Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPEDERSEN TOYOTA EXPANSION - PDP - PDP140007 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTSUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PEDERSEN TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ADDITION & RENOVATION 4455 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1142002 Prepared for: AW Architectural Workshop 280 S Pennsylvania Street Denver, Colorado 80209 Attn: Mr. Mark Bowers, AIA, LEED AP (mbowers@archshop.com) Prepared by: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282 www.earth-engineering.com EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC February 13, 2014 AW Architectural Workshop 280 S Pennsylvania Street Denver, Colorado 80209 Attn: Mr. Mark Bowers, AIA, LEED AP (mbowers@archshop.com) Re: Subsurface Exploration Report Pederson Toyota Dealership – Addition & Renovation Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project No. 1142002 Mr. Bowers: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) personnel for the proposed expansion at the existing Pedersen Toyota Dealership located at 4455 South College Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. For this exploration, seven (7) soil borings were completed at the site to obtain information on existing subsurface conditions. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated December 23, 2013. In summary, existing asphalt pavement and aggregate base course was encountered at the surface of each boring and was underlain by apparent fill and/or native sandy lean clay subsoils, granular sands and gravels, and sandstone bedrock. The in-situ cohesive materials were generally classified as sandy lean clay, were soft to medium stiff, and exhibited low swell potential, as measured in laboratory testing at current in-situ moisture contents and dry densities. The granular soils were generally medium dense and the bedrock consisted of highly weathered sandstone that became less weathered and more competent with depth. Groundwater was encountered in four of the borings at depths ranging from approximately fifteen (15) to twenty (20) feet during the initial drilling operations. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; therefore subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained. Based on materials observed within the site-specific soil borings, and the anticipated foundation loads, we recommend the proposed three-story, slab-on-grade parking garage addition be supported on a grade beam and straight shaft drilled pier/caisson foundation system. We also recommend the interior slab-on-grades by supported on two (2) feet of SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PEDERSEN TOYOTA DEALERSHIP – ADDITION & RENOVATION 4455 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1142002 February 13, 2014 INTRODUCTION The subsurface exploration for the proposed expansion at the existing Pedersen Toyota Dealership located at 4455 South College Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado has been completed. For this exploration, seven (7) soil borings were completed to approximate depths of 10 to 35 feet below existing site grades to obtain information on existing subsurface conditions. Individual boring logs and a site diagram indicating the approximate boring locations are provided with this report. We understand this project will include an addition to the existing 2-story building, consisting of a 3-story parking garage, an on-site park area and on-site pavement improvements. The majority of the proposed expansion along the west side of the existing dealership is planned on the grounds of an existing storage yard. We understand the storage facility building will be razed to accommodate the proposed expansion. The first story of the proposed parking garage will include areas for service bays, storage, retail, and a car wash, as shown on the site diagrams provided to us by the project architect. The third story of the proposed parking garage will not be constructed immediately, but will allow for future expansion. At this time, we have had the opportunity to review the 50% schematic design dated October 10, 2013, but we do not know the depth of the existing building’s foundation system or the wall/column loads of the proposed expansion. Foundation loads for the proposed parking garage are estimated to be moderate/heavy with maximum column loads in the range of 400 kips and maximum wall loads in the range of 4 klf. Floor loads are expected to be moderate/heavy. Small grade changes are expected to develop final site grades for the expansion project. The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the completed test borings, analyze and evaluate the test data, and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations concerning design and construction of the foundations and support of floor slabs and pavements. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The boring locations were established in the field by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) personnel by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site references. The approximate locations of the test borings are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The locations of the test borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. The test borings were drilled using a truck mounted, CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained using split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively. In the split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are driven into the ground by means of a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the split barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure, relatively undisturbed samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to the laboratory for further examination, classification, and testing. Laboratory moisture content tests and visual classifications were completed on each of the recovered samples. In addition, the unconfined strength of appropriate samples was estimated using a calibrated hand penetrometer. Atterberg limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed 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 and foundation bearing materials to change volume with variation in moisture and load. