HomeMy WebLinkAbout20211207.tiffUSDA United States
=�"-- Department of
— Agriculture
ARCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Weld County,
Colorado,
Southern Part
TROYER PROPERTY
December 1, 2020
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gavlwpsl
portal/n reslm ain /so i l sf health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.govllacatorlapp?agency=arcs) or your N RCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www. nres.0 sda.gov/wps/portal/nresfd etail/soils/contactu sl?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the N RCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface 2
How Soil Surveys A►re Made 5
Soil Map 8
Soil Map 9
Legend 10
Map Unit Legend 11
Map Unit Descriptions 11
Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 13
1 Altvan loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 13
References 15
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
6
Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
40° 9' 10" N
40° 8' 54" N
1040 48'57'W
515810
515930
Map Scale: 1:21520 if printed on A portrait (83' x 11") shed.
Meters
N 0 35 70
A
140
210
Feet
0 100 200 400 600
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WG584 Edge tics: LTTM Zone 13N WG584
515990
516050
sr
40° 9' 10" N
40° 8' 54" N
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
O
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
tv Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
.74
4:4 74
0
O
V
a i
•
90
0
324
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale..
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Survey Area Data: Version 19, Jun 5, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 19, 2018 Aug
10, 2018
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.
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in Aol
Percent of AOI
1
Altman
slopes
loam, 0 to 1
percent
21.8
100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest
21.8
100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
u p of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
n on contrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
u sefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually► but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
1 Altvan loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 361j
Elevation: 4,500 to 4,900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F
Frost -free period: 130 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Altvan and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Altvan
Setting
Landform: Terraces
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Old alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loam
H2 - 10 to 25 inches: clay loam
H - 25 to 60 inches: gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 2.00 inlhr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Available water capacity: Low (about 5.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification ('irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification ('nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Casc aj o
Percent of map unit: 9 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
Aquic haplustolls
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Swales
Hydric soil rating: Yes
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal!
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www. nres. usd a.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www. nres. usd a.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=n res 142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres 142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/land use/rang ep astu re/?cid = stel p rd b 10430 84
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
UnitedStates Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430 -VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.goviwpsiportali
arcs/d etai llsoils/scientists/?cid = nres l 42 p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.goviwpslportal/nres/detailinationallsoils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
res 142 p2_6 63624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/InternetiFSE DOCU M ENTS/n res 142p2_662290. pd f
16
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
SOUTHWEST OF WELD COUNTY ROAD (WCR) 22% AND US HIGHWAY 85
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1202093
Prepared for:
Western Engineering Consultants
127 South Denver Avenue
Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621
Attn: Mr. Chadwin Cox (chadwin.cox(�ijwesternecicorn)
Prepared by:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
4396 Greenfield Drive
Windsor, Colorado 80550
January 19, 2021
EARTH ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, LLC
Western Engineering Consultants
127 South Denver Avenue
Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621
Attn: Mr. Chadwin Cox (chadwin.coxAwesterneci.com)
Re: Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1202093
Mr. Cox:
Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the preliminary subsurface exploration completed by Earth
Engineering Consultants, LLC personnel for the referenced project. A total of three (3)
preliminary soil borings were drilled on January 6, 2021 at the approximate pre -selected
locations as indicated on the enclosed Boring Location Diagram included with this report. This
exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated December 14, 2020.
In summary, the subsurface soils encountered in the preliminary test borings generally consisted
of sand with varying amounts of gravel, silt, and clay which extended to the depths explored at
approximately 20 feet below the ground surface. The sand subsoils were generally medium dense
to dense, dry to moist nearing the groundwater table, and exhibited low swell potential at current
moisture -density conditions. Groundwater was observed in the preliminary test borings at depths
ranging from approximately 11 to 13 feet below existing site grades.
Based on the materials observed within the preliminary boring locations and the anticipated
foundation loads, we believe the proposed lightly to moderately loaded commercial/industrial
type structure(s) could be supported by conventional spread footings bearing on either suitable
native subsoils or on a zone of engineered/controlled fill material placed and compacted as
described within this report. It appears the in -situ site materials could be used for support of
interior slab -on -grades, exterior flatwork, and site pavements. Foundations and floor slabs for
slab -on -grade buildings should be placed at least 3 feet above maximum groundwater levels or
have a drainage system.
4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE
WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550
(970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 2
Preliminary geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations
and support of floor slabs and pavements are provided within the enclosed report. We appreciate
the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the
enclosed report, or if we can be of further service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate
to contact us.
Very truly yours,
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC Reviewed b
Erin Dunn, E .I.T.
Project Engineer
David A. Richer, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Kcal Engineer
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
SOUTHWEST OF WELD COUNTY ROAD (WCR) 22% AND US HIGHWAY 85
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1202093
January 19, 2021
INTRODUCTION
The preliminary subsurface exploration for the proposed auctioneering facility located southwest of
Weld County Road (WCR) 221 and of US Highway 85 in Weld County, Colorado has been
completed. A total of three (3) preliminary soil borings were drilled on January 6, 2021 at the
approximate pre -selected locations as indicated on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams included
with this report. The three (3) completed preliminary soil borings were advanced to depths of
approximately 20 feet below existing site grades across the proposed development property to obtain
information on existing subsurface conditions. Individual boring logs and site diagrams indicating
the approximate boring locations are included with this report.
