No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY TECHNOLOGY PARK FIFTH FILING - Filed GR-GEOTECHNICAL REPORT/SOILS REPORT -Geotechnical Engineering Report Wil Mark Building Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A 02/35/2016 Prepared for: Eldon James Corporation Denver, Colorado Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Fort Collins, Colorado Offices Nationwide Established in 1965 llerracoriEmployee-Owned terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental Construction Materials I Facilities lierracon March 3, 2016 Eldon James Corporation 10325 East 47th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80238 Attn: Mr. William Coulson P: (970)667-2728 E: William.coulson@eldonjames.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Wil Mark Building Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20165012A Dear Mr. Coulson: Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for the project referenced above. These services were performed in general accordance with our Proposal No. P20165012 and signed Agreement for Services dated January 25, 2016. This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor systems, and pavements for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, EGi Terracon Consultants, Inc. O: GNdur 38829 . 0 0 Mafia G. Hayes, E.I. Eric D. Bernhardt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Departmen Enclosures Copies to: Addressee (via e-mail) Terracon Consultants, Inc. 1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite C Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 P [970]484 0359 F [970]484 0454 terracon.com Environmental II Facilities S Geotechnical Materials TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2 2.1 Project Description 2 2.2 Site Location and Description 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile 2 3.2 Laboratory Testing 3 3.3 Corrosion Protection (Water-Soluble Sulfates) 3 3.4 Groundwater 3 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations 4 4.1.1 Expansive Soils and Bedrock 4 4.1.2 Foundation and Floor System Recommendations 4 4.2 Earthwork 5 4.2.1 Site Preparation 5 4.2.2 Excavation 5 4.2.3 Subgrade Preparation 6 4.2.4 Fill Materials and Placement 6 4.2.5 Compaction Requirements 7 4.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill 8 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage 8 4.3 Foundations 9 4.3.1 Spread Footings - Design Recommendations 9 4.3.2 Spread Footings - Construction Considerations 11 4.4 Seismic Considerations 11 4.5 Floor Systems 11 4.5.1 Floor System - Design Recommendations 12 4.5.2 Floor Systems - Construction Considerations 13 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 13 4.7 Pavements 14 4.7.1 Pavements—Subgrade Preparation 14 4.7.2 Pavements— Design Recommendations 15 4.7.3 Pavements— Construction Considerations 17 4.7.4 Pavements— Maintenance 17 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 18 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Appendix A— FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Exploration Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibits A-4 to A-10 Boring Logs Appendix B — LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Description Exhibit B-2 Atterberg Limits Test Results Exhibits B-3 to B-5 Grain-size Distribution Test Results Exhibits B-6 to B-9 Swell-consolidation Test Results Exhibits B-10 & B-11 Unconfined Compression Test Results Exhibit B-12 R-value Test Results Exhibit B-13 Water-soluble Sulfate Results Appendix C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System Exhibit C-3 Description of Rock Properties Exhibit C-4 Laboratory Test Significance and Purpose Exhibits C-5 and C-6 Report Terminology Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A geotechnical investigation has been performed for the proposed Wil Mark Building to be constructed northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive in Fort Collins, Colorado. Seven (7) borings, presented as Exhibits A-4 through A-10 and designated as Boring No. 1 through Boring No. 7, were performed to depths of approximately 25'/z and 30% feet below existing site grades. This report specifically addresses the recommendations for the proposed Wil Mark building foundation, floor system and pavements. Borings performed in these areas are for informational purposes and will be utilized by others. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site can be developed for the proposed project. However, the following geotechnical considerations were identified and will need to be considered: Subsurface conditions below site grade generally consist of about 19 to 28 feet of lean clay with varying amounts of sand interlayered with about 3 to 11% feet of sand with varying amounts of silt and clay. Claystone bedrock was encountered in some borings below the lean clays and silty sands and extended to the maximum depths explored. Groundwater was encountered in the test borings at depths of about 12.2 to 14.1 feet below the existing ground surface approximately 4 days after drilling. Groundwater levels can and should be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions. The proposed building may be supported on shallow spread-footing foundations bearing on 12 inches of scarified and properly prepared on-site soil or on newly placed engineered fill. A slab-on-grade floor system is recommended for the proposed building provided at least 12 inches of properly compacted Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 1 structure backfill is placed below the floor slab. The amount of movement of foundations, floor slabs, pavements, etc. will be related to the wetting of underlying supporting soils. Therefore, it is imperative the recommendations discussed in the 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage section of this report be followed to reduce potential movement. The 2012 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2 IBC seismic site classification for this site is D. Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be retained to monitor this portion of the work. Responsive 7 Resourceful Reliable Geotechnical Engineering Report lierraconWilMarkBuildingFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Wil Mark Building Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20165012A March 3, 2016 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Wil Mark Building to be located northeast of the intersection of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive in Fort Collins, Colorado(Exhibit A-1). The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: subsurface soil and bedrock conditions •foundation design and construction groundwater conditions floor slab design and construction grading and drainage pavement construction lateral earth pressures earthwork seismic considerations Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the initial site visit, the advancement of seven test borings to depths ranging from approximately 251/2 to 301/2 feet below existing site grades, laboratory testing for soil engineering properties and engineering analyses to provide foundation, floor system and pavement design and construction recommendations. Logs of the borings along with an Exploration Plan (Exhibit A-2) are included in Appendix A. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil and bedrock samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included in Appendix B. Previously, Terracon prepared a Geotechnical Engineering Report(Project No. 20155034; report dated September 21, 2015) for the Fort Collins Memory Care Building, located just west of the site. Terracon also prepared a Geotechnical Engineering Report (Project No. 20145027; report dated June 18, 2014) for the Intel Solar Project, located just south of the site. Additionally, we are performing a similar geotechnical study concurrently for the Eldon James Building planned adjacent to this site to the west. Responsive Resourceful a Reliable 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuilding ® Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 •Terracon Project No. 20165012A 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description Item Description Site layout Refer to the Exploration Plan (Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A) Structures The proposed construction consists of a single-story Wil Mark building with parking lots and access roads. Columns: 50— 100 kips(assumed) Maximum loads Walls: 2—3 kips(assumed) Floors: 150 psf(assumed) A grading plan for the proposed project has not been provided to us at this time. For the purposes of this report, we assume maximum Grading in building area cut and fill depths of approximately 3 feet, relative to the existing grades, will be required to develop the final building and pavement subgrade elevations. Below-grade areas No below-grade areas are planned for this site. NAPA Traffic Class: Traffic loading Automobile Parking Areas: Class I Truck traffic and main drives Class II 2.2 Site Location and Description Item Description Location The project site is located northeast of the intersection of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive in Fort Collins, Colorado. Existing site features The site is currently unoccupied farm land. To the north of the site is unoccupied farmland. To the west is an Surrounding developments empty site for the proposed Eldon James building to the south and east are office buildings. Current ground cover The ground is currently covered with tilled crop soil. Existing topography The site is relatively flat except for a large pile of excavated dirt toward the southwest side of the site. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs included in Appendix A. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Based Responsive a Resourceful • Reliable 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report 1 rraconWilMarkBuildingFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows: Material Description Approximate Depth to Consistency/Density/HardnessBottomofStratum(feet) Lean clay with varying amounts of About 18 to 30' feet below Medium stiff to very stiff silt and sand existing site grades. Sand with varying amounts of silt About 16 to 30%feet below and clay existing site grades, only found Loose to dense in Borings Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6. To the maximum depth of exploration of about 30' feet, Claystone bedrock Hard to very hard only found in Boring Nos. 2, 5 and 7. 3.2 Laboratory Testing Representative soil samples were selected for swell-consolidation testing and exhibited 1.0 compression to 0.5 percent swell when wetted. Two samples of clay soils exhibited unconfined compressive strengths of approximately 1,524 and 1,596 pounds per square foot (psf). Samples of site soils selected for plasticity testing exhibited low plasticity with liquid limits ranging from 20 to 35 and plasticity indices ranging from 5 to 20. