Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUCKING HORSE FILING FIVE - MA240135 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - Geotechnical (Soils) Report SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT BUCKING HORSE FILING ONE—COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED BUILDING NOS. 9 - 13 WEST OF TIMBERLINE ROAD AND NORTH OF BLACKBIRD DRIVE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1182100 Prepared for: Bellisimo, Inc. 3702 Manhattan Avenue, Suite 201 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Attn: Mr. Gino Campana(gcampanagbellisimoinc.com) Prepared by: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 December 26, 2018 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Bellisimo, Inc. 3702 Manhattan Avenue, Suite 201 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Attn: Mr. Gino Campana(gcampanagbellisimoinc.com) Re: Subsurface Exploration Report Bucking Horse Filing One—Commercial/Retail Development Proposed Building Nos. 9 - 13 West of Timberline Road and North of Blackbird Drive Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project No. 1182100 Mr. Campana: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the supplemental subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC for the referenced project. For this exploration, six (6) soil borings were extended to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below existing site grades within the five (5) proposed building footprints, two (2) of which were for the Moore Animal Hospital Building No. 9. This subsurface exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated November 30, 2018. In summary, the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings generally consisted of sandy lean clay native and/or fill materials. The sandy lean clay was generally stiff to very stiff and exhibited low to moderate swell potential at current moisture-density conditions. In borings B-1 and B-4, the subsurface materials consisted of previously placed and compacted engineered fill material which, extended to a depth of approximately 9 feet below grade. In borings B-2 and B-6 the near surface soils consisted of possible fill materials classified as gravel and silty sand, respectively. Sand/gravel was underlying the sandy lean clay at a depth of approximately 5 feet below the surface in boring B-5. The sand/gravel soils were generally dense to very dense. Sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered beneath the overburden sandy lean clay, gravel, and/or sand soils at depths of 4 to 14 feet below the ground surface in a majority of the borings and extended to the depths explored, approximately 15 feet below the ground surface. Bedrock was not encountered in borings B-1 and B-4 which extended to maximum depths of approximately 25 feet below the ground surface. The bedrock was generally highly weathered to 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282 www.earth-engineering.com Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 2 moderately hard and exhibited low swell potential. Groundwater was observed in borings B-1 and B-5 at depths of approximately 13 to 20 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was not encountered in the remaining borings which were extended to maximum depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below the ground surface. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings and the anticipated loading conditions, we believe the proposed buildings with slab-on-grade construction could be supported on conventional type spread footings bearing on either properly prepared native subgrades or a zone of approved engineered/controlled fill material as described in the text portion of this report. It is our opinion floor slabs, exterior flatwork, and pavements could be supported on a zone of approved/engineered or imported fill materials. Geotechnical recommendations concerning foundation, floor and pavement design and construction for the proposed site improvements are provided within the attached report. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed report, or if we can be of further service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC Reviewed b •e • � � OM Erin Erin Dunn, E.I.T. David A. Richer, P.E. Project Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer cc: Weeks&Associates, Inc. —Gary Weeks, P.E. (g_aty.weeks(n,weeksinc.com) Alm2s Architects—Ian Shuff(ishuffna,alm2s.com) SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT BUCKING HORSE FILING ONE—COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED BUILDING NOS. 9 - 13 WEST OF TIMBERLINE ROAD AND NORTH OF BLACKBIRD DRIVE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1182100 December 26, 2018 INTRODUCTION The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed Bucking Horse Filing One,building Nos. 9— 13 commercial development,which includes the Moore Animal Hospital along with associated pavement improvements planned for construction in Fort Collins Colorado has been completed. As a part of this exploration, six (6) supplemental foundation related borings were drilled at the approximate locations shown on the boring location diagram included with this report. It should be noted that Earth Engineering Consultants(EEC)conducted a preliminary subsurface exploration in April of 2012, in which four (4) preliminary test borings (B-17 through B-20) were completed within the proposed improvement area as indicated on the enclosed boring diagram. Foundation related soil borings completed within the proposed improvement areas were extended to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below existing site grades. Individual