Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCROWNE AT SUNIGA - PDP230007 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - GEOTECHNICAL (SOILS) REPORTGEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX DEVELOPMENT - GRAHAM PROPERTY NORTHEAST CORNER OF 9TH STREET AND SUNIGA ROAD FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009 Prepared for: Crowne Partners, Inc. 505 North 20th Street - Suite 1150 Birmingham, AL 35203 Attn: Mr. Cary Levow (clevow@crownepartners.com) Prepared by: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE W INDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282 June 9, 2022 Crowne Partners, Inc. 505 North 20th Street - Suite 1150 Birmingham, AL 35203 Attn: Mr. Cary Levow (clevow@crownepartners.com) Re: Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Report Proposed Apartment Complex Development – Graham Property Approximate 11-Acres Parcel – Northeast Corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project No. 1222009 Mr. Levow: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) for the proposed multi-family apartment complex planned for construction in Fort Collins, Colorado. For this exploration, EEC personnel advanced twenty- one (21) soil borings to depths of approximately 4 to 13 feet below present site grades at pre- selected locations within the various proposed building footprints and associated on-site pavement improvements. The limited depth of exploration was due to the required use of a lightly loaded track mounted GEO-Probe drill rig, as requested by the current landowner, to minimize damage to the existing crop. The GEO-Probe utilized did not have the torque capacity to turn the hollow stem augers through the very dense cobble zones encountered across the site. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated January 17, 2022. In summary, the subsurface conditions encountered beneath the surficial vegetation/fescue grass generally consisted of cohesive to slightly cohesive lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils extending to granular gravel/sand with silt/clay soils at depths of approximately ½ to 8 feet. The cohesive soils were generally dry to moist and soft/very loose to stiff/dense and exhibited nil to low with an occasional high swell potential (at boring B-15) and slight tendency to hydro- compact at current moisture and density conditions. Gravel/sand with silt/clay soils were encountered below the cohesive to slightly cohesive soils and extended to the depths explored at approximately 4 to 13 feet below the site grades. Zones of larger cobbles were also encountered in the gravel/sand soils. The gravel/sand soils were generally dry to moist and medium dense to very dense. Groundwater was observed in the two deepest borings; B-14 and B-20 which advanced to depths of approximately 13 and 10 feet below the site grades at depths of GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX DEVELOPMENT - GRAHAM PROPERTY NORTHEAST CORNER OF 9TH STREET AND SUNIGA ROAD FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009 June 9, 2022 INTRODUCTION The geotechnical subsurface exploration for the proposed multi-family apartment complex development planned for construction on the approximately 11-acres parcel – Graham Property located at the northeast corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road in Fort Collins, Colorado has been completed. For this exploration, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) planned to advance twenty-one (21) soil borings to depths of approximately 15 to 25 feet below present site grades at pre-selected locations within the various building footprints and associated on-site pavement improvement areas. However, due to auger refusal with the Geo-Probe drilling rig, which was employed for drilling to minimize damage to the existing agricultural field as per the request of the current landowner; drilling to the desired depths was not possible and test borings were advanced to 4½ to 13 feet below the site grades. Upon completion of the drilling operations, the deepest open bore hole (B-14) was converted to temporary PVC cased piezometer. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated January 17, 2022. We understand the proposed 11+ acre parcel is planned for development into a series of apartment buildings (including garages), an amenity building, swimming pool, drive and parking areas, and additional support infrastructure. The apartment buildings are expected to be four-story wood frame, slab-on-grade structures (no basements). Foundation loads are estimated to be light with maximum continuous wall loads on the order of approximately 1 to 3 kips per linear foot (KLF) and maximum column loads on the order of approximately 25 to 50 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. If actual loads exceed those assumed herein or if basement construction is being considered for the site, we should be consulted to review and modify the recommendations accordingly, if necessary. The pavements are expected to include areas for light duty automobile traffic as well as areas for heavier duty traffic. Small grade changes, cuts and fills less than 5 feet (+/-), are expected to develop site grades for the proposed development. The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the test borings, analyze and evaluate the test data and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations, support of floor slabs and exterior flatwork, and design of pavements for the proposed development. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The boring locations were established in the field by representatives from EEC by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features with the aid of a hand-held GPS unit using appropriate Google Earth coordinates. Those approximate boring locations are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. Photographs of the site taken at the time of drilling are included with this report. The twenty-one (21) test borings, as requested by our client, were completed using a track mounted limited access Geo-Probe 7822DT drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and sampling operations and were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers. The primary purpose of using the Geo-Probe rig was to minimize damage to the existing agricultural field as requested by the current landowner. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained using split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively. In the split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are advanced into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the split-barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure, relatively intact samples are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to our laboratory for further examination, classification, and testing. Laboratory moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. Atterberg limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed on select samples to evaluate the quantity and plasticity of fines in the subgrade samples. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the potential for the subgrade materials to change volume with variation in moisture and load. Soluble sulfate tests were completed on select samples to evaluate potential adverse reactions to site-cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by an engineer and classified in general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System, based on the soil’s texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 3 Classification System is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with this report. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The proposed development lot is located at the northeast corner of 9th Street and Suniga Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. The project site is surfaced with fescue grass. The site is relatively flat with approximately 3 (±) feet of relief from north to south. EEC field personnel were on site during drilling to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered and direct the drilling activities. Field logs prepared by EEC site personnel were based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The final boring logs included with this report may contain modifications to the field logs based on results of laboratory testing and evaluation. Based on results of the field borings and laboratory testing, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. The subsurface soils encountered beneath surficial vegetation, generally consisted of cohesive to slightly cohesive lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils extending to granular gravel/sand with silt/clay soils at depths of approximately ½ to 8 feet. The cohesive soils were generally dry to moist and soft/very loose to stiff/dense and exhibited nil to low with an occasional high swell potential (at boring B-15) and slight tendency to hydro-compact at current moisture and density conditions. Gravel/sand with silt/clay soils were encountered below the cohesive to slightly cohesive soils and extended to the depths explored at approximately 4 to 13 feet below the site grades. Zones of larger cobbles were also encountered in the gravel/sand soils. The gravel/sand soils were generally dry to moist and medium dense to very dense. Maximum nominal size gravel/aggregate particles as determined by the grain-size distribution analyses ranged from approximate ½-inch to 1-inch. Intermittent larger size gravel particles and apparent cobbles were encountered at increased depths within the granular zone at various boring locations. Although larger size particles were apparently encountered during the drilling, the actual size of the larger materials cannot be determined from auger drilling. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and bedrock types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Observations were made while drilling and after completion of the borings to detect the presence and depth to hydrostatic groundwater. At the time of drilling/after completion of drilling and on May 19, 2022, groundwater was observed in the two deepest borings; B-14 and B-20 which advanced to depths of approximately 13 and 10 feet below the site grades at depths of approximately 7 to 9 feet, respectively. Groundwater was not observed in the rest of the borings advanced to maximum depths of 7 feet below the ground surface at the time of drilling. The borings were backfilled upon completion of the drilling operations/follow up reading; therefore, subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions, irrigation demands on and/or adjacent to the site and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. Longer term monitoring of water levels in cased wells, which are sealed from the influence of surface water would be required to more accurately evaluate fluctuations in groundwater levels at the site. We have typically noted deepest groundwater levels in late winter and shallowest groundwater levels in mid to late summer. Zones of perched and/or trapped water can be encountered at times throughout the year in more permeable zones in the subgrade soils and perched water is commonly observed in subgrade soils immediately above lower permeability bedrock. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Swell – Consolidation Test Results The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils or bedrock to help determine foundation, floor slab, and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively intact samples obtained directly from the California barrel sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a predetermined load. All inundated samples are monitored for swell and consolidation. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse after inundation, expressed as a percent of the sample’s initial thickness. After the initial inundation period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and consolidation. For this assessment, we conducted thirteen (13) swell-consolidation tests on samples recovered from various intervals/depths. The swell index values for the in-situ soil samples analyzed revealed low to moderate swell characteristics as indicated on the attached swell test summaries. The (+) test results indicate the soil materials swell potential characteristics while the (-) test results indicate the Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 5 soils materials collapse potential characteristics when inundated with water. The following table summarizes the swell-consolidation laboratory test results for samples obtained during our field explorations for the subject site. Table I – Laboratory Swell-Consolidation Test Results No of Samples Tested Pre-Load / Inundation Pressure, PSF Description of Material In-Situ Characteristics Range of Swell – Index Test Results Range of Moisture Contents, % Range of Dry Densities, PCF Low End, % High End, % Low End, PCF High End, PCF Low End (+/-) % High End, (+/-) % 13 500 Lean Clay to Silty/clayey sand or Sand/Gravel with silt/clay 2.3 24.2 99.3 137.1 (-) 2.40 (+) 5.9 Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information presented below to provide uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of performance risk to measured swell. “The representative percent swell values are not necessarily measured values; rather, they are a judgment of the swell of the soil and/or bedrock profile likely to influence slab performance.” Geotechnical engineers use this information to also evaluate the swell potential risks for foundation performance based on the risk categories. Table II - Recommended Representative Swell Potential Descriptions and Corresponding Slab Performance Risk Categories Slab Performance Risk Category Representative Percent Swell (500 psf Surcharge) Representative Percent Swell (1000 psf Surcharge) Low 0 to < 3 0 < 2 Moderate 3 to < 5 2 to < 4 High 5 to < 8 4 to < 6 Very High > 8 > 6 Based on the laboratory test results, the swell samples analyzed for this project at current moisture contents and dry densities conditions were generally within nil to low with and occasional high (boring B-15) swell range and showed slight tendency to hydro-compact when inundated with water. General Considerations The geotechnical recommendations provided herein are based on our subsurface exploration to depths of approximately 7 feet below the site grades within the proposed development area. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 6 Further/supplemental exploration for completing/improving the accuracy of the recommendation, when possible, may be necessary. Based on the available field and laboratory testing information, the overburden soils on this lot include approximately ½ to 8 feet of lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils overlying gravel/sand soils. Low to an occasional high swell potential was exhibited by a near surface clay sample. In our opinion this is likely due to the dry and very stiff conditions of the lean clay with sand soils. In general, clay soils tend to swell when inundated with water when in-situ moisture contents are less than -2% dry of optimum moisture content. When moisture conditioned and re-compacted to near optimum moisture and density conditions, the swell potential of clay soils can be significantly reduced. The site preparation section of this report includes recommendations for an over excavation moisture treatment, and re-compaction procedure to reduce the risk of movement for the soils underlying the proposed site improvements. Although these methods reduce the overall risk of potential movement, that risk cannot be completely eliminated. Groundwater was observed