The development property is located southwest of Weld County Road (WCR) 22 %a and US Highway
85 in Weld County, Colorado. As we understand, the property may be developed for an
auctioneering facility. Foundation loads for the proposed commercial, and industrial structure(s) are
anticipated to be light to moderate with continuous wall loads less than 4 kips per lineal foot and
individual column loads less than 100 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. The proposed
structure(s) are expected be constructed as slab -on -grade (no basement). We anticipate maximum
cuts and fills on the order of 5 feet (+/-) will be required to develop the site grades. Overall site
development will include construction of interior roadways designed in general accordance with the
Weld County Pavement Design Criteria.
The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the preliminary
borings, analyze and evaluate the test data and provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations
concerning site development including foundations, floor slabs, pavement sections.
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The boring locations were established in the field by a representative of Earth Engineering
Consultants, LLC (EEC) by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features. The
locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 2
used to make the field measurements. Photographs of the site taken at the time of drilling are
provided with this report.
The borings were performed using a truck -mounted C -55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head
employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4 -inch nominal
diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained
using split -barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM
TM
Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively.
In the split -barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are driven
into the ground by means of a 140 -pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of
blows required to advance the samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in -situ relative density
of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and
hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure, relatively undisturbed
samples are obtained in brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to the
laboratory for further examination, classification and testing.
Laboratory moisture content tests were performed on each of the recovered samples. In addition,
selected samples were tested for fines content and plasticity by washed sieve analysis and Atterberg
limits tests. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the subgrade
materials' tendency to change volume with variation in moisture content and load. The quantity of
water soluble sulfates was determined on select samples to evaluate the risk of sulfate attack on site
concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets.
As a part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in
general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System,
based on the sample's texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil
Classification System is shown on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification
system is included with this report.
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed development parcel is located southeast of Weld County Road 22'/4 and US Highway
85. The project site is generally undeveloped. The site is relatively flat with an approximate relief
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 3
across the site from south to north of about 2 feet (+/-). The site is surfaced with sparse vegetation
and topsoil, with approximately 2 inches of gravel on the south side of the site near boring B-1.
An EEC field engineer was on -site during drilling to direct the drilling activities and evaluate the
subsurface materials encountered. Field descriptions of the materials encountered were based on
visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The boring logs included
with this report may contain modifications to the field logs based on results of laboratory testing and
engineering evaluation. Based on results of field andlaboratory evaluation, subsurface conditions
can be generalized as follows.
Sparse vegetation, topsoil, and gravel were encountered at the surface of some borings. The topsoil,
vegetation, and/or gravel layers were underlain by sand with varying amounts of gravel, silt, and
clay which extended to the depths explored at approximately 20 feet below the ground surface. The
sand subsoils were generally medium dense to dense, dry to moist nearing the groundwater table,
and exhibited low swell potential at current moisture -density conditions.
The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of
changes in soil and rock types; in -situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct.
GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS
Observations were made while drilling and after the completion of drilling to detect the presence and
level of groundwater. Groundwater was observed in the preliminary test borings at depths ranging
from approximately 12 to 13 feet below existing site grades. The borings were backfilled upon
completion, and therefore subsequent groundwater measurements were not made. Groundwater
measurements provided with this report are indicative of groundwater levels at the locations and at
the time the borings/groundwater measurements were completed.
Perched and/or trapped water may be encountered in more permeable zones in the subgrade soils at
times throughout the year. Perched water is commonly encountered in soils immediately overlying
less permeable bedrock materials. Fluctuations in ground water levels and in the location and
amount of perched water may occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions,
irrigation activities on surrounding properties and other conditions not apparent at the time of this
report.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 4
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Swell — Consolidation Test Results
The swell -consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils to assist in
determining foundation, floor slab and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively undisturbed
samples obtained directly from the California sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and
inundated with water under a predetermined load. The swell -index is the resulting amount of swell or
collapse after the inundation period expressed as a percent of the sample's preload/initial thickness.
After the inundation period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure
and/or consolidation.
For this assessment, we conducted three (3) swell -consolidation tests on relatively undisturbed soil
samples obtained at various intervals/depths on the site. 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 soils materials collapse/consolidation 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
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
Tested
Low End,
%
Low End,
PCF
High End,
PCF
Low End
(+/-) %
High End,
(+/-)
High
End, %
1
150
Sand & Gravel (SP & GP)
OA
121.4
(-) 0.1
2
500
Sand with Clay (SP — SC)
0.9
1.3
106.4
116.5
(-) 3.1
(-) 0.5
Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information to provide
uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of slab
performance risk to measured swell. "The representative percent swell values are not necessarily
measured values; rather, they are a judgment of the swell of the soil and/or bedrock profile likely to
influence slab performance." Geotechnical engineers use this information to also evaluate the swell
potential risks for foundation performance based on the risk categories.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 5
Table
II
-
Recommended
Representative
Slab
Performance
Swell
Risk
Potential Descriptions
Categories
and
Corresponding
Slab Performance
Risk
Category
Representative
(500
psf
Surcharge)
Percent Swell
Representative
(1000
psf
Surcharge)
Percent Swell
Low
Oto<3
0<2
Moderate
3 to
< 5
2 to
< 4
High
5to<
8
4to<
Very
High
> 8
> 6
Based on the laboratory test results, a majority of the in -situ samples analyzed for this project were
within the low range. It should be noted that granular soils often show compressible results due to
disturbance when loaded under laboratory conditions. The compressible results often are not an
indication of in -situ compressibility of the soils in the field. Observations of soils in the field utilizing
SPT blow counts should be used to determine in -situ stability for granular soils.