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 3 As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in 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. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The existing dealership is located at 4455 South College Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. The area for the proposed 3-story parking garage expansion to the west of the existing building is currently a self-storage facility consisting of rows of 1-story units and asphalt pavement, as shown in the attached site photos. An EEC field engineer was on site during drilling to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered and direct the drilling activities. Borings B-1 through B-6 were completed to obtain subsurface information for the building expansion while boring B-7 was completed to obtain subsurface information for the pavement area on the west. 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 the results of laboratory testing and evaluation. Based on the results of the field borings and laboratory evaluation, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. In summary, approximately 3 inches of existing asphalt pavement and 5 inches of aggregate base course (ABC) were encountered at the surface of the borings. The subsurface soils generally consisted of cohesive soils classified as sandy lean clay with varying amounts of sand underlain by granular sands and gravels. Borings B-4, B-5, and B-6 encountered bedrock at depths of approximately 21, 27, and 17.5 feet, respectively. The cohesive soils were generally soft to medium stiff and showed low swell potential. The granular soils were generally medium dense and contained varying amounts of clay. Bedrock consisted of highly weathered sandstone that transitioned from soft to moderately hard/cemented with depth. The bedrock formation was weathered nearer to the surface and became less weathered and more competent with depth, exhibiting moderate to high load bearing capabilities. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 4 The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and rock 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 our field exploration, groundwater was encountered in four of the borings at depths ranging from approximately 15 to 20.5 feet below existing site grades. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations; subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained. 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. Monitoring in cased borings, sealed from the influence of surface infiltration, would be required to more accurately evaluate groundwater levels and fluctuations in the groundwater levels over time. Zones of perched and/or trapped groundwater may occur at times in the subsurface soils overlying bedrock, on top of the bedrock surface or within permeable fractures in the bedrock materials. The location and amount of perched water is dependent upon several factors, including hydrologic conditions, type of site development, irrigation demands on or adjacent to the site, and seasonal and weather conditions. The observations provided in this report represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may not be indicative of other times, or at other locations. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Swell – Consolidation Test Results The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils to help determine foundation, floor slab and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively undisturbed samples obtained directly from the California sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a predetermined load. The swell-index is the resulting Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 5 amount of swell or collapse after the inundation period expressed as a percent of the sample’s preload/initial thickness. After the inundation period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and/or consolidation. For this assessment, we conducted seven (7) swell-consolidation tests on relatively undisturbed soil samples obtained at various intervals/depths and loading schemes throughout the site. The swell index values for the in-situ soil samples analyzed revealed generally low swell characteristics and a slightly tendency to consolidate with increased loads as indicated on the attached swell test summaries. The following table summarizes the swell-consolidation laboratory test results for samples obtained during our field explorations for the subject site. Boring No. Depth, ft. Material Type Swell Consolidation Test Results In-Situ Moisture Content, % Dry Density, PCF Inundation Pressure, psf Swell Index, % (+/-) B-1 4.0 Red Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) 15.4 109.7 500 (-) 0.2% B-2 4.0 Reddish Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) 19.1 106.8 500 (-) 0.4% B-3 9.0 Red Clayey SAND (SC) 13.3 104.6 1000 (-) 0.2% B-4 4.0 Red Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) 12.0 113.1 500 (-) 0.4% B-5 4.0 Red Clayey SAND (SC) 12.6 119.3 500 (-) 0.1% B-6 9.0 Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) 12.4 115.2 1000 (-) 0.2% B-7 2.0 Red Clayey SAND (SC) 18.1 110.6 150 (-) 0.2% Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information to provide uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of slab 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. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 6 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 in-situ samples analyzed for this project were within the low range. Site Preparation The existing one-story self-storage structures, which are located to the west of the existing building and the associated foundations, we assume will be demolished and removed. In addition, the existing pavement, vegetation including tree root growth from the existing deciduous trees, and topsoil should be removed from the parking garage and pavement improvement areas. After removal of all deleterious materials, as well as completing all cuts and over-excavations, and prior to fill placement and/or site improvements, the exposed soils should 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. Final site grades were not available at the time of this report; however, based on our understanding of the proposed development, we expect small fill depths may be necessary to achieve design grades in the improvement areas. Fill soils required for developing the pavement area