HomeMy WebLinkAboutPreliminary Geotechnical Study 11.30.2000,n, 6. 2006b 4:06PMM ¿drienn¿
H
T'üo' 3453 ru r' I -
îfiîtii:r',il.ll,:l*;:î'il;
'iii.llhlti;Lìfi'"""
IUï.}L
t; \t/t...';.1,"i ¡,r I
'4 ¡ ,t. r
':*. ,j;,, a! ,
'+. ,,/ ;! 4 .
ll4y , ,," :', ,
,, rï?ot¡
i:r', '.:' ; .;,":
t
"..,,,'..
JOB NO' r00 627
NOVEMBER30' 20oo
PREFARßD FOR¡
AOAßtr'TG FOnI( PRESERlry-¡in{t p¿vID [rcMoRßIs
P.o. Box 1360
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
.;
Jun, 6, 2006b 4r06Pli4M adrienne ul(st No.3453lu p. 2 I
SEPWORTH . PAWLAK GEOTECÍINICAL' INC
November 30.2000
Roering Fork Pr¿s¿rve
Àn¡: David McMonis
P,O, tsox 1360
Balatç Color¡do t1621
Subjær: Rcpon Ttansmittal, PrÊltunln¡ry Ory*S1{ S¡ldI' Proposed Rouing
ForkPræetvesrrbdivisiol,CountyRoadl00,GarñeldCounry,
Colorado.
Dear Mr, McMonis:
As rcquesred, wc bavê ænducted a geotechnicrl SrBdy fof the propoSed Rornag Fork
Prescrv¿ Subdivision.
Tbepropcnyissuirablcfortlapropoocddcvclopmcntbæcdongeologícand
geoæcbnical condirions.
subsruface co¡diúons encouptered ln the exploratory pits dug ia rhc gencral proposed
-
dcvcloprnear ,r.. ,yli*lly lonsiet of 1 to 2 fect of ùpsoil.ove¡lyiog dcns¡-s1dy.gr1vel
wirh cobblæ a¡d boulders. Srou¡ilnatcr w¡s cncoumered bâweêt 4 a¡d 7 fcer iu thc
p¡ts.
sorc¡d foodnss placod on råc nan¡ral subsoils and dcsigned ¡6¡ ¡¡¡ ¿llgwrble bearing
;í;ñ;#',"ñ;ti t 3,000 psf appear suimblc for uuitain¡ suPPon' Tbe buildi¡g
cxcavations should bt k d*htfiow iå evoid grouodwater inpacts' Engiueered scptic
U¡rpOsaf Sygrcms witt pribably be needed ¿ue to the shallow groundwater condirion'
The repon which follows describes our exploratio[, sumrnarizes our ñndings' and
presents out reoommendarions suhable forpla¡ning and preliminary desigu' Ir is
iroporuot tüat we providc cous'ltiation during design, an! lcu scrviæs during
construction ¡o rc"i.r ard msnitor üe inplenentation of tbc geotechnical
recommeodations,
If you have any qucstioru rcgarding this report, please contact us'
Si¡cefely,
IIEPWORTH - PA1VLAK CEOTECIIMCAL' fNC.
Iob No,l00 627
%-*'/ pr*-4/
Sreven L, Pawlak, P'E'
Rev. bY: JZA
SLP/ksw
Jun, 6, 20061 4:07Pl/lil adritnne )RSE
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
STTE CONDITIONS
çEOLOcIç SETTING ¡ t . .' . I
¡¡o. 14531 ö P, 3 4
TABLE OF CONTEÌ'ITS
ir.tl¡ t 'r
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
ó
6
6
1
7
7
1
I
8
9
FIELDÉXPLORATION ", ' ' I I ¡ I ".
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS . ., .
GEOLOGIC STTE ÀSSESSMENT
RIVËR FLÕODING
ALLIMALFANFTOODING .I r ' "
SINKIIOLES
EARTHQUAI(E CONS¡DERÂTIONS''
RADIATION POTENTI.AL
PRSLMINARY DES¡GN RECOMMENDÀTIONS
FOUNDATIONS
BEI¡W GR.A.DE CONSTRUÇTTON
FLOORSLAFS .""'i"
SURPACEÞRAINACE .. ":
PAVEMENTSECTION .I I I " ''
PERCOT.ATION TEST¡NG
LIMMAT¡ONS
REFERENCES ,...