Economic Aggregate Resource
The Atlas of Sand, Gravel, and Quarry Aggregate Resources -Colorado Front Range Counties -
Colorado Geological Survey Special Publication 5-B (Schwochow, Shroba, Wicklein, 1974) was
used to gain a general overview of the property. eview of that document indicates that most of the
site consists of Terrace Deposits labeled as T3 with possible portions of Floodplain Deposits labeled
as F4. T3 deposits contain fine aggregates ranging from coarse to fine grained sands. F4 deposits
have not been evaluated as a part of this publication.
The Map Showing Potential Sources of Gravel and Crushed -Rock, Aggregate in the Boulder -Fort
Collins -Greeley Area, Front Rage Urban Corridor, Colorado (Colton & Fitch, 1974) was also used to
gain a general overview of the property. erty. Review of that document indicates the site consists of gravel
deposits underlying terraces and floodplains. Additional information about the depth of deposits, as
well as grain size distribution and typical pebble types can be found on the referenced map. A
segment of the map showing the approximate site location has been attached with this report.
General Considerations
In general, we recommend any building foundation of slab subgrades be placed a minimum of 3 feet
above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels. Depending on final site grading, if the
feet separation cannot be maintained, consideration could be given the use of underdrain or
perimeter drainage systems below the proposed facility.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 6
Site Preparation
All existing vegetation, topsoil, and/or gravel should be removed from beneath site fills, roadways or
building subgrade areas. Stripping depths should be expected to vary, depending, in part, on past
agricultural activities. In addition, any soft/loose native soils or any existing fill materials without
documentation of controlled fill placement should be removed from improvement and/or new fill
areas.
After stripping and completing all cuts, any over excavation, and prior to placement of any fill, floor
slabs or pavements, we recommend the exposed soils be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 inches,
adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's maximum dry density as
determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard Proctor procedure. The
moisture content of the scarified materials should be adjusted to be within a range of ±2% of
standard Proctor optimum moisture at the time of compaction.
In general, fill materials required to develop the building areas or site pavement subgrades should
consist of approved, low -volume change materials which are free from organic matter and debris.
The near surface sand soils with low swell potential could be used as fill in these areas. We
recommend the fill soils be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted in moisture
content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's maximum dry density as determined in
accordance with the standard Proctor procedure. The moisture content of predominately clay soils
should be adjusted to be within the range of ± 2% of optimum moisture content at the time of
placement. Granular soil should be adjusted to a workable moisture content.
Specific explorations should be completed for each building/individual lot to develop
recommendations specific to the proposed structure(s) and owner/builder and for specific pavement
sections.
Care should be taken after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials.
Positive drainage should be developed away from the structure(s) and across and away from
pavement edges to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials allowed to become
wetted subsequent to construction of the residences and/or pavements can result in unacceptable
performance of those improvements.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 7
Areas of greater fills overlying areas with soft/compressible subsoils, especially within the deeper
utility alignments, may experience settlement due to the soft/compressible subsoils below and within
the zone of placed fill materials. Settlement on the order of 1 -inch or more per each 10 feet of fill
depth would be estimated. The rate of settlement will be dependent on the type of fill material
placed and construction methods. Granular soils will consolidate essentially immediately upon
placement of overlying loads. Cohesive soils will consolidate at a slower rate. Preloading and/or
surcharging the fill areas could be considered to induce additional settlement in these areas prior to
construction of improvements in or on the fills. Unless positive steps are taken to pre -consolidate
the fill materials and/or underlying soft subgrades, special care will be needed for construction of
improvements supported on or within these areas.
Foundation Systems — General Considerations
Conventional type spread footings bearing on native subsoils or engineered controlled fill material
were evaluated for use on the site; however final subsurface explorations should be performed after
building footprints and elevations have been better defined and actual design loads determined.
Preliminary Spread Footing Foundation Recommendations
We anticipate use of conventional footing foundations could be considered for lightly to moderately
loaded structure(s) at this site. We expect footing foundations would be supported either on approved
native soils or on newly placed andcompacted fills.
For design of footing foundations bearing on approved native subsoils, or on properly placed and
compacted fill materials as outlined above, maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressures
on the order of2,000 to 3,500 psf could be considered depending upon the specific backfill material
used. Footing foundations should maintain separation above maximum anticipated rise in
groundwater elevation of at least 3 feet as indicated earlier. The net bearing pressure refers to the
pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure.
Total load would include full dead and live loads.
Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas are typically located at least 30 inches below
adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. Formed continuous footings would have
minimum widths of 12 to 16 inches and isolated column foundations would have a minimum width
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 8
of 24 to 30 inches. Trenched foundations could probably be used in the near surface soils. If used,
trenched foundations would have a minimum width of 12 inches and formed continuous foundations
a minimum width of 8 inches.