at depths of 7 and 9 feet in the two borings which advance to greatest depths of 10 and 13 feet below the site grades. Further exploration to establish the more accurate depth to groundwater is recommended. We suggest that floor slab subgrade(s) be placed a minimum of 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels. If final site grading consists of cuts extending floor slabs to less than 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater, consideration could be given to designing and installing a perimeter drainage system or to elevating/raising the site grades to establish the minimum required 4-foot separation to the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater. The drainage system should be constructed around the exterior perimeter of the foundation and sloped at a minimum 1/8 inch per foot to a suitable outlet, such as a sump and pump system or daylighted away from the building. The drainage system should consist of a properly sized perforated pipe, embedded in free-draining gravel, placed in a trench at least 12 inches in width. Gravel should extend a minimum of 3 inches beneath the bottom of the pipe, and at least 1 to 1-1/2 feet above the bottom of the foundation wall. The system should be underlain with a polyethylene moisture barrier, sealed to the foundation walls, and extending at least to the edge of the backfill zone. The gravel should be covered with drainage fabric prior to placement of foundation backfill. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 7 Site Preparation Prior to placement of any fill and/or improvements, we recommend any existing topsoil, vegetation, and undocumented fill, and any unsuitable materials be removed from the planned development areas. In areas such as the location of the boring B-15 where high swell potential was identified/will possibly be identified in the future, we recommend a minimum of 4 feet of over excavation below the building floor slab and a minimum 2 feet of over excavation and replacement below all spread footings. Due to the shallower ground water table, if the over excavation below footings nears the groundwater table and soft/compressible soils are encountered, consideration could be given to ground modification of the subgrades prior to placement of the over excavation backfill soils. Ground modification would consist of completing the 2-foot over excavation below spread footings as described above. At the bottom of the 2-foot over excavation zone, to create a working platform and stabilized zone below the fill materials, we recommend a minimum 6 to 8-inch zone of an interlocking coarse granular, fractured face 3 to 1½ inch minus aggregate material, such as recycled concrete or equivalent be placed and incorporated/pushed into the soft subgrade soils to create a stable platform. Fill materials placed above the stabilized zone should consist of structural fill in these areas. In general, over excavations should not be extended all the way into the groundwater table. If the proposed over excavations are expected to extend into groundwater, we should be consulted to review the recommended over excavation depth and provide revised recommendations. After stripping, completing all cuts, over excavation, and removing all unacceptable materials/soils, and prior to placement of any fill or site improvements, we recommend the exposed soils be scarified to a minimum depth of 9-inches, adjusted in moisture content to within ±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698. Fill materials used to develop site grades, and for foundation backfill should consist of an approved low volume change material. In our opinion, soils similar to the site lean clay with sand to clayey/silty sand materials or imported granular structural fill material could be used. Imported granular materials should be graded similarly to a CDOT Class 5, 6 or 7 aggregate base. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted in moisture content to within ±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 8 material's standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698. Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site structure can result in unacceptable performance. Foundation Systems Based on the soils observed at the test boring locations, we believe the building could be supported on conventional footing foundations bearing on approved in-situ site soils or on a zone of approved placed and compacted fill material prepared as outlined above. Footings bearing on approved in-situ native soils or on approved engineered fill material placed and compacted as described above could be designed for a maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. A minimum dead load pressure would not be required. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load includes full dead load and live load conditions. Cobble sized materials may be encountered beneath foundation areas. Such conditions could create point loads on the bottom of footings, increasing the potential for differential foundation movement. If such conditions are encountered in the footing/post-tension-slab trench excavations, the cobbles should be removed and be replaced with engineered fill, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted. After placement of the fill materials, for foundation support, care should be taken to avoid wetting or drying of those materials. Bearing materials, which are loosened or disturbed by the construction activities or materials, which become dry and desiccated or wet and softened, should be removed and replaced or reworked in place prior to construction of the overlying improvements. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located at least 30 inches below adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. We recommend formed continuous footings have a minimum width of 16 inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 30 inches We estimate the total long-term settlement of footings designed as outlined above would be about 1- inch. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 9 Post Tensioned Slab (PTS) Foundation System It is our opinion that the proposed apartment and auxiliary/garage buildings could be supported on post-tension slab foundations bearing on either natural undisturbed soils or on a zone of over excavated and replaced subgrades as outlined in section titled Site Preparation of this report. In addition to the over excavation and replacement procedures where necessary to establish a uniform bearing zone, the post-tension foundation system should reduce cracking and differential movement of the slab due to potential movement of the underlying subgrades. Care should still be taken to ensure the PT foundations are placed on uniform materials for each building. Outlined in Table III are post-tension slab design criteria based on the subsurface conditions observed and the above recommendations for subgrade preparation below the site structures. The subject site, in our opinion, does not exhibit extensive swell potential or compressible characteristics; therefore, would be suitable for a BRAB Type I or II slab design in general accordance with the 3rd Edition of the Post-Tensioning Institute design manual. Post-tension slab foundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with the appropriate design criteria below. Table III - Recommended post-tension slab design criteria. Maximum Net Allowable Bearing Pressure, psf 2,000 psf Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) 200 pci Young’s Modulus (E) Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) 290 psi/in Slab-Subgrade friction coefficient,  on polyethylene sheeting 0.75 on cohesionless soils (sands) 1.0 on cohesive soils (clays) 2.0 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork Subgrades for floor slabs, flatwork and site pavements should be prepared as outlined in the section Site Preparation. Any over excavations should be completed, and fill materials should be placed as described in the section Site Preparation. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) or 200 pci could be used for floors supported on controlled/engineered fill materials or imported structural fill materials, respectively. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 10 Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:  Interior partition walls should be separated/floated from floor slabs to allow for independent movement.  Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns, and utility lines to allow for independent movement.  Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking.  Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in a similar manner as previously described for imported structural fill material.  Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.  Other design and construction considerations as outlined in the ACI Design Manual should be followed. For interior floor slabs, depending on the type of floor covering and adhesive used, those material manufacturers may require that specific subgrade, capillary break, and/or vapor barrier requirements be met. The project architect and/or material manufacturers should be consulted with for specific under slab requirements. We estimate the long-term movement of floor slabs designed and constructed as outlined above would be 1 inch or less. Care should be exercised after development of the floor slab and exterior flatwork subgrades to prevent disturbance of the in-place materials. Subgrade soils which are loosened or disturbed by construction activities or soils which become wet and softened or dry and desiccated should be removed and replaced or reworked in place prior to placement of the overlying slabs. Lateral Earth Pressures Portions of the new structures or site improvements which are constructed below grade may be subject to lateral earth pressures. Passive lateral earth pressures may help resist the driving forces for retaining wall or other similar site structures. Active lateral earth pressures could be used for design of structures where some movement of the structure is anticipated, such as retaining walls. The total deflection of structures for design with active earth pressure is estimated to be on the order of one half of one percent of the height of the down slope side of the structure. We recommend at- rest pressures be used for design of structures where rotation of the walls is restrained, such as below Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 11 grade walls for a building. Passive pressures and friction between the footing and bearing soils could be used for design of resistance to movement of retaining walls. Coefficient values for backfill with anticipated types of soils for calculation of active, at-rest and passive earth pressures are provided in Table IV below. Equivalent fluid pressure is equal to the coefficient times the appropriate soil unit weight. Those coefficient values are based on horizontal backfill with backfill soils consisting of on-site essentially cohesive subsoils. For at-rest and active earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure would result in reduced driving forces with slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30 inches of soil on the passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, should not be used as a part of the passive resistance value. Frictional resistance is equal to the tangent of the friction angle times the normal force. Surcharge loads or point loads placed in the backfill can also create additional loads on below grade walls. Those situations should be designed on an individual basis. Table IV - Lateral Earth Pressures Soil Type On-Site Overburden Cohesive Soils Medium Dense Granular Material Wet Unit Weight (psf) 125 135 Saturated Unit Weight (psf) 135 140 Friction Angle () – (assumed) 20° 35° Active Pressure Coefficient 0.49 0.27 At-rest Pressure Coefficient 0.66 0.43 Passive Pressure Coefficient 2.04 3.69 The outlined values do not include factors of safety nor allowances for hydrostatic loads and are based on assumed friction angles, which should be verified after potential material sources have been identified. Care should be taken to develop appropriate drainage systems behind below grade walls to eliminate potential for hydrostatic loads developing on the walls. Those systems would likely include perimeter drain systems extending to sump areas or free outfall where reverse flow cannot occur into the system. Where necessary, appropriate hydrostatic load values should be used for design. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 12 Seismic Site Classification The site soil conditions consist of lean clay with sand to silty/clayey sand soils underlain by gravel/sand soils. For those site conditions, the International Building Code indicates a Seismic Site Classification of C. Pavements Pavement subgrades should be prepared as outlined in the section Site Preparation. If fly ash or Portland cement treatment is chosen, we recommend the addition of at least 13% Class C fly ash or approximately 4% of Portland cement, to the in-place subgrade materials, based on dry weights. The Class C fly ash r Portland cement should be thoroughly blended with the in-place soils to a depth of 12 inches below the top of subgrade. The blended materials should be adjusted to be within ±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the materials maximum dry density as determined in accordance with the standard Proctor procedure for stabilized materials (ASTM Specification D558). We expect the site pavements will include areas designated for light-duty automobile traffic as well as some areas for heavier automobile and heavy-duty truck traffic. For design purposes, an assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 7 is used in the light-duty pavement areas and an EDLA of 15 is used in the heavy-duty pavement areas. An assumed R-Value of 10 is being used for the pavement design, based off of the observed subsurface conditions and soil classification. Note that Larimer County requires a minimum 5 inches of asphalt for minor collector roadways and a minimum ABC thickness of 6 inches for all roadways. Hot mix asphalt (HMA) underlain by aggregate base course or a non-reinforced concrete pavement may be feasible options for the proposed on-site paved sections. HMA pavements may show rutting and distress in areas of heavy truck traffic or in truck loading and turning areas. Concrete pavements should be considered in those areas. Suggested pavement sections are provided in the table below. The outlined pavement sections are minimums and thus, periodic maintenance should be expected. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 13 Table V - Minimum Pavement Thickness Recommendations Light Duty Areas Heavy Duty Areas 18-kip EDLA 18-kip ESAL Reliability Resilient Modulus (Based on R-Value=10) PSI Loss 7 51,100 75% 3562 2.5 15 109,500 80% 3562 2.2 Design Structure Number 2.47 2.88 Composite Section – Option A (assume Stable Subgrade) Hot Mix Asphalt Aggregate Base Course Structure Number 4" 7" (2.53) 5" 7" (2.97) Composite Section with Fly Ash Treated Subgrade Hot Mix Asphalt Aggregate Base Course Fly Ash or Cement Treated Subgrade (assume half-credit) Structure Number 3-1/2" 6" 12" (2.80) 4" 6" 12" (3.02) PCC (Non-reinforced) – placed on a stable subgrade 5½" 6" We recommend aggregate base be graded to meet a Class 5 or Class 6 aggregate base. Aggregate base should be adjusted to a workable moisture content and compacted to achieve a minimum of 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density. HMA should be graded to meet a S (75) or SX (75) with PG 58-28 or 64-22 binder. HMA should be compacted to achieve 92 to 96% of the mix's theoretical maximum specific gravity (Rice Value). Portland cement concrete should be an acceptable exterior pavement mix with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,500 psi and should be air entrained. The recommended pavement sections are minimums; thus, periodic maintenance should be expected. