HomeMy WebLinkAbout20073274.tiff TETRA TECH RMC
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Weld County Planin Department
FROM: Gary Linden
RE: The Waterfront at Foster Lake Mineral Deposits
DATE: August 25,2006
Review of Colton and Fitch(1974)indicates the low lying area adjacent to the Saint Vrain
River in the southeast corner of the site is a potential source of sand and gravel. However,
exploratory drilling(Wassenar,2006)did not encounter sand and gravel in this area. In
addition,soils mapping by the U.S.D.A. (2006)concludes that the site soils are a poor source
of gravel. No lots or development are planned in the low lying area adjacent to the river.
References
Colton R.B.and Fitch,H.R., 1974,"Map Showing Potential Sources of Gravel and Crushed-
Rock Aggregate, in the Boulder-Fort Collins-Greeley Area,Front Range Urban Corridor,
Colorado",U.S.G.S. Map I-855-D.
• U.S.D.A., 2006,"Gravel Source Rating for Weld County,Colorado, Southern Part",
U.S.D.A.,Natural Resources Conservation Service,National Cooperative Survey.
Wasenaar,2006, "Geotechnical Due Diligence Study,The Waterfront at Foster Lake,South
of State Highway 66 Between Weld County Road 7 And Interstate 25, Weld County,
Colorado",Project Number 88030,April 26,2006.
1900 S.Sunset Street Suite 1-1 Longmont CO 80501
• H Tel 303.772.5282 Fax 303.665.6959
:5 ICI 002_0IU(inadgi�t,tOpvµ Memomladoc www.ttrmc.com
2007-3274
•
SOIL SURVEY OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART
Waterfront at Foster Lake
499200 499600 500000 500400 500800 501200 501600 502000 502400 502800 it
rt o o�J� Foster Reservoir. �l . ,,
{
rJ Sanborn Reservoir !'� � �" �„ '� y '" � /
$
-1'1,:e:4e
li ' K �2d
oO • 1 S�1 py 4t O
& Sa r '
`\ ° i Fi g &
'40.t,;*,: vi ;
,,,,p.:-. „, .„ . , „. 7111, , ,.,"„ 1.,,) ' . ,"' 4;,'.'t ,'I , ) I'll ..,_ . i.
, (frid
3 o- ' . 1- d
_, , ii,... • Barbour Ponds 1 "I ' ' _ '4 .,e ' ,
499200 499600 500000 500400 500800 501200 501600 502000 502460 502800
Meters Feet
0 200 400 800 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
USDA Magma gasman _Web Soil Survey 1.1 ^8/152006
SOIL SURVEY OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART
Waterfront at Foster Lake
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Soil Map Units
O Cities Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Detailed Counties Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
a Detailed States
- Interstate Highways Coordinate System: UTM Zone 13
- Roads Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
--�I Rails Spatial Version of Data: 2
water Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:24000
Hydrography
Oceans
AYAVAV* Escarpment,bedrock
vnvnvnv. Escarpment,non-bedrock
- Gulley
111111111111111 Levee
Slope
W Blowout
® Borrow Pit
• Clay Spot
• Depression,closed
• Eroded Spot
X Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Gulley
A Lava Flow
® Landfill Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates:
4 Marsh or Swamp 1999
® Miscellaneous Water
v Rock Outcrop
* Saline Spot
. . Sandy Spot
3' Slide or Slip
O Sinkhole
fy Sodic Spot
?a seal Area The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and
digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.
o Stony Spot
As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
to dmy 3W,ry Spot
® Perennial Water
USDA Mound Resew-cal t Wet Spot Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
Soil Survey of Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Waterfront at Foster Lake
Map Unit Legend Summary
• Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
3 Aquolls and Aquents,gravelly 34.7 3.4
substratum
4 Aquolls and Aquepts,flooded 3.1 0.3
10 Bankard sandy loam,0 to 3 0.1 0.0
percent slopes
15 Colby loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 25.1 2.5
16 Colby loam,3 to 5 percent slopes 9.1 0.9
17 Colby loam,5 to 9 percent slopes 4.0 0.4
41 Nunn clay loam,0 to 1 percent 17.6 1.7
slopes
42 Nunn clay loam, Ito 3 percent 13.0 1.3
slopes
59 Shingle loam,3 to 9 percent 24.6 2.4
slopes
61 Tassel fine sandy loam,5 to 20 31.4 3.1
percent slopes
• 65 Thedalund loam,3 to 9 percent 38.2 3.7
slopes
81 Wiley-Colby complex,0 to 1 94.6 9.2
percent slopes
82 Wiley-Colby complex, Ito 3 614.6 60.0
percent slopes
83 Wiley-Colby complex,3 to 5 0.0 0.0
percent slopes
85 Water 115.0 11.2
•
USDA Nad Raven Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
C.nenrla.Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3
• • • .
GRAVEL SOURCE RATING FOR WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART
Waterfront at Foster Lake
499200 499600 500000 500400 500800 501200 501600 502000 502400 502800
T ^
Foster Reservoir .,. r.+
„ s Sanborn Reservoir' I
'' )ii
1 al •r' „
Ibt ,
ems, .,Alia
I , I
,
I.
t
v'
�rc a W t>. _w ,. or-- �: .:Barbou`Barbour Ponds r 11 9t. "" ,..„'
499200 499600 500000 500400 500800 501200 501600 502000 502400 502800
Meters Feet
0 200 400 800 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
USDA Natural Yew:ren Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
a ca.eerralir Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 5
• • •
GRAVEL SOURCE RATING FOR WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART
Waterfront at Foster Lake
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Gravel Source
(Dominant Condition,81t} Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Poor
Fair Coordinate System: UTM Zone 13
err: Good Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Not rated or not available Spatial Version of Data: 2
Soil Map Units Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:24000
O Cities
I Detailed Counties
MN Detailed States
- Interstate Highways
- Roads
I I Rails
Water
- Hydrography
Oceans
Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates:
1999
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and
digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.
As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
USDA NwnWYawvices Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
Gravel Source Rating Waterfront at Foster Lake
Tables - Gravel Source
• Summary by Map Unit - Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Soil Map Unit Name Rating Component Name Rating Total Percent of
Survey (Percent) Reasons Acres in AOI
Area Map AOI
Unit
Symbol
3 Aquolls and Poor Aquolls(55%) Bottom layer 34.7 3.4
Aquents,gravelly
substratum
Thickest layer
Aquents,gravelly Thickest layer
substratum(30%)
Bottom layer
4 Aquolls and Not rated Aquolls(55%) 3.1 0.3
Aquepts,flooded
Aquepts,flooded
(25%)
Haverson(10%)
Thedalund(10%)
10 Bankard sandy Poor Bankard(85%) Bottom layer 0.1 0.0
loam,0 to 3
percent slopes
Thickest layer
15 Colby loam, l to Poor Colby(85%) Bottom layer 25.1 2.5
3 percent slopes
Thickest layer
16 Colby loam,3 to Poor Colby(85%) Bottom layer 9.1 0.9
5 percent slopes
Thickest layer
17 Colby loam,5 to Poor Colby(90%) Bottom layer 4.0 0.4
9 percent slopes
Thickest layer
41 Nunn clay loam,0 Poor Nunn(85%) Bottom layer 17.6 1.7
to 1 percent
slopes
Thickest layer
42 Nunn clay loam, 1 Poor Nunn(85%) Bottom layer 13.0 1.3
to 3 percent
slopes
Thickest layer
•
USDA Natural Ragmen Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
r.ee nuor Sake National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 5
Gravel Source Rating Waterfront at Foster Lake
Summary by Map Unit - Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Soil Map Unit Name Rating Component Name Rating Total Percent of
• Survey (Percent) Reasons Acres in AOI
Area Map AO1
Unit
Symbol
59 Shingle loam,3 to Poor Shingle(85%) Bottom layer 24.6 2.4
9 percent slopes
Thickest layer
61 Tassel fine sandy Poor Tassel(85%) Bottom layer 31.4 3.1
loam, 5 to 20
percent slopes
Thickest layer
65 Thedalund loam, Poor Thedalund(80%) Bottom layer 38.2 3.7
3 to 9 percent
slopes
Thickest layer
81 Wiley-Colby Poor Wiley(60%) Bottom layer 94.6 9.2
complex,0 to I
percent slopes
Thickest layer
Colby(30%) Bottom layer
Thickest layer
• 82 Wiley-Colby Poor Wiley(60%) Bottom layer 614.6 60.0
complex, 1 to 3
percent slopes
Thickest layer
Colby(30%) Bottom layer
Thickest layer
83 Wiley-Colby Poor Wiley(55%) Bottom layer 0.0 0.0
complex,3 to 5
percent slopes
Thickest layer
Colby(30%) Bottom layer
Thickest layer
85 Water Not rated Water(95%) 115.0 11.2
Aquolls(5%)
• USDA Nam.Rnnem Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
a Cantles Sate National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 5
Gravel Source Rating Waterfront at Foster Lake
Summary by Rating Value
• Rating Total Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
Poor 907.0 88.5
Not rated 118.1 11.5
Description - Gravel Source
Gravel are natural aggregates(2 to 75 millimeters in diameter)suitable for commercial use with a minimum of processing.