Care should be taken to avoid placement of the structure(s) partly on native soils and partly on newly
placed fill materials to avoid differential settlement. In these areas, mitigation approaches could
include surcharging of the fill materials or overexcavation of the native soils. Mitigation approaches
may vary between structures depending, in part, on the extent and depth of new fill placement.
Specific approaches could be established at the time of exploration for the individual structures.
Care should be taken on the site to fully document the horizontal and vertical extent of fill placement
on the site, including benching the fill into native slopes.
Preliminary Floor Slab/Exterior Flatwork Subgrades
Based on the observed subsurface conditions, we believe the native sand subsoils and/or properly
placed structural fill material could be used for direct support of floor slabs. Floor slab and exterior
flatwork subgrades should be prepared as outlined in the section Site Preparation.
Preliminary Soil Percolation Characteristics
We have been requested to provide our opinion as to the anticipated soil percolation rates of the on-
site subsoils associated with an on -site wastewater treatment system (OWTS) for the site. As part of
this preliminary subsurface exploration, soil percolation tests were not performed, however based on
our experience we have provided a typical range of what to expect for the on -site subsoils.
percolation test means a subsurface soil test at the depth of a proposed absorption system or similar
component of an OWTS to determine the water absorption capability of the soil; the results of which
are normally expressed as the rate at which one inch of water is. absorbed. The rate is expressed in
minutes per inch. Based on the subsurface soil profile encountered on -site within the three (3)
preliminary borings, in our opinion the soil percolation would generally be within the 5 to 15
minutes per inch range. According Table 30-10-1, (a copy of which is included in the appendix of
this report), Chapter 30 of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment OWTS
Regulation, this would classify the subsoils as Sands, Loamy Sand having a percolation rate (MP')
between 5 to 15. Site -specific soil percolation tests should be performed during the upfront design
stage to verify this range. Soil percolation testing should be performed in general accordance with
the guidelines/requirements as presented in Chapter 30.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 9
Preliminary Pavement Subgrades
All existing vegetation and/or topsoil and any soft or loose materials should be removed from
pavement areas. After stripping, completing all cuts, and any over excavation, and prior to
placement of any fill or pavements, we recommend the exposed soils be scarified ed to a minimum
depth of 9 inches, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's
maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard
Proctor procedure. The moisture content of the scarified soils should be adjusted to be within the
range of ±% of standard Proctor optimum moisture.
Fill materials required to develop the pavement subgrades should consist of approved, low -volume
change materials, free from organic matter and debris. The near surface sand soils could be used for
fill in these areas. We recommend those fill soils be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches
thick, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's standard Proctor
maximum dry density. Settlement in the fill areas should be expected as previously outlined with
possible mitigation including surcharging or preloading.
After completion of the pavement subgrades, care should be taken to prevent disturbance of those
materials prior to placement of the overlying pavements. Soils which are disturbed by construction
activities should be reworked in -place or, if necessary, removed and replaced prior to placement of
overlying fill or pavements.
epending on final site grading and/or weather conditions at the time of pavement construction,
stabilization of a portion of the site pavement subgrades may be required to develop suitable
pavement subgrades. Stabilization could also be considered as part of the pavement design, although
prior to finalizing those sections, a stabilization nix design would be required.
Preliminary Site Pavements
Pavement sections are based on traffic volumes and subgrade strength characteristics. Based on our
observations, a preliminary R -value of 10 would be appropriate for design of the pavements
supported on the subgrade soils. Suggested preliminary pavement sections for the various
parking/drive pavements and minor collector roadways are provided below in Table III. Thicker
pavement sections may be required for roadways classified as major collectors. A final pavement
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 10
design thickness evaluation will be determined when a pavement design exploration is completed
(after subgrades are developed to ± 6 inches of design and wet utilities installed in the roadways).
The projected traffic may vary from the traffic assumed from the roadway classification based on a
site -specific traffic study.
Preliminary Minimum
Pavement
Sections
Table
III
—
Automobile
Parking
-
Areas
Duty
Minor
Heavy
Collector
Roadways
EDLA
7
15
25
Reliability
75%
80%
80%
Resilient
Modulus
3562
3562
3562
PSI Loss
(Initial
4.5, Terminal 2.0 and 2.5 respectively)
2,5
2.2
2.2
—
Design Structure
Number
2.47
188
3.11
Composite Section
without
Fly Ash — Alternative
A
Hot Mix Asphalt
(HMA) Grading S (75) PG 58-28
4"
5"
5"
Aggregate
Base Course
ABC
CDOT
Class 5 or 6
7"
7"
9"
—
Design Structure
Number
(2.53)
(2.97)
(3
A 9)
Composite Section
with
Fly Ash
— Alternative
B
Hot
Mix Asphalt
(1-IMA)
Grading
S (75) PG 58-28 or 64-22
3-112"
4"
4"
Aggregate
Base Course ABC. — CDOT
Class 5 or 6
6"
6"
8"
Fly
Ash Treated
Subgrade
12"
12"
12"
Design Structure
Number
(2.80)
(3.02)
(3.11)
PCC (Non -reinforced) placed
on an approved subgrade
54"
6"
6W'
Asphalt surfacing should consist of grading S-75 or X-75 hot bituminous pavement with PG 64-22
or PG 58-28 binder in accordance with Town of Fort Lupton's or Weld County's requirements.