subgrades, after the initial zone has been moisture conditioned/stabilized, should consist of approved, low-volume-change materials, which are free from organic matter and debris. Based on the testing completed, it appears the on-site cohesive type materials could be used as general site fill below the pavement area subgrades provided adequate moisture treatment and compaction procedures are followed. Those procedures would include placement in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjustment in moisture content to +/- 2% Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 7 of optimum moisture content for cohesive type soils, and compaction to at least 95% of the materials maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard Proctor procedure. If the site’s existing cohesive fill subsoils are used as general site fill, care will be needed to maintain the recommended moisture content prior to and during construction of overlying improvements. Care will be needed after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from site structures and pavements to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site improvements can result in unacceptable performance. Foundation System Based on the subsurface conditions observed in the test borings and on the anticipated foundation loads, we recommend supporting the proposed building addition/parking garage on a grade beam and straight shaft drilled pier/caisson foundation system extending into the underlying bedrock formation. Particular attention will be required in the construction of the drilled piers due to the depth of bedrock and presence of groundwater. For axial compression loads, the drilled piers could be designed using a maximum end bearing pressure of 40,000 pounds per square foot (psf), along with a skin-friction of 4,000 psf for the portion of the pier extended into the harder underlying bedrock formation. Straight shaft piers should be drilled a minimum of 8 feet into competent or harder bedrock. Lower values may be appropriate for pier “groupings” depending on the pier diameters and spacing. Pier groups should be evaluated individually. To satisfy forces in the horizontal direction, piers may be designed for lateral loads using a modulus of 50 tons per cubic foot (tcf) for the portion of the pier in native cohesive soils, 75 tcf for native granular materials or engineered fill, and 400 tcf in bedrock for a pier diameter of 12 inches. The coefficient of subgrade reaction for varying pier diameters is as follows: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 8 Pier Diameter (inches) Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction (tons/ft3) Cohesive Soils Engineered Fill or Granular Soils Bedrock 18 33 50 267 24 25 38 200 30 20 30 160 36 17 25 133 When the lateral capacity of drilled piers is evaluated by the L-Pile (COM 624) computer program, we recommend that internally generated load-deformation (P-Y) curves be used. The following parameters may be used for the design of laterally loaded piers, using the L-Pile (COM 624) computer program: Parameters Native Granular Soils or Structural Fill On-Site Overburden Cohesive Soils Bedrock Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) 130 (1) 115 (1) 125 (1) Cohesion (psf) 0 200 5000 Angle of Internal Friction  (degrees) 35 25 20 Strain Corresponding to ½ Max. Principal Stress Difference 50 --- 0.02 0.015 *Notes: 1) Reduce by 64 PCF below the water table Drilling caissons to design depth should be possible with conventional heavy-duty single flight power augers equipped with rock teeth on the majority of the site. However, areas of well- cemented sandstone bedrock lenses may be encountered throughout the site at various depths where specialized drilling equipment and/or rock excavating equipment may be required. Varying zones of cobbles may also be encountered in the granular soils above the bedrock. Excavation penetrating the well-cemented sandstone bedrock may require the use of specialized heavy-duty equipment, together with rock augers and/or core barrels. Consideration should be given to obtaining a unit price for difficult caisson excavation in the contract documents for the project. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 9 Due to the presence of granular soils and groundwater at approximate depths ranging from 10 to 20 feet below current site grades in the parking garage area, maintaining open shafts may be difficult without stabilizing measures. Groundwater was encountered at approximate depths of 15 to 20.5 feet below site grades; we expect temporary casing will be required to adequately/properly drill and clean piers prior to concrete placement. Difficulty can be encountered in “sealing” temporary casing into the surface of the sandstone bedrock. Groundwater should be removed from each drilled pier hole prior to concrete placement. Pier concrete should be placed immediately after completion of drilling and cleaning. A maximum 3-inch depth of groundwater is acceptable in each drilled pier prior to concrete placement. If pier concrete cannot be placed in dry conditions, a tremie pipe should be used for concrete placement. Due to potential sloughing and raveling, foundation concrete quantities may exceed calculated geometric volumes. Pier concrete with slump in the range of 6 to 8 inches is recommended. Casing used for pier construction should be withdrawn in a slow continuous manner maintaining a sufficient head of concrete to prevent infiltration of water or the creation of voids in pier concrete. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. A representative of the geotechnical engineer should inspect the bearing surface and pier configuration. If the soil conditions encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations may be required. We estimate the long-term settlement of drilled pier foundations designed and constructed as outlined above would be less than 1-inch. Floor Slab Design and Construction All existing vegetation and/or topsoil should be removed from beneath the new floor slabs. Additionally, the floor slab subgrades should be over-excavated to allow for at least 2 feet of approved fill below the floor slabs. Soft or loose in-place fill/backfill associated with prior building or utility construction, and any wet and softened or dry and desiccated soils should be removed as encountered. Close evaluation of the existing on-site fill material within the building floor slab areas will be required during the construction phase. A proof roll should be Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 10 performed to evaluate the integrity and/or stability of the material prior to floor slab preparation. After stripping, completing all cuts and removal of any unacceptable materials and prior to placement of any new fill, the in-place soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 inches, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D-698, the standard Proctor procedure. The moisture content of the scarified materials should be adjusted to be within the range of 2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture at the time of compaction. Fill materials required to develop the floor slab subgrade should be an approved imported structural fill, which should consist of inorganic, non-plastic, granular soil containing less than 10 percent material passing the No.200 mesh sieve with a 2-inch maximum particle size. Structural fill procedures would include placement in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjustment in moisture content to +/- 2% of optimum moisture content, and compaction to at least 95% of the materials maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard Proctor procedure. After preparation of the subgrades, care should be taken to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Materials which are loosened or disturbed by the construction activities will require removal and replacement or reworking in place prior to placement of the overlying floor slabs. Positive drainage should be developed away from the proposed building addition to avoid wetting the subgrade or bearing materials. Subgrade or bearing materials allowed to become wetted subsequent to construction can result in unacceptable performance of the improvements. Seismic Conditions The site soil conditions consist of approximately 20 feet of medium stiff to medium dense overburden soils. For those site conditions, the 2009 International Building Code indicates a Seismic Site Classification of D. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 11 Pavements – Design and Construction Recommendations We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for automobile traffic and areas of heavier truck traffic. For heavy-duty truck areas we are using an assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 25 and in automobile areas we are using an EDLA of 10. Proofrolling and recompacting the subgrade is recommended immediately prior to placement of the aggregate road base section. Soft or weak areas delineated by the proofrolling operations should be undercut or stabilized in-place to achieve the appropriate subgrade support. It should be noted that the clay subgrade soils are subject to pumping at high moisture contents. It is possible or even likely that pumping of the subgrades will occur during construction and stabilization of the subgrades will be required to allow for placement of the overlying pavements. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site and the laboratory test results, it is recommended the on-site parking areas be designed using an R- value of 10. If instability is observed during proofroll observations, we suggest subgrade stabilization may be considered to mitigate for unstable subgrade soils. The stabilization could include incorporation of Class “C” fly ash to enhance the subgrade integrity by incorporating at least 13 percent by weight, Class “C” fly ash, into the upper 12-inches of subgrade. An alternate would be to use granular import to develop the pavement subgrades after removal of the cohesive subgrade soils. The granular soils would be less likely to show instability and could result in reduced pavement sections. We would be pleased to evaluate planned import materials and provide appropriate pavement design sections placed on the proposed subgrade fill. Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for shrink/swell movements of an expansive clay subgrade or consolidation of a wetted subgrade. Thus, the pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still experience cracking and deformation due to shrink/swell related movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce shrink/swell movements. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 12 Recommended pavement sections are provided below in Table I. The hot bituminous pavement (HBP) could be grading SX (75) or S (75) with PG 58-28 oil. The aggregate base should be Class 5 or Class 6 base. Portland cement concrete should be an exterior pavement mix with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4200 psi and should be air entrained. HBP pavements may show rutting and distress in truck loading and turning areas. Concrete pavements should be considered in those areas. TABLE I – RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS Automobile Parking Heavy Duty Areas EDLA 18-Kip ESAL’s Reliability Resilient Modulus – (based on assumed R-Value of 10) PSI Loss 10 73,000 75% 3562 2.5 25 182,500 85% 3562 2.0 Design Structure Number 2.60 3.25 Composite Section – Option A Hot Bituminous Pavement Aggregate Base Design Structure Number 4" x 0.44 = 1.76 8” x 0.11 = 0.88 (2.64) 5" x 0.44 = 2.20 10” x 0.11 = 1.10 (3.30) Composite Section with Fly Ash - Option B Hot Bituminous Pavement Aggregate Base Fly Ash Treated Subgrade Design Structure Number 3-1/2" x 0.44 = 1.54 6" x 0.11 = 0.66 12” x 0.05 = .60 (2.80) 4-1/2” x 0.44 = 1.98 8" x 0.11 = 0.88 12” x 0.05 = 0.60 (3.46) PCC (Non-reinforced) 5″ 7″ The recommended pavement sections are minimums and periodic maintenance should be expected. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut as recommended by PCA guidelines. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Since the cohesive soils on the site have some shrink/swell potential, pavements could crack in the future primarily because of the volume change of the soils when subjected to an increase in Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 13 moisture content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily constitute structural failure of the pavement. The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining subgrade moisture levels and providing for preventive maintenance. The following recommendations should be considered the minimum:  The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface drainage.  Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g. garden centers, wash racks)  Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately,  Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils;  Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and,  Placing curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils with the use of base course materials. Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 14 desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for pavement construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully evaluated at the time of pavement construction for signs of disturbance, such as but not limited to drying, or excessive rutting. If disturbance has occurred, pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving. Please note that if during or after placement of the stabilization or initial lift of pavement, the area is observed to be yielding under vehicle traffic or construction equipment, it is recommended that EEC be contacted for additional alternative methods of stabilization, or a change in the pavement section. Other Considerations Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure 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 adjacent to the building and parking and drive areas to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the pavement, 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. Lawn watering systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the building and parking areas. Spray heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structure or site pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structure and away from the pavement areas. 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 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1142002 February 13, 2014 Page 15 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 and foundation construction phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Heath Construction 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 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: PEDERSEN TOYOTA EXPANSION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1142002 JANUARY 2014 DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 5.5" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 2 red _ _ medium stiff to stiff 3 with traces of gravel _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 5 6000 15.4 107.4 31 18 54.8 <500 psf None _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ sand seam SS 10 11 -- 6.5 _ _ 11 gravel seam _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC) CS 15 21 1000 4.3 121.9 red _ _ medium dense 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ brown / red SS 20 21 6000 14.4 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5' 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 3" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 2 dark brown _ _ stiff to very stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 10 9000 19.1 107.3 <500 psf None _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ CLAYEY SAND & GRAVELS (SC/GC) SS 10 16 6000 7.0 red / brown _ _ medium dense 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) CS 15 31 9000 6.6 119.7 31.4 dense to medium dense _ _ with clayey zones 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 SS _ _ 14 5000 21.1 1) See Note 1 below 21 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 21.0' _ _ 22 1) Encountered 3 inches of sandy LEAN CLAY with _ _ brown/gray/rust interbedded layers 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 2" _ _ BASE - 7" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 2 brown / red _ _ medium stiff to stiff CS 3 9 3000 21.6 101.0 mottled _ _ 4 _ _ brown / red SS 5 6 4000 14.1 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) 9 red _ _ % @ 1000 psf medium dense to dense CS 10 10 2000 13.3 111.7 <1000 psf None _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SS 15 19 -- 5.5 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CS 20 30 -- 5.3 134.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.0' _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 13" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 2 red _ _ stiff 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 14 8000 12.0 111.6 <500 psf None _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SAND & GRAVEL (SP/GP) SS 10 22 -- 5.6 red _ _ medium dense 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SILTY SAND (SM) CS 15 9 8000 10.5 red _ _ loose 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 GRAVEL _ _ medium dense SS 20 27 1000 10.9 112.9 with clay seams _ _ 21 BEDROCK: SANDSTONE _ _ weathered/poorly cemented to cemented CS 22 50/6" 5000 17.2 107.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 22.0' _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 5" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) 2 red _ _ very stiff to stiff / medium dense 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 11 5000 12.6 114.1 29 16 36.6 <500 psf None _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ sand seams SS 10 11 3000 13.7 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) CS 15 8 4000 22.2 101.5 stiff _ _ with gravel seams 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ CLAYEY SAND (SC) SS 20 6 -- 20.8 40.2 loose to medium dense _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ medium dense 24 decomposed, poorly cemented sandstone at 25' _ _ CS 25 28 5000 21.7 116.4 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 _ _ 27 _ _ BEDROCK: SANDSTONE 28 poorly cemented to cemented with increased depths _ _ 29 _ _ SS 30 50/4" 4000 17.2 _ _ 31 _ _ 32 _ _ 33 _ _ 34 brown/rust _ _ CS 35 Bounce BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 35.0' _ _ 36 _ _ 37 _ _ 38 _ _ 39 _ _ 40 _ _ 41 _ _ 42 _ _ 43 _ _ 44 _ _ 45 _ _ 46 _ _ 47 _ _ 48 _ _ 49 _ _ 50 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 6.5" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 2 red _ _ stiff to very stiff CS 3 8 3000 10.9 118.8 with traces of gravel _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 9 6000 16.3 _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 1000 psf brown CS 10 11 7000 12.4 118.4 <1000 psf None _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ SILTY