They are used in many kinds of construction.Specifications for each use vary widely.Only the probability of finding
material in suitable quantity is evaluated.The suitability of the material for specific purposes is not evaluated,nor are factors
that affect excavation of the material.
The properties used to evaluate the soil as a source of gravel are gradation of grain sizes(as indicated by the Unified
classification of the soil), the thickness of suitable material,and the content of rock fragments.If the bottom layer of the soil
contains gravel,the soil is considered a likely source regardless of thickness.The assumption is that the gravel layer below
the depth of observation exceeds the minimum thickness.The ratings are for the whole soil,from the surface to a depth of
about 6 feet.
The soils are rated "Good," "Fair," or"Poor" as potential sources of gravel.A rating of"Good"or"Fair"means that the
source material is likely to be in or below the soil.Coarse fragments of soft bedrock,such as shale and siltstone,are not
considered to be gravel.
Parameter Summary - Gravel Source
• Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff:
Tie-break Rule: Lower
•
USDA Naha!Rnoren Web Soil Survey 1.1 8/15/2006
ConenMioe Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 5 of 5
• a
A.G. Wassenaar 2180 EMVe.Ivanhoe
Colo ado r6 Y2Suite
67,0
--��_ 303-759-8100 Fax 303-768-2920
Geotechn'cal and Environmental Consultants : www.agwassenaarcom
GEOTECHNICAL DUE DILIGENCE STUDY
THE WATERFRONT AT FOSTER LAKE
SOUTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 66
BETWEEN WELD COUNTY ROAD 7
AND INTERSTATE 25
WELD COUNTY,COLORADO
•
PREPARED FOR
HF HOLDINGS, LLC
1745 SHEA CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 310
HIGHLANDS RANCH, COLORADO 80129
APRIL 26,2006
PROJECT NUMBER 88030
•
............ ..._...... . ...... .............. ...
A.G. Wa senaar 2180 South Ivanhoe Strait. Suite 6
Denver. Colorado 80222-5710
• 303-769-8100 Fax 303-758-2920
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants C. wwwsgwessenaar.com
April 26,2006
HF Holdings,LLC
1745 Shea Center Drive, Suite 310
Highlands Ranch, Colorado 80129
Attention: Mr. Darwin Horan
Subject: Geotechnical Due Diligence Study
The Waterfront at Foster Lake
South of State Highway 66 between Weld County Road and Interstate 25
Weld County, Colorado
Project Number 88030
Gentlemen:
We have conducted the geotechnical due diligence study for the proposed structure at the subject
site. Our summary of the data collected during our field and laboratory work and our analysis,
opinions, and conclusions are presented In the attached report. The purpose of our study Is to
• provide preliminary geotechnical information for planning, site development, foundations, and
pavements for the proposed parcel.
In general, the subsurface materials encountered consist of approximately one (1)to 16 feet of
overburden soils consisting of sandy day, dean to clayey sand, and weathered claystone
overlying daystone,sandstone,and interbedded claystone and sandstone bedrock. Sedimentary
bedrock was encountered at depths of one(1)to 16 feet below the ground surface. Ground water
was measured at depths ranging from three(3)to 15%feet during this study.
Site development considerations should include provisions related to the presence of shallow
ground water, soft soils, and the presence of expansive claystone bedrock across the parcel.
Based upon the results of this preliminary study, we expect that a majority of the structures
constructed across the site will need to be founded upon a deep foundation system. Footings
and/or post-tensioned slabs may be feasible across portions of the site where non to low
expansive soils exist at and several feet below foundation elevation.
•
• HF Holdings, LLC
Project Number 88030
April 26, 2006
Page 2
Slabs-on-grade floors will require consideration of the potential for expansion of soils and bedrock.
Structural floors may be required where movement can not be tolerated.
Preliminary pavement guidelines are given in the following report.
Additional recommendations are presented in the following report.
If you have any questions regarding the contents of this report or our analyses of the subsurface
conditions which will influence the proposed development,please call us. We have appreciated
the opportunity to provide this service for you.
Sincerely,
A. G.WASSENAAR, INC.
• /
vin roeder, E. .
Staff gl
•
Patrick S. • n, $289 '
Senior Engin •DLDS/PSCllia i et\vol
SRpN Lek
•
• TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAG E
PURPOSE 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 1
SITE CONDITIONS 2
FIELD EXPLORATIONS 2
LABORATORY TESTING 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS 6
Ground Water 6
Excavation and Site Grading 7
Expansive Bedrock 8
STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION a
PAVEMENTS 9
FINAL DESIGN CONSULTATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION 10
• GEOTECHNICAL RISK 11
LIMITATIONS 11
ATTACHMENTS
SITE PLAN FIGURE 1
EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS FIGURES 2 THROUGH 4
SETTLEMENT-SWELL TEST RESULTS FIGURES 5 THROUGH 12
GRADATION/ATTERBERG TEST RESULTS FIGURES 13 THROUGH 17
DEPTH TO BEDROCK MAP FIGURE 18
ELEVATION OF BEDROCK MAP FIGURE 19
DEPTH TO GROUND WATER MAP FIGURE 20
ELEVATION OF GROUND WATER MAP FIGURE 21
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I
•
_....... . .... _. .... ....
• GEOTECHNICAL DUE DILIGENCE STUDY
The Waterfront at Foster Lake
South of State Highway 66 between Weld County Road 7 and Interstate 25
Weld County,Colorado
April 26, 2006
PURPOSE
This report presents results of a geotechnical due diligence study conducted at the site of the
proposed Waterfront at Foster Lake development, located south of State Highway 66 between
Weld County Road 7 and Interstate 25 in Weld County, Colorado (see "Site Plan and Vicinity
Map", Figure 1). This study was conducted for the purpose of generating geotechnical due
diligence Information for preliminary planning, site evaluation,and development considerations.
• Factual data gathered during the field and laboratory work is summarized on Figures 2 through
17 and In Table I. Our opinions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the
data generated during this field exploration, associated laboratory testing,our experience with
similar type projects,and our understanding of the proposed project.
This report was not Intended to provide design criteria for site development, foundation or
pavement construction. Additional geotechnical studies will be required to develop these types
of design criteria and construction recommendations.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
It is our understanding that the subject site is planned for residential development. Specific details
of construction and site configuration are not known at this time.
Geotechnlcal Due Dligence Study HF Holdings,LW
• Project Number 66030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
A.G.waseenaar,Inc. 1 Apr6 26,2006
• SITE CONDITIONS
The site occupies approximately 570 acres of land which lies south of State Highway 66 between
Weld County Road 7 and Interstate 25 in Weld County, Colorado (see Figure 1). The property
is bordered on the north by Foster Reservoir and agricultural farmland, on the east by Interstate
25,on the west by Weld County Road 7,and on the south by the St.Vrain State Recreation Area
and the St. Vrain River. A number of small retention ponds are located in the middle of the
southern third of the property. A residential dwelling,several agricultural structures,and a number
of storage units for grain are located just south of Foster Reservoir,south of Weld County Road
28,which runs east to west through the property. The site has been used extensively as irrigated
agricultural farmland. A small irrigation canal runs from the southwest end of Foster Reservoir
south across Weld County Road 28 and then to the southeast and intersects with Interstate 25
about midway through the property on the east side. Vegetation on the site consists of some
native grasses and weeds as well as various wheats and alfalfa. Some cottonwood trees are
• located around the reservoir and retention ponds. A number of discarded vehicles and other
debris are located around the retention ponds. The site ranges in elevation from the northwest
corner to the south southeast where there is a steep slope that leads down into the St.Vrain flood
plain. Approximately 140 feet of relief was noted across the site on USGS mapping.
