_ _
18
_ _
19
_ _
20
_ _
21
_ _
22
_ _
23
_ _
24
_ _
25
_ _
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
GRAHAM PROPERTY
PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-21 MAY 2022
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH
START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None
SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A
FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A
*Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation
within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and
cobble zone
A-LIMITS SWELL
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
Beginning Moisture: 16.2%Dry Density: 116.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 18.8%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Sample Location:Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 28 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 80.0%
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Clayey Sand (SC)
Sample Location:Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 24 Plasticity Index: 9 % Passing #200: 30.3%
Beginning Moisture: 14.4%Dry Density: 114.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.7%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sand with Clay and Gravel (SW-SC)
Sample Location:Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 14 % Passing #200: 8.1%
Beginning Moisture: 6.5%Dry Density: 117.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.0%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sand with Clay and Gravel (SW-SC)
Sample Location:Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 24 Plasticity Index: 11 % Passing #200: 33.9%
Beginning Moisture: 2.7%Dry Density: 137.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 10.2%
Swell Pressure: 2000 psf % Swell @ 500:0.7%
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sand with Silt and Gravel (SW-SM)
Sample Location:Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: NL Plasticity Index: NP % Passing #200: 18.0%
Beginning Moisture: 2.3%Dry Density: 120.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.1%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sand with Silt and Gravel (SW-SM)
Sample Location:Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: NL Plasticity Index: NP % Passing #200: 11.5%
Beginning Moisture: 3.6%Dry Density: 130 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.4%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Silty / Clayey Sand (SM/SC)
Sample Location:Boring 12, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 12.9%Dry Density: 120.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.8%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sand Lean Clay (CL)
Sample Location:Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 31 Plasticity Index: 18 % Passing #200: 61.1%
Beginning Moisture: 15.4%Dry Density: 120.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.8%
Swell Pressure:% Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
Sample Location:Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 10.5%Dry Density: 121.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 17.9%
Swell Pressure: 6000 psf % Swell @ 500:5.9%
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Clayey Sand (SC)
Sample Location:Boring 16, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 25 Plasticity Index: 12 % Passing #200: 39.8%
Beginning Moisture: 13.7%Dry Density: 111 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.3%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC)
Sample Location:Boring 17, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 24.2%Dry Density: 103.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.3%
Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location:Boring 18, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 70.7%
Beginning Moisture: 9.3%Dry Density: 99.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.0%
Swell Pressure: 1200 psf % Swell @ 500:1.2%
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:Silty, Clayey Sand (SC-SM)
Sample Location:Boring 20, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 21 Plasticity Index: 6 % Passing #200: 40.5%
Beginning Moisture: 6.0%Dry Density: 109.7 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.3%
Swell Pressure: 900 psf % Swell @ 500:0.7%
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
May 2022
-10.0
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Load (TSF)
Sw
e
l
l
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Water Added
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-1, S-2, at 4'-5.5'
Sample Desc.: Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Date: May 2022
73
66
62
27
26.3
61
58
51
44
34
100
100
89
79
76
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 1.63 0.58
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-1, S-2, at 4'-5.5'
D100 D60 D50
0.21 0.08
Fine
21.67 0.35
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-2, S-1, at 4'
Sample Desc.: Silty, Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC-SM)
Date: May 2022
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
100
100
83
72
71
62
55
53
15
14.6
47
36
32
31
21
0.41 ‐‐‐
Fine
‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
D30 D10 Cu CC
37.50 8.21 2.19
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-2, S-1, at 4'
D100 D60 D50
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-4, S-1, at 2'
Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)
Date: May 2022
65
52
41
12
9.0
36
32
24
20
17
100
100
94
82
68
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 7.75 4.40
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-4, S-1, at 2'
D100 D60 D50
1.02 0.10
Fine
79.39 1.39
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-6, S-1, at 4'-5.5'
Sample Desc.: Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP)
Date: May 2022
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
100
100
78
78
68
61
50
41
10
6.7
38
32
23
19
16
1.04 0.08
Fine
119.09 1.62
D30 D10 Cu CC
37.50 8.93 4.94
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-6, S-1, at 4'-5.5'
D100 D60 D50
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-11, S-2, at 4'-5.5'
Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)
Date: May 2022
68
51
43
14
9.6
40
33
26
22
19
100
100
96
85
79
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 7.16 4.36
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-11, S-2, at 4'-5.5'
D100 D60 D50
0.94 0.08
Fine
95.51 1.66
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-12, S-2, at 4'
Sample Desc.: Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Date: May 2022
70
61
56
32
23.1
55
51
46
43
40
100
100
92
77
72
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 4.24 1.08
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-12, S-2, at 4'
D100 D60 D50
0.13 ‐‐‐
Fine
‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-14, S-2, at 9'
Sample Desc.: Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP)
Date: May 2022
57
46
39
11
7.4
37
32
25
21
17
100
100
88
76
63
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 10.89 6.37
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-14, S-2, at 9'
D100 D60 D50
1.01 0.12
Fine
87.74 0.75
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-19, S-1, at 4'
Sample Desc.: Silty, Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC-SM)
Date: May 2022
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
100
100
94
80
75
73
63
54
17
12.8
52
45
35
30
25
0.42 0.08
Fine
53.36 0.60
D30 D10 Cu CC
37.50 4.00 1.80
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-19, S-1, at 4'
D100 D60 D50
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size
2 1/2" (63 mm)
2" (50 mm)
1 1/2" (37.5 mm)
1" (25 mm)
3/4" (19 mm)
1/2" (12.5 mm)
3/8" (9.5 mm)
No. 4 (4.75 mm)
No. 8 (2.36 mm)
No. 10 (2 mm)
No. 16 (1.18 mm)
No. 30 (0.6 mm)
No. 40 (0.425 mm)
No. 50 (0.3 mm)
No. 100 (0.15 mm)
No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Project: Graham Property Apartments
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No: 1222009
Sample ID: B-21, S-1, at 4'
Sample Desc.: Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)
Date: May 2022
85
64
52
15
10.8
49
42
31
26
22
100
100
95
93
85
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
100
Sieve Size Percent Passing
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)
Date:
Project:
Location:
Project No:
Sample ID:
Cobble Silt or ClayGravel
Coarse Fine
Sand
Coarse Medium
May 2022
37.50 3.94 2.10
Graham Property Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado
1222009
B-21, S-1, at 4'
D100 D60 D50
0.56 0.08
Fine
52.59 1.05
D30 D10 Cu CC
6"
5"
4"
3"
2.5"
2"
1.5"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 10
No. 16
No. 30
No. 40
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.010.11101001000
Fi
n
e
r
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
%
)
Grain Size (mm)
Standard Sieve Size