Aggregate base should be consistent with CDOT requirements for Class 5 or Class 6 aggregate base.
As previously mentioned, a final subgrade investigation and pavement design should be performed
in general accordance with the Weld County Pavement Design Criteria prior to placement of any
pavement sections, to determine the required pavement section after design configurations, roadway
utilities have been installed and roadway have been prepared to "rough" subgrade elevations have
been completed.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 11
Underground Utility Systems
All piping should be adequately bedded for proper load distribution. It is suggested that clean, graded
gravelcompacted to 70 percent of Relative Density ASTM D4253 be used as bedding. Where utilities
are excavated below groundwater, temporary dewatering will be required during excavation,, pipe
placement and backfiliing operations for proper construction. Utility trenches should be excavated on
safe and stable slopes in accordance with OSHA regulations as further discussed herein. Backfill
should consist of the on -site soils or approved imported materials. The pipe bac ill should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density ASTM D698.
Water Soluble Sulfates (O4
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.
Table
IV - Water Soluble
Sulfate
Test Results
Sample
Location
Description
Soluble
Sulfate
Content %
B-1, S-2, at 4'
Sand
& Gravel
(SP
& GP)
0.01
B-2, S -1, at 2'
Sand & Gravel
(SP
& GP)
0.01
Based on the results as presented above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site sand soils have a low
risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete, therefore, ACI Class SO 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 and Recommendations
Groundwater was observed at depths of approximately 10 to 11,6 feet below present site grades.
Excavations extending to the wetter soils could create difficulties for backfilling of the sewer
trenches with drying of the subgrade soils required to use those materials as backfill. In general, the
subgrade soils could be used as overlot fill and backfill soils although care will be necessary to
maintain sufficient moisture to reduce potential for post -construction movement.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC C Project No. 1202093
January 19, 2021
Page 12
Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, cesspools, basements, and
utilities was not observed during the site reconnaissance, such features could be encountered during
construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should be
removed, and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction.
Excavations into the on -site soils will encounter a variety of conditions. Caving soils may be
encountered in the sand/gravel soils especially in close proximity to the groundwater table.
Groundwater seepage should also be anticipated for deeper utility excavations. Pumping from
sumps may be utilized to control water within the excavations. Well points may be required for
significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater to a significant depth.
The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable,
temporary excavations as required to maintain stability ofboth 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.
Positive drainage should be developed away from the proposed structure(s) and pavement areas with
a minimum slope of 1 inch per foot for the first 10 feet away from the improvements in landscape
areas. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping (if required) adjacent to the building(s) to
avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the foundations or stemwalls. Placement of
plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the
subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Irrigation systems should not be
placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the building(s) and parking areas. Spray heads should be
designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structure(s) or site pavements. Roof
drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structure(s) and away from the
pavement areas.
GENERAL COMMENTS
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the
soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this
report. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between borings or across the
site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If
variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. Site
specific explorations will be necessary for the proposed site building(s).
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 120 093
January 19, 2021
Page 13
It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications
so that comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical
recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical
engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork and foundation construction
phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Western Engineering Consultants 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 modified or verified in writing by the
geotechnical engineer.
DRILLING
ID E PL R A]L ION
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon - 13/8" I D , 2" C .D., unless otherwise noted
ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 2"' 0..D., unless otherwise noted
R: Ring Barrel Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" C.D. unless otherwise noted
PA: Power Auger
HA: Hand Auger
DB: Diamond Bit = 4"', N, B
AS: Auger Sample
HS: Hollow Stem Auger
PS: Piston Sample
WS: Wash Sample
FT: Fish Tail Bit
RB: Rock Bit
BS: Bulk Sample
PM: Pressure Meter
WB: Wash Bore
Standard "N" Penetration: Blows perfoot 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
WCI: Wet Cave in
DCI: Dry Cave in
AB : After Boring
WS : While Sampling
WD : While Drilling
BCR: Before Casing Removal
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 CLASSIF
CATION
Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification
system and the ASTIR 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
500 - 1,000
1,001- 2,000
2,001- 4,000
4,001- 8,000
8,001- 16,000
Very Soft
Soft
Medium
Stiff
Very Stiff
Very Hard
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS:
N -B I aws/ft
0-3
4-9
10-29
30-49
50-80
80 +
Relative Density
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very, Dense
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
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSI'EM
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests
Group
Symbol
Group Name
Coarse - Grained Soils
more than 50%
retained on No. 200
sieve
Gravels more than
50% of coarse
fraction retained on
No. 4 sieve
Clean Gravels Less
than 5% fines
Cu .4 and 1<Cc≤3E
GW Well -graded gravel F
Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E
GP Poorly -graded gravel F
Gravels with Fines
more than 12%
fines
Fines classify as ML or MH
GM Silty gravel GM
Fines Classify as CL or CH
GC Clayey Gravel F'c°"
Sands 50% or more
coarse fraction
passes No. 4 sieve
Clean Sands Less
than 5% fines
Cu≥6 and 1<Cc≤3E
SW Well -graded sand
Cuc6 and/or 1>Cc>3E
SP Poorly -graded sand
Sands with Fines
more than 12%
fines
Fines classify as ML or MH
SM Silty sand c'"'I
Fines classify as CL or CH
SC Clayey sand c"I
Fine -Grained Soils
50% or more passes
the No. 200 sieve
Silts and Clays
Liquid Limit less
than 50
inorganic
PI>7 and plots on or above "A" Line
CL Lean clay"'M
PI<4 or plots below "A" Line
ML Silt K'L'M
organic
Liquid Limit - oven dried
Liquid Unit - not dried
<0.75 OL
Organic clay K,L,M,N
Organic silt "M'°
Silts and Clays
Liquid Limit 50 or
more
inorganic
PI plots on or above "A" Line
CH Fat clay ICL,M
PI plots below "A" Line
MH Elastic Silt K,LLM
organic
Liquid Umit - oven dried
Liquid Limit - not dried
<0.75 OH
Organic clay KJL,MJ,P
Organic silt K,LM'°
Highly organic soils
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
ABased on the material passing the 3 -in. (75 -mm)
sieve
61f field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or
both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to
group name.