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut in accordance with ACI recommendations. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Long-term pavement performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining subgrade moisture levels and providing for preventive maintenance. The following recommendations should be considered the minimum:  The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface drainage. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 14  Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g., garden centers, wash racks).  Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately.  Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils.  Place and compact low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter, and  Placing curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils without the use of base course materials. If during or after placement of the initial lift of pavement, the area is observed to be yielding under vehicle traffic or construction equipment, it is recommended that EEC be contacted for methods of stabilization, or a change in the pavement section. Swimming Pool Design and Construction Current plans for the proposed swimming pool were not provided to us prior to preparation of this subsurface exploration report; however, we would assume the swimming pool would be on the order of approximately 4 to 8 feet in depth. The construction and performance of the pool may be affected by the presence of groundwater, which was encountered at depths as shallow as 7 to 9 feet below existing site grades. Consideration should be given to the use of reinforced gunnite concrete/shotcrete for pool construction. This material can normally withstand relatively large soil movements without cracking. Consideration should also be given to designing and installing a drainage system around and beneath the pool. If elected to design and install a drainage system, the drain should consist of a minimum six-inch layer of clean gravel (minimum 3/4-inch size) beneath, and along the sides of the pool. The top of the drain layer should be sealed with 18 inches of relatively impermeable soil at the surface. The gravel layer beneath the pool should be sloped so that it will drain into tiles or perforated drainpipes. The layout of the perforated pipe should include at least one pipe running down the center of the pool lengthwise. Cross-connecting pipes, spanning with the pool, should be placed at approximate six-foot centers. The cross-connecting pipes should be joined to the center pipe with solid "tees" or "cross" connections. The center pipes should be sloped to a positive gravity outlet or sloped to a sump located in the equipment room, permitting pump discharge. If the ownership group has successful previous experience of constructing a pool without the suggested drainage system, and accepts the risk of potential damage, the drainage system could be eliminated. The swimming pool should be bedded in a layer of well compacted free-draining granular material to provide a solid base for construction. A clean material with a maximum 1-1/2-inch size and a Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 15 minimum 3/8-inch size is recommended. A reinforced gunnite/shotcrete pool is acceptable for the site provided that the groundwater is not penetrated during construction. If the excavation extends into the groundwater, a one piece fiberglass or similar pool could be considered. As a precaution, pressure relieve valves should be placed in the deep end of any pool constructed to prevent flotation should groundwater rise when the pool is empty. The bottom of the excavation beneath the gravel layer and the pipe should be lined with an impervious membrane (polyethylene film or equal) in order to reduce potential moisture fluctuations in the subgrade soils. Pressure relieve valves could be considered in the base of the pool to prevent excessive uplift pressures from developing in the event of failure of the drain system. The soils that will support pool deck slabs around the pool could experience movement with increasing moisture content. To reduce possible damage that could be caused by the underlying subgrade section, we recommend:  deck slabs be supported on approved engineered/controlled fill material with no, or very low expansion potential  strict moisture-density control during placement of subgrade fills  placement of effective control joints on relatively close centers and isolation joints between slabs and other structural elements  provision for adequate drainage in areas adjoining the slabs  use of designs which allow vertical movement between the deck slabs and adjoining structural elements Fill, backfill, and surface drainage in the pool area should be placed in accordance with the recommendations in the Earthwork section of the appended GEO-report. Grading should be provided for diversion of deck surface runoff away from the pool area. In no case should water be allowed to pond around the slab perimeter. Water Soluble Sulfates (SO4) The water-soluble sulfate (SO4) content of the on-site overburden subsoils, taken during our subsurface exploration at random locations and intervals are provided below. Based on reported sulfate content test results, the Class/severity of sulfate exposure for concrete in contact with the on- site subsoils is provided in this report. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 16 Table VI - Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Sample Location Description % of Soil by Weight B-4 S-1 2' Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC) 0.33 B-12 S-1 2' Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC) 0.18 B-16 S-1 4' Clayey Sand (SC) 0.05 B-20 S-3 9' Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM) 0.03 Based on the results as presented above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site soils have a low to severe risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete, therefore, ACI Class S2 requirements should be followed for concrete placed in the overburden soils. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. Other Considerations Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure with a minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10 feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Flatter slopes could be used in hardscapes areas although positive drainage should be maintained. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping adjacent to the building, parking, and drive areas to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the pavements, foundations, or stem walls. Placement of plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Excavations into the on-site soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the on-site lean clay soils can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction while excavations extending to the gravel/sand soils may experience caving/sloughing. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. GENERAL COMMENTS The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect any variations, which may occur between borings or across the Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC EEC Project No. 1222009 June 9, 2022 Page 17 site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications, so comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use for Crowne Partners, Inc. for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical engineer. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC    DRILLING AND EXPLORATION DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:  SS:  Split Spoon ‐ 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted  PS:  Piston Sample  ST:  Thin‐Walled Tube ‐ 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted  WS:  Wash Sample    R:  Ring Barrel Sampler ‐ 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D. unless otherwise noted  PA:  Power Auger       FT:  Fish Tail Bit  HA:  Hand Auger       RB:  Rock Bit  DB:  Diamond Bit = 4", N, B     BS:  Bulk Sample  AS:  Auger Sample      PM:  Pressure Meter  HS:  Hollow Stem Auger      WB:  Wash Bore     Standard "N" Penetration:  Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2‐inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted.     WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:  WL  :  Water Level      WS  :  While Sampling  WCI:  Wet Cave in      WD :  While Drilling  DCI:  Dry Cave in       BCR:  Before Casing Removal  AB  :  After Boring      ACR:  After Casting Removal    Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated.  In pervious soils, the indicated  levels may reflect the location of ground water.  In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of ground water levels is not  possible with only short term observations.    DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION    Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification  system and the ASTM Designations D‐2488.  Coarse Grained  Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a  #200 sieve; they are described as:  boulders, cobbles, gravel or  sand.  Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight  retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as :  clays, if they  are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non‐plastic.   Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor  constituents may be added according to the relative  proportions based on grain size.  In addition to gradation,  coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in‐ place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their  consistency.  Example:  Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff  (CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM).     CONSISTENCY OF FINE‐GRAINED SOILS  Unconfined Compressive  Strength, Qu, psf    Consistency             <      500    Very Soft     500 ‐   1,000    Soft  1,001 ‐   2,000    Medium  2,001 ‐   4,000    Stiff  4,001 ‐   8,000    Very Stiff  8,001 ‐ 16,000    Very Hard    RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE‐GRAINED SOILS:  N‐Blows/ft    Relative Density      0‐3    Very Loose      4‐9    Loose      10‐29    Medium Dense      30‐49    Dense      50‐80    Very Dense      80 +    Extremely Dense                            PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK    DEGREE OF WEATHERING:   Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on  joints.  May be color change.     Moderate Some decomposition and color change  throughout.     High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely  broken.     HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION:    Limestone and Dolomite:  Hard Difficult to scratch with knife.    Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife.     Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail.     Soft Can be scratched with fingernail.     Shale, Siltstone and Claystone:  Hard Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot be  scratched with fingernail.     Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail.  Hard     Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with  fingers.     Sandstone and Conglomerate:  Well Capable of scratching a knife blade.  Cemented     Cemented Can be scratched with knife.     Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers.  Cemented                                    Group Symbol Group Name Cu≥4 and 1<Cc≤3E GW Well-graded gravel F Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E GP Poorly-graded gravel F Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel G,H Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel F,G,H Cu≥6 and 1<Cc≤3E SW Well-graded sand I Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E SP Poorly-graded sand I Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G,H,I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G,H,I inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above "A" Line CL Lean clay K,L,M PI<4 or plots below "A" Line ML Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,N Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O inorganic PI plots on or above "A" Line CH Fat clay K,L,M PI plots below "A" Line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,P Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O Highly organic soils PT Peat (D30)2 D10 x D60 GW-GM well graded gravel with silt NPI≥4 and plots on or above "A" line. GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay OPI≤4 or plots below "A" line. GP-GM poorly-graded gravel with silt PPI plots on or above "A" line. GP-GC poorly-graded gravel with clay QPI plots below "A" line. SW-SM well-graded sand with silt SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC IIf soil contains >15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name JIf Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a CL- ML, Silty clay Unified Soil Classification System Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Sands 50% or more coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Fine-Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve <0.75 OL Gravels with Fines more than 12% fines Clean Sands Less than 5% fines Sands with Fines more than 12% fines Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines Gravels more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Coarse - Grained Soils more than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve CGravels with 5 to 12% fines required dual symbols: Kif soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. <0.75 OH Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor ABased on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve ECu=D60/D10 Cc= HIf fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name LIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MIf soil contains ≥30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. DSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name.FIf soil contains ≥15% sand, add "with sand" to GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC- CM, or SC-SM. Silts and Clays Liquid Limit less than 50 Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 50 or more 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) LIQUID LIMIT (LL) ML OR OL MH OR OH For Classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils. Equation of "A"-line Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5 then PI-0.73 (LL-20) Equation of "U"-line Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7, then PI=0.9 (LL-8) CL-ML B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 B-13 B-14 B-15 B-16 B-17 B-18 B-19 B-20 B-21 1 2 Boring Location Diagram Graham Property - Apartment Complex Fort Collins, Colorado EEC Project #: 1222009 Date: May 2022 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Approximate Boring Locations 1 Legend Site Photos Photos taNen in approximate location, in direction oI arroZ GRAHAM PROPERTY APARTMENT COMPLEX  FORT COLLINS, COLORADO  EEC PROJECT NO. 1222009  MAY  2022        DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 _ _ SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)3 brown / red, moist _ _ very dense 4 _ _ CS 5 50/10"4.5 92.5 24 9 30.3 None -1.1% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY LOG OF BORING B-1PROJECT NO: 1222009 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (SC)_ _ reddish brown, moist 2 soft _ _ CS 3 2 3000 16.2 108.4 28 15 80 None -0.1% _ _ 