HELD EXPLORATIONS
Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling 18 test borings,spaced roughly 1,500 to 2,500
feet apart, at the approximate locations indicated on Figure 1. The borings were staked in the
field at locations determined by the Client and A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. The borings were advanced
using a 4-inch diameter, continuous flight auger powered by a truck-mounted drilling rig. At
frequent intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken using a Modified California
sampler which was driven into the soil by dropping a 140-pound hammer through a free fall of 30
GeotechNral Due Diligence Study HF Holdings,LLD
Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
•
A G.wassenaar,Inc. 2 April 28,2006
• inches. The Modified California sampler is a 2.5-inch outside diameter by 2-inch inside diameter
device. The number of blows required for the sampler to penetrate 12 inches gives an indication
of the consistency or relative density of the soils encountered. Results of the penetration tests
and location of sampling are presented on the"Exploratory Boring Logs," Figures 2 through 4.
In addition to sampling and logging each boring for material types, ground water measurements
were made at the time of drilling and again 12 to 13 days after drilling.
LABORATORY TESTING
The samples were returned to our laboratory where they were visually classified by a geotechnical
engineer. Testing was then assigned to specific samples to evaluate their engineering properties.
The laboratory tests performed included 16 settlement-swell tests to evaluate the effect of wetting
and loading on the selected soils samples. The results of the settlement-swell tests are presented
on Figures 5 through 12. Ten (10) gradation analysis tests and Atterberg limits tests were
• conducted to evaluate grain size distribution and plasticity. These results are presented on
Figures 11 through 17. In addition,representative samples were tested for water soluble sulfates
and soil corrosivity. The laboratory testing is summarized on Figures 2 through 4,and in Table I.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our test borings indicate the subsurface materials, in general, consist of approximately one (1)
to 16 feet of overburden soils consisting of silty, sandy clay, silty, clean to clayey sand, and
weathered daystone overlying daystone,sandstone,and interbedded claystone and sandstone
bedrock. Bedrock was encountered in all 18 test borings at depths ranging from one(1)to 16 feet
(see"Depth to Bedrock Map", Figure 18 and 'Elevation of Bedrock MapTM, Figure 19). Ground
water was found in 12 of the 18 test borings at the time of drilling at a measured depth of four(4)
to 28 feet. When checked 12 to 13 days after drilling ground water was measured in 17 of the 18
Geoteclaical Due Diligence Study HE Fklldtgs,LLG
• Prgect Number 88030 A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. 3 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
April 26,2006
{
..._._... .. ._...
• borings at depths of three (3)to 15%feet. Test Boring No. 16, the only test boring without any
measured water,as only explored to eight(8)feet due to drilling refusal. Given the vicinity to the
retention ponds and the water level of the test borings In the surrounding area,ground water can
be expected at and around this boring location as well. A number of the test borings caved at
depths ranging from three and one-half(3%)to 2634feet when checked 12th 13 days after drilling
due to ground water. Maps depicting the ground water depths and elevations can be found on
the"Depth to Ground Water Map"(Figure 19)and"Elevation of Ground Water Map"(Figure 20).
A more complete description of the subsurface materials and ground water is shown on Figures
2 through 4.
Clay was encountered In all 18 test borings from the ground surface to depths ranging from one
(1) to 16 feet below the ground surface. The clay was generally very soft to stiff, silty, sandy,
slightly calcareous,medium moist to wet,and brown in color. The clay is moderately plastic. The
• samples tested exhibited no to low measured swell(-0.8%to+0.7%)when wetted under a 1,000
pound per square foot(psf)surcharge load. The clay is considered to possess low potential for
expansion.
Sand was encountered in two(2)test borings, Boring Nos. 7 and 17,below the clay at depths of
seven(7)and two and one-half(2%)feet, respectively,and extended to depths of nine (9)and
nine and one-half (914) feet. The sand was generally loose to medium dense, silty, clean to
clayey,with clay lenses,contained some gravel,was moist to wet,and brown in color. The sand
was visually of no to low plasticity. The sand Is considered to possess no to low potential for
expansion.
Geotechnical Due Diligence Study HE Hddngs,LW
• Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster take
A.G.Wassenaar,inc. 4 April 26,2006
• Weathered claystone was encountered in Test Boring Nos. 7 and 9 at depths of nine(9)and five
(5)feet below the ground surface, respectively,and extending to depth of 11 and eight(8)feet.
The weathered daystone encountered was silty, sandy,moist,and brown to olive brown to gray
in color. Based upon our field and laboratory results,the weathered claystone was of moderate
to high plasticity. Based upon our experience in the area,the weathered claystone is considered
to possess moderate to high expansion potential.
Sandstone bedrock was encountered in 10 of the 18 test borings ranging in depths of two(20 to
17 feet below the ground surface and extended to depths of 10%to 29'%feet,the maximum depth
explored. The sandstone is firm to very hard,poorly to very well cemented,silty,clean to clayey,
with claystone and siltstone lenses,medium moist to moist,and brown to rust brown In color. Test
Boring No. 16 found very well cemented sandstone at a depth of eight (8)feet where drilling
refusal was encountered. The tested samples of sandstone exhibited low measured swell(+0.1%)
• when wetted under a 1,000 psf surcharge. The tested sandstone with siltstone lenses exhibited
no plasticity. The sandstone is considered to possess no to low potential for expansion.
Claystone bedrock was encountered in nine(9)of the 18 test borings at depths ranging from three
(3)to 19 feet below the ground surface and extended to depths ranging from seven(7)to 29%
feet, the maximum depth explored. The claystone material was firm to very hard,silty, sandy,
medium moist to moist, and olive to rust brown to gray in color. The samples tested exhibited
moderate to high plasticity and no to moderate measured swell (-0.4%to+3.7%)when wetted
under a 1,000 psf surcharge load. The claystone is considered to possess moderate to high
potential for expansion.
Geotechnical Due Diligence Study HF Holdings,LLC
• Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. 5 126,ZW6
................ ..... ... _.._....... ....
• The interbedded sandstone and claystone bedrock was encountered in nine (9) of the 18 test
borings at depths ranging from one (1) to 22 feet below the ground surface and extending to
depths ranging from 19 to 29%feet,the maximum depth explored. The material was hard to very
hard,silty, medium moist to moist,and rust brown to olive to gray in color. The samples tested
exhibited low to moderate plasticity as well as low measured swell (+0.4%)when wetted under a
1,000 psf surcharge load. The sandstone and claystone portions should expand as described
previously. The interbedded material, as a mass, is considered to possess low to moderate
potential for expansion.
DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
GROUND WATER
The main geotechnical concern for the proposed development Is the issue of shallow ground water
located across the site. The area is in close proximity to multiple water sources, from Foster
• Reservoir at the north end of the site to the St.Vrain River and the Barbour Ponds just south of
the southern border. A number of retention ponds with standing water are also located in the
southern third of the site and an irrigation canal runs from the southwest end of Foster Reservoir
south southeast until it intersects with Interstate 25 about midway along the east property line.
At the time of our field exploration,water levels were found from three(3)to 15%:feet below the
ground surface in 17 of the 18 test borings. The only boring not to see any measured water,Test
Boring No. 16,was terminated at a depth of eight(8)feet due to drilling refusal. Due to the time
of year that our field explorations took place and on-going irrigation on this and adjacent
properties, it is likely that the water table will rise during the wetter parts of the year.
Dealing with the ground water will require some planning. We generally recommend that ground
water levels be three(3)to four(4)feet below structures (foundations, pavements,etc.). If the
Geolechnical Due Diligence Study HF Hddings.LLC
• Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. 6 April 26,2006
.... _.. ...............