SAND (SM) SS 15 50 -- 15.7 dense _ _ brown / grey / rust 16 poorly cemented sandstone/siltstone _ _ 17 _ _ 18 BEDROCK: SANDSTONE AND SILTSTONE _ _ poorly cemented to cemented with depth 19 _ _ brown / grey / rust CS 20 Bounce 4000 8.2 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ SS 25 50/1" 5000 13.3 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION DATE: RIG TYPE: CME55 FOREMAN: DG AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF ASPHALT - 3" _ _ BASE - 5.5" 1 _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY / CLAYEY SAND (CL/SC) 2 red _ _ % @ 150 psf medium stiff to stiff / medium dense CS 3 8 4000 18.1 110.5 25 11 39.8 <150 psf None _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 5 5000 10.4 _ _ 6 _ _ SAND (SP) 7 medium dense _ _ with fine gravel 8 _ _ 9 _ _ SS 10 15 -- 5.5 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5' 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC PEDERSEN TOYOTA - REMODEL EXPANSION Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 31 Plasticity Index: 18 % Passing #200: 54.8% Beginning Moisture: 15.4% Dry Density: 109.7 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.9% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 -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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 Beginning Moisture: 19.1% Dry Density: 106.8 pcf Ending Moisture: 18.3% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Reddish Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY (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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 Beginning Moisture: 13.3% Dry Density: 104.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.2% Swell Pressure: <1000 psf % Swell @ 1000: None Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Clayey Sand (SC) -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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 Beginning Moisture: 12.0% Dry Density: 113.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Sandy LEAN CLAY (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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 Beginning Moisture: 12.6% Dry Density: 119.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.8% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 16 % Passing #200: 36.6% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Clayey SAND (SC) -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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 Beginning Moisture: 12.4% Dry Density: 115.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.7% Swell Pressure: <1000 psf % Swell @ 1000: None Sample Location: Boring 6, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: - - Plasticity Index: - - % Passing #200: - - SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY (CL) -20.0 -18.0 -16.0 -14.0 -12.0 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Red Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 25 Plasticity Index: 11 % Passing #200: 39.8% Beginning Moisture: 18.1% Dry Density: 110.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 14.9% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 150: None Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 February 2014 -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 Percent Movement Load (TSF) Consolidatio Swell Water Added 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: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion - 4455 S. College Avenue Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1142002 Sample ID: B-2, S-3, 14 Sample Desc.: Sand & Gravel (SP/GP) Date: February 2014 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing 100 95 85 82 72 60 54 48 39 31.4 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion - 4455 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 B-2, S-3, 14 Sand & Gravel (SP/GP) February 2014 Project: Location: Project No: Sample ID: Sample Desc.: Cobble Silt or Clay Gravel Coarse Fine Sand Coarse Medium Fine 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 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Finer by Weight (%) Grain Size (mm) Standard Sieve Size 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: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion - 4455 S. College Avenue Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1142002 Sample ID: B-5, S-4, 19 Sample Desc.: Clayey SAND (SC) Date: February 2014 81 76 70 57 40.2 100 98 94 93 89 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing Gravel Coarse Fine Sand Coarse Medium Fine EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Date: Pedersen Toyota - Remodel Expansion - 4455 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 1142002 B-5, S-4, 19 Clayey SAND (SC) February 2014 Project: Location: Project No: Sample ID: Sample Desc.: Cobble Silt or Clay 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 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Finer by Weight (%) Grain Size (mm) Standard Sieve Size FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-7 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV 5035 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-6 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV 5035.5 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-5 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING 17.0' 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE A-LIMITS SWELL 5035 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-5 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 2 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING 17.0' SURFACE ELEV 5035 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-4 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING 19.5' SURFACE ELEV 5035 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-3 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV 5035 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-2 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING 15.0' SURFACE ELEV 5031 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1142002 LOG OF BORING B-1 JANUARY 2014 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 1/24/2014 WHILE DRILLING 20.5' SURFACE ELEV 5035 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 1/24/2014 AFTER DRILLING N/A A-LIMITS SWELL 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