The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About861 Green Meadow Dr - 239121402003 - 2014-00ISM JUL-28-00 FRI 10:57 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 P. 01 FAX COVER SHEET HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. G LLN'1 001) SPRINGS FAX (970) 945-2555 DENVER 11AX (303) 925-0547 DATE: July 2R. 2000 le County Enviroltinental i'lealth i L1u,PA FAX N1JM8J"3i: 329-0349 FROM: Erie Tuin W''C, Y'ROJECT NUMBER: 2000004.24 Tot-0 number of pages, including this cover page, Brie I' Description or Additional -manon: 11 m U of 4 Sonris Mesa 11) If you have any problents receiving this transmission, please cal( (970) 945-8676. ORIC(INAL MAILED 923 C'uuper Mu tue, UmNDnrl Sprin�,5, ('0 91601 �n.n...,!,k—nic corm g'f c^9`vg4 = i — iOM cry s.G�cc ��E yurirnc ,cvl l 1 ORTGINAL NOT MAILED x 14 timmess Drive Gast Suite B-144 jintlGwnod, ("0 90112 t 414 i111Vi11. IJMJI �Ti��t.! f � 1 a�{-1 �JYJj 7F�.Jv� ��! JUL-28-00 FRI 10:5't AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 P. 02 yolil RECEIVEO JUL 1 7 ;I rth-Pawlak Geotecliniclil, Inc. 11;T0WC110Ufity Road 154 Glenwood Springq, ('olorado 81601 Phone. 970-945-7989 Fax: 970-945-8454 11ppocr0hppoted)-com July 14, 2000 Scott Dtjryca P,O. Box 1769 Aspen, COIM00 81612 Job No. 100 520 sul)ject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed Resi&acc, Lot 4, Sqp_ris Mesa Subdivision Green Meadow Drive, , F-igle County, Colorado. Dt~ar Duryea: )�s m(luested, Nopwortb-Pawlak Grotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and percolation test for foundation and septic disposal designs at the subject sito. The study vilas coaducWd iti accordance with our agreeincrit for -cotechnical engineering services tO VOLL dated June 16, 2000. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this TUI)OIL Ilepworth-Pawlak GeoLechnical, Inc. previously performed a preliminary subsoil study and geologic hazards evaluation of the Sopris Mesa Subdivision, report dated Ocrcober 23, 1997, Job No. 197 495. FlroposM Construction: The proposed residence will be a 2 story wood frame structure located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. The ground floor will be slab -on -grade at art elevation of 7,145 feet. Cut depths are expected to range between about I to 6 1'ecT, Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assmned to be relatively light grad.grad.typical of the proposed type o[ construction. The septic disposal systeiri is proposi-,6 to be located to the southwcst of the residence. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those des,cf ibt--d above, we shoiitd be 'notified to re-evaluate the reconunendations presented, in thk report. Site Coniditions: The lot is vacant and located uphill of Green Meadow Drive, The .0-rolind surface in the building area is strongly sloping down to the southwest. Ekl vatiort difference across the proposed building is about 6 feet, There is an irrigation to the north- of the building site, The lot is vegetated with grass, weeds and S'Igebrush. Subsurface Conditions, The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavathig two cxploratory pits in the building area and one profile pit in tho septic disposal area at Lbe- approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs of the pits are prescatc-d on Fig, 2, The subsoils encountered, below about I foot of topsoil, consisted of very stiff, sandy clay that was blocky in Pits I and 2, The sandy clay extended to T1 if -.n �-;rarr I-M T 4 n. A -" r M. rr.ri - - IL 1-11 -1 1. � . -, -1 0 Scott Dwyea July 14, 2000 PFQc 2 the depth explored of 9 feet at the Pit 3, and to a depth of about 5 feet at Pits I and 2 which was underlain by stiff silty clay to the pit depths of 7 feet. Results of swell- con,solidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the soils, presented on Fig, 3, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading. The sandy clay showed a low expansion potential when wetted under a constant fight stircharge, The samples showed moderate compressibility when loading was increased after Wetting, The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was observed in the Pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist to fn(Ast. 