boring logs are provided with this report. Site photographs of the property at the time of our exploration are also provided with this report. The proposed development is expected to include five (5) single-story structures having slab-on- grade construction with associated on-site parking. Foundation loads for the structures are expected to be light to moderate with continuous wall loads less than 4 kips per lineal foot and individual column loads less than 150 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. Paved drives and parking areas are expected as a part of the site development. The pavements are expected to carry light traffic volume consisting predominately of automobiles and light trucks with areas of heavier traffic volumes consisting of larger trucks. Small grade changes,cuts and fills less than 4 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 field and laboratory test data and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations and support of floor slabs,exterior flatwork,and pavements for the proposed development. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The boring locations were established in the field by a representative of Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features. Photographs of the site at the time of drilling are included with this report and the approximate locations of the borings are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The test borings were completed using a truck mounted,CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered in the foundation related borings 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 by means of a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the split barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils. In the California barrel sampling procedure, relatively undisturbed samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to the laboratory for further examination, classification and testing. Laboratory moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. Atterberg Limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the quantity and plasticity of fines in the subgrade. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the potential for the subgrade materials to change volume with variation in moisture and load. Soluble sulfate tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate potential adverse reactions to site-cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. As part of the testing program,all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System,based on the soil's texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with this report. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The proposed development is planned for construction Jessup Farms retail development within Bucking Horse Filing No. 1 development. Sparse vegetation and topsoil was encountered at the surface of the borings. Ground surface across the site is relatively flat. The near surface materials in the test borings generally consisted of sandy lean clay soils in either a native and/or engineered fill condition. The sandy lean clay was generally stiff to very stiff and exhibited low to moderate swell potential at current moisture-density conditions. In borings B-1 and B-4, previously placed and compacted engineered fill material, in late 2012,was encountered and extended to an approximate depth of 9 feet below site grades. In borings B-2 and B-6 the near surface soils consisted of materials classified as gravel and silty sand,respectively. Sand/gravel was underlying the sandy lean clay at a depth of approximately 5 feet below the surface in boring B-5. The sand/gravel soils were generally dense to very dense. Sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered beneath the overburden sandy lean clay,gravel, and/or sand soils at depths of 4 to 14 feet below the ground surface in a majority of the borings and extended to the depths explored, approximately 15 feet below the ground surface. Bedrock was not encountered in borings B-1 and B-4 which extended to maximum depths of approximately 25 feet below the ground surface. The bedrock was generally highly weathered to moderately hard and exhibited low swell potential. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Observations were made while drilling and after completion of the borings to detect the presence and depth to hydrostatic groundwater. At the time of drilling,free groundwater was observed in borings B-1 and B-5 at depths of approximately 13 to 20 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was not observed in the remaining borings which were extended to maximum depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below the ground surface. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; therefore, subsequent groundwater measurements were not performed. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. Longer term monitoring of Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 4 water levels in cased wells,which are sealed from the influence of surface water,would be required to more accurately evaluate fluctuations in groundwater levels at the site. We have typically noted deepest groundwater levels in late winter and shallowest groundwater levels in mid to late summer. