The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHARMONY VILLAGE PUD LOT 9 - Filed GR-GEOTECHNICAL REPORT/SOILS REPORT -GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED HARMONY VILLAGE PUD HARMONY AND TIMBERLINE ROADS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO TERRACON PROJECT NO. 20985216 December 29, 1998 Prepared for DIAL COMPANIES 11506 NICHOLAS STREET, SUITE 200 OMAHA, NEBRASKA 68154 ATTN: MR. TY FANGMAN Prepared by: Terracon 301 North Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 TIE C®f i December 29, 1998 Dial Companies 11506 Nicholas Street, Suite 200 Omaha, Nebraska 68154 Attn: Mr. Ty Fangman Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Harmony Village PUD Harmony and Timberline Roads Fort Collins, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20985216 Terracon has completed a geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed shopping center to be located at the southwest corner of Harmony and Timberline Roads, Fort Collins, Colorado. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposal number D2098268 dated November 13, 1998. The results of our engineering study, including the boring location diagram, laboratory test results, test boring records, and the geotechnical recommendations needed to aid in the design and construction of foundations and other earth connected phases of this project are attached. The subsurface soils at the site consisted of lean clay with sand and sandy lean clay underlain by silty and/or clayey sand with gravel. Field and laboratory test results indicate the clay soils exhibit low to moderate swell potential and moderate bearing characteristics. Based on the type of construction proposed, it is recommended the proposed structures be supported by conventional-type spread footing and/or grade beam foundation systems. Slab-on-grade construction may be utilized provided care is taken in the placement and compaction of the subgrade soil and if the recommendations set forth in the report are followed. Other design and construction recommendations, based upon geotechnical conditions, are presented in the report. Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 We appreciate being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. If you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, TERRACON nut. a". of PROF Fss 114 Prepared b /Q:'," ; 477..s,, 2575 . 6,1,1-' Reviewed by:'-..% 1P0 Ack) ,\\\ Q*„ 1iOr ; Cir//^;1 1 5s AIPG 5;0, V):N\ 1' Alf. f. e-iV it R. Sherrod c,.- y' ..... 'oo c.' i lam J. Attwooll, P.E , 18S g Senior Engineering Geoloo!9.^0 z q SI•0- 4411(80FES MO",, e Office Manager a<:% 4, Copies to: Addressee (2) i'`i!itito','' JR Engineering - Mr. Dave Klockeman (2) ii Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Letter of Transmittal INTRODUCTION 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE EXPLORATION 2 Field Exploration 2 Laboratory Testing 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 Geology......... ......... .......................................................... ....... .......... 4 Soil and Bedrock Conditions 4 Field and Laboratory Test Results 5 Groundwater Conditions 5 ENGINEERING ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 Geotechnical Considerations................................................................................._ 6 FoundationSystems................................................................................................_ 6 Lateral Earth Pressures 8 Retaining Wall Drainage 8 Seismic Considerations 9 Floor Slab Design and Construction....................................................._.................... 9 Pavement Design and Construction........................ ....... ........ ........ ......... ..........10 Earthwork 13 General Considerations 13 Site Preparation 14 Subgrade Preparation 15 Fill Materials and Placement 15 Shrinkage 16 Excavation and Trench Construction 17 Additional Design and Construction Considerations 17 Exterior Slab Design and Construction 17 Underground Utility Systems 18 CorrosionProtection............................................................................. 18 Surface Drainage 18 lii ti Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 GENERAL COMMENTS 19 Figure No. SITE PLAN 1 APPENDIX A Logs of Borings APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX C General Notes Pavement Notes iv GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED HARMONY VILLAGE PUD HARMONY AND TIMBERLINE ROADS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO TERRACON PROJECT NO. 20985216 DECEMBER 29, 1998 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed shopping center to be located on Timberline and Horsetooth Roads, Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is located in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 6, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: subsurface soil conditions groundwater conditions foundation design and construction lateral earth pressures floor slab design and construction pavement design and construction earthwork drainage The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil conditions, structures and our understanding of the proposed project. A Report of a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was prepared that included the site area by Terracon in May of 1993. Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Based on information provided by JR Engineering Ltd., the proposed structures are to be one- and two-story buildings with slab-on-grade construction. A theater and neighborhood services building are located along the west portion of the site. Restaurants, banks and office pads are located along the east and north portions of the site. Grading plans prepared by JR Engineering Ltd., indicate minor cuts of 1 to 2 feet and fills of between 1 and 4 feet over the majority of the site. Parking areas are planned adjacent to the buildings with a major parking area located in the central portion of the site. SITE EXPLORATION The scope of the services performed for this project included a site reconnaissance by a geotechnical engineer, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Field Exploration A total of 24 test borings were drilled on December 9 and 11, 1998. The borings were drilled to approximate depths of 10 to 15 feet at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The borings were advanced with a truck-mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-inch diameter solid stem augers. The borings were located in the field by pacing from existing street intersections and site features. Ground surface elevations at each boring location were interpolated from a topographic map prepared by JR Engineering Ltd. dated November 6, 1998. The accuracy of boring locations and elevations should only be assumed to the level implied by the methods used. Continuous lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by the engineering geologist during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by means of pushing thin-walled Shelby tubes, or by driving split-spoon samplers. Bulk samples of subsurface materials were obtained from borings in pavement areas. Penetration resistance measurements were obtained by driving the split-spoon into the subsurface materials with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The penetration 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 resistance value is a useful index in estimating the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. Groundwater conditions were evaluated in each boring at the time of site exploration, and 1 to 5 days after drilling. Laboratory Testing All samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer and were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Boring logs were prepared and are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and are presented in Appendix B. The test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. All laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. Selected soil samples were tested for the following engineering properties: Water Content Grain size Dry Density Permeability Consolidation R-Value Compressive Strength Plasticity Index Expansion Resistivity Shear Strength Water Soluble Sulfate Content SITE CONDITIONS The site consists of an irrigated farm field vegetated with cut grain. The area is relatively flat and has minor drainage to the south and east. The property is bordered to the west by an existing warehouse, to the south by an existing residence, to the north by Harmony Road, 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 and to the east by Timberline Road. Evidence of a previous farmstead is located at the northeast corner of the property. Future City streets consisting of Wilmington Drive, Rockport Court, and Delaney Drive are to be constructed in the south and east portions of the site. A geotechnical engineering report for these streets will be done at a later date after the street subgrade has been completed in accordance with City of Fort Collins requirements. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Geology The proposed area is located within the Colorado Piedmont section of the Great Plains physiographic province. The Colorado Piedmont, formed during Late Tertiary and Early quaternary time (approximately 2,000,000 years ago), is a broad, erosional trench which separates the Southern Rocky Mountains from the High Plains. Structurally, the site lies along the western flank of the Denver Basin. During the Late Mesozoic and Early Cenozoic Periods (approximately 70,000,000 years ago), intense tectonic activity occurred, causing the uplifting of the Front Range and associated downwarping of the Denver Basin to the east. Relatively flat uplands and broad valleys characterize the present-day topography of the Colorado Piedmont in this region. The site is underlain by the Cretaceous Pierre Formation, and it is anticipated the Pierre shale underlies the site at approximate depths of 20 to 25 feet below the surface. The bedrock is overlain by alluvials sands and clays of Pleistocene and/or Recent Age. Mapping completed by the Colorado Geological Survey ('Hart, 1972), indicates the site in an area of "Moderate Swell Potential". Potentially expansive materials mapped in this area include bedrock, weathered bedrock and colluvium (surficial units). Soil and Bedrock Conditions The majority of the site is overlain by a 6-inch layer of silty topsoil which has been. penetrated by root growth and organic matter. A 6-inch layer of fill material was encountered at the surface of Boring 12. The fill consists of sandy lean clay which is moist and stiff. The topsoil and fill are underlain by lean clay with sand and sandy lean clay which 1Hart, Stephen S., 1972, Potentially Swelling Soil and Rock in the Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey, Environmental Geology No.7. 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 extends to the depths explored and/or to the silty sand with gravel stratum below. A lower clay stratum was encountered below the sand in Boring 18 at a depth of 14% feet. The clays are generally moist to wet and soft to hard in consistency. Silty sand with gravel that varies to a silty clayey sand was encountered in the majority of the borings at depths of 7 to 14 feet and extends beyond the depths explored. The silty sand is moist to wet and very loose to medium dense. Field and Laboratory Test Results Field and laboratory test results indicate that the clay soils exhibit low to moderate swell potential and moderate bearing characteristics. The granular soils are nonexpansive and exhibit moderate bearing characteristics. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was encountered in the majority of the borings at approximate depths of 10 to 13% feet at the time of field exploration. Borings 3, 12, 13, 14 and 19 through 24 were dry at the time of drilling. When checked 3 to 5 days after drilling, groundwater was measured at approximate depths of 9 to 14 feet in all test borings. These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may not be indicative of other times, or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions. Based upon review of U.S. Geological Survey maps (2Hillier, et al, 1983), regional groundwater is expected to be encountered in unconsolidated alluvial deposits on the site, at depths ranging from 10 to 20 feet below the existing ground surface at the project site. The possibility of groundwater fluctuations should be considered when developing design and construction plans for the project. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater monitoring wells, and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. 2 Hillier, Donald E.; Schneider, Paul A.,Jr.; and Hutchinson, E. Carter, 1983, Depth to Water Table(1979)in the Boulder- Fort Collins-Greeley Area,Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States Geological Survey,Map I-855-1. 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 ENGINEERING ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical Considerations The site appears suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical engineering point of view. Potentially expansive soils will require particular attention in the design and construction. The following foundation systems were evaluated for use on the site: o spread footings and/or grade beams bearing on undisturbed soils; and, spread footings and/or grade beams bearing on engineered fill. Conventional slab-on-grade construction is considered acceptable at the site provided the recommendations set forth in this report are followed. Foundation Systems Due to the presence of low- to moderate-swelling soils on the site, spread footing foundations bearing upon undisturbed subsoils and/or engineered fill are recommended for support for the proposed structures. The footings may be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. In addition, the footings should be sized to maintain a minimum dead-load pressure of 500 psf. The design bearing pressure applies to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. Existing fill on the site should not be used for support of foundations without removal and recompaction. Exterior footings should be placed a minimum of 30 inches below finished grade for frost protection and to provide confinement for the bearing soils. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings. Footings should be proportioned to reduce differential foundation movement. Proportioning on the basis of equal total settlement is recommended; however, proportioning to relative constant dead-load pressure will also reduce differential settlement between adjacent footings. Total settlement resulting from the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on 6 h Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 the order of 3/4 inch or less. Differential settlement should be on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 of the estimated total settlement. 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. Reinforced concrete foundations, cast-in excavations against undisturbed subsoils or properly backfilled are recommended for resistance to uplift. The equation for determining the ultimate uplift capacity as a function of footing foundation dimension, foundation depth, and soil weight is presented below: T"=.9xy xD2x(B +L) + W Where: T"= Ultimate uplift capacity (Ibs) y = Unit weight of soil (lbs/ft3)* D= Depth to base of footing foundation below final grade (ft) B= Width of footing foundation (ft) L = Length of footing foundation (ft) W= Weight of footing +weight of soil directly over the top of the footing/block(lbs) A unit weight (y) of 120 pcf is recommended for soil (either undisturbed or compacted backfill) at this site. The design uplift resistance should be calculated by dividing the ultimate resistance obtained from the equation above by an appropriate factor of safety. A factor of safety of at least 2 is recommended for live uplift loads in the analysis. Foundations and masonry walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report supplemental recommendations will be required. 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Lateral Earth Pressures For soils above any free water surface, recommended equivalent fluid pressures for unrestrained foundation elements are: Active: Cohesive soil backfill (on-site clay) 45 psf/ft Passive: Cohesive soil backfill (on-site clay) .,.. ...... ......... ............300 psf/ft Adhesion at base of footing 500 psf Where the design includes restrained elements, the following equivalent fluid pressures are recommended: At rest: Cohesive soil backfill (on-site clay) 60 psf/ft The lateral earth pressures herein do not include any factor of safety and are not applicable for submerged soils/hydrostatic loading. Additional recommendations may be necessary if submerged conditions are to be included in the design. Fill against grade beams and retaining walls should be compacted to densities specified in Earthwork. High plasticity clay soils should not be used as backfill against retaining walls. Compaction of each lift adjacent to walls should be accomplished with hand-operated tampers or other lightweight compactors. Overcompaction may cause excessive lateral earth pressures which could result in wall movement. Retaining Wall Drainage To reduce hydrostatic loading on retaining walls, a subsurface drain system should be placed behind the wall. The drain system should consist of free-draining granular soils containing less than five percent fines (by weight) passing a No. 200 sieve placed adjacent to the wall. The free-draining granular material should be graded to prevent the intrusion of fines or encapsulated in a suitable filter fabric. A drainage system consisting of either weep holes or perforated drain lines (placed near the base of the wall) should be used to intercept 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 and discharge water which would tend to saturate the backfill. Where used, drain lines should be embedded in a uniformly graded filter material and provided with adequate clean- outs for periodic maintenance. An impervious soil should be used in the upper layer of backfill to reduce the potential for water 'infiltration. As an alternative, a prefabricated drainage structure, such as geocomposite, may be used as a substitute for the granular backfill adjacent to the wall. Seismic Considerations The project site is located in Seismic Risk Zone I of the Seismic Zone Map of the United States as indicated by the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Based upon the nature of the subsurface materials, a soil profile type Sc should be used for the design of structures for the proposed project (1997 Uniform Building Code, Table No. 16-J). Floor Slab Design and Construction Some differential movement of a slab-on-grade floor system is possible should the subgrade soils become elevated in moisture content. To reduce potential slab movements, the subgrade soils should be prepared as outlined in the earthwork section of this report. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on existing or engineered fill consisting of on-site soils. A modulus of 200 pci may be used for floors supported on non- expansive imported fill meeting the specifications outlined below. Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows: Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement. Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking. Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance with recommended specifications outlined below. 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 In areas subjected to normal loading, a minimum 4-inch layer of clean-graded gravel or aggregate base course should be placed beneath interior slabs. For heavy loading, 6 inches of aggregate base course should be used. If moisture sensitive floor coverings are used on interior slabs, consideration should be given to the use of barriers to minimize potential vapor rise through the slab. Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade. Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1 R are recommended. Pavement Design and Construction The required total thickness for the pavement structure is dependent primarily upon the foundation soil or subgrade and upon traffic conditions. Based on the soil conditions encountered at the site, the anticipated type and volume of traffic and using a group index of 13 as the criterion for pavement design, the following minimum pavement thicknesses are recommended: Recommended Pavement Thicknesses(Inches) Traffic Area ;: Alternative.;: Asphalt Aggregate Plant Mixed Portland Concrete Base Bituminous Cement Surface Course Base Concrete Total Automobile A 3 5 8 Parking B 2 3 5 C 5 5 Main Traffic A 3 10 13 Corridors B 2 4% 6% C 6 6 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Each alternative should be investigated with respect to current material availability and economic conditions. Rigid concrete pavement, a minimum of 6 inches in thickness, is recommended at the location of dumpsters where trash trucks park and load. 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 base course. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding six inches and should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Standard Proctor Density (ASTM D698). Asphalt concrete and/or plant-mixed bituminous base course should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler and additives, if required, and approved bituminous material. The bituminous base and/or asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix designs stating the Hveem properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in plant-mixed bituminous base course and/or asphalt concrete should meet particular gradations. Material meeting Colorado Department. of Transportation Grading C or CX specification is recommended for asphalt concrete. Aggregate meeting Colorado Department of Transportation Grading G or C specifications is recommended for plant-mixed bituminous base course. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to verify their adequacy. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Hveem density (ASTM D1560) ASTM D1561). Where rigid pavements are used, the concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design with the following minimum properties: Modulus of Rupture @ 28 days 600 psi minimum Strength Requirements ASTM C94 Minimum Cement Content ....................... 6.5 sacks/cu. yd. Cement Type Type I Portland Entrained Air Content 4 to 8% Concrete Aggregate ASTM C33 and CDOT Section 703 Aggregate Size 1 inch maximum Maximum Water Content......... ........ 0.49 lb/lb of cement 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Maximum Allowable Slump 4 inches 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. Other specifications outlined by the Colorado Department of Transportation should be followed. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry and should be placed (in feet) at roughly twice the slab thickness (in inches) on center in either direction. Sawed joints should be cut within 24- hours of concrete placement, and should be a minimum of 25% of slab thickness plus 1/4 inch. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Future performance of pavements constructed on the clay soils at this site will be dependent upon several factors, including: maintaining stable moisture content of the subgrade soils; and, providing for a planned. program of preventative maintenance. Since the clay soils on the site have shrink/swell characteristics, pavements could crack in the future primarily because of expansion of the soils when subjected to an increase in moisture content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily constitute structural failure of the pavement. The performance of all pavements can be enhanced by minimizing excess moisture which can reach the subgrade soils. The following recommendations should be considered at minimum: Site grading at a minimum 2% grade away from the pavements; Compaction of any utility trenches for landscaped areas to the same criteria as the pavement subgrade; Sealing all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils; 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Placing compacted backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and, Placing curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on subgrade soils without the use of base course materials. Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventative maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Recommended preventative maintenance policies for asphalt and jointed concrete pavements, based upon type and severity of distress, are provided. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventative maintenance. Earthwork General Considerations 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. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project. 13 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Site Preparation Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris, and other deleterious materials from proposed building and pavement areas. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions which could prevent uniform compaction. Stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from the site, or used to revegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. The site should be initially graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed building structures. All exposed areas which will receive fill, once properly cleared and benched where necessary, should be scarified to a minimum depth of eight inches, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted. Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, cesspools, 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. It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. Pumping from sumps may be utilized to control water within excavations. Based upon the subsurface conditions determined from the geotechnical exploration, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively stable. However, 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. Overexcavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Use of lime, fly ash, kiln dust, cement or 14 a Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 geotextiles 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 be required to reduce subgrade pumping. The individual contractor(s) is 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. Subgrade Preparation Subgrade soils beneath interior and exterior slabs, and beneath pavements should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum depth of 8 inches. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until slab or pavement construction. Fill Materials and Placement Clean on-site soils or approved imported materials may be used as fill material. On-site soils are not recommended for use as compacted fill beneath interior or exterior floor slabs. Imported soils (if required) should conform to the following: Percent fines by weight Gradation ASTM C136) 6.,100 3., 70-100 No. 4 Sieve 50-100 No. 200 Sieve 70 (max) Liquid Limit 35 (max) Plasticity Index 15 (max) 15 r Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Group Index 13 (max) 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. Recommended compaction criteria for engineered fill materials are as follows: Minimum Percent Material ASTM D698) Scarified subgrade soils.... .................. ...............95 On-site and imported fill soils: Beneath foundations 95 Beneath slabs 95. Beneath pavements 95 Aggregate base(beneath slabs) 95 Miscellaneous backfill (non-structural areas) .................... 90 On-site or imported clay soils should be compacted within a moisture content range of 2 percent below, to 2 percent above optimum. Imported granular soils should be compacted within a moisture range of 3 percent below to 3 percent above optimum unless modified by the project geotechnical engineer. Shrinkage For balancing grading plans, estimated shrink or swell of soils and bedrock when used as compacted fill following recommendations in this report are as follows: Estimated Shrink(-) Swell (+) Material Based on ASTM D698 On-site soils: Clays 15 to -20% 16 t Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Excavation and Trench Construction Excavations into the on-site soils will encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the clays can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. However, caving soils may also be encountered. 