FIGURE I . GEOLOGY MAP.TND EXPLORÂTORY PIT LOCÀTIONs
RGURE 2'LOGS OF ÊXPLORATORY PTTS
FIGURE 3 . LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - SWELL.CONSOLIDATTON TËST REST'LTS
FIGURE 5 - GNÂDATION TEST RESI,LTS
TABLE f 'SUMI,IARY OF I.ABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - PERCOLAT1ON TESÎ EESULTS
H.P GEOTECh
Jun, ó, 20060 4r0iP}llM ¡drienne ul(Jl N0.34531ð P, 4 )
.7,
SITE COIYDÍilONS
The Roaring Fork Preserve is loeeted in the Roari¡g Fork valley about two
miles upsream fiom carbondalc. The propefry covers parts of the southern half of
Secrious 35 anrt 36, T. ? S. R. 88 !V. Cormty Road 100 borders tlre property on the
south, see Ftg. 1. Thc Roaring Fork Riva borders tots I and 2 on the north' Tbe
prôperry is on üc neuly level rive( valley floor, Tt¡c valley floor has an average down
Sçeam slope ofabout 1% fn ¡be projecr area. Tbe valley floOr C¡nsisfs oftb¡ce ËrracÊ
levcls q¡irh rhc highÊst being abour 5 ro l0 fca abovc tha rivcr' To tbc soutb of thc
propÊrry the oeuly ¡sysl valleÏ floor rransftions to sæall alluvial f¿ns rha¡ havc averagc
slopes of abour 25/0, nb¿ fan heads a¡e locatcd ef ûe toe of the sreep vallcy sidc whcre
rhc colluvial slopcs Avêrage about EQt[, Drainagc besi¡s on lhe steep valley sides
above rbe alluvì¿[ frns rre smãll eûd usually do oot exceed 2 ¡o 3 acres' Tbc drainages
above rhc åns ue ephemaal and only bave surf¡ce flow during heavy prccipiø¡ion' At
the rime of our snrdy the Prope¡ry was pâsh¡fe and inigated hay ficlds. Nunerou$
irrigariou d¡rcbes rbar diven warer from rh¿ riyer are prcsent on the propeny' ourside
te inigaþd Ateas, vegeration consisrs of cot¡onrvood Eees, grass. and brusb'
GEOLOGIC SETTTNG
RcgioDsl gèolo8y rnapptng showg tlut fotua¡Íon rock í¡ ttre projæt ües h üe
Pcnnsylvanian a8ê Ergle Vrlley Evrporire (Kirkhasr and lVidma¡¡, 1997)' Rock
ourcrôps are so¡ prescnt on tbe ProPeny, but outcrOpS a¡rd ShellOw colluviUm (Qc/Pce)
arc prcteil on tbc sæep valley sidÈ þ dre sourh of rla properry' Àt tha projcct sha thc
Eaglc Vrlley Evaporltc is cxpccrcd æ liebclow typicrl foundadon êxctvedon dcptbs'
Tbe Eagt¿ VatlÊy f,vaporire is a gray þ f¡D gyPst¡û, anhydrlte and hrlito witb
interbedded siltsrone, claystone, shale a¡d dolomiæ. Bedding in rlre rock is ustully
cornplcxly fotded because of ftow deformation of the plætic evaporirc, The gypsum,
anlrydrire and hali¡e are sotubte in ftesh water. Subsurface voids ¿nd rêlatsd sit¡l:holcs
are somerimes present in arcæ wberc rle Ergle Vellcy EvapOrire iS nea¡ the surfece'
Evide¡ce of si¡rkÌ¡olcs was not oþServed on üe properly'
H-P Georrcx
Jun. 6. 20066 4:07Pilt{ ¡driennr 0RS[N0,345318 P.