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Swell—Consolidation Test Results The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils or bedrock to assist in determining foundation, floor slab, and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively undisturbed 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 nine (9) swell-consolidation tests on samples recovered from various intervals/depths. The swell index values for the samples analyzed in the overburden lean clay soils and underlying bedrock revealed generally low to moderate swell characteristics of approximately (-)0.3 to(+)5.9%for the overburden lean clay soils and approximately(+) 1.9%for the bedrock. The laboratory swell-consolidation test results are summarized in the table below and the swell test data sheets are provided with this report. Table I—Laboratory Swell-Consolidation Test Results(Overall 8 Samples) In-Situ Characteristics No of Pre-Load/ Range of Moisture Range of Dry Densities, Range of Swell—Index Test Results Samples Inundation Description of Material Contents,% PCF Tested Pressure,PSF Low High Low End, High End, Low End High End, End,% End,% PCF PCF (+/-)% (+/-)% 1 150 Sandy Lean Clay 7.6 130.0 (+)5.9 6 500 Sandy Lean Clay/Claystone 4.1 17.5 112.1 124.6 (-)0.3 (+)2.0 2 1000 Sandy Lean Clay 8.2 9.6 113.7 116.3 (-)0.4 (+)0.1 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 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 5 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 H-Recommended Representative Swell Potential Descriptions and Corresponding Slab Performance Risk Categories Slab Performance Risk Category Representative Percent Swell Representative Percent Swell (500 psf Surcharge) (1000 psf Surcharge) Low 0to<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 in the low to moderate range. The soils encountered near the surface generally exhibited swell characteristics above the typical allowable value of 2%,therefore a swell mitigation procedure should be implemented below pavements. We recommend a minimum 2-foot over excavation below pavements or fly ash treatment of the top 12 inches. General The near surface lean clay soils were generally stiff to very stiff,with varying moisture content,and exhibited low to moderate swell potential. The moderately expansive subgrade soils would be a concern for support of lightly loaded floor slabs, and pavements. Recommendations are provided in this report to reduce the risk of post construction heaving; however,that risk cannot be eliminated. If the owner does not accept that risk,we would be pleased to provide more stringent recommendations. Site Preparation Prior to placement of any new fill and/or improvements, we recommend any existing vegetation, topsoil, and any unsuitable subsoils or undocumented fill materials be removed from the planned construction areas. Care should be taken to remove any previously placed fill material,especially in Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 6 previous building, with unknown origin or compaction verification. Due to the moderate swell potential,we recommend over excavating the near surface sandy lean clay and/or fat clay materials to minimum depths of 3 feet below existing site grades or below finish floor slab grade within the proposed building envelopes, whichever provides the greatest over excavation depth. The over excavation and replacement concept should provide a minimum of 3 feet of fill below the proposed floor slabs.In the pavement areas,the sandy lean clay soils should be over excavated to a minimum depth of approximately 2 feet below pavements. All over excavations should be extended 8 inches laterally for every 12 inches of over excavation depth. Close evaluation will be required at time of foundation excavation to determine the suitability/acceptance of the remaining in-place material. After removal of all topsoil/vegetation and trees/roots within the planned development areas, removal of unacceptable or unsuitable subsoils, over excavation,and prior to placement of fill,the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of 9 inches,adjusted in moisture content to within f2% 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 replace the over excavated zone and establish grades in the floor slab,flatwork and pavement areas,after the initial zone has been prepared as recommended above, should consist of an approved low volume change material, in our opinion, soils similar to the site sandy lean clay/clayey 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 f2% 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. Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials.Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures,flatwork and pavements to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site improvements can result in unacceptable performance. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 7 Footing Foundations It is our opinion the proposed structure could be supported on conventional footing foundations bearing on either properly prepared native subgrades or on approved engineered fill materials. For design of footing foundations supported on either native subgrades or approved fill as outlined in the section "Site Preparation",we recommend using a maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressure of 2,000 ps£ The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load would include full dead and live loads. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located at least 30 inches below adjacent exterior grades to provide frost protection. We recommend formed continuous footings have a minimum width of 12 inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 24 inches. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located a minimum of 36 inches below adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. Care should be taken to thoroughly evaluate anticipated bearing materials at the time of construction. All footings for the structures should bear on uniform/similar materials to reduce the potential for differential movement between soil types. Close evaluation will be required for Building 9,as bedrock was encountered at a depth of 4 feet below site grades. A minimum 3-foot over-excavation and replacement should be completed to maintain a minimum separation at 3 feet beneath bottom of footings and the underlying bedrock formation. Total movement resulting from the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on the order of I-inch and should tend to be more uniform than differential. Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils or stabilization is not achieved; therefore, it is imperative proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction for the structure. Care should be taken during construction to see that the footing foundations are supported on suitable strength approved/engineered fill material. In areas with evidence of prior buildings, previously placed backfill materials may be encountered beneath the foundation bearing levels. Extra care should be taken in evaluating the in-place soils in these areas as the backfill materials are commonly not placed for future support of foundations. If unacceptable materials are encountered at the time of construction, it may be necessary to extend the footing foundations to bear below the unacceptable materials or removal and replace a portion or all of the unacceptable materials.Those conditions can best be evaluated in open excavations at the time of construction. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 8 Seismic The site conditions generally consisted of sandy lean clay overburden subsoils underlain by bedrock materials extending to depths of approximately 25 feet below the ground surface. For those site conditions, the International Building Codes indicates a Seismic Site Classification of D. Lateral Earth Pressures Any site retaining walls or similarly related structural elements that would be subjected to unbalanced lateral earth pressures would also be subjected to lateral soil forces. 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,including the grade beam walls for the loading docks. Free standing wing walls could be designed for active pressures assuming rotation of the walls is allowed. 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 III below. Equivalent fluid pressure is equal to the coefficient times the appropriate soil unit weight. Those coefficient values are based on horizontal backfill with backfill soils consisting of essentially granular materials or low volume change cohesive soils. For the at-rest and active earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure would result in reduced driving forces with slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30 inches of soil on the passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, 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. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 9 Table III Parameters for Lateral Earth Pressures Soil Type Sandy Lean Clay Granular Structural Fill Wet Unit Weight 115 135 Saturated Unit Weight 135 145 Friction Angle,f(assumed) 250 35 Active Pressure Coefficient 0.40 0.27 At-rest Pressure Coefficient 0.58 0.42 Passive Pressure Coefficient 2.46 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. The outlined values assume wall backfill consists of non-expansive material extending a minimum distance of 4 feet laterally away from all walls. Care should be taken to develop appropriate drainage systems behind below grade walls to reduce potential for hydrostatic loads developing on the walls and infiltration of water into below grade areas. Those systems would likely include perimeter drain systems extending to sump areas or free outfall where reverse flow cannot occur into the system. Where necessary,appropriate hydrostatic load values should be used for design. Floor Slabs Subgrades for floor slabs and exterior flatwork should be prepared as outlined in the "Site Preparation" section of this report. We estimate the long-term movement of floor slabs with properly prepared subgrade subsoils as outlined above would be about one-inch or less assuming reasonable moisture accumulation in the subgrade materials. Excessive moisture accumulation from any source can result in additional movements. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 or 200 pounds per cubic inch(pci)may be used for floors supported on a zone of approved/engineered fill or imported structural fill, respectively. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 10 Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows: • Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement. • Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking. • Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in a similar manner as previously described for imported structural fill material. • Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade. • Other design and construction considerations,as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1R are recommended. Pavements After stripping,removing apparent fill materials, and completing all cuts and prior to placement of any fill, road base or pavements, we recommend a minimum 2-foot over excavation below pavements and replacement with approved/engineered fill materials or imported structural fill materials as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report, or fly ash treatment of the top 12 inches of subgrade. The fly ash treatment procedure would involve incorporating Class C fly ash within the upper 12- inches of the site pavement's cohesive subgrade soils prior to construction of the overlying pavement structure. Stabilization should consist of blending 13%by dry weight of Class C fly ash in the top 12 inches of the subgrades. The blended materials should be adjusted in moisture content to slightly dry of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95%of the material's maximum dry density as determined in accordance with the standard Proctor procedure. Compaction of the subgrade should be completed within two hours after initial blending of the Class C fly ash. 