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. The soils to be penetrated by the proposed excavations may vary significantly across the site. The preliminary soil 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. As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept to a minimum lateral distance from the crest of the slope equal to no less than the slope height. The exposed slope face should be protected against the elements. Additional Design and Construction Considerations Exterior Slab Design and Construction Exterior slabs-on-grade, exterior architectural features, and utilities founded on, or in backfill may experience some movement due to the volume change of the backfill. Potential movement could be reduced by: minimizing moisture increases in the backfill o controlling moisture-density during placement of backfill using designs which allow vertical movement between the exterior features and adjoining structural elements placing effective control joints on relatively close centers 17 I Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 Underground Utility Systems All piping should be adequately bedded for proper load distribution. It is suggested that clean, graded gravel compacted to 75 percent of Relative Density ASTM D4253 be used as bedding. Where utilities are excavated below groundwater, temporary dewatering will be required during excavation, pipe placement and backfilling operations for proper construction. Utility trenches should be excavated on safe and stable slopes in accordance with OSHA regulations as discussed above. Backfill should consist of the on-site soils or imported material approved by the geotechnical engineer. The pipe backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density ASTM D698. Corrosion Protection Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I Portland cement is suitable for all concrete on and below grade. However, if there is no, or minimal cost differential, use of ASTM Type II Portland cement is recommended for additional sulfate resistance of construction concrete. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. Surface Drainage Positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project. Infiltration of water into utility or foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. Planters and other surface features which could retain water in areas adjacent to the building or pavements should be sealed or eliminated. In areas where sidewalks or paving do not immediately adjoin the structure, we recommend that protective slopes be provided with a minimum grade of approximately 5 percent for at least 10 feet from perimeter walls. Backfill against footings, exterior walls, and in utility and sprinkler line trenches should be well compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. Downspouts, roof drains or scuppers should discharge into splash blocks or extensions when the ground surface beneath such features is not protected by exterior slabs or paving. Sprinkler systems should not be installed within 5 feet of 18 Geotechnical Engineering Report Dial Companies Terracon Project No. 20985216 foundation walls. Landscaped irrigation adjacent to the foundation system should be minimized or eliminated. 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 testing and observation during excavation, grading, foundation and 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 which may occur between borings or across the site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental assessment of the site or identification of contaminated or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, 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. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report, are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes, and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. 19 r p 1 HARMONY ROAD 1 NO.1 RESTAURANTLIRESTAURANT_. NO.12 Q poUR 0 0 N0.11 1 kIC LJ Q. NO.2 O O.' N0.13 N0:20 1 , 0 J NEIGNBORH00' NO.19 O O SERVICESFN NO.14 0 NO , 0 A 0 O NEIGHBORHOOD O BANK SERVICESeismiii o NO.15 WN0.4 NO.5 r—, ,, NO.16 N 0 I I '. Wgll'::N0.21 W Y', I r• O 0 I I J011 THEATER N0.17 I LC"—JI0 O NO22 0I rNO.8 0NO.24 N0.9 r0 N0.10 1 FIGURE I: SITE MAP HARMONY VILLAGE P.U.D. J SW CORNER OF HARMONY ROAD AND TIMBERLINE ROADQ•••• FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Project Mngr: NRS NRS 9 ® Project No. 20985216 1 /Designed By: Scale: 1"=200' Checked By: NRS 301 N. Howes STREET Date: 12=23-98 Approved By: NRS FORT COLLINS.COLORADO 80521 Drawn By: MLS DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY.Figure No. AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. File Name: 216SLD 9 P io LOG OF TEST BORING No. 1 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT - Fort Collins,Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS cm J x >- i~i E3 1- w w" cHo LU= w w H DESCRIPTION N w Z D w U-0 U)0 w 1 to I-- o Z Z cn a_ to m W O 3 tn. ow W to O_ C.) E Q. t3 H O H >Lt. U CL LL W W.LL U] to 0 >- LU fl.J O CY V FZ -Yo CC CC to 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 4961.0 ft. o = z -- CC arm oa Dtno; LL0_o_ 0.5 TOPSOIL 4960.5 CL I SS 12" 19 22 ' LEAN CLAY WITH SAND .. Brown; moist, very stiff 2.0 •. -- . 4959.0 jSANDY LEAN CLAY CL 2 ST 12" 22 104 4580 140 Tan to red, moist to wet v, ,' Medium to very stiff 3 SS 12" 9 20 5ice, j 4 SS 1;,, 22 10 2 14.0 4947.0 SILTY SAND SM 5 SS 12" 5 26 15.0 Tan, wet, loose 4946.0 15 BOTTOM OF BORING I I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: 1N-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OI3SLRVA'I IONS BORING S'IAI'.'I'I D 12-9-98 VL 13;0' W.D. T. 13,8'A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-9-98 WLrr acon RIG 0IE_55 FOREMAN RS V1• Water checked 5 days A.B. APPROVED NRS JOB/1 20985216 d It LOG OF TEST BORING No. 2 Page 1 of l CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd sf1'E Harmony & Timberline Roads RO ECr Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD_ _ SAMPLES TESTS co t X >- 0 0 o J F- [ LL H W _1 H DESCRIPTION IX W z = w LLCD U)n x I W 1 U) E— o z z U) a. I— U) m W 0 3 U) O W W U) Q Cl- U E Q. U I-O H >-Li.. U O:LL W W LL CC W W O >- W a.J O CCU ZI-W CCCW 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 4958.5 ft. o = z I— m cnm E oa. Dcna. LLa.a. 0,5 TOPSOIL 4958.0 CL 1 SS 12' 7 19 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium i 3.0 495.5..5_ CL 2 ST 12" 27 93 2930 115 J SANDY LEAN CLAY 3 SS 12' 6 18 Tan to red, moist to wet Medium to very stiff 5 i MI 111111111=21 107 4270 10 14.0_4944.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL SM '6 SS 12" 20 10 II.15.0 Tan, wet, medium dense 4943.5 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 1 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WA'PER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING S'CAR'I'El) 12-9-98 VI- 13.3' w.1D. s 11.8'A.B. BORING COMPLt iTD 12-9-98 erraconWI. RIG CIVIE-55 FOREMAN RS t.I" I • \ ater checked 5 days A.B. Al PRO\'I I) NRS lion# 20985216 r LOG OF TEST BORING No. 3 Page l of l CLIENT ARCHITECT'/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PRo1ECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS O o LI O i— o J LL E Z 2 I- C) DESCRIPTION ce z\ c z H I- 2 2I.,- O m W O 3 U) O W DCLI.,- U E O CUF-O H >-LL C LL V) CCLLI N O >- IA0_J O IY o Z I-(A Approx. Surface Elev.: 4959.0 ft. 4 = z I-- Ct (1)m E CI CL otnCI_ 0.5 TOPSOIL 4958.5 CL 1 SS 12" 7 18 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND 1.5 Brown, moist, medium 4957.5 7:/)/,' / i SANDY LEAN. CLAY CL 2 ST 12'' 16 104 4580 .0022 Tan to red, moist I j % Soft to very stiff 3 I SS 12" 2 26 j r 5 i' 7.0 4952.0 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL 4 ST 12" 14 ( 118 11970 Tan. moist to wet Loose to medium dense 5 SS 12" 7 19 i 10— 1 SM 6 SS 12" 13 20 1 I 15.0 4944.0 15 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-9-98 BORING coMPLI:II D 12-9-98 WI- ' None \v.D. y 12.2'A.B. ma, IterrRIG CtiIE-SS FOREMAN_ - RS vi. Water checked 5 days A.B. - APPROVED NRS I JOB 4 ___'_0985216 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 4 Page 1 of 1. CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER. Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd srrE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES I TESTS J X r I LI- E w 0") z= w W DESCRIPTION lr z\ I z H I- 3lr H Gr) CC 1.11 Lil LL.CD (n D W I (n I O z z (n a. F-- N cc) W O 3 fn O W W(A Q a. (-) E a. U I-Ca H >-L- OCCti WWW CC Approx. Surface Elev.: 4957.0 ft. o D z I- CC a CO E a a_ =um. a a a_ A, p,s TOPSOIL 4956.5 CL 1 SS 13" 9 17 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, stiff 2.5 4954.5 SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 2 ST 12" 16 108 5600 240 Tan to red, moist to wet Medium to very stiff 3 SS 12" 4 :0 f; j 5 1 j/ i ij/ 4 SS 12" 4 19 i;/, 10— 7.5 SS 12" 7 20 1/ 15.0 4942.0 15 BOTTOM OF BORING I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-11-98 WI_ 11.5' W.D. T 11,3' A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 VI. erracri RIG CME-55 (FOREMAN RS V` I. Water checked 3 days A.B. APPROVEDNRS JOB# 20985216 e f LOG OF TEST BORING No. 5 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd. SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads I'ROJI:C'r Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS J J F- [ LL • H W LL tit (n z 2 U DESCRIPTION ce z cc z HF- a_ F=- O m W O 3 C O OW CC D. C.) x a. U i-O H }LL UIYLL C 7O 3 Z II-- c min E 00_ D a.Approx. Surface Elev.: 4957.0 ft. 0 5 TOPSOIL 4956.5 CL l SS 12" 10 15 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, stiff i ST 12" 18 1.06 2740 4.0 4953.0 SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 3 SS 12" _ 8 22 I 7/ Tan to red, moist I Medium 5 Ij, 7.0 4950.Q SILTY SAND SM 4 SS 124 5 21 Tan, moist to wet, loose 10— Y r 5 SS 12" 8 11 i. 15.0 4942.0 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WAIT?I: I,INVi 1.OIISLRVA'I IONS IlORING S'1'AIR'Ii:i) 12-9-98 WI. 12.0' w-o- t 11.3'A.B. BORING COhn'LIThI) 12-9-98 wi_e aconrr RIG CNIE-55 FOREMAN RS VL Water clrecl:.ed5 days A.B. A'I'IZoV1 1) NRS .1( 'IS 20985216 e f LOG OF TEST BORING No. 6 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCIIrrEC'I'I ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads I 'ROIIiC'I' Fort Collins, Colorado 1 Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS CD r J I >- I H W I H DESCRIPTION w Z0cewLHL o?w 2 2 W 1 to F- t] Z Z H F-Z. F- to m W O 3 to O W O u-H Q'. 