4 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, moist SS 5 30 7.5 26.3 dense _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-2 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _ reddish brown, moist 2 very loose to loose _ _ CS 3 3 2000 14.4 114.6 _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 7 1500 13.7 SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)_ _ brown / red, moist 6 _ _ 7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC A-LIMITS SWELL FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-3 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ brown, dry 2 dense _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.33 CS 3 50 2.6 _ _ 4 SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SW-SC)_ _ brown / red, dry SS 5 50/6"1.9 9 very dense _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-4 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _ brown, dry 2 medium dense _ _ CS 3 10 6.5 100.4 29 14 8.1 None -0.1% _ _ 4 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry SS 5 50/11 3.1 very dense _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-5 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM/SC)_ _ brown, dry 2 _ _ 3 _ _ 4 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry CS 5 33 1.6 dense _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-6 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 _ _ 3 _ _ 4 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry CS 5 10 2.7 101.3 24 11 33.9 2000 PSF 0.7% medium dense _ _ 6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-7 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 _ _ 3 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry 4 very dense _ _ CS 5 50/6"1.0 117.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'_ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-8 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 _ _ SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SW-SC)3 brown / red, dry _ _ very dense 4 _ _ CS 5 50/6"1.4 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 4.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-9 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM)_ _ brown / red, dry CS 3 29 2.3 108.9 NL NP 18 None -0.3% medium dense to very dense _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 50/6"1.3 _ _ 6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-10 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)1 _ _ SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM)2 brown / red, dry _ _ medium dense to very dense CS 3 12 4000 3.6 122.0 NL NP 11.5 None None _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 35 1.7 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-11 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ brown, moist 2 loose _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.18 CS 3 4 500 13.1 116.0 None -1.7% _ _ 4 _ _ CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)SS 5 40 8.4 brown / red, moist, dense _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-12 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ 2 _ _ CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)3 brown / red, dry _ _ very dense 4 _ _ CS 5 50/7"4.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5'_ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-13 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)_ _ brown, moist 2 medium stiff _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 5 4500 15.4 113.2 31 18 61.4 None -0.3% _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ GRAVEL WITH CLAY (GP-GC)9 brown / red, dry _ _ dense 10 42 7.7 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ rock and cobbles 13 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 13'_ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-14 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING 8' SURFACE ELEV N/A 5/19/2022 7' FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)_ _ brown, moist 2 stiff _ _ CS 3 10 9000+10.5 108.0 6000 PSF 5.9% _ _ 4 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry SS 5 29 3.0 medium dense _ _ 6 _ _ 7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 13'_ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-15 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 CLAYEY SAND (SC)_ _ brown, moist 2 loose _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.05 CS 5 5 1000 13.7 102.1 25 12 39.8 None -1.2% _ _ 6 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ 7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 7'_ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-16 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY / CLAYEY SAND (SM / SC)_ _ brown, moist 2 very loose to loose _ _ CS 3 2 500 24.2 101.0 None -2.4% _ _ 4 _ _ SS 5 4 11.6 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ 6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 6'_ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-17 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)1 _ _ 2 _ _ CS 3 28 9000+9.6 CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SC)_ _ brown / red, dry 4 medium dense to very dense _ _ SS 5 50/5"4.0 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-18 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)1 _ _ SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)2 reddish brown, dry _ _ dense 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 34 4.0 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-19 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/12/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/12/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SILTY SAND (SM)_ _ brown, dry 2 dense _ _ CS 3 33 5500 6.0 79.0 21 6 40.5 900 PSF 0.7% _ _ 4 SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (SP-SM)_ _ brown / red, dry SS 5 50/6"1.0 very dense _ _ 6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4) = 0.03 CS 10 50/8"10.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10'_ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-20 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING 9' SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL DATE: RIG TYPE: GEO-PROBE FOREMAN: AKH AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -200 TYPE (FEET)(BLOWS/FT)(PSF)(%)(PCF)LL PI (%)PRESSURE % @ 500 PSF FESCUE GRASS _ _ 1 SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL (SP-SC)_ _ brown, moist 2 very dense _ _ 3 _ _ 4 _ _ CS 5 50/5.5"17.7 _ _ BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 5.5'6 _ _ 7 _ _ 8 _ _ 9 _ _ 10 _ _ 11 _ _ 12 _ _ 13 _ _ 14 _ _ 15 _ _ 16 _ _ 17 _ _ 18 _ _ 19 _ _ 20 _ _ 21 _ _ 22 _ _ 23 _ _ 24 _ _ 25 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC GRAHAM PROPERTY PROJECT NO: 1222009 LOG OF BORING B-21 MAY 2022 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH START DATE 5/11/2022 WHILE DRILLING None SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A FINISH DATE 5/11/2022 AFTER DRILLING N/A *Auger refusal with Geo Probe drilling operation within dense to very dense to very dense gravel and cobble zone A-LIMITS SWELL Project: Location: Project #: Date: Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 Beginning Moisture: 16.2%Dry Density: 116.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 18.8% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Sample Location:Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 28 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 80.0% SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Lean Clay with Sand (CL) -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location:Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 24 Plasticity Index: 9 % Passing #200: 30.3% Beginning Moisture: 14.4%Dry Density: 114.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.7% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sand with Clay and Gravel (SW-SC) Sample Location:Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 14 % Passing #200: 8.1% Beginning Moisture: 6.5%Dry Density: 117.