'MI-h dQq)[b in thk� Pit 3. Fourtdation Recommendatious: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread foodng-s placed on tha undisturbed natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pm5sure of 2,500 psf and a inininium dead load pressure of 600 psf for support of the proposed residence, The soils inay have variable heave or settlement potential after %veming and thorn could be sonic post -construction foundation movement if the bearing soils become wetted. Prccautions should be taken to prevent wetting of the bearing soils, FoojiTigs should be a minimum widtL of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. All topsoil and loose or disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level tp exteiAW down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings to Least 42, inches below the exterior grad,is typically used in this area. Coivinuous fbaodation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomnlies, such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pef for the on -site soil, excluding topsoil and oversized rocks, as backfill, Floor Slabs: Tho natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support 11glWy loadod slab -on -grade construction. There could be some slab heave if the exparksive clay subgrade is wetted- To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor stabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical moyment, Interior partition walls re.sthig oa the slabs -on -grade should be provided, with slip joints so that if the slab licaves the movemem is not transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also lri.iportant for stairways. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to,shfiT)kagccracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should duo established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A in i ni rimm 4 inch layer of aggregate base course should be placed beneath slabs for subtyrade StIppOrt aTid as a leveling course. This material should consist of min -Lis 2 inch H-P GEOTECH TI 11 -��-OMMM 17DT 4 rA-- 10nM Tr,- C:n(--i C: (nI IKITV MA I U=nI -rU D n ('- C' - -X M" NEVILIM, Scou rkiryca July 14, 700() Page 3 -ig� � 3regrjto. withless than 50% passing the No, 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. All 'fill noterials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of maxiinurn standard Proctor density at a moisture colitcat near optimum, Required fill car,, consist of the; on -site soils, or suitable imported granular soils, devoid of vegetation, topsoil and OVew'rsized rock. Surface Drainage: Positive exterior surface drainage is an important aspect of the project to prevent wetting of the soils below the building. The following drainage prcoautlwis should be observed during construction and maintained at all tunes after the residcticc ' lia.3 been completed: 1) inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase die expansion potential of the clay soils. 2) E.xtr-:rior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas, 1) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backrill. 5) Lan&capirig which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, should be located at least 5 feet from the building, .t. I'crcohAion Testbig: Mrcolation tests were conducted on July 7, 2000 to evaluate the feasibility, of an infUtrgloR septic disposal system at the site, One profile pit (Pit 3) and three p cycolation holes were dug at the locations shown on Fig, I. The test holes (nominal 12 inch diarneter by 12 irtcli deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow bate khoipits and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the porcolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Pit 3 shown on Fig. 2 and consist of saiidy clay. The percolation test results, presented in Table 11, indicate average percoLaiion races of bc:twcuri about 23 and 60 minutes per inch, Tho average LI rates were determined from the last 3 readings of Qach test, Based on the subsurface coilditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a emiventiona-I infiltration septic disposal system. The systang should be designed by H-P GEOTFCH Till 170T 4 M-10r)hl TM- Cf-*,rl C: f-r'll lKl'rV C1,11 I Ul:nl TU lDnf--r= - A JUL-28-00 FRI I M8 AN HIGH OOUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX N0, 9YO 945 2555 1=1161 Scott Daryea July 14,2000 a civil ertginecr. Limitntionsc This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We male no warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted In this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on Fig, 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in tb(c area. Our lindings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface cotLdition,q identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notifi.