cGravels with 5 to 12% fines required dual symbols:
GW-GM well graded gravel with silt
GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay
GP -GM poorly -graded gravel with silt
GP -GC poorly -graded gravel with clay
°Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
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
60
50
40
w
30
20
cia
10
0
ECu=D6o/D10 Cc=
(D30)2
D10 X D60
Elf soil contains ≥150 sand, add "with sand" to
clf fines classify as CL -ML, use dual symbol GC -
CM, or SC-SM.
"If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to
group name
'If soil contains >15% gravel, add "with gravel" to
group name
'If Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a CL -
ML, Silty clay
Kif soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand"
or "with gravel", whichever is predominant.
`If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand,
add "sandy" to group name.
"'If soil contains ≥30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel,
add "gravelly" to group name.
"P14and plots on or above "A" line.
°PI .4 or plots below "A" line.
'API plots on or above "A" line.
°PI plots below "A" line.
For Classification
fine-grained
fraction
of "A" -line
at PI=4
P1-0.73 (LL
of "U" -line
atLL-16toPI-7,
P1=0.9 (11-8)
of fine-grained
of coarse
to LL=25.5
-20)
soils and
-grained
--J
f
/
1/
soils.
Horizontal
./Equation
,, ,t,
r'
•%>(`
then
Equation
Vertical
r`
/
f
then
/
/
J
/'
07
&'
MH
CR
OH
IVI
L OR
OL
CL -ML
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
80
90
100
110
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
=tea l�
r
1 .) >___ ..rs=!.ae • .'te- _.r.
=w
_Ill Ala:_.';‘,...::;17.1e7.cri "S":"Fiffn44-1 LindtHala:, tql•-.1. 11.-••••;.- Zrawit!lrakii;jv--.:;.-77:
.sa•
‘:t:
:. .i * y
ice)
'ate •'" t.
ire
a -
a
•...4-
-
-a
1 (iiitibli" A..q t'. e t RY - Lhc-
. at. sSLWr,��}� y...,L*�. '!Y1' 1.1.11r;iliel—:
..3 --.y- f' •-r�
y J� � ..i. it A r�i iF_!t. L " J .14V eye � . 4 !/ 6 ,�1• 1� k � Z'y1.� . �{
°c1 -..C1 `_'1 '•i ..-2:----.1.1Ac lid�f >1l -ice` ` :F.II�;t attic( !_'S y fM _.sJ •1S7 �l":"y_ _.
T.-.d11lii ii ;
.." _ �!.- �tr'-.---,Y1e,.y�• F:. oeZ.ti `+.f.�. .� c l)tli ..i
a
•
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT No. 1202093
JANUARY 2021
i�
---e-t.- 1 .r. -...C: _-‘-. -- -a.= - di- , „
_r_r_r_----.-.Hrs _r_p_.,,
-fT-}_�,r-f r FIBER .
t�.��l BCE T'r'- r Y - FIF3LR 24" CMP.,CUI: R
2
SHOWN UTILITIES PER SITE
INSPECTION - NOT SURVEYED
WITH 2003 ALTA.
:E5 INC
100 50
0
100 200
FULL SCALE: 1" = 100'
HALF SCALE: I" - 200'
TR€VINO. PATRICIA
10508 WCR 22112
FORT LUPTON CO 80621
PARCEL: 130907100005
ACCT: R4721707
ZONING C
L3
EX CONCRETE
IRRIGATION DITCH
20.15' ADDITIONAL ROW
EX CONCRETE
IRRIGATION DITCH
•
14
t7C-7:;\ \
iT-T�,BER
G
LI
In
tn
c,1
EXCEPTED PARCEL
(BOOK 87, PAGE 228)
VELD COUNTY ROAD 25 1/2
,P JPJP•41
2
i
30.00'
EX DR ROAD
CENTERLINE Of _Reit
(400' RIOT —OE —WAY)
rte'g 6_1(16))
-�': --r �, �, PTO 332 -1i EC'!' NO. 00
_ 1j �x� X45, PAGE f (P}Z
EX GAS/OIL WELL
API NO. 0S-123-06896
• Bia PARCEL 2
17.52 AC1 +/—
EXISTING ZONE: AG
9.77' A0DI I ZONAL ROW
TITT' r—im
I
• J— r a r ,
-
ELBEItk
PURIFOY. ROLAND D. 24-" CMP CULVERT
10541 WCR 25 1/2
FORT LUPTON, CO 60621
PARCEL: 130907000004
ACCT: R51833136
ZONING R
Legend
Aifr Approximate Boring
Locations
Site Photos
(Photos taken in approximate
location, in direction of arrow)
/2.