• ground water Is above this level, special designs may be necessary. These include extensive
drainage systems, possibly limiting excavation, stabilization of soils and pavement drains and
drainage blankets in order to limit frost heave of roadways. Several types of area drainage
systems may be possible (e.g., infiltration galleries, interceptor drains, subdivision wide area
drains, etc.); however, the feasibility of any area drainage system would be dependent upon
finding a suitable gravity discharge for a permanent outfall. Methods are available to limit water
infiltration beneath the site(such as a slurry wail at the property line);however,these methods are
very expensive to construct and would require either a pump or gravity discharge for the water that
seeps through the barrier. Active systems (pumping) may be feasible and necessary for
temporary construction(e.g.,well points to facilitate sewer line construction);however,we do not
believe that active pumping will prove feasible for long term ground water relief. Additionally,
removal of the shallow ground water may affect previous down gradient water rights.
Consideration should be given to limit below grade construction (e.g., parcels with townhome
• construction on post-tensioned slab foundations)in orderto limit the amount of fill necessary while
providing sufficient separation from the ground water.
EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING
Excavation and site grading will involve some challenges with any well to very well cemented
sandstone encountered. The excavation of the clays and sands should be relatively easy for
typical earthmoving equipment, however, any poorly to moderately cemented portions of the
sandstone may be excavated using a single tooth hydraulic ripper tooth mounted on a D8 Dozer
and where well to very well cemented sandstone or interbedded sandstone layers are
encountered, the use of a jack-hammer or blasting may be required.
Geofechnical Due DOlgence Study I-IF Holdings,LW
• Project Number 88030 The Waterfront al Foster lake
A.G.Wescenaar,Inc. 7 April 26,2006
. ..............................
• The depth to ground water will Impact utility excavation, and may present stability concerns in
foundation excavations. If soft,rutting or otherwise yielding soils are encountered,in-place drying
or stabilization may be necessary.
The ground water may also affect the ability to construct stable slopes due to soft soils and
erosion. In order to provide permanent cut slopes that are stable and erosion resistant,it may be
necessary to construct flatter slopes [e.g., 3:1 (horizontal:vertical)or flatter] than is typical. Fill
slopes of 2:1 may be feasible as long as erosion control is completed relatively quickly after
completion of the slope. In addition, erosion control will need to be a priority during and after
construction. Any sands and silts encountered will be readily eroded by both water and wind
action. Temporary sedimentation basins may be necessary and may require cleaning during
construction. Permanent erosion control and seeding should be planned to be constructed as
soon as possible after completion of grading.
•
EXPANSIVE BEDROCK
Claystone bedrock and interbedded claystone and sandstone bedrock was found at depths from
one (1) to 16 feet in 17 of the 18 test borings. These materials may be mitigated by
overexcavation and moisture treatment either during site development or foundation construction.
Where site grading brings claystone bedrock near to foundations, construction methods for
expansive soils will need to be followed.
STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION
Footing or post-tensioned slab foundations may be feasible across limited portions of the site.
These will include conventional footings for non-expansive soils and minimum dead load footings
Geotechnical Due pie Study HF Holdings,tie
Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster rake
• A.G.Wassenear,Inc. 8 April 26,2008
• or footing pads for low expansive clay or day fills. Overexcavatlon or moisture treatment of any
encountered expansive clays may be necessary where the bedrock is deep.
Pier type foundations will be required on most sites where site development brings the bedrock
near to the surface. The piers will be drilled through the overburden and into the bedrock in most
cases. Most pier foundations can plan on being cased due to the shallow ground water and
caving soils due to the ground water.
Interior floors may be subject to heaving where placed upon expansive clays or daystone. We
believe that where footing foundations are constructed, the risk of future slab heave will be low
to moderate. Where piers are required, the risk of significant heave will be moderate to high.
Therefore,structural floors may be necessary where the structures are founded upon piers.
• Drain systems will likely be necessary for all structures with below grade spaces.
PAVEMENTS
The soil found across the site range from good to poor for pavement support. For residential
streets we would anticipate pavement thicknesses slightly greater than Weld County minimums
(five and one-half(5'A)to six and one-half(6%)inches of asphalt),for residential collector streets
(minor and major) we would anticipate six (6) to 10 inches of asphalt. However, their low to
moderate plasticities indicate that significant subgrade preparation should not be required. Areas
where caystone is at or near pavement subgrade wilt require additional pavement thickness(six
(6)to seven(7)inches of asphalt for residential and seven(7)to 11 inches of asphalt for collector
streets)and will likely require additional subgrade preparation in the form of overexcavation and
moisture treatment, overexcavation and replacement, chemical treatment of the subgrade
Geotechnlcal Due Diligence Study HP Holdings,LW
Project Number 88030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
• A.G.Wassenar,Inc. 9 April 26,2006
• materials with lime, fly ash, etc. or other methods to reduce potential swell and plasticity. For
arterial type streets,we would estimate that 10% to 12'% inches of asphalt would be necessary
on the clays. Chemical stabilization may also be necessary where subgrade is soft due to ground
water so that paving operations can continue. In addition,pavement drains and drainage blankets
may be necessary to limit frost heave of roadways.
FINAL DESIGN CONSULTATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of HF Holdings, LLC for the purpose of
providing prelininary geotechnical criteria for due diligence for the proposed project. The data
gathered and the conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based upon the
consideration of many factors including, but not limited to,the type of structures proposed, the
configuration of the structures,the proposed usage of the site,the configuration of surrounding
structures,the geologic setting,the materials encountered,and our understanding of the level of
• risk acceptable to the client Therefore,the conclusions and recommendations contained in this
report shall not be considered valid for use by others unless accompanied by written authorization
from A. G. Wassenaar, Inc.
Additional geotechnical studies will be required once actual development plans and the
details of construction have been established in order to provide recommendations for the
design of the site improvements. Once site grading is complete,foundation and pavement
recommendations for construction can be prepared. It Is recommended that A. G.
Wassenaar,Inc_be retained to provide these studies. It is also recommended that we be retained
to provide a general review of the final design and specifications In order that the
recommendations presented in our reports may be properly interpreted and implemented. Our
firm should also be retained to provide geotechnical engineering and material testing services
Geotedmtcd Due Diligence Study HF Holdings,LLC
• A.G. Humber 86030 The Waterfront at Foster Lake
A.G.Wassenaar,Inc 10 April 26,2006
• during construction at the parcels. The purpose of these services would be to observe the
construction with respect to the geotechnical design concepts,specifications or recommendations,
and to facilitate design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those
anticipated prior to start of construction.
GEOTECHNICAL RISK
The concept of risk is an important aspect of any geotechnical evaluation. The primary reason
for this is that the analytical methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not
comprise an exact science. The analytical tools which geotechnical engineers use are generally
empirical and must be tempered by engineering judgment and experience. Therefore, the
solutions or recommendations presented in any geotechnical evaluation should not be considered
risk-free and,more importantly,are not a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and the
proposed structure will perform as desired or intended. What the engineering recommendations
• presented in the preceding sections do constitute is our best estimate,based on the information
generated during this and previous evaluations and our experience In working with these
conditions, of those measures that are necessary to help the development perform in a
satisfactory manner. The Developer and Owner must understand this concept of risk,as it is they
who must decide what is an acceptable level of risk for the proposed development on the site.
LIMITATIONS
The professional judgments expressed in this report meet the standard care of our profession at
this time in this location. The test borings drilled for this study were spaced to obtain a reasonably
accurate picture of underground conditions to develop preliminary geotechnical information for the
site. Variations frequently occur from these conditions which are not Indicated by the test borings.
Geoiednloel Due Diligence Study HF Holdings,LW
•
Project Number 88030 The Waterfront et Foster Lake
A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. 11 April 28.2006
• These variations are sometimes sufficient to necessitate modifications in the designs. Therefore,
additional geotechnical studies will be required prior to construction.
Our scope of services for this project did not include any research,testing,or assessment relative
to past or present contamination of the site by any source. If such contamination were present,
it Is likely that the exploration and testing conducted for this report would not reveal its existence.
If the Owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, additional studies should
be undertaken. We are available to discuss the scope of such studies with you.
Our scope of services for this project did not include a local or global geological risk assessment.