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. 3.3 Corrosion Protection (Water-Soluble Sulfates) Results of water-soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I or II portland cement should be specified for all project concrete on and below grade. Foundation concrete should be designed for low moderate, severe, very severe sulfate exposure in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. 3.4 Groundwater The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of groundwater. In addition, delayed water levels were also obtained in the borings. The water levels observed in the boreholes are noted on the attached boring logs, and are summarized below: Boring Depth to groundwater Depth to groundwater 4 Elevation of groundwater Number while drilling,ft. days after drilling,ft. 4 days after drilling,ft. 1 16.0 13.3 80.49 2 11.5 12.4 81.89 3 15.0 12.5 80.99 Responsive ® Resourceful o Reliable 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuilding Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 a Terracon Project No. 20165012A Boring Depth to groundwater Depth to groundwater 4 Elevation of groundwater Number while drilling,ft. days after drilling,ft. 4 days after drilling,ft. 4 20.0 13.3 79.28 5 16.0 12.2 80.49 6 16.0 12.8 78.28 7 16.0 14.1 76.99 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations Based on subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, the site appears suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical point of view provided certain precautions and design and construction recommendations described in this report are followed. We have identified geotechnical conditions that could impact design and construction of the proposed building, pavements, and other site improvements. 4.1.1 Expansive Soils and Bedrock Laboratory testing indicates the native clay soils exhibited low expansive potential at the samples in-situ moisture content. However, it is our opinion these materials will exhibit a higher expansive potential if the clays undergo a significant loss of moisture. This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and expansion. However, even if these procedures are followed, some movement and cracking in the structures, pavements and flatwork should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and other damage such as uneven floor slabs will probably increase if any modification of the site results in excessive wetting or drying of the expansive clays. Eliminating the risk of movement and distress is generally not feasible, but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during construction. It is imperative the recommendations described in section 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage of this report be followed to reduce movement. 4.1.2 Foundation and Floor System Recommendations The proposed building may be supported on a spread footing foundation system bearing on properly prepared on-site soils or properly placed imported fill. We recommend a slab-on-grade for the interior floor system of the proposed building provided at least 12 inches of properly compacted Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT)Class 1 structure backfill is placed below the floor slab. Even when bearing on properly prepared soils, movement of the slab-on-grade floor system is possible should the subgrade soils undergo an increase in moisture content. We estimate movement of about 1 inch is possible. If the owner cannot accept the risk of slab movement, a structural floor should be used. Responsive a Resourceful u Reliable 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingoFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A 4.2 Earthwork The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. All earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon on a full-time basis. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation of over-excavation operations, testing of engineered fills, subgrade preparation, subgrade stabilization, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project. 4.2.1 Site Preparation Prior to placing any fill, strip and remove existing vegetation and any other deleterious materials from the proposed construction areas. Stripped organic materials should be wasted from the site or used to re-vegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. Prior to the placement of fills,the site should be graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed structures. 4.2.2 Excavation It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Excavations into the on-site soils will encounter weak and/or saturated soil conditions with possible caving conditions. The soils to be excavated can vary significantly across the site as their classifications are based solely on the materials encountered in widely-spaced exploratory test borings. The contractor should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the proposed area of excavation. If different subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, the actual conditions should be evaluated to determine any excavation modifications necessary to maintain safe conditions. Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, vaults, basements, and utilities was not observed during the site reconnaissance, such features could be encountered during construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should be removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction. Any over-excavation that extends below the bottom of foundation elevation should extend laterally beyond all edges of the foundations at least 8 inches per foot of over-excavation depth below the foundation base elevation. The over-excavation should be backfilled to the foundation base elevation in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report. Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, surface water infiltration and/or groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. The subgrade soil conditions should be evaluated during the excavation process and the stability of the soils determined at that time by the contractors' Competent Person. Slope inclinations flatter Responsive ® Resourceful • Reliable 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingmFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 ® Terracon Project No. 20165012A than the OSHA maximum values may have to be used. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. If any excavation, including a utility trench, is extended to a depth of more than 20 feet, it will be necessary to have the side slopes and/or shoring system designed by a professional engineer. As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept a minimum lateral distance from the crest of the slope equal to the slope height. The exposed slope face should be protected against the elements 4.2.3 Subgrade Preparation The top 8 inches of the exposed ground surface should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698 before any new fill or foundation or pavement is placed. If pockets of soft, loose, or otherwise unsuitable materials are encountered at the bottom of the foundation excavations and it is inconvenient to lower the foundations, the proposed foundation elevations may be reestablished by over-excavating the unsuitable soils and backfilling with compacted engineered fill or lean concrete. After the bottom of the excavation has been compacted, engineered fill can be placed to bring the building pad and pavement subgrade to the desired grade. Engineered fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in subsequent sections of this report. The stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. Alternatively, over-excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be used, or crushed gravel and/or rock can be tracked or"crowded" into the unstable surface soil until a stable working surface is attained. Use of lime could also be considered as a stabilization technique. Laboratory evaluation is recommended to determine the effect of chemical stabilization on subgrade soils prior to construction. Lightweight excavation equipment may also be used to reduce subgrade pumping. 4.2.4 Fill Materials and Placement The on-site soils or approved granular and low plasticity cohesive imported materials may be used as fill material. The soil removed from this site that is free of organic or objectionable materials, as defined by a field technician who is qualified in soil material identification and compaction procedures, can be re-used as fill for the building pad and pavement subgrade. It should be noted that on-site soils will require reworking to adjust the moisture content to meet the compaction criteria. Responsive Resourceful is Reliable 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report lierraconWilMarkBuilding • Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A CDOT Class 1 structure backfill should meet the following material property requirements: Gradation Percent finer by weight(ASTM C136) 2" 100 No.4 Sieve 30-100 No. 50 Sieve 10-60 No.200 Sieve 5-20 Soil Properties Values Liquid Limit 35(max.) Plastic Limit 6(max.) Imported soils (if required) should meet the following material property requirements: Gradation Percent finer by weight(ASTM C136) 4"100 3" 70-100 No.4 Sieve 50-100 No. 200 Sieve 15-50 Soil Properties Values Liquid Limit 35(max.) Plastic Limit 6(max.) Maximum Expansive Potential(%) Non-expansive1 1. Measured on a sample compacted to approximately 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698 at optimum moisture content. The sample is confined under a 100 psf surcharge and submerged. 4.2.5 Compaction Requirements Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. Item Description 9 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self- propelled compaction equipment is used Fill lift Thickness 4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided equipment(i.e.jumping jack or plate compactor)is used Responsive Resourceful • Reliable 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuilding ® Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A Item Description Minimum compaction requirements 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698 Moisture content cohesive soil (clay) 1 to+3 %of the optimum moisture content Moisture content cohesionless soil 2 percentsand) 1. We recommend engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved. 2. Specifically, moisture levels should be maintained low enough to allow for satisfactory compaction to be achieved without the fill material pumping when proofrolled. 3. Moisture conditioned clay materials should not be allowed to dry out. A loss of moisture within these materials could result in an increase in the material's expansive potential. Subsequent wetting of these materials could result in undesirable movement. 4.