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. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 11 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. Light Duty Areas Heavy Duty Areas 18-kip EDLA 7 15 18-kip ESAL 51,100 109,500 Reliability 75% 80% Resilient Modulus(Based on R-Value=10) 3562 3562 PSI Loss 2.5 2.2 Design Structure Number 2.47 2.88 Composite Section—Option A(assume Stable Subgrade) Hot Mix Asphalt 4" 5" Aggregate Base Course 7" 7" Structure Number (2.53) (2.97) Composite Section with Fly Ash Treated Subgrade Hot Mix Asphalt 3-1/2" 4" Aggregate Base Course 6" 6" Fly Ash Treated Subgrade(assume half-credit) 12" 12" Structure Number (2.80) (3.02) PCC(Non-reinforced)—placed on a stable subgrade 5'/z" 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 SX(75)or S(75)with PG 58-28 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 minimum28-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 j oints 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. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 12 The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining subgrade moisture levels and providing for preventive maintenance. The following recommendations should be considered the minimum: • The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface drainage. • Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g. garden centers,wash racks) • Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately. • Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils. • Place and compact low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter. Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance(e.g.crack and joint sealing and patching)and global maintenance(e.g.surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance,additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. 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. 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 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 13 sulfate content test results,the Class/severity of sulfate exposure for concrete in contact with the on- site subsoils is provided in this report. Table IV:Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Sample Location Description Soluble Sulfate Content(mg/1) B-1,S-2,at 9' Sandy Lean Clay 320 B-2,S-4,at 14' Claystone/Siltstone/Sandstone 100 B-3,S-2,at 4' Sandy Lean Clay 340 B-5,S-2,at 9' Sand/Gravel 120 B-6,S-2,at 4' Silty Sand 270 Based on the results as presented above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site soils have a moderate risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete,therefore,ACI Class S 1 requirements should be followed for concrete placed in the lean clay soils and underlying bedrock. 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 structures and pavement areas with a minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10-feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping, (if required), adjacent to the buildings to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the foundations or stemwalls. Placement of plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Irrigation systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the building and pavement/parking areas. Spray heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structures or site pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structures and away from the pavement areas. Excavations into the on-site soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the on- site cohesive soils can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. 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 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1182100 December 26,2018 Page 14 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 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 of Bellisimo,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. 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 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification system and the ASTM Designations D-2488. Coarse Grained DEGREE OF WEATHERING: Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on #200 sieve;they are described as: boulders,cobbles,gravel or joints. May be color change. sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight Moderate Some decomposition and color change retained on a#200 sieve;they are described as : clays, if they throughout. are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor broken. constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION: coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in- Limestone and Dolomite: place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their Hard Difficult to scratch with knife. consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand,trace gravel, stiff (CL);silty sand,trace gravel, medium dense(SM). Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail. Unconfined Compressive Soft Can be scratched with fingernail. Strength,Qu, psf Consistency Shale,Siltstone and Claystone: < 500 Very Soft Hard Can be scratched easily with knife,cannot be 500- 1,000 Soft scratched with fingernail. 