Therefore,Issues such as mine subsidence,slope stability,active faults,etc.were not researched
or addressed as part of this study. tf the Owner is concerned about these issues,we are available
to discuss the scope of such studies upon your request
•
Geoledmntcal Due Dlgence Study HF Holdings,LW
Project Number 60090 The Waterfront et Foster Lake
• A.G.Wassenaar,Inc. 12 Apol 26.2006
I
• 6 9 e j 11
+e I
C 2
i yi
_,fit. l a I
pi gii
t
ri ---4::
a III i ge
g; .01; 9
I [-:-.j
,
,
• 4 €i; tfi 1 _
TO i
I I gs� I
g,
-- —
ea
,isi iii
Diq
t -
ti
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
BORING BORING BORING BORING BORING BORING
NO.1 NO.2 NO.3 NO.4 NO.5 NO.El
REV.4914 ELEV.4953 ELEV.4953 ELEV.4951 ELEV.4956 ELEV.4950
•
-0 11/12 0-
/ DD-99 ♦ ♦ ♦• ♦ -
/ MC-24 • .•• WS-t60 \ \
- SW-0.7 ♦ ... -
• 13 \ ... 13 \ p1i•624 ; \
`- ♦ ♦ 4M2 0 3 ; CL 0.0042 ; 3/12 ♦� 4/12
- ♦ \ -
•♦ 0 ♦\ MC-24 51$9 ♦ 3114 ♦ ♦ 6-
-5 .; -1' -02W.92 140-19 ♦ 13 \
13 N -3112 \ LL-39 13 •- 4200-92 \ N.
♦ -'
♦ .% PI-23-- : 11-40
- 0 •
- •\ \ ::: PI-25 ♦ 13- ; i 3 ♦ -
-= 13 ♦ • •" \ 13 ♦ D
E - 30/12 .♦ ... W5 • .3112 t ♦ 4(14 - E
DD-115 ♦ -. CO-113 ♦ ♦ ♦ MG-30 p
P T -10 1.4C-10 ♦ MC-16 •♦ ♦ • -#2007810"--1T
N - SW-0.0 SW-0.4 ;• ` ' LL-39 - N\• PI-23 _
N
N - •" •
` 20/12 ♦ - F
F ./ NR • DO-106 ♦ 15-
E -15 ... ._ 0 ::: ♦ \ MG74 •
... E
E ... ::: .. \ CON-0.4 ... E
_ -
T
::. 5015 ... ::: 50� -- .. NR
*"-20 . ... ... _.- 20-
• - :: -
5&4 13 :.. _ 50/4 _: -
-25 ::. 25-
- ' 642 .. 5f Y4 -
:
-30 NR 30
-95 35-
-40 40-
SEE FIGURE4 FOR LEGEND AND NOTES TO EXPLORATORY BORINGS
• EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
FIGURE 2
• TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
BORING BORING BORING BORING BORING BOEING
NO.7 NO.13 NO.9 NO.10 NO.11 NO.12
• ELEV.4952 ELEV.4941 ELEV.4934 ELEV.4930 ELEV.4942 ELEV.4918
_p 0--
•\ 7/12 \ / \ 6/12 / \ -
\\ DD-103 \ / \ DD•107 z \ -
\ MC-21 \ / \•
MO-7B / \
- \ CON-0,3 \ / \ CON-C1.8 / \ -
- \ 2112 .• 8/12 / 11/12 \ 2/12 / II/12 \ 3114 -
-5 19 1 \ \ DD-112 \ / DD-1p8 \ 6-
(/ MC-18 \ / MC-17 \
\ • / COti 0.3 \ . CON-0.5 \ -
Vi \
- /. 13 / /� - \
1 \ D
ho7/14 •WS-450 N. DD-11B DD-111 10- P
H .. � � R4J73 \ SW-0.1 SW-12 - H
/ CL-0.0004 WS-<60
I
N ... / 8018 �' 50/5 - N
13
F
F• -15 ... 1 SW-0.7 12 12 16- E
T / r r' - T
... -
LL-35- / PI-14 0
- C. 50/7 ' 50 --- 50/9 - • 5017 Z0-
_f'2p0-5B -
• _ P 20
I-16 1 • __
- DDO-715 50n -
13
- SW-3.7 / • -
if- 4 5W4 '• BBIB -
BOUNCE
-90 30 -
-95 33-
-40 40-
SEE FIGURE 4 FOR LEGEND AND NOTES TO EXPWRATORY BORINGS
• EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
FIGURE 3
-4.n„ _ m..ma
Iii 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1
a e x e x n _ a n e •
q• I'F i� ��4lly•
y p b x�
�SG4,-sy .r:L` :,N,t'-,CCV Y.�.�' Gv:G4�'s� 4�F.e�I l!iw
€ i 5 u
IlY_
ig
`t,, glogi
g
iFIY§ 3
IIr 11
a x e
1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I , I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I l I I I , i I I I I f
-ma, z_ zrvna
•
p rPP• ik; i•Plifi.FiggaS-Hf5 +1 m % ®®®®BEJEI®I
i � I a IIil A li�B a 1 1 1 iH �
2fliI ilibliM it I I I VNJi ! , 113
Ili Iiii 1 !Q ■ I
111111 it I- 1 Il Q11 ill
I'll
; 1i ill 131 s
1IIIIJJ
i 11
oiltgl I1HIII
eP1
II
pai i 2
f it
s IiJi I
II 11111 i •
il
=l 1
A.G. Wassenaar
t3eotefin(cal and Envtrwanoctal Consultants C.II 5 -I ,
4 - -- 1 .--.-.
3 J_..�
SWELL UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2 -- .- t— -- I '
F
6
1
1 r tb
U 2 1 -
WATER ADDED
3 _ . _L__ .. -_ — -
4 1 -
5 ' _ ,- 4
100 1,000 APPLE PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SLIGHTLY SANDY DRY UNIT WT._ 99 PCF
LOCATIION TEST BORING NO.1 Q DEPTH OF 1' MOISTURE CONTENT 24 %
• 5 - I -
4 I t -
3 I 1 I -
NO CHANGE UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2 ---- -- - -- - - -
wz
6� 1 I + - --- -- - I - - --
Q
P
2 -E ---
WATER ADDED
3- - I - -
4 -- 1
5 t I
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSTONE,SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 115 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.1 C1a DEPTH OF 9' MOISTURE CONTENT 10 %
• SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FURE 5
A.G. Wassenaar
cootea,nIca1 end Environmental Consuitanta C.
• 5 r - I
4 — — I
3 -----r�- - 1 - —
SWELL UNDER CONSTANT
IrBTEW
OF ETTING
60
g
n 1
2
Z
o
O 2 / ,
WATER ADDED--'
3 ___ 1
4 - - - - * • ,--4 , -.
1
5
100 1,000 APPLEED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION GLAYSTONE,SUC3HTLY SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 113 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.3 p DEPTH OF 9' MOISTURE CONTENT 16 %
0 6 ,
4 - I- - -
CONSOLIDATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
i1 r I r .-
4L'''''N\O 4 -
1
WATER ADDED
3 1_ ,--L
r
5i _
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSTONE,SANDY DRY UNIT WT. _ 105 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.5 Cr DEPTH OF 14' MOISTURE CONTENT 14 S
• SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE B
A.G. Wassenaar
GmtechnbeN and Enyvonmerttat Consuitants Co
• 5
4 - 4
3
CONSOLIDATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
O
2 `- -
WATER ADDED
3 •
5 •
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY _ DRY UNIT WT. 103 FCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.7 @ DEPTH OF 1' MOISTURE CONTENT 21 %
5
4
-- - 11
3 Il ■1111111 11111
2 - IIIIII���1i1111 I UNDER CONSTANT
BECAUSE O WETTING
dill ll _ P111111111 — 1
ae
�1�1 Ij���11 Iil���li 11
��I�i��� lu 111 _ ■11 Ill
2 11111111 _11111
WATER ADDED
3 •
�illll� 1. 111
4 - 11111_ _11
f
5 J
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10.000 100,000 •
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION E AYSTONE DRY UNIT WT. 116 PCF
l OCATTON TEST BORING NO.8 @ DEPTH OF 14' MOISTURE CONTENT 14 % •
•
S SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 7
A.G. Wassenaar
Gootechnical end Ertvlron tamer GamHants C.