'
6
Holoceup and laa Plcistoccne alluviu¡q dcPÕsítËd by tlre R'oaring Fork River is
presenr Þlow ¡bc têrreces on rlrc propeny. The exploratory pits ghow that tbe alluvium
rypically consiso of sr¿rlficd silry sând and rounded gravel, cobbles and boulders in a
silry t0 clca[ s¡nd ¡¡¡qrix. The elluvium in the pi* extended ro dcpús greater tban 7
fcct' Th¡æ ¡ülaçc lcvele aro Prsseru ou tbe proPcrty (Qtt' Q¿ and Qt3)' Thc lowcst
level consists ofrecêDtly aba¡doncd, braided river cha¡nels. The rwo higher lerrâces
represent former vnlley floor l¿veh. Along tlis reach of thc Roa¡ing Fork River, lhe
modern river channel t¡arrsftions fttm a Suaighr, i¡cised cba¡¡el up stream of the
County Road 100 bridgc [o â Shallow, braidêó channel penern down sream of the
bridge. The bridge is locared ebow ore mite r¡p sqeârn of the projecl areâ- h rppears
tbat thc cha¡nel in tÌ¡c braided rcach may bc slowly aggrading under present geologic
condkions.
FIELD EXPI,ORATION
The fieltl explOradoa for the nrolcct wæ çonductçtl on Âugust 3, 2000. Twelve
exp¡orarory pis werc dug wirb a rubber tired backhoe ar the locations shorrn on Fig' I
to evaluate ùe subsur&cc condfuions. Ooe pit was dug il each of tbe 9 lots and 3 piS
werc dug in thc proposed acceSS rOads. Tte pits were logged by a representstive of
Hepworthfawl¿k Gcoiec,hnicaln Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken witl¡ relatively undisn¡rbcd and disturbed
sanrpling methods. Depths at which rhe samples wcrê t¡kÊn arc shown on the Logs of
Exptoratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples wcfç tcgnêd to our laboratory for review by
the project engiueer and tesriüg,
SUDSURTACE CONDITTONS
Oraphic logs of the subsurface coodïdons êncôuntered at thc site a¡¿ shown on
Fig. 2. The subsoits rypically ôonsist of I to 2 fcet of topsoil overlying rclatively
dense, slightly silty sandy gravel comaíning cobblcs rnd bouldcrs. In Piu 9 Snd 12,
siky sand ancl sandy silt laycrs bewccn I and 3 feet thick wsrc encoumered bclow rhc
ropsoil-
H-P 6rore*r
iun, ó. 2006b 4:07PltrM ¿drienße 0l(51 ¡¡o, 345318 P. 6 t
-4-
Laboratory rcsdng pcrformcd on samples obtrincd fron the pi¡s íncluded n¡wral
moi¡n¡re co$snt and dansþ, gradation amlyscs asrt liquid aad plarstic limiu' I.E\t
gadadou ar¡Âlys$ pcrformed on di¡trrbod bulk srmple¡ (ninus 5 inÊh fracion)of thc
na6at côüsc grrnulâr soils ¡rc shorvn on Fig. 5. The laboratory tesring is suu¡nui¿d
tn Tablc I.
Ftee wa¡er $tas encotm4red in rhe pirs ar depthi of 4 m 7 feet. The subsoils
were rnoist ro ü,Èt utith depth.
GEOLOGIC SIÎE ASSESSMENT
Therc eæ several cg¡úitions of a gcologic n¿$rc üat shoutd bc considered i¡
projact ptanníng and developmenr, Tbcsc condirione a¡rd thcir cxpcded influcnce on rie
proposeil development are discu¡sed bclow.
RIVER FLOODING
The low-lying grouud along the river may ba subjcct to occasional flootli¡g by
tbc Roaring Fork River. A hydrologist shor¡ld evaluete the flood ponntial for ùe
projccr. Tbese cvaluarions should estâblish potÊntia¡ flood lcvcls and tlc necd for
mitigadOn to protect prOpoSed s¡n¡cturcs, if any, in the lowJying paru of the slte' The
flood evaluation should also consider the possibiliry of river reoæupation of thc
abandoned cts¡nels asd the possible need for river bank søbiliæ¡ion if buildings and
other facitities are located ncer ¡hc rlvcr,
ALLWTAL FÀN FI,OODING
Thc wcam cùa¡¡cls iu rtre srüa[ cphemerat drainages to the sout! of the project
area (across 100 Road) are well deñncd on the sæep velley side above rhe fans bu¡ at
rbe fan bead rte chennels bscome shallow and poorly definod, thi¡ isdisatcs that tbe
fa¡s uc geologicatþ Êsrive aod coutd bt ¡hc sitcg of furure debris floods a¡d dcbris
flows. the probabilistic rccurcoce timæ for <lebris ftoods ¿¡d flows on üe fans likely
cxcccd 50 ro 100 yÊars, but úrc f¡ns should not bê considcrcd totally dcbris flood a¡d
l{-P 6ÉOrËCl{
Jun, ó, ?006' 4:0BPltjl t¿t¡*¡1¡¿ )RSl l\lo. 3453 u P, i o
-5-
flow free, Às presentþ planlrcd the proposeû buildin8 shes are tocâted well away from
rhe fans and poteutial debús flood ud flow arcas, If buildings or oürer fecilities are
planned oear the fe¡rs, then rhe poreÛial for debris flood rnd flow should bc ev¡lurted
on e facility spÊciFlc bâsis.