0_ U = CL U F-O H >-LL O LL O:C LL C Approx. Surface Elev.: 4955.5 ft. o = .z 1- Ce o in z 000 =cn CO ii x A, 0,5 TOPSOIL 4955.0 CL 1 SS 12" 8 ` 18 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist I Medium to very stiff 3.0 4952.5 1_ ! _ 2 ST 12" 17 ; 112 7350 Free j Swell = j;'^ SANDY LEAN CLAY --3 SS 12" 6 18 355 psf j;, Tan to red. moist 36/20/65 y%% Soft to medium 5 i Sulfate = I j I 0020`/ i 7.5 4948.0 _CL 4 j ST 12" 20 j 107 780. SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL SM 5 I SS l'" 7 17 ! i I Tan, moist to wet Loose to medium dense Z I i I to— I i 6 SS 12" 10 11 T.:: 15.0 4940.5 - BOTTOM OF BORING I D I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. _ LEVEL. BORING S`IAi:'fED 2_ _ OVA"1'CR LL•VL'L OBSERVATIONS 1.. 9 98 WL 9.8' W.D. T. 9.7' A.I3. sir BORING COMPLETED 12-9-98 rrWLeaconRIG0/1E-55 FOREMAN RS APPROVED NRS I Olt# 20985216 tivL Water checked 5 days A.B. f 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 7 Page 1 of 1 CL_IE_NT ARCIIITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd srl-E Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT' Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD __ SAMPLES TESTS r. ....1 p O 1- F- 0 -J J LL E W (A Z S W W u DESCRIPTION ct z\ i z H 3 CC H cn ce W D W U_CD (A D W I cA I- o Z Z cA a. 1.. cn m W o 3 to O W ' W to Q D_ U E O U 1-O 1-1 )-LL U CC LL UJ W LL cc UJ to O >-• W CL-1 O CCU Z1-fA CCCtA La Approx. Surface Elev.: 4955.5 ft. O m z f— tr cn ca E o O. =cn d Ll-a-n= A 0,5 TOPSOIL 4955.0 CL 1 SS 12" 8 17 . 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND I ABrown, Wig, medium/ 2.0 4953.5 SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 2 ST 12 15 ; 111 8910 j 440 i Brown to red, Hoist Stiff to hard 3 ; SS 17„ 7 20 I I 5 i l • 7.0 4948.5 a j j 1 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL_SM 4 SS 13" 3 ?i Tan, wet 1 IVeryloosetomediumdense. a 10 3 I h a 1 I I i I 5 SS 12„ 17 1 17 a 15.0 4940.5 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 1 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL O13SERVAI'IONS BORING STARTED 12-11-98 W.D. t 9.0, acon BORING COMPLETEDWL = 10.3 13. 12-11-93 errWLRIGC1\IE-55 FOREMAN RS WL Water checked 3 clays A.B. APPROVED NRS Jon a 20985216 t P LOG OF TEST BORING No. 8 Page l of t CLIENT ARCI•I1'rEC'I'/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR_Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS 0 J LL. 5 W Cn Z S. W W 13 H DESCRIPTION o_ Z\ CY Z H F- 3 CY cn o: W n W Li-CO to o Sa. IS- Cn m W O = u O OW W CC CL C.) E a.. U 1-O H >-L. Li_ W W Li_ CY Q W N > >- W 0-J O CY CJ Z F-to CC CC Cn 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 4954.5 ft. o = z 1-- ce cnao = oo- i ccnn- Li_0_C 4954.0 CL 1 SS 12" 70.5 TOPSOIL 1 i%, LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium 2 2.0 4952.5 SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 2 ST 12" 16 113 i 6870 510 Tan to red. moist Stiff to very stiff 3 SS 12" 9 17 i/, 5 t 7.0 4947.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL - SM1 4 ST 12" 15 I I Sulfate = Tan. moist to wet 0013 Very loose to medium dense 5 SS 12" 3 56 s 10— 6 SS 12„ 21 16 15.0 4939.5 15 BOTTOM OF BORING j THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: 1N-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS PORING STAW:`I'ED 12-11-98 WI. 12.5' W.D. - 9.6' A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-1.1-98 V1,err RIGcon CiV'IE-JJ FOREMAN RS W'I- Water checked 3_days A.B. APPROVED NRS lo13# 20985216 r------ LOG OF TEST BORING No. 9 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS LD X >- i I- [O U- H w LL w (n Z 2 H DESCRIPTION cc LU z 0 w CD 2 2 w 1 to I- 0 zz C 0- U Z 0- U 1-0 H >-LL OU CY LL CZ w W 0 >- w EL-I O 0:U Z I-W o Approx. Surface Elev.: 4957.0 ft. o = z I— 0: cn o z I o a_ m cn 0- 0.5 TOPSOIL 4956.5 1 SS 12„ 8 10 I 0 SANDY LEAN CLAYj, CL 2 ST l_" 19 10. 3160 7' Tan to red. moist to wet Medium to very stiff 3•SS 12" 5 16 If! l i rr 4 SS 12" 6 27 i,,/ 10 5 I SS 12" 16 15 I 15.0 4942.0 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 I THE' STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STAR'IT:I) 12-1.1.98 WE 13.3' W.D. 12.6'A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 WI. err acon RIG CME-55 I FOREMAN RS VL Water checked 3 days A.B. APPROVED NRS IJOB a 20985216 f f LOG OF TEST BORING No. 10 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCIIITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS 0 I c) DESCRIPTION v } ce z\ cc z HI- CC 2 2 N W I W 1 O I- O Z Z J d F- CO m W O 3 U) OW. M CC tZ U E O U 1-0 H >-Lt. O U.. 0 ce Lo Approx. Surface Elev.: 4955.5 ft. o = z i- cc u)m z oa =`um. x 0.5 TOPSOIL 4955.0 1 SS 12 7 24 e/ SANDY LEAN CLAY WITH CL 2 ST 12" 15 112 3500 .0023 GRAVEL Tan to red moistI _3 SS 12" 4 13I Medium to stiff 1 4 I ST 12`' 5 114 SASS 12' 5 I51 I I 10 i 12.0 y4943.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL Tan, wet, medium dense s, 4.-: 6 I SS 12" 19 18 15.0 4940.5 15 I 1 BOTTOM OF BORING 1 i I. THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12.11-98 WL " 12.3, . W.D. s 11.8'A.13. BORING COMPLLIFD 12-11-98 WI. e con RIG CN1E-55 I FOREMAN RS WI_ WVater checked 3.days A.B. APPROVED NRS JOB# 209852.16 f P 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 11 Page 1 of I CLIENT ARCI lII ECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies _ JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads I'ROJ1CT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village_PUD I SAMPLES TESTS o x >- 0 0 I- o J I- m LL 1=i LLLI. H DESCRIPTION N Cr LU z ? w L:0 0- F=-- 0 m L/1 O = V O W CC 0_ U E 0- U 1-O I-I >-LL U CC LL CC LIJ U) > >- 111 0--I O 0:U Z I-(n CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4959.5 ft. p = z cn m E o o_ o cn n_ 0.5 TOPSOIL 4959.0 1 SS 12" 8 18 i SANDY-LEAN CLAY CL 2 ST 12" 15 99 2I0 f Tan, moist to wet Medium 3 SS 12" 5 19 I f f 4 ST 12" 19 107 1840 5 SS 12` 4 13f 10 _ Y i 14.0 4945.5 SILTY SAND WITH-GRAVEL SM 6 SS 12" 13 19— 15.0 Tan, wet, medium dense 4944.5 15 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING S'1'AR'rEl) 12-9-98 wi. ? 12,3' W.D. t 13.5'A.B. 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-9-98 rrWERIG CME-55 1'ORIilviAN Its V, APPROVED NRS 1 JOB n 20985216 CVater checked days A.B. LOG OF TEST BORING No. 12 Page 1 of 1. CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd srrE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJI:C•r Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS cm x >- of 12- E IL w I coz= w w o DESCRIPTION M Z\ M I Z H F= 3 M H to M W O . W Lr_U' W 0 2 2 W IN F- ; 0 ZZ (n a. F— w m W O 3 co I OW Wm Q 0- U E O U 1-0 H 1 )-IL UMIL W W LL ce W w O ?- W J O mu ZF—w mmw CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4964.0 ft. o m z 1— m m m z .O a m ul m LI-m a 0.5 FILL-Sandy Lean Clay 4963•5 CL 1 SS 12" 11 13 Brown, moist, stiff SS 12' 20 Z:I : SANDY LEAN CLAY WITH CL 2 ST 12" 17 ! 107 7300 415 GRAVELj ' Sulfate = Tait to red, moist S SS l?" l l 1 G ; 0037 Stiff to very stiff 4 i ST I'_' 12 l l 2 ' 5 i SS 12" 13 9 j j j I i i r 10.0 4954.0 10 SILTY CLAYEY SAND WITH ce r GRAVEL Red, moist, lose f 0' SC 6ISS 12"1 7 8 ! fir' 15.0 _ 4949.0 SM S M i t BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 13ORING S'I'AI:'II D 12-9-98 VI- = None w-1). Y 14.6'AM. e BORING COMPLETED 12-9 98 rr a WI, IzIG 01E-55_ FOREMAN RS wI Water checked 5 clays A.B. APtI O\•1 1) NRS J013# 20985216 f 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 13 Page t of 1 CLIENT ARCIirrECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD. SAMPLES TESTS cp J 0 0 1.