5 1
4 -I------
--- SWELL UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2 1 1 -Alm ---
1 r-r-
I
6
Q 1 ,
ril
WATER ADDED
3 1 1
4 _ l , 1
5
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSTONE,SLIGHTLY SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 116 PCP
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.B @ DEPTH OF 24' MOISTURE CONTENT' 17 %
0 5 .
4 - 1 ----- I
3 A .
CONSOLIDATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2
z 0 f
- I/ r r - I
i
z
O
U 2 .
WATER ADDED - .
3 . r 1 -- ' - -
4 - _ ,- ..__ I
5 I ;
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000 1
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 112 PCF i
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.0(qi DEPTH OF 4' MOISTURE CONTENT 16 %
I
• SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 8 I
1
I
1
A.G. Wassenaar
Get:technical and Environmetmel ConsultanC.
• 5
4 -- f
3 __ l
CONSOLIDATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2
1 , .
d 0
O 1-+7,7Z
1 } t
m
x
WATER ADDED
3 .
4 .-
5 , I
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY - DRY UNIT WT. 107 PCF
LOCATION_.-. TEST f3ORING NO.10 @ DEPTH OF 1' MOISTURE CONTENT 18 %
1. 5
I
4 . I .
L__
/ SWELL UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
1 f
'
z ° i
p __
r
0 1 - I
WATER ADDED
5 1
100 1,00D APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SANDSTONE,CLAYEY - DRY UNIT WT. 115 PCF
LOCATION- TEST BORING NO.10 @ DEPTH OF 9 MOISTURE CONTENT 15 %
• SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 9
A.G. Wassenaar
Geotaidwical and ErMrorunemat Conwnents C.
5
3 _ f
CONSOI I)ATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2
„717
A
p 1 i i
Z
U I
2 / -
WATER ADDED
3 l _
4 I
5 I
100 1,000 APPl1ED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,400
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 10B PCF
LOCATION_- TEST BORING NO.11 Q DEPTH OF 4' MOISTURE CONTENT 17 %
• 5 I
4 -
3SWELL� III� X111111 R
PRESSURE CONSTANT
WETTING
1 1 ! Milli ail 11
0 4 _ 11111��, 111111 .11011
01 iii _ 1111 X111
co
2 11111 1111 1111
WATER ADDED
s '111 . 11 ■ 11111
4 •
1111111 __.__ 11 ■ 111111
5 1
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSIONE,SANDY DRY UNIT WT. _ 111 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.12 0 DEPTH OF 9' MOISTURE CONTBVT 17 %
• SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 10
A.G. Wassenaar
I
Beotechnical and Environmental Conn&ants C.
• 6 j
4 III lli —_ Illli ■�� 11 i
3 ■�Illlsl� 11�'i _ _
NO CHANGE UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2 Ills i''1 ' 1 Ili
g 1 ■. Il
zo
8 1 -- - -_
_ 1111���.�1 lii ��Illili
2 I/�lii�� 1 lii ■�Illl s
wATEFI ADDED111111�� 11111 _ _ 11
4
5
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SLIGHTLY SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 105 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.13 Q DEPTH OF 1' MOISTURE CONTENT 18 %
• 1 I ' I
3 -- J
77 CONSOLIDATION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF WETTING
2 - 7 r
- '
- - Z }I -�
1 C
-- i I <
8
2 1 _ - I - I , , , - I - , ' -
2 F - ,
WATER ADDED -- !!
3 _____F___-----J- - --__
4 -- - --- ------- 4 - - - ---I---
5 I
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY _ DRY UNIT WT- 96 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.15®DEPTH OF 4' MOISTURE CONTENT 22 %
• SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 11
A.G. Wassen.aa.r
Qeomchnical and Environmenial C 1a C.
.
• 5 . I I
4 1 ; _ f _ .
3 t
. - - - I ,
SWELL UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE BECAUSE OF'NETTING
2
} _
0
v
O
WATER ADDED ---
3 _--i- - ---------- --
1
4 - - - I- -- .
I
5 1 1 --
100 1,000 APPUED PRESSURE-PSF 10,000 100,000
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY$TONE,SLIGHTLY SANDY DRY UNIT WT. 111 PCF
LOCA11ON TEST BORING NO.15 % DEPTH OF 14' (MOISTURE CONTENT 17 %
5
1
• S
_,.' LL UNDER CONSTANT I
PRESSURE BECAUSE WETTING
2
1 I
3 TTi
' ' . - ,
5
100 1,000 APPLIED PRESSURE-PSF 10.000 100,000 `
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSTONE _ DRY UNIT WT. 110 PCF
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.18 DEPTH OF 4' MOISTURE CONTENT 17 %
III
SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 12 i
i
i
I
A.G. Wassenaar
GanIeohnk.ai and Environmental CO sunems C•
0
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PLASTIC)TO SILT(NON•PlAST1C) SANDVQ r COBBLES
]
r FM 1 N�Af 'COARSE ME j COARSE 1
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE H MILLIMETERS
.001 .02 .005 A08 018 1.07 1774 .14$ .287 '090 1.19 293 4.78 8-52 18.1 36.1 792 127 200
108 r _ •_ T - - _ ^.���._, 0 vimC7 70 .r ..,�i�� 30 Q
ILI
1• - 1_ —T
b
I1 -.1 ru
s9 �, . . __ -- 59 E
w ! p �. . - _ --Immo�r_
CC
ao
99 �.=• •- 70
FNim=101
—— 60
== = 1
10 90
2 100
51w 71 .nh 18,0i 438 In* #200 #100 #e0#40#30 418 #1014 44 3/3' 314' 1.112' 3' e'6' 0.
Fir 60
45'Tin Iendn
TI1 TIME READINGS l u3 STM7GND MIMS I CLEAR SQUARE 1PE71AJO3
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.2 @ DEPTH OF 4' - GRAVEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 39
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY Al SAND 18 % PLASTICITY INDEX 23_
CLASSIFICATION AAS1-ITO A6(18) SILT&CLAY 82 %
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PSTICS TO SiLT¢t1ON�-PLASTIC) SAND CRAWLLA ICOMES
FOE I MEDIUM ICOARSE POE 1 CONNIE
OIAMET7311IF PAfirICLF II A* sieram
.001 002 .003 .M0 .018 00x77 .074 .149 .97 590 1.18 2.30 4.78 OS ILI 21.1 7701 127 200
900 o
BE. -
� .:cli
z = = _= 1 l� — •'::
I
cm
0 _ .:- . .-. 1 ,_ -, _____- ...„5°
SO
ao _ J -- 7o E
- , eo
10 M SO
.-
YShr IM, 80m t8 MO 4pin 1 min p #130 #50#40130 #16 i10•#0 #4 Mr 3/4' 1.112' 9' 5'6' r
100
Umh 15mF
TYMErI0A INQS ( U.S-STANDARD 8EFEE'8 ) CLEARS MAW OPfi4HOS
1
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.3 @ DEPTH OF 4' GRAVEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 40
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAYSTONE,SLIGHTLY SANDY(CU SAND 8 % PLASTICITY INDEX 25
CLASSIFICATION AASHTO A-6(23} - SILT&CLAY 92 %
III GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 13
A.G. Wassenaar
Geotechnical and EMI:mutant&Consultant' C•
•
HYJAOMUT1 R ANALYSIS SrVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PLAST1C)TO SILT(NON-PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL
1 EWE 1 MED01N ICOARSE FINE I COARSE C08BLES
DIAMETER OF
001 -002 .006 _000 .018 .037 .074 .297 PARTICLE IN 9.1 38.1 78.2 127
1.19Q�
ESS 4.7' 052 1 200
100
- --- �� — - 0
10
SO
70 = ==
=IN IMINNE
�r m.. 'ilr_....a, 6, f
lu
a -• 1 -- �� � - Q iiito _ ��
== -
25 n 7 h 00 n n 19 8*, ♦.4 1 min 9200 #100 #50#40#'0 #1S 41048 04 319' WC t-1R' 3' 5'5 8'too
45708 15inN
1 TUC READNt33 ( U.S STANDARD SE11ES I CLEAR SQUARE OP®INGS
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.6 0 DEPTH OF 9 INIAHEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 39
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY,SANDY{CL) SAND 21 % P1.AST1CITY INDEX 23
CLASSIFICATION AASHTO A 6(17) — SILT&CLAY 79 %
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PLASTIC)TO SILT(NOM-PLASTIC) SAND QRANF]
FIE I MEDIUM ICRSE FINE i rAARRE GOBBLES
«
OF
.801 M .'05 .000 .119 .037 d7 PARTICLE MILLIMETERS
SOO 1.19 2.38 4.76 AFP 18.1 88.1 762 127 200
100
— 0
40 1
70
20 _ ;mac:
�_a. - ---- .:a- : BO•w _ _ _- T — =; _--•m25
trki 19 a* '0 min t'mkt 4 min 1 nIt #203 0100 050#40#30 #1' 91013 s4 3/17 3/4-•_••1-112' ...3' - s 0'O'tao
I TIME REA01NGS I U.S.STANOARO SERIES I CLEAR 3OUAFIE OPENINGS i
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.7 W DEPTH OF 19' GRAVEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 31 •
-
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CIAYSTONE,VERY SANDY(CL) SAND 42 % PLASTICITY INDEX 16 I
CLASSFICATION AASI-ITO A-6(161 - SILT&CLAY 56 5
• GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 14 I
ii
1
I
A.G. Wassenaar
ReoteclWcd and Emionmerad Caroidanla C.
