Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutObservation of Excavation 10.30.15~ec HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL October 30, 2015 Lisbeth Oden P.O. Box 1677 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 ( cabindream@me.com ) l lcp11vrth·P.1wl.1k Gco1cclm1L.1l, Inc 5010 Count~· Ro.id 15-t GlcnwooJ Sprin~'S, Cnlor.1do 81601 l'bon.: 970-9·U· 7933 F.1x 970·9~j HH cm:ul. hpi:c,,?5hpgcotcch cum Job No. 115 130A Subject: Observation of Excavation. Proposed Cabin, Lot 4, Sillivan Subdivision, 4726 County Road 335, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Beth: As requested by Mark Miller, a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical observed the excavation at the subject site on October 17, 2015 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design arc presented in this report. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated May 29, 2015, Job No. 115 130A. The proposed construction is similar to that discussed in our previous report. The building has been designed to be supported on spread footings using an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1 ,000 psf as recommended with some risk of settlement. At the time of our site visit, the foundation excavation which was essentially complete had been cut in several levels from about 2 to 9 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted primarily of medium dense, silty occasionally clayey sand and gravel with cobbles (to about 8 inches in diameter). There were several scattered pockets of medium dense, silty to clayey sand with scattered gravel. Results of swell-consolidation testing perfonned on a sample of the clayey sand taken from the site from one of the pockets. shown on Figure J, indicate the soils are moderately compressible under conditions of loading and welling with a minor swell potential when wetted under a constant 500 psf surcharge. No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. The excavation subgrade was not compacted and at this time we recommended the footing subgrade areas be compacted which was done. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are consistent with those previously encountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allowable bearing pressure of I ,000 psf. The risk of foundation settlement appears low. however, excessive wetting of the bearing soils may cause some settlement and precautions should be taken to prevent wetting. Structural filJ below the footings Parker 303-841-7119 • Color.ido Springs 719-633-5562 • Stlvcrrhome 970-468-1939 Lisbeth Oden October 30, 2015 Page 2 docs not appear needed. The minor swell potential measured in the one sample can be neglected in the foundation and floor slab design. Prior to the footing construction, loose disturbed soils should be removed to expose the undisturbed natural soils and the subgrade re-compacted as needed. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous (limited) subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, cc: Pattillo Associates Engineers -Bob Pattillo (bob@ paen ginecr!i.com > Three G Construction-Mark Miller (t.~rcc g co niruuc ti on @msn.com ) Garfield County Building Dept. -Jim Wilson (jwil!,on@ garfield-count y.com} Job No. 115 l30A Moisture Content = 9.1 percent Dry Density • 89 pcf Sample of : Clayey Sand with Gravel From: Bottom of Northwestern Portion of Excavation 1 ?P- c: 0 0 c;; c: • ll... t'O ---r-.. Q. ...... >11 ""' 1-.h in I\ t • 1 I\ \ .§ ~ f.,." rn ~ 2 \ \ a. g u \ \ 3 Expansion \ upon wetting 4 ' 5 l'I 0.1 10 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksl 115 130A cGetech SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1 HitrWORn+ftAWLAIC GmfSCtNCAL