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill All trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit construction including backfill placement and compaction. All underground piping within or near the proposed building should be designed with flexible couplings, so minor deviations in alignment do not result in breakage or distress. Utility knockouts in foundation walls should be oversized to accommodate differential movements. It is imperative that utility trenches be properly backfilled with relatively clean materials. If utility trenches are backfilled with relatively clean granular material, they should be capped with at least 18 inches of cohesive fill in non-pavement areas to reduce the infiltration and conveyance of surface water through the trench backfill. Utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. All utility trenches that penetrate beneath the building should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow through the trenches that could migrate below the building. We recommend constructing an effective clay "trench plug" that extends at least 5 feet out from the face of the building exteriors. The plug material should consist of clay compacted at a water content at or above the soil's optimum water content. The clay fill should be placed to completely surround the utility line and be compacted in accordance with recommendations in this report. It is strongly recommended that a representative of Terracon provide full-time observation and compaction testing of trench backfill within building and pavement areas. 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage All grades must be adjusted to provide effective drainage away from the proposed building during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project. Infiltration of water into foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. Landscape irrigation adjacent to Responsive Resourceful • Reliable 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingoFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A foundations should be minimized or eliminated. Water permitted to pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of the structure (either during or post-construction)can result in significantly higher soil movements than those discussed in this report. As a result, any estimations of potential movement described in this report cannot be relied upon if positive drainage is not obtained and maintained, and water is allowed to infiltrate the fill and/or subgrade. Exposed ground (if any) should be sloped at a minimum of 10 percent grade for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed building,where possible. The use of swales, chases and/or area drains may be required to facilitate drainage in unpaved areas around the perimeter of the building. Backfill against foundations and exterior walls should be properly compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. After construction of the proposed building and prior to project completion, we recommend verification of final grading be performed to document positive drainage, as described above, has been achieved. Flatwork and pavements will be subject to post-construction movement. Maximum grades practical should be used for paving and flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond. In addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post-construction movement of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the structure, care should be taken that joints are properly sealed and maintained to prevent the infiltration of surface water. Planters located adjacent to structure should preferably be self-contained. Sprinkler mains and spray heads should be located a minimum of 5 feet away from the building line(s). Low-volume, drip style landscaped irrigation should not be used near the building. Roof drains should discharge on to pavements or be extended away from the structure a minimum of 10 feet through the use of splash blocks or downspout extensions. A preferred alternative is to have the roof drains discharge by solid pipe to storm sewers or to a detention pond or other appropriate outfall. 4.3 Foundations The proposed building can be supported by a shallow, spread footing foundation system. Design recommendations for foundations for the proposed structure and related structural elements are presented in the following paragraphs. 4.3.1 Spread Footings - Design Recommendations Description Values Properly prepared on-site soil or new, properly Bearing material placed engineered fill. Maximum allowable bearing pressure'1,500 psf Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingaFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 a Terracon Project No. 20165012A Description Values Lean clay: Active, Ka = 0.41 Passive, Kp =2.46 At-rest, Ko=0.58 Lateral earth pressure coefficients 2 Granular soil: Active, Ka = 0.27 Passive, Kp = 3.69 At-rest, Ko = 0.43 Lean clay: Sliding coefficient 2 p =0.37 Granular soil: p =0.56 Lean clay: y = 120 pcfMoistsoilunitweight Granular soil: y= 130 pcf Minimum embedment depth below finished grades 30 inches Estimated total movement 4 About 1 inch Estimated differential movement 4 About IA to 3/4 of total movement 1. The recommended maximum allowable bearing pressure assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if encountered, will be over-excavated and replaced with properly compacted engineered fill. The design bearing pressure applies to a dead load plus design live load condition. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. 2. The lateral earth pressure coefficients and sliding coefficients are ultimate values and do not include a factor of safety. The foundation designer should include the appropriate factors of safety. 3. For frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. The minimum embedment depth is for perimeter footings beneath unheated areas and is relative to lowest adjacent finished grade, typically exterior grade. 4. The estimated movements presented above are based on the assumption that the maximum footing size is 4 feet for column footings and 1.5 feet for continuous footings. Footings should be proportioned to reduce differential foundation movement. As discussed, total movement resulting from the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on the order of about 1 inch. Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils; therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction and throughout the life of the structure. Failure to maintain the proper drainage as recommended in the 4.2.7 Grading and Drainage section of this report will nullify the movement estimates provided above. Responsive :: Resourceful a Reliable 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report lierraconWilMarkBuildingaFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 a Terracon Project No. 20165012A 4.3.2 Spread Footings - Construction Considerations Spread footing construction should only be considered if the estimated foundation movement can be tolerated. Subgrade soils beneath footings should be moisture conditioned and compacted as described in the 4.2 Earthwork section of this report. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until foundation construction. Footings and foundation walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. Unstable subgrade conditions are anticipated as excavations approach the groundwater surface. Unstable surfaces will need to be stabilized prior to backfilling excavations and/or constructing the building foundation, floor slab and/or project pavements. The use of angular rock, recycled concrete and/or gravel pushed or "crowded" into the yielding subgrade is considered suitable means of stabilizing the subgrade. The use of geogrid materials in conjunction with gravel could also be considered and could be more cost effective. Unstable subgrade conditions should be observed by Terracon to assess the subgrade and provide suitable alternatives for stabilization. Stabilized areas should be proof-rolled prior to continuing construction to assess the stability of the subgrade. Foundation excavations should be observed by Terracon. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required. 4.4 Seismic Considerations Code Used Site Classification 2012 International Building Code(IBC)1 D 2 1. In general accordance with the 2012 International Building Code, Table 1613.5.2. 2. The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) requires a site soil profile determination extending a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope requested does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination. The borings completed for this project extended to a maximum depth of about 30'%feet and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil and bedrock conditions exist below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths could be performed to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. Alternatively, a geophysical exploration could be utilized in order to attempt to justify a more favorable seismic site class. However, we believe a higher seismic site lass for this site is unlikely. 4.5 Floor Systems A slab-on-grade may be utilized for the interior floor system for the proposed building provided at least 12 inches of properly compacted CDOT Class 1 structure backfill is placed below the floor Responsive Resourceful • Reliable 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildinggFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A slab. If the estimated movement cannot be tolerated, a structurally-supported floor system, supported independent of the subgrade materials, is recommended. Subgrade soils beneath interior and exterior slabs below interior floor slabs and exterior slabs should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until slab construction. 4.5.1 Floor System - Design Recommendations Even when bearing on properly prepared soils, movement of the slab-on-grade floor system is possible should the subgrade soils undergo an increase in moisture content. We estimate movement of about 1 inch is possible. If the owner cannot accept the risk of slab movement, a structural floor should be used. If conventional slab-on-grade is utilized, the subgrade soils should be over-excavated and prepared as presented in the 4.2 Earthwork section of this report. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade subjected to point loadings, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on re- compacted existing soils at the site. A modulus of 200 pci may be used for floors supported on at least 1 foot of non-expansive, imported granular fill. 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 saw-cut in slabs in accordance with ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1 R-37 8.3.12 (tooled control joints are not recommended)to control the location and extent of cracking. Interior utility trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented in the 4.2 Earthwork section of this report. Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade. The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious floor coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1 R are recommended. Responsive • Resourceful u Reliable 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuilding © Fort Collins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A 4.5.2 Floor Systems - Construction Considerations Movements of slabs-on-grade using the recommendations discussed in previous sections of this report will likely be reduced and tend to be more uniform. The estimates discussed above assume that the other recommendations in this report are followed. Additional movement could occur should the subsurface soils become wetted to significant depths, which could result in potential excessive movement causing uneven floor slabs and severe cracking. This could be due to over watering of landscaping, poor drainage, improperly functioning drain systems, and/or broken utility lines. Therefore, it is imperative that the recommendations presented in this report be followed. 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures Reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free-standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at-rest" condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. For active pressure movement S = Surcharge 0 4 (0.002 H to 0.004 H) For at-rest pressure No Movement Assumed Horizontal Finished Grade H Horizontal Finished Grade p2--/I pi- 1 Retaining Wall EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Responsive § Resourceful .: Reliable 13 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingmFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A Earth Pressure Coefficient for Equivalent Fluid Surcharge Earth Conditions Backfill Type Density(pcf) Pressure, Pressure, p(psf) p2 (psf) Active(Ka) Imported Fill -0.27 35 0.27)S 35)H Lean Clay-0.41 49 0.41)S 49)H At-Rest(Ko) Imported Fill -0.43 56 0.43)S 56)H Lean Clay-0.58 70 0.58)S 70)H Imported Fill -3.69 480 Passive(Kp) Lean Clay-2.46 295 Applicable conditions to the above include: O For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height; O For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance; O Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure; In-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 120 pcf; Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and 98 percent of maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698; c Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included; No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall; n No dynamic loading; No safety factor included in soil parameters; and Ignore passive pressure in frost zone. To control hydrostatic pressure behind the wall we recommend that a drain be installed at the foundation wall with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If this is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for lean clay backfill using an equivalent fluid weighing 90 and 100 pcf for active and at-rest conditions, respectively. For granular backfill, an equivalent fluid weighing 85 and 90 pcf should be used for active and at-rest, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided. 4.7 Pavements 4.7.1 Pavements — Subgrade Preparation On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are typically placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or rainfall/snow melt. 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 or instability. We recommend the pavement subgrade be thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem-axle dump truck prior to final Responsive a Resourceful • Reliable 14 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingaFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 o Terracon Project No. 20165012A grading and paving. All pavement areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving. 4.7.2 Pavements — Design Recommendations Design of new privately-maintained pavements for the project has been based on the procedures described by the National Asphalt Pavement Associations (NAPA) and the American Concrete Institute (ACI). We assumed the following design parameters for NAPA flexible pavement thickness design: El Automobile Parking Areas Class I - Parking stalls and parking lots for cars and pick-up trucks, with Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) up to 7,000 over 20 years 0 Main Traffic Corridors Class II — Parking lots with a maximum of 10 trucks per day with Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) up to 27,000 over 20 years (Including trash trucks) Subgrade Soil Characteristics USCS Classification — CL, classified by NAPA as poor We assumed the following design parameters for ACI rigid pavement thickness design based upon the average daily truck traffic (ADTT): Automobile Parking Areas ACI Category A: Automobile parking with an ADTT of 1 over 20 years Main Traffic Corridors ACI Category A: Automobile parking area and service lanes with an ADTT of up to 10 over 20 years Subgrade Soil Characteristics USCS Classification — CL 71 Concrete modulus of rupture value of 600 psi We should be contacted to confirm and/or modify the recommendations contained herein if actual traffic volumes differ from the assumed values shown above. Recommended alternatives for flexible and rigid pavements are summarized for each traffic area as follows: Responsive • Resourceful a Reliable 15 Geotechnical Engineering Report lierraconWilMarkBuildingQFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Q Terracon Project No. 20165012A Recommended Pavement Thicknesses(Inches) E Asphaltic Aggregate Portland Traffic Area m Concrete Cement Total Surface Base Course' Concrete Automobile Parking A 4 6 10 NAPA Class I and ACI Category A) B 5'h 5% Main Traffic Corridors A 4'/2 6 10% NAPA Class II and ACI Category A) B 6 6 Aggregate base course (if used on the site) should consist of a blend of sand and gravel which meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for aggregate base course. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTM D698. Asphaltic concrete should be composed of a mixture of aggregate,filler and additives(if required) and approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix designs stating the Superpave properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in asphalt concrete should meet particular gradations. Material meeting CDOT Grading S specifications or equivalent is recommended for asphalt concrete. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to verify their adequacy. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and compacted within a range of 92 to 96 percent of the theoretical maximum (Rice) density (ASTM D2041). Where rigid pavements are used, the concrete should be produced from an approved mix design with the following minimum properties: Properties Value Compressive strength 4,000 psi Cement type Type I or II portland cement Entrained air content(%) 5 to 8 Concrete aggregate ASTM C33 and CDOT section 703 Concrete should be deposited by truck mixers or agitators and placed a maximum of 90 minutes from the time the water is added to the mix. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation per ACI 325. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry. Responsive ® Resourceful Reliable 16 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingnFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 m Terracon Project No. 20165012A Although not required for structural support, a minimum 4-inch thick aggregate base course layer is recommended for the PCC pavements to help reduce the potential for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade "pumping" through joints. Proper joint spacing will also be required for PCC pavements to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. For areas subject to concentrated and repetitive loading conditions (if any) such as dumpster pads, truck delivery docks and ingress/egress aprons, we recommend using a portland cement concrete pavement with a thickness of at least 6 inches underlain by at least 4 inches of granular base. Prior to placement of the granular base, the areas should be thoroughly proofrolled. For dumpster pads, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the container and tipping axle of the refuse truck. Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and layout of pavements: Site grades should slope a minimum of 2 percent away from the pavements; The subgrade and the pavement surface have a minimum 2 percent slope to promote proper surface drainage; Consider appropriate edge drainage and pavement under drain systems; Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting; Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately; Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils; and Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter. 4.7.3 Pavements — Construction Considerations Openings in pavement, such as landscape islands, are sources for water infiltration into surrounding pavements. Water collects in the islands and migrates into the surrounding subgrade soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near-surface soils. The civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or to collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drains connected to the storm water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeable barriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below the pavement structure. 4.7.4 Pavements — Maintenance Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an ongoing pavement management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 17 Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerraconWilMarkBuildingrsFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth-related construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological(e.g., mold,fungi,and bacteria)assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as described in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 18 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION IIF N 1)• Ali il 1.--, LA POUDRE .I dvrt;/J ELofB J o LI i B ro`c p`N. , m i. Lii,,,----. m t J Q utQYri5nusit-ngg,,ma to 'i piiuu•.. team) ct 1 2/ if 1 / r •,--at el.:I is / O• c O i/ f e 1 // y 1 q yI1...._ _N• 4., I 1 LU\ f tt... `..,/ 6) a, I rt 1/r o l \ / -A j o b 11 6'2.:p N N 1 0 o N N ! a°sue t M III ii s`_ I r r sw w w T.1 1 1 _ I m 1 O z } z U i 4 // 1 I / N . I • 00 0 g`'- :Cil N 1 I I '• rI-- / /";k7 O El LLO 0o f r / i rUW20 ac m I r Sty- t / 1 /' r/ a 0 U < rn 4 o u, 1 ! '" 4„.,,_ I - - y Z 1•' o a i 11::1' NLOON, . Ir. ,, aasaso` c0 Za_ ICci a Z c' m Y c EL o m U Ocico rc x o w 1 d600__...._ _ _. i i‘ Z"'"'''"' ir C N c, N r Y e r U 6 N o a ! rS t\.. WOjo L. 7 s 6 vi i - c H o o O r r Z zN E N F aQ Z' a` y LL o m 2 m m r ILWCID. I ini O q NOo a 11:ll p . 