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVEANALYSIS
SAND GRAVEL
CLAY MLASTE)TO SET(NONPUSTIC) EWE I Rau Iowa I COARSE
COBBLES
not 402 150E 400 1519 431 m4��i4o�.200 t1�228 ale a.ez let set 782 to 203
tw 0
N 10
._... T _ ---
w - an
T
w
Z 7n -- —i _ H _. —- .`_w Z-03 03 2 — -- 4o a
a
—_
w — — m 5
_10 w
D _�.: ) . --
- -- _Ir100
ihn w Wain Sin Omen tmk 9312 #100 modem) 31080 M SW ON 1-Tit W re V
I ME REARMS I U.S.S'At°ADDSERES I CLEAR SOUMECPENPIOS
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.S a DEPTH OF I4' GRAVE. 0 % LIQUID LAW 35
SAMPLE DESCRPIION CLAYSTONE(G) SAND 2 % PLASTICITY INDEX 14
CLAS4RCAT10N AASHTO MB(14) SILT&CLAY 98 %
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(MASTIC)TO SILT(NON-MASTIC; SAND GRAVEL COBBLES
ME I MEDIUM 'COARSE FINE I COARSE
DIAMETER OF PARTICLEN MSJMErB18
.01 402 .000 .000 1518 40T .074 .iN .9a1 Sea 1.19 290 420 082 19.1 w.t 78.2 19 200
100 _ t_.: o
_ — -
BO __ - -- 2e
Z m .-
--- ao w
w - __ .. - .. 40@
- ___
EI
w = .__. ..._— . --.— -__— - . m a
rD ._ . __ _— __. . ___ .—. — p
0 100
.V 15 80 it 1950 4mF I Sn 0200 3100 #4*940930 #10 #1088 #4 SW 31W I-ta r 22 If r
I THE REALINR6 I Mt STAiDARSERIES I CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
LOCATION TEST DORWIG NO.13 a DEPTH OF i' GRAVEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 40
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY.SLIGHTLY SANDY(CL) SAND 6 % PLASTICITY INDEX 21
CLASSIFICATION AASHTO ASE(20) SILT&CLAY 94 %
• GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 15
A.G. Wassenaar
Gootechnloal and Envlrorrme tal Clams C.
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSES
CLAY(PLASTIC)TO SLT INCN•PIASTIC) SAND GRAVEL
FINE I MEOIUIB ICE 1E I COARSE GOBBLES
DIAMETER CF14 IMIU.INEIEFIS
M1 .007 .0DS .e E .019 .037 .297 P�IC�.6B 1.19 220 4.70 9.62 12I 98.1 752 127 ?D0
100
__ 0
go_; I__s�___5Li_si__ i_simi ID
80 ss�i r�.i�ii Mss s�I" 29
x =minima=
�i �.= .= i =-�
a 70 T M sM CIiEIMMIL. ..bfl 30 0
.�"' w .. =Ego_ .a s s �=.n 110 WMmom ir�NMIMO ��i■s ■: �M OM 40 a
I- 50 s=l�_—s.MEMMI Lasss6_ asses ■�■■�ENE Mil 50 D:
0 40 �I MUM MM. —ss_ssm'a— a
.__.__ - =
a. 30 —— ISM iE.sm !II■L! i •• 70 0.
20 �I . LigairmWill __I__ I_ _____ MFE 90
mss—_ .1�y- —�c_. ME==
10 s I. brim= EMU so
=77 -- = - = - = . - = =C== '��
o
too
2512 16 In 09 Ain 19 Mn ♦8.9.9.91 tail MI #mE #50#40#90 #16 #10.98 #4 a19' air 1-1, r Eor r
46 I 'ME READINGS I U.S.STANM.]S2ES I C1EAH SQUARE OPENINGS
LOCATION_ TEST BORING N0.13 0 owniQF191 GRAVEL 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 39
SAMPLE DESCH'TTON CLAYSTONE ONTERBEDIXD SAM5TONE)(CL) _ SAND 4 % PLASTICITY INDEX 22
CLASSIFICATION AASHTOA-43(21) _ SLT&CLAY 96_-%
•
HYDA0ML I Li-I ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY IPLAL1'TlC)TO SILT(NON-PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL
FINE f tram lCpARBE ri E I =vise GOBBLES
_..._
.a01 J ! AN .009 .018 937 ��149�� .5 ICLE p s2-a6 4,79 982 19.1 1161 7812 127 2OD_r_.. _.. ,
t0a
..
_. , .._ _ .
-T - - L -_ o
: - -.-- ::
�--.. :�.. �= --l- •
•
. -- . gr
• - • - '_- ----so . • at
0
261v The 00 nil ,c 1#rah 4 5 I r#t #200 #I00 #80#40.30 #10 #10.98 94-• ats 1M' 1-1/r sr r
43 sin 19 Bits
j TIME READINGS I U.S.STANOArm 8ELOBe I CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS j
LOCATION TEST BORING NO.16 @ DEPTH OF 4' GRAVEL_ 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 47
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION CLAY$TONE(CU SAND 1 % PLASTICITY INDEX 30 j
CLASSIFICATION AASHTO A-7-6(32) SILT&CLAY 99 %
GRADATION TEST RESULTS I
IIII FIGURE 16
I
i
I
1
A.G. Wassenaar
Geotsdnloal and E_rlvironmonlal Consultants C.
III
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PLAsT1c)TO SILT(ND 1-PLASTI(,7 SAND GRAVEL
FINE I wpm jaunt FARE I COARSE COBBLES
DW.METER OF PARTICLE IN IM.L1 1 15 -
.001 .002 .005 .COB .019 .001 -074 .149 .297 .980 1.19 2,1 478 9352 18.1 39.1 7112 127 200
100
---___ t�=tom " CiC`�. m�� 0
====I�W.rrrr = s..—=r= -- =Cr=
90 ���.r Mrr_�r�w�ww�i; C �
Ill� ���rr_
err— � ��� rn.r.__ ,_ Ma_ w...ww
ter_
80 =29
17M IMO 1� I_M�=—Mt:Ml_? sitl•sn 30
z M - tC .�r��...t"a�ZC CM� �1Q
40 zc_
MMES. era a Qa====—. ._..r..
, .E 40 === —:iC •--_ = := Z
Mr_M satitassang_ i NI aTiM�ri 110 w
..� rte. a "'� m ffin�= m—== .