1,001- 2,000 Medium Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail. 2,001- 4,000 Stiff Hard 4,001- 8,000 Very Stiff Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with 8,001-16,000 Very Hard fingers. Sandstone and Conglomerate: RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS: Well Capable of scratching a knife blade. N-Blows/ft Relative Density Cemented 0-3 Very Loose Cemented Can be scratched with knife. 4-9 Loose 10-29 Medium Dense Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers. 30-49 Dense Cemented 50-80 Very Dense 80+ Extremely Dense Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Group Group Name Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Symbol Coarse-Grained Soils Gravels more than Clean Gravels Less Cu24 and 1<Cc<3E GW Well-graded gravel F more than 50% 50%of coarse than 5%fines retained on No.200 fraction retained on Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E GP Poorly-graded gravel F sieve No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel G'" more than 12% fines Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel F'G'" Sands 50%or more Clean Sands Less Cu>_6 and 1<Cc53E SW Well-graded sand coarse fraction than 5%fines passes No.4 sieve Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E SP Poorly-graded sand Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G'"'l more than 12% fines Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G'"'l Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A"Line CL Lean clay K,L,M 50%or more passes Liquid Limit less the No.200 sieve than 50 PI<4 or plots below"A"Line ML Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,N <0.75 OL Liquid Limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above"A"Line CH Fat clay K,L,M Liquid Limit 50 or more PI plots below"A"Line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,P <0.75 OH Liquid Limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat ABased on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm) Cu=D60/Dlo Cc= (DBO)z Kif soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand" sieve D10 x D60 or"with gravel",whichever is predominant. BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or Llf soil contains 2 30%plus No.200 predominantly sand, both,add"with cobbles or boulders,or both"to add"sandy"to group name. group name. IF Ifsoil contains>_15%sand,add"with sand"to MY soil contains>_30%plus No.200 predominantly gravel, cGravels with 5 to 12%fines required dual symbols: GIf fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC- add"gravelly"to group name. GW-GM well graded gravel with silt CM,or SC-SM. NP124 and plots on or above"A"line. GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay "If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to 0PI54 or plots below"A"line. GP-GM poorly-graded gravel with silt group name PPI plots on or above"A"line. GP-GC poorly-graded gravel with clay If soil contains>15%gravel,add"with gravel"to °PI plots below"A"line. OSands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: group name SW-SM well-graded sand with silt 'If Atterberg limits plots shaded area,soil is a CL- SW-SC well-graded sand with clay ML,Silty clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay 60 For Classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained 50 soils. Equation of"A"-line 40 Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5 x then PI-0.73(LL-20) o Equation of"U"-fine z � 30 Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7, then PI=0.9(LI-8) a 20 p� MH o OH 10 ML OL CL- L' i 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 410 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC I1�t F/ II �yrFgtiq�< Its-I BF DG 110 R � _ \` G9p SbCMM,K �� I v � I J/` r _ ` BLDG 9 1 , J `• OT LOT\ 1 BLDG 8 _,\ \\ Z \\ Al Legend F �1. $B-17 thru B-20:Preliminary Borings Completed April r "s yly 2012-EEC Project# - — — 1122025B F g 1 6,2�' $B-1 thru B-G:Approximate �� A=� F 61� Locations of G Final Borings �� a3 11• „� ���/ for Proposed Development ,ryIF�' I �, \ y��• s� " E 1 Site Photos ry-J i` �° \\ ✓ y= (Photos taken in approximate location, 0 in direction ofarrow) Boring Location Diagram Bucking Horse Filing One- Commercial/Retail Development- Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project Number: 1 182100 North December 2018 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC d S 1 � 1 14 J� 5. ° 0 0 MOORE ANIMAL HOSPITAL FORT COLLINS,COLORADO EEC PROJECT No. 1182100 DECEMBER 2018 BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B-1 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING 20.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF SPARSE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 FILL MATERIAL-Sandy Lean Clay(CL) _ brown/red 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ 3 4 rc-S 5 15 9000+ 12.2 122.1 34 17 67.9 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) SS 10 21 9000+ 14.8 reddish brown, stiff to very stiff 11 12 13 14 Fc_s 15 7 7500 10.8 113.6 27 12 56.9 1300 psf 0.1% 16 17 18 19 dark brown SS 20 7 1000 30.8 21 22 23 24 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP)-dense,brown/red CS 25 31 9.4 130.8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B-2 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SILTY SAND w/GRAVEL and intermittent COBBLES(SM _ medium dense to dense 2 3 4 SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE CS 5 21 1.7 105.4 brown/gray/rust _ highly weathered to moderately hard 6 7 8 9 'classified as LEAN to FAT CLAY(CL/CH) FC_s 10 50/111, 9000+ 17.5 112.7 49 29 89.9 3500 psf 1.9% 11 12 13 14 SS 15 50 9000+ 16.