1/4.
W. SET 3/4" $X 30"
2 1/2" ALUMINUM
?72 9.
n
p4
u�
•
to
W .
5N0003
f G
VONASEK, HOLLY
10501WCR 25 1/2
FORT LUPTON, C 808 b21.
PARCEL: 1309 074 00006
ACCT R6763525
ZONING R
it+
r
• B -Z
OR TA
1
dee
EX SECURITY GATE
l
EX PORTABLE
BUILDING (20')(15')
i
ofo-ecee „Lase'
EXCEPTED PARCEL
(BOOK 621, RECEPTION NO: 1542734)
MILLER, KENNETH C
• PARCEL: 130907400009
ACCT: R6₹83628
ZONING AG
,— PARCEL 2 To
BE REZONED
(AG TO 1-3)
ER-
r.rr
EX DIRT ROAD
EX WATER WELL
PERMIT NO,
843 —WOE, 4490—R
(TO BE ANBANDONED)
rte..
HARR S, EARL C•.‘JR_
'HARRIS, LAURIE D.
10447 WCR 25 1/2
'FORT LUPTON, CO80821'
' PARC EL: 1309070000611 \`
• ACCT R5165186 \
,,. ZONING R
vi▪ -
cci
*I
i
co
4
..\ \en
Ell
co co
cod
VIGINI I Y MAP
E12, NE 1/4. & N1/2. SE 114.57. T2N, R66W, 6th P.M.
SHAWN VICINITY MAP TAKEN FROM USS8 QUAD MAPS- PLATTE
FIBER
FIBER 3H0
BE 300 /
31-10
{
-SALAMANCA. MARGARET A.
10254 WCR 25 112
FORT LUPTON, CO 60621
PARCEL: 130907000009
AC0T: R5163886
ZONING R
p
f
9
LINE
BEARI
L1
I2
3
L4
N43'16
NO'6'OO
N49'03'
O
LINE
RADIUS
DEL
"
5E,40.28:
04
C2 2
:-.5.1O.2.B'
` "O6
03
tic '4.88'
5'05
HERMAN, DEBRA
10225 WCR 25112
FORT LUPTON, CO 80621
PARCEL: 130907000007
ACCT: R6163586
ZONING AG
BOUT
SO LITHE
SECT
North
Nat to Scale
Boring Location Diagram
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
EEC Project #: 1202093 Date: Januar)/ 2021
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
i� Approximate Boring
Locations
b� Site Photos
(Photos taken in approximate
location, in direction of arrow)
Boring Location Diagram
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
EEC Project #: 1202093 Date: January 2021
•gri=-S - 1- �-, - _ 'a ='48
r
r _
r
North
Not to Scale
MAP SHOWING POTENTIAL SOURCES OF GRAVEL & CRUSHED ROCK AGGREGATE
In the Boulder --Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado
by Cotton, R.8., Fitch, H.R., 1974, Map I -855-D USGS
Aggregate Resource Map
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
EEC Project #: 1202093 Date: January 2021
Legend
Gf Gravel deposits underlying
terraces and flood plains
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
Table 30-10-1
Soil Treatment Area Long-term Acceptance Rates by Soil Texture, Soil Structure, Percolation Rate and Treatment Level
Soil
Type,
Texture,
Structure
and Percolation
Rate
Range
Long
(LTAR);
Term
Gallons
square
Acceptance
foot
per
day
Rate
per
USDA
Soil
USDA
Soil
Percolation
Rate
Soil
Type
USDA
Soil
Texture
Structure
-Shape
Structure
-Grade
(MPI)
All
Treatment
Levels
Soil
Type
yp
1
with
more
than
Minimum
3
foot
deep
unlined
sand
0
35%
Rock
(>2mm); Soil
Single
Grain
<5
2
Types
2- with
more than
--
(0)
filter
required
,
50%
Rock
(>2mm)
1.0
LTAR
1
Sand,
Loamy Sand
--
Single
Grain (0)
5-15
0.80
•
_
PR (Prismatic)
BK
2Sandy
Loam,
Loam, Silt
(Blocky)
2 (Moderate)
16-25
0.00
Loam
GR(Granular)3
(Strong)
.
_
Sandy
Loam,
Loam
Loam, Silt
PR,
0 (none)
BK, GR
1
Massive
(Weak)2A
26-40
0.50
3Sandy
Clay
Loam, Silty
Loam,
Clay
Clay
Loam
PR,
BK,
GR
2, 3
41-60
0.35
3A
Sandy
Loam,
Clay
Silty
Loam,
Clay
Clay
Loam
PR,
BK,
0
GR
Massive
1
61-75
0.30
.
.