—_-_=—= = ====== Cr Q
tip i��C�= `�--=._ — a
20 �wti� �t=s====m =M=CL
r•+ita f�MC=MIMI �rs��....111...11�.�..�����-��i..••.rM=..pp Ib ie
so r
25hf 1710Swig 0 1
60min 19 min 4en I min 6201 #1074#4010`19 #l0# �8 #4 /F 1-12 8'' $6' F700
4bmM I [WE
RENN1438 I U.S.STANDARD 9d0ES t CLEAR BLMfARE OPEN!!39
LOCATION TEST OOHING NO.17 @ DEPTH OF 14' GAVEL 1 % LIQUID LIMIT NV
SAMPLE DIa3CRIFTION SILTS TONE, (ML) SAND 23 % PLASTICITY WDDC NP
CxASSIF ICATTON AASHTO A-4(D) - SILT&CLAY 78 %
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLAY(PLASTIC)TO SLT(JON-PLASTIC) BAND GRAVEL COBBLES
—
FINE I MEDIUM 1CCIARRE FINE I COMC3E
DYMIETER OF PARTICLE 0411 LIN C CRS
A01 ,002 '005 .998 .019 O. .074 .149 .21N 5 9.2 90 1.19 8 4.78 9.80 2 127 20 19.1 38.1 790
1� 0
la
1' . �.•
v •• —t , 1 r I 1 I .. —
z 70 f • i I - .4 . _ •• I . �_ . i_-- se
- -50 t t_ -J-: 1 - 7
v 40 1 —1 L .:- •— 1_ _ - X
ap tc
-- :- _ .�a_ _--- — 9l1
lao
41155 1 IS min 60 min 19 min 4 W lobs It00 !1100 I50#49130 #18 #ID #9 Air WW 1-1/1' V 5-A" r
YI aER64t N0S
I t IM 8:8TANOARt7 6pttE3 I CLEAR SOINRF omens
LOCATION TEST BORING NO,18(4)DEPTH OFR GRAVEL O % LIQUID LIMIT NV
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SLTSTONE.VERY SANDYJMU SAND 47 % PLASTICITY INDEX NP
CLASSIFICATION AASHTO A-4(O) SILT&CLAY 53 %
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
•
FIGURE 17
. I
i 0
•
-.wrillICN
BC LL 1' SOO TEST ,EST 11:sT
1�0.BOR36 WING I� •BOirr
Nio BORING CONJ°
9 NO.e ( NO.11 NO.14 N0.17
le
TEST
PORNO I
ND 4 I TBst
• aorta
NCI.IS
TEST
I mar OA B NO.13 BBBrrreee2Ydd40
I •NO.10 Na \
TEST NO.Te
poem NO.7
RESERVOIR
TEAT
ITpgT BORING
I DORM NO.15
I I —
Tl$f
noauIG
• No.I
EON F33
NO.2
/,
C I I NOTE, AREAS SHOWN ARE BASED ON
WIDELY SPA.CEO TEST BCP4NGS
I
TAT
TEST BORING TEST
lef$0.6
— • — BORING
No.1 _ NO.9•
W .7
NOTE:AU.LOCATIONS ARE APPROfoMA*E
A.G.Wa,9senxar
044,4044,4 44
DEPTH TO PRO.ECT NO.eeoso
BEOROC%UTAP FIGURE 16
BL 3M10tl SO NOI0N1D9
.ON 99996 LWOW SO NOLLYA919
-"An...frompoopswaimera~am.
31Yw1rowav 9NY BNd1YJ0i TN:310N
NfM
OOP
'Cray — — — — — 10N
9NNae •EON 1.31
1931 COMB 1931
1831
99Ntl091931030NJ9 Aa0M1 I I I
NO aim 3NINN10N9CYAN 31ON I I I I
ii i
e
9nN39 on,
ON9M)6 •
1931
99• i
• - -a1
91'ON ONMOe I
lath 019 18.31 I
1931 v
9•r • — •— • C0NN
9•uo9
n 1:91Ma 99•109
•
IBM WON• I
N1‘ 831 L
•aaoe II •
11
•ON 99b'ONor3uoa matmatU9 YINOS9ON
! _ _ • _ _ inks_ • MECO
99• 099r yet 008 IS — — 1931
941
OMI,-a TWOS
N
• • •
•
. •
---CN-
_goo
Me
TEST — — —DORM • U - v,rJ - - �., Tear
NO.e Wa++ TM wma aONw
N0.e map NO.0 ND.+a
N0.11
TEST
BORIC
NO.N I 1
• ea•
Nau 11 I TEST 000
/
eoera 1 r 1
I •Nn+a ernxa
TEST +p N0.I
0.1 1 1Esi
FOSTER BOR — —
I
REMUS N
I TESTe
Note
Tar
• BON ONO
SORNO
NO.I I
I I I J I NOTE: AREASw s ,wx BORINGSSED ON
-�_a P I
rear (//
TEST BONING Tar
le BCRetl Nag., eagrq
N0.+ — — — — — —@O,S•
WORT
NOTE:ALL LOCA11ONS NW APPRJN WlE
A asscnaar
DEPTH TO PROJECT NO.MOO
OPOlIIO WATER LAP ROLM SO
• g
t w i
I 2e 0 Si°
DID
M r a g
NV
ggi7
fl
• I I• ii L — — —
( I —� — —
•
I.I DO
i I
s •1. Ni,
• S • .
i Natural % Atterberg Water
Test I Dry Natural Swell(+)1 Swell Passing Liquid Plasticity Soluble
Baring Depth Density Moisture Consolidation(—) Pressure 4200 LimIt Index Resistivity Sulfates Chlorides
No. j (feet) Soil Type i 170c1)____ _. (96) (:)(1))" (psf) _ Sieve 1 LL _J PI pH (ohm/cm) (;,+m) (%
1 Clay,slightly sandy 99 24 +0.7 3,000I
9 Claystone,sandy 115 10 r 0.0 —
4 Clay,sandy 24 82 39 23
4 Claystone,slightly sandy 19 1 92 40 25
(interbedded sandstone)
IIIII 9 slightly sandy
Mill
16 +0.4 1,900 �■-■��-
4 1 Clay,slightly sandy IIIIIIIIIIII IIII - 624 262 <50 0.0042
mi14 Claystone,sandy 105 14 -0.4 --
9 Clay,sandy 30 MMIIIIIIIIIIIII 79 39 ®IMMIIII -
7 II Clay, sandyIII
103 21 -0.3
Claystone,very sandy 14 58 16
(interbedded sandstone) IIII
Ilial
8 14 Claystone 116 14 ' +0.7 2,200 98 35
24 Claystone,slightly sandy 116 17 +3.7 9,000
9 4 Clay,sandy 112 16 -0.3 —
9 Claystone,very sandy 8,18 613 <50 0.0004
10 1 Clay, sandy 107 18 -0.8 —
1
9 Sandstone,clayey 116 15 +0.1 1,400 i
Notes: A.G. Ways enaar
'Indicates Percent Swell(+)or Consolidation(-)when wetted under a 1,000 psf load.
NV Indicates No Value oeotecnnical and Emfnanmental Consuttanta C.
NP indicates Non-Plastic
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I
HP Holdings,LLC
The Waterfront at Foster Lake Page 1 of 2
Project Number 88030
» _. »—
, ;
0 . • ill .
•
Natural % Atterberg Water
Test Dry Natural Sweil(+)/ Swell Passing Liquid Plasticity Soluble ii •
Boring Depth Density Moisture Consolidation(—) Pressure #200 Limit Index Resistivity Sulfates Chlorides
No. (feet) �— Soil Type (pct)- (%) (%)' (psf) Sieve LL PI pH (ohm/cm) (ppm) (%)
11 4 Clay,sandy 106 17 -0.5 —
12 9 Claystone,sandy 111 17 +1.2 2,300 <50
.
13 1 Clay,slightly sandy 105 18 0.0 — 94 40 21
19 Claystone 17 96 36 22
(interbedded sandstone)
'` 15 4 Clay,sandy 98 22 -0.4 —
14 Claystone, slightly sandy 112 17 +2.9 7,700
16 4 Claystone 110 17 +2.4 6,000 99 47 30
17 14 Siltstone,sandy 17 76 NV NP
l (interbedded sandstone)
15 4 Sandstone,silty 8.41 476 <50 <0.0001
9 Siltstone,very sandy 15 53 NV NIP
(interbedded sandstone)
I _ .,
1
Notes: A.G. Wassenaar
'Indicates Percent Swell(+)or Consolidation(-)when wetted under a 1,000 psf load.
NV Indicates No Value Geotechnical and ErMronmental ConsultaMa C.
NP Indicates Non-Plastic
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I
HF Holdings, LLC
The Waterfront at Foster Lake Page 2 of 2
Project Number 88030
Hello