-d at once so re-evaluation of the reconnnendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during; construct"ioti to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verity flint the reconunendalions have been; appropriately interpreted. Significant design cliangos may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical e7zg;iner:r. If yotL have any clttestions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, 'tkkt@94d44 NICAL, INC. =ivid A. r��4e� •°t lam°• n Reviewed by: �MM°a,104d ,t O e��, Steven L. Pawlak, l'.E. DAY/ksmlrso attacltriac;nt�; cc: Fligh Country Engineering - Attn: Laic Tuin H-P GEOTECH TI II -- ---- --T A — In— Trt. r ^P l r ! 1 MMIT r'lll I "r7nl TLI on(= - C_- JUL-28-UU hHl 1U:b8 AM HIGH GOUNTHY ENGINEENING FAX NO. 9'(0 U45 2555 F. U6 API"ROXNATIF., SCALE I 2D' 7140 d Q, 7140 100 52,0 I-ll-,PVMRTl-I — PAWLAK I GEOTFCiNICAL, INC. LEGIEND: m EXPLORATORY PIT LOT 5 A PERCOLATION! TEST HOLE LOT 3 7150 LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fly. AND PERCOLATION TEST lr-IOLES Ti [I - - - - - - --I a M . I -^I�A T - . I—Y1t�l r rare lk ]T4J rk li 1 1 1lr l T[ I rnrlrr— . r! JUL-28-00 FRI 10:59 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 P. 07 PIT I PIT 2 PIT 3 ELEV. = 71148' ELEV. = 7142' FI-W =- 7137' 7' DD-TUZ -200=,B7 -77 --7 5 Cd R=111 WC=1011 D D - 9 5 10 10j L F ( F t4 D TO' 0501k, orgal-iTc silty clay. CLAY (CL); medium plmwticlity, sandy, very skiff, slightly moist, mixed brown. Blocky in Pits 1 and 2, mcj'[,,-.t vAth depth in Flit 1 -1 CLAY (CL-ML); low plasticity, silty, slightly sandy, stiff, slightly moist, red-br6wn. ,-, A 2' Djan,ioter hand driven liner sample. NQ'TL13- 1, rxplorolory pit-, were excavated on July 6, 200D with a backhoe. 2. Lrmollom. of axplorntory pits were measured approximately 1sy pacing from features, an (ha nIWA plcin provided. EIa-vk)tIcn:; of the nxploratory pits were obtained by interpo]Qtjon between contours on the site plan provid provided. W1.!3 are drawn to depth, 4, 1ha exploratory piL locations and Elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree Jf-npii,-,d by the rnathod used. 1), The lines, br-,tw�,w m0priols shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate bnundnrlao betw-�Qn crintericl types and transitions may be gradual. F. frao wnLor wars encountered In the pits at the 'time of excavating. Fluotijatfon,- In water level may occur with time. V. L.0pratory Te,--AIn,,,i Resuftn,. ky = 'Afriter Content ( P. Dig Ory DpwAty ( pc; ) 1 -200 -- Percent passing No, 7,00 sieve 100 57271-HEPWORTH - PAWLAV, C-'17r)TFC-WWIC`AI - INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY, PITS I Fig. 2 T1 If 'i '�i-M - A - - - - - - I - . -- - - .1 1-11 -1 1. . I -, -1 . JUL-28-UU FRI 10:b9 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 P, 08 01 Moisture Content = 9.1 percent Dry Density = 95 PCf Sample of. Slightly Sandy Silty Clay From-, Pit I at 6 rect 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — k,5f im Moisture Content 11.1 percent Dry Density =-- 108 Pof Sample of, Sandy Clay From: Pit 2 at 4 Feet Expansion upon 0.1 1,0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf —1o(— SWELL— CON S01_1 DAn ON TEST RESULTS !u o f-IEPWORTH — PAWLAK dig. 3 G FOTECHNICAL. INC- Tin _Mmm rm T r M. =M^" Tr . r'nf r � Mf M. MW ( k 11 1 1 1r-,'11 Trf I on.=. JUL-28-00 FRI 10;59 AM HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING FAX NO, 970 945 2555 PI 09 Vj co m M cr CJ e. q co (D I r n z co 6 N QD n3l ill ti cn 11 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. - --. it ITiJ -1 1. 1 1 .--1 -1 1 cl JUL-28-UU FRI IMY AM HIGH GOUNIRY MGINEEKING FAX NO, VU Mb 2bbb F. lu I [OLE NO. F-2 P-3 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO, 100 520 110 LE DFPTI I (DICHES) I-ENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER 13EPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE (MINJINCH) 46 30 7 '/2 7 112 7 5 Y, 47 is water added 7 '/2 6 1 Y7 5 4 Y2 41/2 3 1/2 7 Y1 6 '/Z 61/2 5 1/3 G 4 1/1 45 15 wattr addod 7 6 5 4 Y2 tf 4 '/4 3 1/2 7 '/2 6 Yj 61/2 6 YZ 1 51/2 5 1/2 I r? 4 1/2 Yj i%tota: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on July 6, 2000, Percolation tests were conducted on July 7, 2000 by Hepworth - Pawlak (ieotc-,,chnical. Average percolation rates determined by averaging the last 3 readings of ouch test. TI 11 r-r',T 4 M. =MnM TrI . 17'n1-1 r7 1-MI M i-r'..' r7ill 1 L1r7l-.1 'rL I Mnl= . -1 M