SINKHOLES
Evidçnco of sinf,åoles was uot observed is lhe fleld or on the aerial photographs
of rhe propery. The sinkhote risl on ùe ProPerty is vicwod to be low and no greâfer
than that p6eût in other pans of northwestegr Colorado whero the evaporiæ ß qeu rhe
surfacs. the potenrial fo¡ sballow subsr¡rftce voids tb¡r could develop inro si¡tkholæ
should bc considered whcn planning sìte specific gcotcchnical $$dies at ¡be building
sitcs. If conditious indicative of sir¡lf¡ole retated ploblêms arÊ encou$ered, tbe
building sirc should be abandoned or úe feasibility of mitigation evah¡ated' Mitigation
measürÊs could include:
. Stabilizetion by Oroudng
r Srabilization by Excavation and Backfilling
' DeeP Foudadon SYstems
. Structural Bridgiqg
. Mqt Formd¿rions
' Set'back fiom ¡he Si¡iùote
H6¡ss swDÊrs should be advisÊd 6f ¡þg Sinkhsle potential, since early detection
of foundation disucss üd timely reme{lgl aqioos afe imporralr in rdducing the cost of
remediariou, should ¡ si¡Pùole sÉft tO develOp after coOs¡ruction' Wate¡ features such
as landscape pood5 a.od streams may noed O be lined tO preveil unconnolled subsurface
scepaEe.
EARTHQUAKË CONSIDERÂ1IONS
Theprojcm arca could cxpcrience moderately stro¡g earthquake rela¡cd gfOund
shekin8. Modified ìÁcrcalli Intcnsþ W grnrnd shaking should bc cxpectcd during a
rcasonable scrvice life for the devolopment, but tbe probabÍlity for suonger ground
shaking is low. Intensity VI ground shaking is felt by most pople and causes general
¿lârm, but resu¡s in negligibtc darnage to smtfiures 0f good design and construc¡ion.
H-P GeoftcH
iun, 6, 2006b 4:0BPIJIM adr ienne ol{ut ¡¡o,34531u P, B '
-6
Occupied strucilres should be desigued to witbstutd modmately strong ground shakiug
wirh lirtlc or uo damage and nor to collapse undø suonger ground shaking' Tbc region
isintheUniformBuíldingCode,seismicRiskZonel.Basedotr.outcurrent
undersnnding of thc earthqurke lrazud in ois part of colorado, we see n0 reâson Io
increase ¡he cornmonly accspted scismic risk zone for tbc area'
RADIATION POTENTIAL
The project is not located i¡ sn Ërca wbcre geologic dcposirs are expcmed to bave
unusually high concenuatious of r¡dloactivc mìncrals' Howevcr, ttrere is À poßûtiä¡ Ûat
radon gas could b¿ ploggDt i¡ the area. It is ilifñë|¡lt to âssess üe porcntial for ñ'rntre
radon gæ concentralio¡s in bulldtngs bcfore the buildirys âfe constn¡crcd' Testbg for
radou gas ca¡ be douc afrcr consmrcdot of e residencê Ór other occupied strucrure'
New bUilding uo ofrsU dæigned with provisions for ventilation of lower enclosed spaces
should posl cofi$rruclion tcsting sbow unacceptable radon gas concentrations'
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions a¡d rccomrnendations presented below ¡re based on the
proposed develOp¡nent, the sitc rcCon¡alsSanCC, tub$urftcç conditions encOunmred in lhe
exploratory pin, aod our erperienCe in the are¡. Thc rcco¡nmendadons are suît¿ble for
planning and preliminary dcsign but sitc spæif,c S¡¡rliæ should be condumed for
indivrdual lOt development,
FOUNDATIONS
Bearing conditions will vary dcpcnding on the speciñc locarion of the building on
thc properry. Based on tbe nÀR¡rè of the proposed construction, spread footings bearing
orr rhc Dan¡ral subsoils should be suitabte for building suppon. We expcct Úre footiogs
can be ¡ized for an allowable beuing pressure in thc range of 2.000 psf o 3,000 psf'
Thc uppcr sand and sil¡ soils appear loosc and nây need to be rernoved and replaced
wirh compacred fill or tbe bcaring level decpened to derse gravel. Fouudarion walls
should be designcd ro spân local anomalies and to resist lateral eartb loadipgs when
H-P GEOTECIi
Jun, 6, 20066 4:08P[afi adri€ßne JRIiL ¡¡o, 1453ìö P, 9 ll'l
.7-
acring æ reuining stn¡c¡¡¡.cs. The foorings sbould have a fninimum depth of 36 inches
for frost Protecdon.