---- o J F- to LL H W U. u DESCRIPTION r ce z\ ce z H I 0 w D 1 cn 1-- o z-z 1 IL F- cn co W O 3 cn ow Q. U E Q U I-O F-i >-U_ U Q IL C W O > >- W CLJ O CCC) ZI-CO CO Approx. Surface Elev.: 4959.5 ft. o 0 Z I- CC cnm E on. 0cna. 0.5 TOPSOIL 4959.0 1 SS 12" 8 17 ' i/ r/ Vi SANDY LEAN CLAY WITH. CL 2 ST 12" 20 100 1550 j GRAVEL Tan to red, moist to wet SS 12" 6 16 Y j Medium to stiff 5 I i I J CL 4 SS 12" 5 23 10— 1 f/, 5 SS 12" 9 ' 20 1 S o 4944.5 I I BOTTOM OF BORING 15 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY.BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-9-98 W1_ None V.D. - 14.2'A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-9-98 rrwLRIGCME-55 FOREMAN RS WI- Water checked 5 clays A.B. PPROVCD NRS JOB# 20985216 P LOG OF TEST BORING No. 14 Page 1 of I CLIENT ARCHITECT I ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SPIT Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado _ __ Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS _. _ co 0 1- H o E oO LL W • W H Z2 HZ H DESCRIPTION W IX w Z 0 w IHiCD o •w W I W I•- 0 Z Z H I--Z 0„ H u) m W O = W OW O to H Q 0.. C.) E 0- C.) F-O H >-Lt- U 0!Lt. O C U. 0: W U O >- W 0-J O =U ZHN HJ U) Approx. Surface Elev.: 4960.0 ft. p M Z F- Q: O m E 00- O W 0- =I0 0.5 TOPSOIL 4959.5 1 SS 12" 9 15 1 j I SANDY LEAN CLAY__ CL 2 ST 12" 15 109 7660 37/21/71 Brown to tan, moist FreeI/ Medium to very stiff 2" 23SS1_ 6 1 I Swell = 1155 psf 5 Sulfate = 0017% 1 j, 7.5.4952.5 i // LEAN CLAY WITH SAND CL 4 SS 12" 5 19 1 Tan to red, moist to wet Medium I 10— I I . j i y i 5 SS 12" 4 25 4945.015.0 15 BOTTOM OF BORING I I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. BORING STARTED 12-9-98VA'I'rR LEVEL OBSERVATIONS wl. 2- None W.D. = li13.6'A.B. BORING CON'IPLETED 12-9-98 WI. erraconRIG CN1E-55 FOREMAN RS vi Water checked 5 clays A.B. APPROVED NRS loll# 20985216 1 r 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 15 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCIIITI CT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins,Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS Lo x r- O O F- I- CI J 3 1-:. SI It H W _1. LL E W U 22 W W U DESCRIPTION m z\ ce z HI- 3 W H U CC W M W LL CD O O S 2 W D, I N F- O 22 O a. I- to m W O 3 u) O W W(A Q CL U E O U HO H >-LL 0WU_ WWLL Et W O > >- W d-1 O WO Z I=U W W W CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4956..5 ft. o m z m cn m E o a_ mum. I u.a.a. 0.5 TOPSOIL 4956.0 CL 1 SS 12" 9 15 Z% LEAN CLAY WITH SAND 2 ST l2' 13 1 l3 10020 485 Brown, moist jib Medium to hard 3 SS 12"7 5 6.0 4950.5 SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 4 ST 12" 2( 104 1690 2 Tan to red, moist to wet Medium 5 SS 12" 5 2.1 j 10— i% f"//, 13.0 774943.5 7: . SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL Tan, wet, medium dense SM 6 SS 12" 10 11 15_0 4941.5 15 BOTTOM OF BORING 1 THE STRATIFICATION 'LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, 'THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WVA`I`I:IR LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 12-11-98BORINGSTARTED wI• = None W.D. T. 12.2'A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 AI. ..err RIG 0,1E-55 FOREMAN RS I- 1 Water checked 3 clays A.B. nPi'I:OVI=» NRS JOB2098521E e - 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 16 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGiNEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village-RID• SAMPLES TESTS o 1 X >- J cc. W W (n = W W H DESCRIPTION cn ce w z = w cp can m x x w i m 1.- o z z cn a, F- U m W o 3 cn ow w cn Q n- U E n. U 1-0 H )-LL UL LL WWLL o Approx. Surface Elev.:4955.5 ft. 0,J TOPSOIL 4955.0 1 SS 12" 10 16 1'% j ,.LEAN CLAY WITH SAND CL 2 ST 12" 15 114 9740 385 Brown, moist Medium to hard 4.4951..0 3 SS 12" 5 19 71 j SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 4 ST 12" 17 105 1350 85 j Tan to red, moist to wet Medium 5 SS 12" 6 18 i j j/; l0_ 12.0 4943.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL 1. Tan, wet, medium dense r SM 6 I SS 12" 20 12 15.0 4940.5 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-11-98 wi. 7._ 11.2' W.D. = 11.1' _ A.B.BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 CME-55 FOREMAN t'L rr RIG RS V'L Water checked 3 clays A.B. APPROVED NRS I x)B# 20985216 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 17 page 1 of 1 CLIENT Ai ci r c r/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJEC r Fort.Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS o I X >- o 0 1•- F- o J W E WW W Z 2 W W U DESCRIPTION Z.\ M. z. HI- 3 M N w D. I W o Z Z to o- 1- O m W O 3 O ow Ww Q O_ U E o- U 1-0 H U. U M LL W W LL co Approx. Surface Elev.: 4954.5 ft. o m z 1-- a cn m = o oo- c ai a LPL a.a.. 0,5 TOPSOIL 4954.0 1 SS 12" 8 20 t. LEAN-.CLAY WITH SAND CL 2 ST 12'' 14 114 5240 310 ijBrown. moist Medium to very stiff 3 SS 12" 7 18 5..0 _ _ 4949.5 _ 1.;/ SANDY LEAN CLAY -- Tan to red, moist to wet Medium CL 4 SS 1.2" 5 20 i7/ T 10- 2 12.0 4942.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL i i Tan, wet, medium dense Sal 5 SS 12" 19 13 15.0 4939._5 1'5" BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. VAII'R LI:VI L OBSERVATIONS BORING SIARL'1'ED 12-11-98 WI 4 10.0' w.D. X 9.9' A.B. BOILING COMPLETED 12-11-98 erraconWI. RIG Ci 1)r-5J FOREMAN RS wl. I Water checked 3 days A.B. APPROVED NRS l to13# 20985216 r P LOG OF TEST BORING No. 18 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SrrE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS I—x co J H W J F- m o I-- 1- o E o J LL H W H Z U DESCRIPTION v } O_ Z\ cc Z HI2.- JH( n H U) Q: w D w U_CD d •w 2 2 W 1 U) I- O ZZ 1-_-11=Z n. I-- (A m W O 3 (n O W 0 W H Q O- U E O. U I-O H >-LL CU CC U. O 2 U_ Lt W O > >- W O_J O CCU ZI-I(n HJ co' Approx. Surface Elev.: 4953.5 ft. o m z L— n m z co- CO a. _1 a x 0,5 TOPSOIL 4953.0 CL 1 SS 12" 8 18 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium 2.5 4951.0• i CL 2 ST 12" 15 110 3580 34/17/47 i,, Sulfate j ,/ SANDY LEAN CLAY 3 I SS 12" 3 21 0015 c Tan to red, moist to wet i Soft to stiff 5 7-, : I i y 4 i ST 12` i I I 5 ' SS 12" 2 20 10— i"r 12.0 4941.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL fl..4E, Tan, wet, loose 4- .7 _14.5 4939.0 SIv1 6 SS 12" 9 23 i_ y 15.0 SANDY LEAN CLAY 4938.5 15 CL Olive to brown, moist, medium BOTTOM OF BORING I I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORINGSTARTED. 12-11-98 wL 12,2' W.D. T 8,8' A.B. BORING COMPLETE!) 12-11-98 WI,err co RIG CN1E-55 roiztavtAN RS Vl. Water checked 3 clays A.B. AI'PROVFI) . NRS I-1°11 a 20985216 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 19 . Page 1 of l CLIENT ARCIIrrECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony 84 Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort.Collins, Colorado _ Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS o J H W w1-4 H DESCRIPTION N w Z\ M w F- Z tu 2 I W 1 U) I— 0 Z Z HI—Z 0„ I— U) m W 0 3 U) OW =(/)H Q O L) E 0_ U 1-0 H >-U_ UCCU- OCU_ Approx. Surface Elev.: 4957.5 ft.O O Z F- M Wm E O0- DMn. Ji 0.5 TOPSOIL 4957..0 CL 1 SS 12" 8 18 j 43/27/67 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium 7/.2 2.0 4955.5 I I SANDY LEAN CLAY , CL 2 SS 12" 6 19 i ; Tan to red, moist to wet Median) i. ; i m 3 SS 117„ 5 20 10.0 4947.5 I BOTTOM OF BORING i I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OI3CRVAI'IONS BORING STARTED 12-9-98 WL -- None W.D. Y 8.9' A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-9-98 rraconaconI. CN1-RIG FOREMAN RS VL Water checked_5 days A.B. APPROVED NRS JUB# 20985210 _ 4 f 1 LOG OF TEST BORING No. 20 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCI{rrECr/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS co r. J H W J LL. E W Z= JZ U DESCRIPTION O: z\ ce z HI- n 2 O W D, I (1) I- O ZZ HHI--Z a,. 1- V) m W O 3 V) O W. O(1)H Q, O. U = 0- U I—O. I-I >-U_ U 0=LL O C LL W (n = >- W O-J O CC L) Z 1-(n 1-=I_] co Approx. Surface Elev. 4961.0 ft. p p z 1= ce m E o a_ =(n a J a 0.J TOPSOIL 4960.5 1 SS 12" 10 19 i j• , LEAN CLAY WITH SAND CL SS 12" 10 23 39/21/73 Tan, moist to wet A/ Medium to stiff 5 0 i// I i'i 3 SS 12„i 6 -3 10.0 4951.0 10 I BOTTOM OF BORING 1 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL. AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. BORING S'CAK I'ED 12-9-98WATERLEVELOBSERVA"!'IONS BORING COMPI_E'i Ian 12-9-98 WL - None W.D. Y. 9.5, A.B• vL err acon RIG CME-55 t rot:En,tnN RS I l 1:0\fill HOB xVt. NRS 0985/16 Water checked days r\ [3, s r LOG OF TEST BORING No. 21 Page 1 of t CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd srrl_ Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS cp J x ,- O O 1-- I— 0 J U_ E Li_ LLI U) ZS o DESCRIPTION CC z\ CC z H F- S-- U) m W O 3 to O O WF Q o_ U = a. U F-O H >-U. UtYLi_ CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4955.5 ft. n = z ce in in E o a m cn a 0.5 TOPSOIL 4955.0 1 SS 12" 8 19 LEAN_CLAY-WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium i CL 2 SS 12" 7 17 5.0 4950.5 - SANDY LEAN CLAY Tan to red. moist to wet Medium yif T SS 12„ 3 19 10.0 4945.5 10 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,, THE TRANSITION MAY GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS nORING 5'1'ARI'I D 12-11-98 r w.D. _ 8.6' A.B. BORING COMPLEIEI) 12-11-98 WL = bone rr aconWt_ RIG CME-55 I I-i>ittNInN RS VI. Water checked 3 clays A.Q. API'i:ovID NRS_ ,JOI1# 20985216 0 s LOG OF TEST BORING No. 22 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SIFE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJIiCI Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES_ - TESTS CD H W 0 0 I- 0 E o I U- E W W Z2 JH H DESCRIPTION ce z\ O: z HI- to 2 2 o w I Cr I_- o Z z HI-Z I- CI) CO W 0 3 CA O W O CA H Q CL C.) E O- U I-0 H >-LL C..)XLi OQLL CC W CA 0 >- W CI--:.IO CCU z 1-N H J CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4954.0 ft. 0 0 z I-- CC Cn COE CICL 0 CI) X 0,5 TOPSOIL 4953.5 1 1 SS 12" 11 18 141/24/62 v SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 2 SS 13" 3 20 E,r Brown to red,1iie ist to wet 7i.: Medium to stiff 5 i --. l 3 SS 12" 4 19 10.0 4944.0 10 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-11-98 WL 1 None W.D. s 8.9' A.I;. BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 wL err acen RIG CN'IE-55 FOREMAN RS wL, Water checked 3 days A.B. APPROVE!) NRS JOi3# 20985216 r LOG OF TEST BORING No. 23 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd Srrl? Harmony St Timberline Roads Ro1EC'I' Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS t-x C. r. J N. >- H W O O F- I- 0 E O IU_ E LU (A Z 2 J H U DESCRIPTION cc z\ o: z H I-- n H 2 N W I (A i= O I Z Z H t=Zdt- CO CO W O Z CO OUJ OfAH C a. U E a. U t-O H A LL I L./CC _ 0 C U. CC W U > >- W a.J O CU ZI-(n HJ CD Approx. Surface Elev.: 4958.5 ft. o = z t- Ct CO m E o a. D WO- J a. 0,5 TOPSOIL 4958.0 1 SS 12" 10 16 SANDY LEAN CLAY i:;:: Tan to red, moist Medium to stiff I ./././.I Ej i'/ CL 2 SS 12" 3 17 32/16/60 5 J itt Ef%/ 7.5 4951.0 J CLAYEY SAND E': l:Tan to red, moist to wet if .. r: • Loose l ': SC 3 SS 1 2' 4 21Y 4948.5 I 10 BOTTOM OF BORING I I. THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 12-11-98 lirWLNone. W.D: T. 9,4' A.B. BORING COMPLETED 12-11-98 VL err_ . acon RIG CiV1E-55 FOREMAN RS wi, Water checked 3 days A.B. APPROVED NRS -Km# 20985216 O LOG OF TEST BORING No. 24 Page l of l CLIENT ARCHITECT'/ENGINEER Dial Companies JR Engineering Ltd SITE Harmony & Timberline Roads PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Harmony Village PUD SAMPLES TESTS co x >- 0 0 I-- o t~i. w' uHi z= DESCRIPTION U) o w z = w LHi.0 0_ H . U) m W O CO CO O O W Q a: 0 = a_ U 1-0 H >-LL. UCLL co Approx. Surface Elev.: 4951.5 ft. o m z cc m z o a D U))a 0.5 TOPSOIL 4951..0 CL I SS 12" 7 24 2)"' LEAN CLAY WITH SAND Brown, moist, medium i/ 2.5 4949.0 yi SANDY LEAN.CLAY 2 1113" 10 17 l/ Tan to red, moist, stiff i, 5 j,, 4 i 8.0 4943.5 1 III SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL.illEg 12" 13 15 Tan, wet, medium dense Y 10 MI 12 14 14 a. 15.0_- 4936.5 15 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STAR ED 12-11-98 L ? T W.D. s 9.8' 1.rs. BORING COh1PLE"1'I D12-11-98 gone lierraconI. Ric CIVIE-55 1:c)itiavanN RS wt. Water checked 3 days A.B. APi'ROVFI) NRS JOB II 10985216 e 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.52 0.51 V O 1 ll 0.50 R A • I. 0.49 O 0.48 0.47 0.46 0.45 0.4:4 0.43 10 0.1 l APPLIED PRESSURE.TSP Boring and depth(ft.) Classification I DD MC% 0 3 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 110 18 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD Harmony & JOB NO. 2098521.E Timberline_Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON 4 3 2 1 N 0 b 3 0 4 I S 10 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSE Boring and depth (ft.)Classification DD MC% 3 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 110 18 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD -Harmony& JOB NO. 20985216 DATE 12/22/93 Timberline Roads CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON 0.60 0.58 0.56 ---- - Water Added _ 0.54 I I ::: D It r 0 4\ I 1 0.46 0. 4 I I 1 1 1 I I 0.4 I I 1 0.40 0.1 i ro APPLIED PRESSURE,'I'SE Boring and depth (ft.) _ ClassiticClassificationI_ i DD MC% 0 8 7.0 Silty Sand with Gravel 107 20 PROJECT Harmony Village_ JOB NO. 20985216PUD - Harmony & DATE 12/22/98 Timberline Roads- -_ CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON 1 2 1 - Water Added - - 1 S W E 2 L C, C N. o S I U 1 L i i_ 1) A 1 U N I 10 l IO 1 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSI= Boring and depth (ft.) Classification _ _ I DD MC% 8 7.0 Silty Sand with Gravel 107 20 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - 1-larmony-& JOB NO. 209852.16 Timbe?line Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON w i 3 I 1 Water Added 1 lip S e-"-'---\ L 1 I C O 3 N S O L D 1 A T 1 I O N 1 6 1 0.1 t 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSF Boring and depth(ft.)Classification DD MC 9 3.0 • Sandy Lean Clay 110 18 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads _-.__ DATE 12/22/98_ CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON di 0.54 0.52 Water Added 1 I4„,........_________________:_______:_ 0 I N D 0.48 A 1 1 I 0 0.46 I I 1 A 1 1 I I I 1 0.44 1 11 0.4_2 I 1 I I 1 I 1 0.40 I 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSF Boring and depth (ft.) Classification DD MC 0 9 3.0 Sandy Lean Clay 110 18 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD.- Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON di 4 Water Added I I I1 s 1 r: I_ L 1111\ , I 4 I I C 1 II N I S 6 I IO I 1 A I A i 1 I 1 1 N 1 I I I i 1 10 _ ___i I 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.Tsr Boring and depth (ft.) Classification DD MC% 13 3.0 Sandy Lean Clay with Gravel 100 13 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - Harmony & JOB NO. 20935216 T unberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON I 0.68 0.66 7 Water Adde• 0.64 r_ 6.. 0.62 v N0 I 0.60 A I 0:56 I 1 0:54 1 I 0.5? I Ii I j 1 0.50 0.48 I 0.I 1 l0 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSF Bo ring and depth (ft.) Classification DD MC% 13 3.0 Sandy Lean Clay with Gravel 100 13 I PROJECT Harmony_V_illage PUD Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON I 4 3 Water Added as 1 _ O AO L 3 I) A O 5 6 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.'CSP Boruw and depth (ft.) Classification I DD MC%_ 15 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 119 12 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - Harmony & ..- --- JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON r 0.43 0.42 0.41 W.:ter Ad.-d 0.40 0.39 V U D 0.38 A A 0.37 - O 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSr Boring and depth (ft.) Classification DD MC i+ 15 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 119 12 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON 4\ 4 0.43 0.47 0.41 Water Adde 0.40 i 1 V 0 1 D 0.38 R 1 e,\ 1 1 0.37 0 N03b035I 0.34 I i j I 0.33 1 0.32 0.31 0.1 l l0 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSP' Boring and depth (f[.)Classification DD MC% 0 15 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 119 12 PROJECT Harmony Village PUD - Harmony & --JOB NO. 2098521E Timberline Roads _. DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON I 4 3 . . I 2 Water Added t L l 4N\ O 3 S O A I 6 . 7 1 0.1 t IU APPLIED PRESSURE.9'SP Boring and depth (ft.) Classification DD MC 0 15 3.0 Lean Clay with Sand 119 12 PROJECT Harmony Village PUp_--Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON I I , f 1 I c I .``` Waite-Added s Iw I IL may L I o I I I N I I y S 1 O I N 1 I L I I D A i. o 1 1 N 1 , I 11 I 1 i I I 10 I I- 0.1 10 APP1 1ED PRESSURE.'I:SP Boring and depth (ft.) Classification I _DI) MC 6 18 3.0 Sandy Lean Clay 114 15 i PROJECT Harmony Village PUD Harmony & JOB NO. _ 20985216 Timberline Roads _ _ DATE _ 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON 1 I 0.48 0.46 0 0.44 - _ - Wa,er Added v 0 I D 0.42 - R A T I 0 0.40 I 0.38 I I 0.36 I I I 0.34 0.32 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE.TSP Boring and depth(ft.) Classification DD MC 18 3.0 Sandy Lean Clay 114 15 PROJECT Harmony Village PUI) - Harmony & JOB NO. 20985216 Timberline Roads DATE - 12/22/98 CONSOLIDATION TEST TERRACON I DRILLING AND EXPLORATION DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: R € Ring Barrel) 2.42" I.D., 3" 0.D., unless otherwise noted SS : Split Spoon - 1_" l D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS : Piston Sample ST : Thin-Walled Tube - 2" 0.D., unless otherwise noted WS Wash Sample PA : Power Auger FT : Fish Tail Bit HA : Hand Auger RB : Rock Bit DB : Diamond Bit = 4", N, B BS : Bulk Sample AS : Auger Sample PM Pressure Meter HS Hollow Stem Auger DC : Dutch Cone WB : Wash Bore Penetration Test: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch 0.D. split spoon, except where noted. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling WCI : Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling DCI Dry Cave in BCR : Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR : After Casting Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with only short term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification system and the ASTM Designations D-2487 and D- 2488. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as clays, if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in-place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM). CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS: RELATIVE DENSITY OF Unconfined Compressive COARSE-GRAINED SOILS: Strength, Qu, psf Consistency N-Blows/ft: Relative Density 500 Very Soft 500 - 1,000 Soft 0-3 Very Loose 1,001 - 2,000 Medium 4-9 Loose 2,001 - 4,000 Stiff 10-29 Medium Dense 4,001 - 8,000 Very Stiff 30-49 Dense 8,001 -16,000 Very Hard 50-80 Very Dense 80+ Extremely Dense RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) Major of Components Also Percent of Component Present in Sample) Dry Weight of Sample Size Range Trace 15 With 15 = 29 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) Modifier 30 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm) Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES Sand 4 to #200 sieve(4.75mm to Descriptive Term(s) 0.075mm) of Components Also Percent of Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) Present in Sample) Dry Weight Trace 5 With 5 - 12 Modifier 12 1Irrracan I. I s UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests^ Group Symbol Group Names Coarse-Grained Gravels more than Clean Gravels Less Cu > 4 and 1 .< Cc <3E GW Well-graded gravel`Soils more than 50% of coarse than 5,o finesc 50% retained on fraction retained on No. 200 sieve. No, 4 sieve Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly gradedgravel° Gravels with Fines c. Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel.G,H more than 12% fines Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey graver." Sands 50%or more Clean Sands Less Cu > 6 and 1 < Cc < 3E SW Well-graded sand' of coarse fraction than 5% finese passes No. 4 sieve Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sand' Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM _ Silty sand°•"•' more than 12% fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sands"•1 - - Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A line CL Lean clay"' 50% or more Liquid limit less passes the than 50 PI < 4 or plots below "A" line'__ _ _ ML Silt"•`'M No. 200 sieve g K4.M.N organic Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay 0.75 OL Liquid limit,-not dried Organic silt43'M•0 Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on orr above "A" line CH Fat clay'"-M Liquid limit 50 or more PI lots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt"`•M organic Liquid limit -oven dried _ Organic clay`•`"'•° 0.75 OH Liquid limit -not dried Organic silt"-m.° Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark_in color, and organic odor PT Peat ABased on the material passing the 3-in. if soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add 75-mm) sieve cll3pbo plo Cc - ( D3a)2 with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is elf field sample contained cobbles or D:o z boo predominant. boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or If soil contains > 30% plus No. 200 boulders, or both`' to group name. predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group cGravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual 'If soil contains > 15% sand, add "with name. symbols:sand" to group name. If soil contains > 30% plus No.200, GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GC-GM, or SC-SM. name. GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" "PI > 4 and plots on or above "A" line. GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay to group name. PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual 'If soil contains > 15% gravel, add "with PI plots on or above "A" line. symbols:gravel" to group name. PI plots below"A" line. SW-SM well-graded sand with silt If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is SW-SC well-graded sand with clay a CL-ML, silty clay. SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay bu For elaerlliea!lenl of line-grainea eo.I, - I r I 1 and line-gr'inid Iracoon of coarse- grained sons a tn:a 1 i :a...1..J. i V X 4° .an al 1J ne Vern LL:^a:. • 18 Op: O?I " 7, 1 iCe1 • 0:9 (lL - 0) I Cr z I I j I,-. C.) o I,MH OR OH 1 l 10 iML OR OL 13 14 :0 33 40 -- 60 7: 90 ,L3 11C LIQUID LIMIT (LL) 1rrrcon -- s LABORATORY TESTS SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE California Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement Bearing subbase, and base course material, including recycled , Thickness Ratio materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Design Consolidation Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of Foundation both differential and total settlement of a structure. Design Direct Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength of Bearing Capacity, Shear soil or rock. Foundation Design & Slope Stability Dry Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic, Index Property Density fine-grained soils. Soil Behavior Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained soil Foundation & Slab and to provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of Soil particle sizes in soil.Classification Liquid &Used as an integral part of engineering classification systems Soil Plastic Limit, to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, and to Classification Plasticity specify the fine-grained fraction of construction materials. Index Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a Groundwater liquid or gas. Flow Analysis pH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a soil. Corrosion Potential Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Corrosion electrical currents. Potential R-Value Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement subbase, and base course material, including recycled Thickness materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Design Soluble Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble Corrosion Sulphate sulfates within a soil mass. Potential Unconfined To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils that.Bearing Capacity Compression possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the Analysis unconfined state. for Foundations Water Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil Index Property Content mass. Soil Behavior llerracôn 6a, 4 , • REPORT TERMINOLOGY Based on ASTM D653) Allowable Soil The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the Bearing Capacity foundation element and the supporting material. Alluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and subsequently deposited by sedimentation. Aggregate Base A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath slabs Course or pavements. Backfill A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. Bedrock A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for excavation. Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. Caisson (Drilled pier A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an or Shaft) enlarged base. 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 Friction stress at which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Colluvium Soil, 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 Grade typically used as a floor system. Differential Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of a Movement structure. Earth Pressure The pressure or force 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). Engineered Fill Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer. Equivalent Fluid 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 simplified 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 man- Materials deposited through the action of man prior to exploration of the site. made fill) Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration. lerr n 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 of which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. Grade Beam A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between 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 occuring 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 Content weight by a given compactive effort. Perched Water Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuing 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 structure such Shear) as a drilled pier or shaft. Soil (earth) Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical 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. llerracDn i a 3 a RECOMMENDED PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE POLICY FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENTS Distress Distress Recommended Distress Distress Recommended Type Severity Maintenance Type Severity Maintenance Alligator Low None Patching & Low None Cracking Utility Cut Patching Medium Full-Depth Medium Full-Depth Asphalt Concrete Asphalt Concrete Patch Patch High High Bleeding Low None Polished Low None Aggregate Medium Surface Sanding Medium High Shallow AC Patch High Fog Seal Block Low None Potholes Low Shallow AC Patch Cracking Medium Clean & Medium Full-Depth Seal Asphalt Concrete All Cracks Patch High High .. Bumps & Low None Railroad Low No Policy Sags Crossing for This Project Medium Shallow AC Patch Medium High Full-Depth Patch High Corrugation Low None _ Rutting Low None Medium Full-Depth Medium Shallow AC Patch Asphalt Concrete Patch High High Full-Depth Patch Depression Low None Shoving Low None Medium Shallow AC Patch Medium Mill& Shallow AC Patch High Full-Depth Patch High._ Edge Low None Slippage Low None Cracking Cracking Medium Seal Cracks Medium Shallow Asphalt Concrete Patch High - Full-Depth Patch High Joint Low Clean & Swell Low None Reflection Seal All Cracks Medium Medium Shallow AC Patch _. High Shallow AC Patch High Full-Depth Patch Lane/Shoulder Low None Weathering Low Fog Drop-Off Ravelling Seal Medium Regrade Medium Shoulder High High Longitudinal & Low None Transverse Cracking Medium Clean & Seal All Cracks High llerracDn . - 1 e I c i e, LimminomommimminimmiRECOMMENDED PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE POLICY FOR JOINTED CONCRETE PAVEMENTS Distress Distress Recommended Distress Distress Recommended Type Severity Maintenance 1 Type Severity Maintenance Blow-up Low None Polished No Groove Surface Aggregate Severity or Levels Overlay Defined Medium Full-Depth Concrete Patch/ Slab Replacement High Corner - Low Seal Cracks Popouts No None Break Severity 1 Levels Defined Medium Full-Depth Concrete Patch High Divided Low Seal Cracks Pumping No Underseal, Slab Severity Seal cracks/joints Levels and Defined Restore Load Transfer Medium Slab Replacement High- Durability Low None Punchout Low Seal Cracks Cracking Medium Full-Depth Patch Medium Full-Depth Concrete Patch High Slab_Replacement High Faulting Low None Railroad Low No Crossing Policy for this Project Medium Grind Medium High High Joint Low None Scaling Low None Seal Map Cracking Crazing Medium Reseal Medium Slab Replacement, Joints Full-depth Patch, or Overlay High High Lane/Shoulder Low Regrade and Shrinkage No None Drop-off Fill Shoulders Cracks Severity to Match Levels Lane Height Defined Medium High Linear Cracking Low Clean& Spelling• Low None Longitudinal, Seal all Cracks Corner) Transverse and Diagonal Cracks Medium Medium Partial-Depth Concrete Patch High Full-Depth Patch - High Large Patching Low None Spalling Low None and Joint) Utility Cuts Medium• Seal Cracks or Medium Partial-Depth Patch Replace Patch High High Reconstruct Joint Small Low None Patching Medium Replace Patch High