4
Sandy
Clay,
Clay,
Clay
Silty
PR,
BK,
GR
2, 3
76-90
0.20
4A
Sandy
Clay,
Clay
y7 Clay,
y� Silty
PR,
BK,
0
GR
Massive
1
91-120
0A5
5
Soil
Types
2-4A
Platy
1,
2, 3
121+
0.10
Shaded areas require system design by a professional engineer.
Treatment levels are defined in Table 30-6-3.
2
Unlined sand filters in these soil types shall provide pathogen removal. Design shall conform to Section 30-11-30.8.3,, Unlined Sand Filters,
PAGE 61
2013-**
ORD201 -1
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1202093
LOG OF BORING B-1
DATE: JANUARY 2021
RIG TYPE: CME55
SHEET 1 OF 1
I,
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1/6/2021
WHILE DRILLING
12'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
1/6/2021
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
QU
MC
DD
A -LIMITS
-200
SWELL
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWS/FT)
(PSF)
(%)
(PCF)
LL
PI
(%)
PRESSURE
%@ 500 PSF
GRAVEL LOT 2"
1
SAND & GRAVEL (SP & GP)
brown, red, gray
2
3
medium dense to dense
with occasional silty zones
CS
20
4500
5.0
120.2
NL
NP
4.1
{500 psf
None
4
CS
5
16
0.9
6
7
8
9
SS
10
32
2.0
NL
NP
6.1
11
12
13
14
SS
15
36
500
8.9
16
17
18
19
SS
20
29
11.7
21
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20'
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1202093
LOG OF BORING B-2
DATE: JANUARY 2021
RIG TYPE: CME55
SHEET 1 OF I
I,
WATER DEPTH
i
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1/6/2021
WHILE DRILLING
13'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
1/6/2021
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
QU
MC
DD
A -LIMITS
-200
SWELL
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWS/FT)
(PSF)
(%)
(PCF)
LL
PI
(%)
PRESSURE
%@ 500 PSF
SPARSE VEGETATION & TOPSOIL
1
SAND & GRAVEL (SP & GP)
brown, red, gray
2
medium dense to dense
_ _
%@ 150 psf
CS
3
13
0.4
NL
NP
2.8
{150 psf
None
4
CS
5
15
0.9
6
7
8
9
SS
10
39
2.3
11
12
13
14
CS
15
30
12.1
126.6
16
17
18
19
SS
20
38
8.0
21
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5'
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
TROYER AUCTIONEERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1202093
LOG OF BORING B-3
SHEET 1 OF I
DATE: JANUARY 2021
RIG TYPE: CME55
I,
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1/6/2021
WHILE DRILLING
13'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
1/6/2021
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
(FEET)
N
(BLOWS/FT)
QU
(PSF)
MC
(%)
DD
(PCF)
A -LIMITS
-200
(%)
SWELL
TYPE
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%@ 500 PSF
VEGETATION & TOPSOIL
SAND with CLAY ( SP - SC)
brown
- —
1
- —
2
-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
- —
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
medium dense
with calcareous deposits
CS
22
3500
6.6
CS
12
1.3
120.0
29
15
12.7
{500 pef
None
SAND with SILT & GRAVEL (SP - SM)
brown, red, gray
SS
37
1.7
NL
NP
9.9
medium dense to dense
CS
17
1500
12.2
118.8
SS
40
7.9
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20.5'
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
SWELL l CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:
Brown Sand (SP)
Sample Location:
Boring 1, Sample 2, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: NL
Plasticity Index: NP
% Passing #200: 4.1%
Beginning Moisture: 0.9%
Dry Density: 116.5 pcf
Ending Moisture: 12.2%
Swell
Pressure: <500 psf
% Swell @ 500: None
10.0
8.0
6.0
1
4.0
2.0
c
g
o
0.0
V
c
u
i_
a
-2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
o
ti
72
o
ca
o -6.0
O
'
-8.0
-10.0
0.01
0.1
Load
(TSF)
1
10
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
1202093
January 2021
SWELL l CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:
Brown Sand & Gravel (SP & GP)
Sample Location:
Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: NL
Plasticity Index: NP
% Passing #200:
2.8%
Beginning Moisture: 0.4%
Dry Density: 121.4 pcf
Ending Moisture:
13.7%
Swell
Pressure: <150 psf
% Swell @ 150: None
10.0
8.0
6.0
1
'
Tui
4.0
2.0
c
au
E
0
o
0.0
m
c
u
i
a
-2.0
Water
Added
-i
-4.0
o
ti
32
to
ca
o -0.0
O
'
-8.0
-10.0
0.01
0.1
Load
(TSF)
1
10
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
1202093
January 2021
SWELL l CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:
Brown Sand with Clay (SP - SC)
Sample Location:
Boring 3, Sample 2, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 29
Plasticity Index: 15
% Passing #200:
12.7%
Beginning Moisture: 1.3%
Dry Density: 106.4 pcf
Ending Moisture:
14.7%
Swell
Pressure: <500 psf
% Swell @ 500: None
10.0
8.0
6.0
1
co
4.0
2.0
c
au
E
0
O
0.0
m
c
u
I_
o-
-2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
o
ti
32
to
ca
o -6.0
O
F
-8.0
-10.0
0.01
0.1
Load
(TSF)
1
10
Project:
Location:
Project #:
Date:
Troyer Auctioneers
Weld County, Colorado
1202093
January 2021
Hello