BELOW GRADE CONSTRUCTION
Ground uarcr level is rclativcly shallow throughout rbc project area' tÀrs did not
find a¡} ¿rcess hydrosruic prcrsurc caused by a confning uppe¡ soil layer in ùe
exploratory pits, This condi¡ion hæ bccn found in low'lying flood prone arcas near the
Roariug Fork River^ Due to the shallow wárcr level, ít will probably not be Pfactical t0
prorccr bclow grade arcas from weuing and hydrostatic pressule buildup by use of an
undcrdrAin Sy$en. VIe rcco¡¡$leud tbat bæe¡nents urd deep crawlspaces be avoided'
shbon grade floors should be placed neÂl to rbove existing grade and crawlspaces
should be æ sbatlow as Possible.
FLOOR SLABS
slab-on-grade coostrucrion should be feæible for bearing on the naüal soils
bclow the topsoil. There could bc sgme post co¡stnlction stab sedemeil whe¡e th¿re
arc loosc sand and silr soits. To rcduæ thc effecs of somc differenrial movement, floor
slabs shortld be separated from ell bearing walls and cotumns wiù expansion joints'
Floor slab coouol joints sbould be uS-ed ro reduce damage dUe ro shrinlege craching' A
miûimum 4 incb rhick layer of free'draining gravel sbould u¡dc¡lic intcrior slabs rc
faciliure drrinage'
SUR¡ACE DR]TTNAGE
Thc grading plan for the subdivisio¡ should consider runoff rhrough ùe project
¡nd at individu¡I sires. tYater should not bo allowed ro pond Àûr[ !o buildings' Exterior
backfill should bc well compaced and have e poritivc slopc away frorn the building fot a
disunce of ar leas¡ l0 fær. Roof downspoue and drai¡s should discbarge well beyond
the li¡nirs of all backfll.
PAVEMENT SECTION
The near sr¡Jfâce soils eucountered in the píts below the mpsoil c0nsist mainly of
silry sa¡d and gravel whicb is a fair to good marerial for supporl of pavement naredâls'
H-P GEOIECI{
Jun, 6, ?006i 4:00Pl/l adrienne )RSI ¡io, 3453 u P, l0 |
I
we rccommend rhe pavement sectio¡ for ¡be site road¡ coruisr of 3 incb¿g of ¡sph¡lr
pavem€nt on 6 i¡ches of clus 6 aggrcgare b¡se course The subgradc should bc
evahutcd br paveneut sUpport at the timo Of consruction' SUbexøvation of sofi soils
and replacement with stn¡crural sand and Eavcl materials coUld be needed'
PERCOLATION TESTN'TG
Pcrcolation le$s were conductcd ¡t cach of the building sitcs to evaluare the
feæibiliry of ¿n infiluariou reptic disposel systèm' The percolation hole was dug next to
each of rhe exploratory piu located æ sbown oo Fig' I' Tbe lesl holes (nominrl 12 inch
diame¡er by 12 inch deep) were lred dug $ Ihe borom of shrllow backhoe pits and
were soaked wirh water onc day prior to testing. The soils exposed ìn the percoledon
holes aro sl¡nilu to tbose e1Possd in ùe rdjacent cxploratory pit shown on Fig' 2 and