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.0% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sand with Clay and Gravel (SW-SC) Sample Location:Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 24 Plasticity Index: 11 % Passing #200: 33.9% Beginning Moisture: 2.7%Dry Density: 137.1 pcf Ending Moisture: 10.2% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf % Swell @ 500:0.7% Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sand with Silt and Gravel (SW-SM) Sample Location:Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: NL Plasticity Index: NP % Passing #200: 18.0% Beginning Moisture: 2.3%Dry Density: 120.4 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.1% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sand with Silt and Gravel (SW-SM) Sample Location:Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: NL Plasticity Index: NP % Passing #200: 11.5% Beginning Moisture: 3.6%Dry Density: 130 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.4% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Silty / Clayey Sand (SM/SC) Sample Location:Boring 12, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 12.9%Dry Density: 120.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 16.8% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sand Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location:Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 31 Plasticity Index: 18 % Passing #200: 61.1% Beginning Moisture: 15.4%Dry Density: 120.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 15.8% Swell Pressure:% Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Sandy Lean Clay (CL) Sample Location:Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 10.5%Dry Density: 121.2 pcf Ending Moisture: 17.9% Swell Pressure: 6000 psf % Swell @ 500:5.9% Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location:Boring 16, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 25 Plasticity Index: 12 % Passing #200: 39.8% Beginning Moisture: 13.7%Dry Density: 111 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.3% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Silty / Clayey Sand (SM / SC) Sample Location:Boring 17, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: - -Plasticity Index: - -% Passing #200: - - Beginning Moisture: 24.2%Dry Density: 103.6 pcf Ending Moisture: 19.3% Swell Pressure: None psf % Swell @ 500:None Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location:Boring 18, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 29 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing #200: 70.7% Beginning Moisture: 9.3%Dry Density: 99.3 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.0% Swell Pressure: 1200 psf % Swell @ 500:1.2% Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added Project: Location: Project #: Date: SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description:Silty, Clayey Sand (SC-SM) Sample Location:Boring 20, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 21 Plasticity Index: 6 % Passing #200: 40.5% Beginning Moisture: 6.0%Dry Density: 109.7 pcf Ending Moisture: 21.3% Swell Pressure: 900 psf % Swell @ 500:0.7% Graham Property Apartments Fort Collins, Colorado 1222009 May 2022 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10Percent MovementLoad (TSF)SwellConsolidationWater Added 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-1, S-2, at 4'-5.5' Sample Desc.: Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC) Date: May 2022 73 66 62 27 26.3 61 58 51 44 34 100 100 89 79 76 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 1.63 0.58Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-1, S-2, at 4'-5.5'D100D60D500.21 0.08Fine21.67 0.35D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-2, S-1, at 4' Sample Desc.: Silty, Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC-SM) Date: May 2022 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing 100 100 83 72 71 62 55 53 15 14.6 47 36 32 31 21 0.41‐‐‐Fine‐‐‐ ‐‐‐D30D10CuCC37.50 8.21 2.19Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-2, S-1, at 4'D100D60D50EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 20226"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-4, S-1, at 2' Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW) Date: May 2022 65 52 41 12 9.0 36 32 24 20 17 100 100 94 82 68 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 7.75 4.40Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-4, S-1, at 2'D100D60D501.02 0.10Fine79.39 1.39D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-6, S-1, at 4'-5.5' Sample Desc.: Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) Date: May 2022 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing 100 100 78 78 68 61 50 41 10 6.7 38 32 23 19 16 1.04 0.08Fine119.09 1.62D30D10CuCC37.50 8.93 4.94Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-6, S-1, at 4'-5.5'D100D60D50EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 20226"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-11, S-2, at 4'-5.5' Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW) Date: May 2022 68 51 43 14 9.6 40 33 26 22 19 100 100 96 85 79 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 7.16 4.36Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-11, S-2, at 4'-5.5'D100D60D500.94 0.08Fine95.51 1.66D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-12, S-2, at 4' Sample Desc.: Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC) Date: May 2022 70 61 56 32 23.1 55 51 46 43 40 100 100 92 77 72 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 4.24 1.08Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-12, S-2, at 4'D100D60D500.13‐‐‐Fine‐‐‐ ‐‐‐D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-14, S-2, at 9' Sample Desc.: Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) Date: May 2022 57 46 39 11 7.4 37 32 25 21 17 100 100 88 76 63 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 10.89 6.37Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-14, S-2, at 9'D100D60D501.01 0.12Fine87.74 0.75D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-19, S-1, at 4' Sample Desc.: Silty, Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC-SM) Date: May 2022 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing 100 100 94 80 75 73 63 54 17 12.8 52 45 35 30 25 0.42 0.08Fine53.36 0.60D30D10CuCC37.50 4.00 1.80Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-19, S-1, at 4'D100D60D50EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 20226"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size 2 1/2" (63 mm) 2" (50 mm) 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 1" (25 mm) 3/4" (19 mm) 1/2" (12.5 mm) 3/8" (9.5 mm) No. 4 (4.75 mm) No. 8 (2.36 mm) No. 10 (2 mm) No. 16 (1.18 mm) No. 30 (0.6 mm) No. 40 (0.425 mm) No. 50 (0.3 mm) No. 100 (0.15 mm) No. 200 (0.075 mm) Project: Graham Property Apartments Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project No: 1222009 Sample ID: B-21, S-1, at 4' Sample Desc.: Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) Date: May 2022 85 64 52 15 10.8 49 42 31 26 22 100 100 95 93 85 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136) 100 Sieve Size Percent Passing EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLCSummary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136)Date:Project:Location:Project No:Sample ID:CobbleSilt or ClayGravelCoarse FineSandCoarse MediumMay 202237.50 3.94 2.10Graham Property ApartmentsFort Collins, Colorado1222009B-21, S-1, at 4'D100D60D500.56 0.08Fine52.59 1.05D30D10CuCC6"5"4"3"2.5"2"1.5"1"3/4"1/2"3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 10No. 16No. 30No. 40No. 50No. 100No. 20001020304050607080901000.010.11101001000Finer by Weight (%)Grain Size (mm)Standard Sieve Size