0 i 8 u a 0 Y "60 O 2o c m o C (6L a) o o z Q m J L.L. > O= NCO N o 0 N G z N ° a. a cn L X X p N ccLD CCoa a tZil p O a oz Zoa V, m w W Q Q N V) OH 0zG QHZQQ G o J N LL z A CC A \ — a a z Z - gz Geotechnical Engineering Report IIrraconWilMarkBuildingFortCollins, Colorado March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A Field Exploration Description The locations of borings were placed to generally cover the majority of the site outside the area covered by a large soil stockpile. The borings were located in the field by using a handheld GPS unit. The ground surface elevation was surveyed at each boring location referencing the temporary benchmark shown on Exhibit A-2 using an engineer's level. The borings were drilled with a CME-55 truck-mounted rotary drill rig with solid-stem augers. During the drilling operations, lithologic logs of the borings were recorded by the field engineer. Disturbed samples were obtained at selected intervals utilizing a 2-inch outside diameter split- spoon sampler and a 3-inch outside diameter ring-barrel sampler. Disturbed bulk samples were obtained from auger cuttings. Penetration resistance values were recorded in a manner similar to the standard penetration test (SPT). This test consists of driving the sampler into the ground with a 140-pound hammer free-falling through a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the ring-barrel sampler 12 inches (18 inches for standard split-spoon samplers, final 12 inches are recorded) or the interval indicated, is recorded as a standard penetration resistance value (N-value). The blow count values are indicated on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. Ring-barrel sample blow counts are not considered N-values. A CME automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the samplers in the borings performed on this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published correlations between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency cathead and rope method. This higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance blow count value by increasing the penetration per hammer blow over what would be obtained using the cathead and rope method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface information for this report. The standard penetration test provides a reasonable indication of the in-place density of sandy type materials, but only provides an indication of the relative stiffness of cohesive materials since the blow count in these soils may be affected by the moisture content of the soil. In addition, considerable care should be exercised in interpreting the N-values in gravelly soils, particularly where the size of the gravel particle exceeds the inside diameter of the sampler. Groundwater measurements were obtained in the borings at the time of site exploration and several days after drilling. After subsequent groundwater measurements were obtained, the borings were backfilled with auger cuttings. Some settlement of the backfill may occur and should be repaired as soon as possible. Responsive Resourceful o Reliable Exhibit A-3 BORING LOG NO. 1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver,Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado W I. STRENGTH TEST ATT LIMITS cn o LOCATION See Exhibit o-2 w co Z n F 0 e Z0 Latitude:40.51802° Longitude: -105.01392° ir- ¢ r- o a e w z 1- qq w2 W Uppr F ww a wWCL J¢ Ewa z kz riCD LL-PL-PI U Surface Elev093.79(Ft) o G N LL WZ OJ to g F V d Oo o w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) 0 h v ~ O a j'':a s sVEGETATIVELAYER-6 INCHES a 1 SANDY SILTY CLAY(CL-ML),fine grained,light brown to reddish-brown,stiff to very stiff X 6-8-7 18 N=15 8-13 18 100 5- — x • Y^ ` n 7 e. 1 5-12 UC 1524 5.4 18 116 27-21-6 69 27. 0x / m Ui o 01,4 6 10 21 0 15- N=16 7 reLii' x o A'a 0 19.0 75 — m • SILTY CLAYEY SAND,fine to coarse 4-7-5 22 N :•. grained,light brown to orange-brown, 20- N=12 medium dense o 0 o 5-11-14 m ;- - 25— X N=25 13 o a et z :•. 7-6-7 cc 30— X N=13 22 o 30.5 63.5 Boring Terminated at 30.5 Feet 0rr 0 aStratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic rr a co Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Notes: LL 4-inch solid-stem auger O See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data(if any). o Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and Z Boring badffilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. ro 0 2 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Competed:2/5/2016 0 16'while drilling lierracon m 13.3'On 2/9/2016 Drill Rig:CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. 1)1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C Fort Collins.Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-4 r BORING LOG NO. 2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver, Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado ATTERBERG o LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 w CO Lij0_ STRENGTH TEST _ LIMITS w Y F rn N n Z O Latitude:40.51872° Longitude: -105.01381° Q ~ co 1- p o W = o w • z 6 W F rY> 0y UV aLI-° c z QW }S 2 w w a w W w n 2 LL-PL-PI U O Surface Elev.:94.29(Ft) o <m a LL o co 0 o DEPTH ELEVATION Li O Co ~ 0O N U a V'''. 5 \VEGETATIVE LAYER-6 INCHES as LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CLI,fine grained,light brown to orange brown, medium stiff to stiff 7-9 18 101 5— 5-5 UC 1596 4.4 20 100 35-22-13 84 10— X 2-2-3 N_5 18 mr. 4 r/13.0 81.5 — SILTY SAND,fine to coarse grained, reddish-brown,dense 15-22-23 815— x N=4510 16.0 78.5cc u SANDY LEAN CLAY,fine grained,light brown to orange brown,stiff to very stiff i-3) / 20— X N3 23 0 / c / o 9 11-9WX2325= N=2o0Wo kz ff2F28.0 66.5ui ce SEDIMENTARY BEDROCK- z CLAYSTONE,light brown to gray,medium 5 hard 9-17-26 E 30.5 64 30— X N=43 22 0 o Boring Terminated at 30.5 Feet EtW OW a Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automaticcc 0.Wrn Advancement Method: 4-inch solid stem auger See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Notes: 0 a See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data(if I- any). o Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and 0 Boring baddilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. 00 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSa Boring Started:215R016 Boring Completed:2/5R016 a' = 11. 4' while drilling lierracon Drill Rig 0 Z 12. 'On 2/9/21t76 g CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. i 1931 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C 1— Fort Collins,Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-5 BORING LOG NO. 3 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver, Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado ATTERBERG m0 LOCATION See Exhibit o-2 l w CO a F STRENGTH TEST e U LIMITS Z O Latitude:40.51872° Longitude: -105.01314° Q r-I 0 oe a w t- 1 w Z 0 I- F 2 W U H a a. HW a Ww JQ Iwo z LLPLPI v Surface Elev.:93.49(FL) 0 C w LL J o c, a O 0 m0 Q J F E 0 a DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) co 00 i'••-' 5 \VEGETATIVE LAYER-6 INCHESre qq SANDY LEAN CLAY(CLl,fine grained, brown to light brown,medium stiff to very stiff 214 5 23 102 5= X 3 N=5 22 4-5 -1.0/1000 19 108 26-14-12 51 10— 2 / tl2 / o o / 1:, 5-6-7 21 15— X N=13 w o c'u! / 5 5-7 20— X N=12 20 JlY 0 0 1-re m 4-7-7 O 425.5 68 25— N=14 25 o Boring Terminated at 25.5 Feet cco0 wwcc J zZ_ Fc O 0Orru. 0w HammerT AutomaticStratificationlinesareapproximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Type: ri u) Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Notes: LL 4-inch solid-stem auger C See Appendix B for description of laboratory a procedures and additional data(if any). o Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and Z Boring bacM'illed with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. rn 0O WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Completed:2/5/20160 15'while drillingolierraconDrillRig:CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. m 12.6'On 2/9/2016co1901SharpPointDrive,Suite C Fort Collins,Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-6 BORING LOG NO. 4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver,Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado ATTERBERG O LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 w rn wa o STRENGTH TESTc. LIMITS ZOmmIL c) Latitude:40.51826° Longitude: -105.01283° x - 1< F-I Zp,e w ? e w i- z a LT a W inC UQ mC7 Z Qw r2 Z w w a w_w Q Ewa i LLPL-PI cwiSurfaceElev.:92.58(Ft.) o m Q 2u o w 0 F g c 0 - w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) Cl) ~ O0 a LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL1,fine grained,light brown,stiff to very stiff 6-10 +0.5/150 20 107 34-15-19 80 5-5-4 5— X N=9 24 5-9 18 110 10— 12O 80.5 — o SANDY LEAN CLAY,fine grained,light o gray to pinkish-brown,stiff to very stiff 7Lei N o0 15— X N 15 22 2 ILE ,./ EF co 4-8-11E. 20NXN=19 20 ioO 1# th D a 766coX23o425.5 67 25 N-13 c. Boring Terminated at 25.5 Feet 00wo: azZ 0o aoccLL 0w 1-Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic awErl Advancement Method: 4-inch solid-stem auger See Exhibit A-3 for descriptionNotes:of field procedures. 0 See Appendix B for description of laboratory F procedures and additional data(if any). O Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and COBoring badd'illed with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. 0O WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS z Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Competed:2/5/201620'while drilling iTerraconCO13.3'on 2/9/2016 Drill Rig:CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. 1931 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C 1- Fort Collins,Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-7 BORING LOG NO. 5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver,Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado w J STRENGTH TEST ATTERBERG co c LOCATION See Exhibit o-2 w z o 0 c a LIMITS w v >o v iu-, CO a w I—a z co Latitude:40.5187° Longitude: -105.01249° Qrir r o e a co F e w Z j H • F w Ww d ww Q Ewa Z LL-PLPI v Surface Elev.:92.69(Ft) o ¢m Q J w v 0 0 5 cc 0U w 0 DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) 3 co co O0 N a ii r'-• 1. 9 \VEGETATIVE LAYER-6 INCHES 92 4,4rSANDY LEAN CLAY,fine grained,light brown to brown,medium stiff to stiff x N- 3 37 13 4-5 18 101 5— 7// 10.0 82.5 10— X N 1- 12 SILTY CLAYEY SAND(SC-SMI,fine to coarse grained,reddish-brown,loose 0 • 0 o z 5-9 20 110 20-15-5 42 o 15— --- 16.0 76.5 _ V cc SANDY LEAN CLAY,fine grained,light 7 brown to brown,very stiff 4-7-8 Ø, . 20— X N=15 20 ii o / 0 1-re r;/f25.0 67.5 8 14 20 22 o SEDIMENTARY BEDROCK- 25— x N=34 CLAYSTONE,light brown and gray, 1-: medium hard to very hard rr0awre JQ z 18-28-50/5"20 2 30.5 62 30— X N=78/12" 0 o Boring Terminated at 30.5 Feet ccu_ 0Lu Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic o.wto Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Notes: 4-inch solid-stem auger o J See Appendix B for description of laboratory a procedures and additional data(if any). 