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B.3 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) I%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF SPARSE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) _ brown/red 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ %@ 150 psf with calcareous deposits [Cs 3 25 9000 7.6 124.9 32 16 62.0 3800 psf 5.9% 4 Ess 5 24 9000+ 10.4 6 7 8 9 Fc_s 10 9 2500 7.6 117.9 <500psf None 11 12 13 14 CLAYSTONE _ brown/rust/olive SS 15 24 9000+ 10.4 highly weathered BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B-4 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) I%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF SPARSE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 FILL MATERIAL:Sandy Lean Clay(CL) _ brown/red 2 very stiff to medium stiff _ with trace gravel 3 4 FC—S 5 27 9000+ 7.7 121.6 34 18 65.1 1400 psf 1.3% 6 7 8 9 SS 10 27 9000+ 12.6 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) _ brown/red 11 very stiff to medium stiff _ with trace gravel 12 13 14 [CS 15 9 9000+ 9.6 109.5 1 26 1 12 67.0 a 1000 psf None 16 17 18 19 ESS 20 6 2500 15.8 21 22 23 24 CS 25 8 5000 15.4 113.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B-5 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING 13.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) I%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF SPARSE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) _ brown/red 2 very stiff _ with calcareous deposits 3 4 CS 5 19 9000+ 7.3 116.6 35 21 52.2 1600 psf 2.0% SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 6 brown/red _ dense 7 with cobbles 8 9 ES9 10 50 1 1.8 11 12 13 CLAYSTONE 14 brown/gray/rust _ moderately hard CS 15 50151, 9000+ 19.1 111.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC BUCKNG HORSE FILING ONE-COMMERCIAL/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT-BUILDING NOS.9-13 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1182100 LOG OF BORING B-6 DATE: DECEMBER 2018 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 12/12/2018 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 1 211 2/2 01 8 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) I%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500PSF 1 SILTY SAND ISM) _ brown/red 2 dense to very dense _ with gravel and cobbles [Cs 3 42 4.1 124.8 22 4 18.9 <500 psf None with calcareous deposits _ 4 with occasional clay lenses Ess 5 50/11" 2000 4.2 6 7 8 9 10 11 CLAYSTONE 12 brown/gray/rust _ highly weathered to moderately hard 13 14 CS 15 5019" 9000+ 16.6 115.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 34 IPlasticity Index: 17 % Passing#200: 67.9% Beginning Moisture: 12.2% JDry Density: 124.6 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.5% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 10 Load(TSF) 1 Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: 27 IPlasticity Index: 12 % Passing#200: 56.9% Beginning Moisture: 8.2% Dry Density: 116.3 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.6% Swell Pressure: 1300 psf %Swell @ 1000: 0.1% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L d a -2.0 Water Added -4.0 - 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Claystone (classified as Lean to Fat Clay-CUCH) Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 2, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 49 IPlasticity Index: 29 % Passing#200: 89.9% Beginning Moisture: 17.5% JDry Density: 112.1 pcf IlEnding Moisture: 21.1% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf %Swell @ 500: 1.9% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 quo SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Red Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 32 IPlasticity Index: 16 % Passing#200: 62.0% Beginning Moisture: 7.6% Dry Density: 130 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.0% Swell Pressure: 3800 psf %Swell @ 150: 5.9% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L Water Added m a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Red Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- IPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 7.6% Dry Density: 118.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 12.4% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L d a Water Added -4.0 0 0 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 34 IPlasticity Index: 18 % Passing#200: 65.1% Beginning Moisture: 7.7% Dry Density: 113.6 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.2% Swell Pressure: 1400 psf %Swell @ 500: 1.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 17 m L d (L Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: 26 IPlasticity Index: 12 % Passing#200: 67.0% Beginning Moisture: 9.6% Dry Density: 113.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.0% Swell Pressure: < 1000 psf %Swell @ 1000: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0 0.0 c m L d (L -2.0 Water Added - -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Red Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 35 IPlasticity Index: 21 % Passing#200: 52.2% Beginning Moisture: 7.3% Dry Density: 114.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.7% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 500: 2.0% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E (V > 0.0 c m L m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Grey/Rust Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) Sample Location: Boring 6, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 22 IPlasticity Index: 4 % Passing#200: 18.9% Beginning Moisture: 4.1% JDry Density: 113.9 pcf JEnding Moisture: 16.8% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L d (L Water Added -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: Bucking Horse Filing One Development-Building Nos. 9-13 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1182100 Date: December 2018