0 Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and Z Boring badcfilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. co 0o WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Competed:2/520160 o V 16'while drilling lierracon 9: m 12.2'On 2/9/2016 Drill Rig:CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. w 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C Fort Collins,Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-8 r BORING LOG NO. 6 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver,Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado ATTERBERG o LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 w z aw STRENGTH TEST LIMITS w p I- 2 o 0 Latitude:40.51815° Longitude: -105.01246° I- w co co r o.e w >.. a w~ Z a I- Di- ca co w W w J w w Q it w n z LL-PL-PI wCI_ 0Surface Elev.:91.08(Ft.) 0 ¢m .. w o w F o o DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft) 0 co ~ U a. J,/ SANDY LEAN CLAY(CLL,fine grained, light brown and light gray,stiff to very stifff 4-5-5XN=10 23 5-9 +0.5/500 21 94 33-19-14 51 5— ii, 4-6-9 1910— N=15 ci o ui ' zcv 7-11 23 103 o 15— -- rcw V 18.0 73 — SILTY SAND,fine to coarse grained, m :?'.• ••-:• reddish-brown to light brown,medium dense X8-8-9 23N20— N=17 21.0 70; LEAN CLAY WITH SAND,fine grained, O . light brown to orange-brown,very stiff I- o rr /' 4-7-8 17w25.5 65.5 25—x N=15 co Boring Terminated at 25.5 Feet cc00awCC G z 3 E 0 00ccLL Ow Stratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic awto Advancement Method: p Notes:I 4-inch solid-stem auger See Exhibit A-3 for descri lion of field ocedures. 0 See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data(if any).H n O Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and N Boring baodilled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. 0O WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Completed:2/5201616'while drilling llerracon Drill Ri 0 12.8'on 2/9/2016 g CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. co 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C 1-- Fort Collins,Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-9 BORING LOG NO. 7 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Denver,Colorado SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Precision Drive Fort Collins,Colorado ATIERBERG o LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 w Z d F 0_ STRENGTH TEST o ,s LIMITS JIr. z oLatitude:40.51791° Longitude: -105.01244° Q ~1--I D ag wa , e W z j x w w w a w W Q , =w o. ¢ 3 z cc(2 LL-PL-PI 1,1 Surface Elev.:91.09(Ft) <m Q LT 1 of CO arc— cc 00 5 w DEPTH ELEVATION(Ft.) 0 a UJ 00 VEGETATIVE LAYER-6 INCHES 9115 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL),fine to coarse grained,dark brown to orange brown,very 3.0 stiff 88 _ 11-12 +0.5/150 12 116 35-15-20 54 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND,fine grained, light brown to pinkish-brown,very stiff 6 5— X N=13621 7-12 22 112 10—011.0 80 _ cor.: / SANDY LEAN CLAY,fine to coarse g grained,dark brown to orange brown,stiff to 0 very stiff N /y z , 5-6-8 19015— x N=14 N /Y 3-4-5 N 20— X N=9 24 JWWs / O re xo 3-4-6 25— N=10 24 c, /7i,4,28.0 63 — SEDIMENTARY BEDROCK- CLAYSTONE.light brown to gray,very hard z 19-50/6" 19 0 30.5 60.5 30— N=69/12" m Boring Terminated at 30.5 Feet 0ccu_ 0 liStratification lines are approximate.In-situ,the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic a vwi Advancement Method: See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. Notes: L 4-inch solid-stem auger 0 J See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data(if any). o Abandonment Method: See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and Z Boring bacl fled with soil cuttings upon completion. abbreviations. rn O o WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS Boring Started:2/5/2016 Boring Completed:2/5/2016 0 lierracon16'while drilling Drill Rig:CME-55 Driller:Drilling Engineers,Inc. 14.1'on 2/9/2016 1901 Sharp Pant Drive,Suite C Fort Collins.Colorado Project No.:20165012A Exhibit: A-10 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING REPORT TERMINOLOGY Based on ASTM D653) Expansive Potential The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume)due to absorption of moisture. Finished Grade The final grade created as a part of the project. Footing A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil. Foundation The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock. Frost Depth The depth at which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. A foundation element or wall,typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between Grade Beam other foundation elements such as drilled piers. Groundwater Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils or within fractures in bedrock. Heave Upward movement. Lithologic The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by observation. Native Grade The naturally occurring ground surface. Native Soil Naturally occurring on-site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil. Optimum Moisture The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a given Content compactive effort. Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the Perched Water presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuous stratum. Scarify To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure. Settlement Downward movement. Skin Friction(Side The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of the structure such as a Shear) drilled pier. Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical Soil(Earth) and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic matter. Strain The change in length per unit of length in a given direction. Stress The force per unit area acting within a soil mass. Strip To remove from present location. Subbase A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course. Subgrade The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system. Exhibit C-6 REPORT TERMINOLOGY Based on ASTM D653) Allowable Soil The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the foundation Bearing Capacity element and the supporting material. Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water andAlluvium subsequently deposited by sedimentation. Aggregate Base A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath slabs or Course pavements. Backfill A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Bedrock Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for excavation. Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. Caisson(Drilled A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an enlarged base. Pier or Shaft) Sometimes referred to as a cast-in-place pier or drilled shaft. Coefficient of A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding shear stress at Friction which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Coll/iv/umSoil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a slope or cliff. Compaction The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation Concrete Slab-on- A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and typically used Grade as a floor system. Differential Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of structure.Movement Earth Pressure The pressure exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall. ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000 pound axle loads). Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditionsEngineeredFill under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer. A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the actual soil. This simplifiedEquivalentFluid approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected. Existing Fill(or Materials deposited throughout the action of man prior to exploration of the site.Man-Made Fill) Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration. Exhibit C-5 LABORATORY TEST SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE Test Significance Purpose Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, California Bearing subbase, and base course material, including recycled Pavement Thickness Ratio materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Design Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of Consolidation both differential and total settlement of a structure. Foundation Design Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength Bearing Capacity, Direct Shear of soil or rock. Foundation Design, and Slope Stability Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic, Index Property SoilDryDensityfine-grained soils. Behavior Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained soil Foundation and Slab Expansion and to provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of Gradation particle sizes in soil. Soil Classification Used as an integral part of engineering classification Liquid& Plastic Limit, systems to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, and Soil Classification Plasticity Index to specify the fine-grained fraction of construction materials. Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a Groundwater Flow Permeability liquid or gas. Analysis pH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a soil. Corrosion Potential Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Resistivity Corrosion Potential electrical currents. Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, R-Value subbase, and base course material, including recycled Pavement Thickness Design materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble Soluble Sulfate Corrosion Potential sulfates within a soil mass. To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils that Bearing Capacity Unconfined possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the Analysis for Compression unconfined state. Foundations Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil Index Property Soil Water Content mass. Behavior Exhibit C-4 DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES WEATHERING Fresh Rock fresh, crystals bright,few joints may show slight staining. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline. Very slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, some joints may show thin clay coatings, crystals in broken face show bright. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline. Slight Rock generally fresh, joints stained, and discoloration extends into rock up to 1 in. Joints may contain clay. In granitoid rocks some occasional feldspar crystals are dull and discolored. Crystalline rocks ring under hammer. Moderate Significant portions of rock show discoloration and weathering effects. In granitoid rocks, most feldspars are dull and discolored; some show clayey. Rock has dull sound under hammer and shows significant loss of strength as compared with fresh rock. Moderately severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars dull and discolored and majority show kaolinization. Rock shows severe loss of strength and can be excavated with geologist's pick. Severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock "fabric" clear and evident, but reduced in strength to strong soil. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars kaolinized to some extent. Some fragments of strong rock usually left. Very severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock "fabric" discernible, but mass effectively reduced to "soil"with only fragments of strong rock remaining. Complete Rock reduced to"soil". Rock"fabric" not discernible or discernible only in small, scattered locations. Quartz may be present as dikes or stringers. HARDNESS(for engineering description of rock—not to be confused with Moh's scale for minerals) Very hard Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick. Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard blows of geologist's pick. Hard Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen. Moderately hard Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to in. deep can be excavated by hard blow of point of a geologist's pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow. Medium Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in. deep by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small chips to pieces about 1-in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist's pick. Soft Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point. Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches in size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure. Very soft Can be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with point of pick. Pieces 1-in. or more in thickness can be broken with finger pressure. Can be scratched readily by fingernail. Joint,Bedding,and Foliation Spacing in Rock a Spacing Joints Bedding/Foliation Less than 2 in. Very close Very thin 2 in.—1 ft. Close Thin 1 ft.—3 ft.Moderately close Medium 3 ft.—10 ft. Wide Thick More than 10 ft. Very wide Very thick a. Spacing refers to the distance normal to the planes,of the described feature,which are parallel to each other or nearly so. Rock Quality Designator(RQD)a Joint Openness Descriptors RQD,as a percentage Diagnostic description Openness Descriptor Exceeding 90 Excellent No Visible Separation Tight 90—75 Good Less than 1/32 in.Slightly Open 75—50 Fair 1/32 to 1/8 in.Moderately Open 50—25 Poor _ 1/8 to 3/8 in. Open Less than 25 Very poor 3/8 in.to 0.1 ft. Moderately Wide a. RQD(given as a percentage)=length of core in pieces Greater than 0.1 ft. Wide 4 in.and longer/length of run. References: American Society of Civil Engineers. Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice- No. 56. Subsurface Investigation for Design and Construction of Foundations of Buildings. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1976. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Engineering Geology Field Manual. lierracon Exhibit C-3 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Group Group Name sSymbol Gravels: Clean Gravels: Cu>-4 and 1 5 Cc<3E GW Well-graded gravel F More than 50%of Less than 5%fines° Cu<4 and/or 1 >Cc>3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F coarse fraction retained Gravels with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F'G.H Coarse Grained Soils: on No.4 sieve More than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,c,H More than 50%retained on No.200 sieve Sands: Clean Sands: Cu>_6 and 1 5 Cc 5 3 E SW Well-graded sand' 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%fines° Cu<6 and/or 1 >Cc>3E SP Poorly graded sand' fraction passes No.4 Sands with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G"'' sieve More than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G'"'' PI>7 and plots on or above"A"fine' CL Lean clay ELM Inorganic: K,L,M Silts and Clays: PI<4 or plots below"A"Ii ne ML Silt Liquid limit less than 50 Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clayK'L'M" Fine-Grained Soils: Organic: 0.75 OL KLMo 50%or more passes the Liquid limit not dried Organic No.200 sieve PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clay ELM Inorganic: K L M Silts and Clays: PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic Silt '' Liquid limit 50 or more Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clayK'L,M'P Organic: 0.75 OH K L M oLiquidlimit-not dried Organic silt L Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-inch(75-mm)sieve If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name. E If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles ' If soil contains>_15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. or boulders,or both"to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded K If soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with gravel," gravel with silt,GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay,GP-GM poorly whichever is predominant. graded gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. L If soil contains>30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add"sandy"to Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded group name. sand with silt,SW-SC well-graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded M If soil contains>30%plus No.200,predominantly gravel,add sand with silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay gravelly'to group name. s PI>4 and plots on or above"A"line. E Cu=Dso/Dio Cc= ( Dao) PI<4 or plots below"A"line. D10 x Dso P PI plots on or above"A"line. F If soil contains>_15%sand,add"with sand"to group name. PI plots below"A"line. c If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM. 60 For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction 50 of coarse-grained soils e ' e - Equation of"A"-line o-J,"4- a Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5. X 40 -- then PI=0.73(LL-20) LU p Equation of"U"-line O Z Vertical at LL=16 to P1=7, CJ 30 then PI=0.9(LL-8) J - c.) Oi' 20 c o 1Q —MH or OH a 1 01 7 CL- ML 4 -- ML or OL 0 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) lierracon Exhibit C-2 GENERAL NOTES DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS 0 Water Initially N Standard Penetration Test Encountered Resistance(Blows/Ft.) Modified Water Level After a Standard HP) Hand PenetrometerDames& Specified Period of Time Moore Ring Penetration Sampler Test w Water Level After N ZW a Specified Period of Time N (T) Torvane W aCL Water levels indicated on the soil boring O ( DCP) Dynamic Cone Penetrometer 2 w logs are the levels measured in the J Q borehole at the times indicated. w Groundwater level variations will occur LT (PID) Photo-Ionization Detector over time. In low permeability soils, accurate determination of groundwater OVA) Organic Vapor Analyzer levels is not possible with short term water level observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve;their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles,gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve;they are principally 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 in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device.The accuracy of such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with+/-indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead,the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the area. RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS 50%or more passing the No.200 sieve.) More than 50%retained on No.200 sieve.) Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing,field Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance i) Descriptive Term Standard Penetration or Descriptive Term Unconfined Compressive Strength Standard Penetration or E (Density) N-Value Consistency)Qu,(psf)N-Value CCBlows/Ft. Blows/Ft. w I— Very Loose 0-3 Very Soft less than 500 0-1 I— I Loose 4-9 Soft 500 to 1,000 2-4 Z ce MI Medium Dense 10-29 Medium Stiff 1,000 to 2,000 4-8 I— Dense 30-50 Stiff 2,000 to 4,000 8-15 Very Dense 50 Very Stiff 4,000 to 8,000 15-30 Hard 8,000 30 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s)Percent of Major Component Particle SizeofotherconstituentsDryWeightofSample Trace 15 Boulders Over 12 in.(300 mm) With 15-29 Cobbles 12 in.to 3 in.(300mm to 75mm) Modifier 30 Gravel 3 in.to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand 4 to#200 sieve(4.75mm to 0.075mm Silt or Clay Passing#200 sieve(0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s)Percent of Term Plasticity Index of other constituents Dry Weight Non-plastic 0 Trace 5 Low 1 -10 With 5-12 Medium 11 -30 Modifier 12 High 30 lierracon Exhibit: C-1 APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Colorado® Analytical Analytical Results LABORATORIES. INC. TASK NO: 160216054 Report To:Eric D. Bernhardt Bill To:Accounts Payable Company:Terracon, Inc. -Fort Collins Company:Terracon, Inc. -Lenexa 1901 Sharp Point Drive 13910 W. 96th Terrace Suite C Lenexa KS 66215 Fort Collins CO 80525 Task No.: 160216054 Date Received: 2/16/16 Client PO: Date Reported: 2/23/16 Client Project: Wilmark Building 20165012A Matrix: Soil -Geotech Customer Sample ID 1 @ 2 Lab Number: 160216054-01 Test Result Method Sulfate-Water Soluble 0.018% AASHTO T290-91/ASTM D4327 Customer Sample ID 3 @ 2 Lab Number: 160216054-02 Test Result Method Sulfate-Water Soluble 0.009% AASHTO T290-91/ASTM D4327 Customer Sample ID 7 @ 4 Lab Number: 160216054-03 Test Result Method Sulfate-Water Soluble 0.018% AASHTO T290-91/ASTM D4327 Abbreviations/References: AASHTO-American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. ASTM-American Society for Testing and Materials. ASA-American Society of Agronomy. r r f DIPRA-Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association Handbook of Ductile Iron Pipe. DATA APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY 240 South Main Street / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / 303-659-2313 160216054 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 507 / Brighton, CO 80601-0507 / Fax: 303-659-2315 1 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT: B-13 lerracon 1901 Sharp Point Dr Fort Collins,Colorado 80525 970)484-0359 FAX(970)484-0454 RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL AASHTO T190 CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation DATE OF TEST: 16-Feb-16 PROJECT:Wil Mark Building/Eldon James Building LOCATION: Top 5 feet Bulk TERRACON NO. 20155012A CLASSIFICATION: LEAN CLAY WITH SAND SAMPLE DATA TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 50 75 100 DENSITY (PCF) 103.3 101.3 101.1 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 24.4 27.0 30.3 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI)0.16 0.37 0.19 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 146 138 135 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.49 2.60 2.51 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI)234.9 345.6 402.4 CORRECTED R-VALUE 5.1 9.3 11.6 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 5.1 9.0 11.6 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 1 8 100 90 80 70 60 Q 50 IY 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 EXUDATION PRESSURE - PSI EXHIBIT: B-12 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST ASTM D2166 1,600 a 1,400 v7 W 1,200 co w 1,000 U) w 0. 800 2 0 0 600 400 200 I- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0CfV AXIAL STRAIN-% Z00 w C, SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE SPECIMEN TEST DATA CLc N Moisture Content: 20 0 Dry Density. pcf 100 Diameter: in. 2.39 wZ I Height:in. 5.88zI o 1 Height/Diameter Ratio: 2.46 z Calculated Saturation: 0/0 o I I Calculated Void Ratio: Lua I I I Assumed Specific Gravity: z Failure Strain: 4.4279 a Unconfined Compressive Strength psf) 1596 o Undrained Shear Strength: psf) 798 F Strain Rate: in/min Remarks: Failure Mode:Bulge(dashed) LU LL_ SAMPLE TYPE:D&M RING SAMPLE LOCATION: 2 @ 4-5 feet o DESCRIPTION:LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) LL PL PI Percent<#200 Sieve 35 22 13 84 PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012Aw SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and lerraconoPrecisionDrive CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Fort Collins,Colorado Denver,Colorado O 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C Fort Collins, Coloradog EXHIBIT: B-11 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST ASTM D2166 1,600 n 1,400 1,200 17 1,00001( w rr EL 800 0 U 600 400 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I-0ci AXIAL STRAIN-% Z0U W SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE SPECIMEN TEST DATA a Moisture Content: 18 Dry Density: pcf 111 Diameter: in. 2.41 0 LL I Height:in. 5.98 II 1 Height/Diameter Ratio: 2.48 z I I Calculated Saturation: o i i Calculated Void Ratio: Assumed Specific Gravity: a I I Failure Strain: 5.35 z I I O 1 I Unconfined Compressive Strength psf) 1524 1 o Undrained Shear Strength: psf) 762 LU o Strain Rate: in/min W Remarks: w Failure Mode:Bulge(dashed) LL_ 0 a SAMPLE TYPE:D&M RING SAMPLE LOCATION: 1 @ 9-10 feet o DESCRIPTION:SANDY SILTY CLAY(CL-ML) LL PL PI Percent<#200 Sieve 27 21 6 69 W PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A I- SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and lie rra co n CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation oPrecision Drive Denver,Colorado Fort Collins,Colorado 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C o Fort Collins, Colorado EXHIBIT: B-10m VV VVV vv I WINO vimal IN/!1 I wIV U VV I ASTM D4546 4 3 2 1 I 1 2 F p O Z0 a 3 w CD 4s NO U 5 h- J 0 Z 60 100 1,000 10,000 UH F o PRESSURE,psf w w QZ Specimen Identification Classification 7d,pcf WC,% Lu 7 2-3 ft SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 116 12 NOTES: Sample exhibited 0.4 percent consolidation upon wetting under an applied pressure of 150 psf. p F0Z w Q PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and o Precision Drive lerracon CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Fort Collins,Colorado Denver,Colorado 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C 3 Fort Collins,Colorado EXHIBIT: B-9 ASTM D4546 3 2 1 0S- 0 1 2 0O N00 3 w 0c 4 U 5 F- JI 0 o 6 100 1,000 10,000 UH PRESSURE,psi 0aw J Z_ O Specimen Identification Classification a,pcf WC,% LL 6 4-5 ft SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 94 21 NNOTES: Sample exhibited 0.5 percent consolidation upon wetting under and applied pressure of 500 psf. LL_ O J 10zZ W N PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and1 Eldon James Corporation cc Precision Drive I(!rr con CLIENT: Denver,Colorado Fort Collins,Colorado 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C Fort Collins,Colorado EXHIBIT: B-8 5 JVVCLL l.VIYJVLIUM I IVIV I CO I ASTM D4546 4 3 2 1 11\ ie z 1 co P 2 00 N00 3 U)W C7 s 4 U) co0y Z 5 JI 0 6 100 1,000 10,0000 o PRESSURE,psf aw Z U)0 2 cc Specimen Identification Classification Yd,pcf WC,% W 4 2-3 ft LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 107 20 N NOTES: Sample exhibited 0.5 percent swell upon wetting under an applied pressure of 150 psf.LL_ 0z7_ Q PROJECT: Wil Mark Building W PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and 1 re rra c o nor` Precision Drive CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation Fort Collins,Colorado Denver,Colorado 0 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C g Fort Collins, Colorado EXHIBIT: B-7 ASTM D4546 4 3 2 1 z c 1 J xQ Q 0OO 00 a 3 0c 4 ONO coU 5 J I 0 Z 6 0O 100 1,000 10,000 0N PRESSURE,psf 0G. ceJ Z_ U' 0 Specimen Identification Classification Yd,Pcf WC,% LL 3 9- 10 ft SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 108 19 NOTES: Sample exhibited 1.0 percent consolidation upon wetting under an applied pressure of 1,000 psf. LL_ 0 JQF- OzZ W N PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A F- SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation o Precision Drive lerracon Denver,Colorado Fort Collins,Colorado 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C 0 Fort Collins, Colorado EXHIBIT: B-6 5 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 100 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 10 95 90 10 85 80 20 75 - 70 30 65 60 40 m E mxiI 0 55 moLT, z 50 50 0co0 ccD z45 tiz mU) w40 60c° 76 0 a W 35 ref a 4 0 w 30 70-4 U)m o— 25 LUwap 20 80 w r 15 rco0co 10 90 m a 5 N 0 li; 100 10 1 0.1 0.01o.oar GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS co COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fineN 7) z BORING ID DEPTH %COBBLES %GRAVEL %SAND %SILT %FINES %CLAY USCS 6 •7 2-3 0.6 44.8 53.9 CL ILU0awcc J z SIEVE PERCENT FINER SOIL DESCRIPTION ET o size) •SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 00 o GRAIN SIZE 1 112" LL ">\ • 3/4" 0 a D60 0.104 3/8" 99.3 a D30 0 994.79 REMARKS 0 D,o 20 89.7 o >< COEFFICIENTS 40 82.51 60 75.08 Cc 100 66.95 r 200 53.9 o Cuz cca PROJECT: Wil Mark Building I- PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A iSITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and o Precision Drive lerracon CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation 1- Fort Collins,Colorado Denver,Colorado 0 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C Fort Collins, Colorado EXHIBIT: B-5 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 1001 20040 100 I I I I I I I I I 0 95 90 10 85 - 80 - 4 20 75 70 30 4 65 60 40 v F mX 0 55 m 50 500 m 0 z 45 ET g m z40 60{ W a w 35 nl Cl)- I o 30 70 H ui 7CO 0- 25 ix 20 80 w a 15 o 10 90 o a 5 0. s 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 o.oar COCO GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS N w COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY D coarse fine coarse medium fine wNL Z BORING ID DEPTH %COBBLES %GRAVEL %SAND %SILT %FINES %CLAY USCS 6 •4 2-3 19.3 80.1 CL I 5 14-15 57.5 42.1 SC-SM ce as A 6 4-5 48.8 50.9 CL w a SIEVE PERCENT FINER SOIL DESCRIPTION o size) • I A LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) FK- o o GRAIN SIZE 1 1/2" II SILTY,CLAYEY SAND(SC-SM) I A 3/4" A SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) o D 0.122 0.115 1/ 2" a 4 99.66 a D 10 99.37 99.56 97.3 REMARKS Di, 20 97.98 95.78 91.23 • LL COEFFICIENTS 40 95.09 88.62 83.23 o >< 60 92.16 78.9 75.13 I 100 88.79 67.4 65.78 Cc 200 80.09 42.08 50.89 a Cuz w a PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A 1- SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and 1 I' 2 rra co n CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation oPrecision Drive Denver,Colorado Fort Collins,Coloradoce1901SharpPointDrive,Suite C o Fort Collins,Colorado EXHIBIT: B-4 3 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 4 2 1 1/2 3 6 16 30 50 100 200631.5 3/4 3/8 4 8,..10 14 40 60 140 100 I I I I I I I I I I I 95 90 10 N 85 80 20 75 70 30 65 60 40-10rrn I c9 55 rnLT zH 50 — 50co0 zcccn45 73 lL rn m w 60w a w 35 m a a I w 30 • 70 H U)w 25 0rw m 20 w 80 a 15 co m0 0 10 90 M Elf 5 0 cav 0 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 o o.oar a, GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS cn000BBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY Lii coarse fine coarse medium fine N y z BORING ID DEPTH %COBBLES %GRAVEL %SAND %SILT %FINES %CLAY USCS 3 •1 9-10 0.0 0.0 30.9 69.1 CL-ML Im 2 4-5 83.6 CL w 3 9-10 48.3 50.6 CL UI J z SIEVE PERCENT FINER SOIL DESCRIPTION o ET size) • m A SANDY SILTY CLAY(CL-ML) 0 o X • GRAIN SIZE 1 1/2" m LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) w I A 3/4" w Ds0 0.1 1/2" SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) a 3/8" CC a D 4 98.87 REMARKS10100.0 97.32wDi02099.82 93.94 • o >./ COEFFICIENTS 40 99.24 89.01 60 83.12 I C 100 94.65 73.41 F 200 69.15 83.6 50.58 oz Cu wEt PROJECT: Wil Mark Building 1- PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012AU) I- SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and Terra c0 noPrecisionDrive CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation 1- Fort Collins,Colorado Denver,Colorado O 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C m Fort Collins,Colorado EXHIBIT: B-3 ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS ASTM D4318 60 50 P L A CP s 40 T OCP T 30 Y O\° N 20 O o" D E G' MH or OH x 0m 10 Ck-ML,' ML or OL 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Boring ID Depth LL PL PI Fines USCS Description N • 1 9- 10 27 21 6 69 CL-ML SANDY SILTY CLAY N m 2 4-5 35 22 13 84 CL LEAN CLAY with SAND N A 3 9- 10 26 14 12 51 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY 4 2-3 34 15 19 80 CL LEAN CLAY with SAND CL 0 5 14-15 20 15 5 42 SC-SM SILTY,CLAYEY SAND 0 6 4-5.5 33 19 14 51 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY O 7 2-3 35 15 20 54 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY CC CO CC ttW Q 0OCL it 0 20 LL a LL 00 a• PROJECT: Wil Mark Building PROJECT NUMBER: 20165012A H SITE: Northeast of Technology Parkway and lierracon CLIENT: Eldon James Corporation oPrecision Drive Denver,Colorado Fort Collins,Colorado 1901 Sharp Point Drive,Suite C m Fort Collins,Colorado EXHIBIT: B-2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Wil Mark Building Fort Collins, Colorado lierracon March 3, 2016 Terracon Project No. 20165012A Laboratory Testing Description The soil and bedrock samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer. At that time, the field descriptions were reviewed and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil and bedrock samples. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs and in this appendix. The test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. The laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with applicable locally accepted standards. Soil samples were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Rock samples were visually classified in general accordance with the description of rock properties presented in Appendix C. Procedural standards noted in this report are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment. Water content Plasticity index Grain-size distribution Dry density Consolidation/swell R-value Compressive strength Water-soluble sulfate content Responsive Resourceful Reliable Exhibit B-1