rypically corsisf of I lo 2 feer of npsoil abovc lligbtly sil$ ro silry sandy gravcl wit
cobbles aod boulders, the percolation çSl resul¡S are prescntcd in Table lI' Bæcd on
¡be SUbsurfaæ conditions encouncred rnd the percoladon tcsr rcsults, infiluuion sepdc
disposal systems âppÊÂr feasible with provision$ to avoid rhe Eouåd watc¡ level and
fapld perçolæion ntes il some of the lot¡. we eryca lbat moundcd systems or oùer
engincerod systems will be mcded. 6 ¡ivil engineer should design the infilrarion septic
disposal 3ystem for each lot development'
LIMITATIONS
This snrdy has been conduc¡ed according to generally accepred georcchnical
engiaeering pnlnciples and practices in rtis üÊÊ at this timc. wc malæ ûo wananry
either exprcssed or irrptied. the conclusio¡s ¡nd recommendâtions submiræd in thi¡
report arc based upon üe it¡re obUinsd from tbe field recomaig¡¿¡ce' review of
published gcologic reltorts' rhe exploratory PIE locarcd æ showu on Fig' l ' thc
proposed type of cons¡rucüon a¡d our expcricncc in the area' Our findings includc
imerpotadon ancl exuapolaüon of rhe subsurfacc conditiot¡s identified at the exploratory
pirs aod veriatlo¡s in the sub¡urfrce conditioDs may not becomc evident until excavati0n
is performed. If conditions encountered during construcrion apPêar dífferent from thosc
H-P GeorrcH
Jun, ó, 2006i 4r09Pttllfi rdrienne JR$[¡1¡o. 34531 u P, 1 li I
ail
Rivsr
ofl
FrnôúBFtì¡Fofilarngeoel Q?
I
It
2I
P-t
a
lotg Ld4)
F4
a
I
a
¡Ê7
.æ-
ILot¡P¡opd
rryttBtrd*onan1\r f\îI
LotF{
{
P{F{p¡
lot
cf¡
Lü5
I
3
o3
Cdnsn
Rlndt
I
\\
LotT
I
I
I
t¡l I
OB
IbtrùGoÈz
Rrtdr
çeuñRdm
Qaf
Qaf
1QdÞe1 Qr/tre
CoobgïMaP an¡f¡CbtûtY HttmljotsHEPIMRT}I.PAYÚI.AK
lna1m
trLÊrilATl0ll:
Otl AbandqÞdRfvsrclunldl
A¿ l¡wsRiverÏe¡ræ
0A HiftqRtvorTsr¿ca
Oc Colt¡vium
Osf Allwi¡{F¡u
Ute EtgÞVdoYB'efdfr
ooohdþmßl
1 F€hlhrlC'hannsls
Ft r ËSotûVFit(ryPtul
0 Ðlt
¡ll
Solc I l¡.=8Dl!
Cafu¡,t10f
ng.
Jun, 6, 2006i 4:09PilIl adrienne )R$[|!0,34531[ P, ,l2ll
PIT(lor
ô{ syrnÞolf is prcsented on Figurc 5'
+
4
PIT
(Lor
PIT 12
ffi
Þlr
(uor
3
3)
7
7)
P¡T 1I
¡ôADt,/rlYS
Pll 2
(LoT 2)
PIT 6
(Lor 6)
HT Iô
ptr
(LoT
Prï
(LoT
I
I
5
5)
(Lor
)
I
0
5
r0
o
5
r0
WC-t1,2
0D¡92
-lô0ç31
B
å)
I
ô¡
tU
l!
I
E
ô-üô
otl!
I
Êo¡tf
oIt&
I
-Ë
4ó
ú}
û¡?l¡-
I
êoô
I
e)
+e"7,
-100-l
,rc)?32
m-e6
-2OO-54
PIT
(Lor
0
5
r0
0
5
t0
ùa¡!2
-?;0Ù'2
lÈa¡r
0D-¡*
-Z0o=55lL-10
Pt-?
PIT
0
Ë
10
o
5
'10
oot!
I
g
ttl¡f5
0olà
I
5
sê
NOTE ErPlonotlon
Fts. 2LOÊS OF EXPLORATORY PITSI{EPWORIþI
GEOTECHN
- PAVYLAK
tcAL, lNC.100 627
-Jun, ó, 2006rc 4r09P[4radrie nne lu(ùt----
LHitNU;
TOPSOIk orgonic ¡ond ond rilt, brorn'
f-m snx¡ (srl)l allty, ¡cndy ailt loyars. slightly cloyey. loasa. moist. brown'
Y:üÅ
ffi nî,ft,ttrt$,i î:lri9i,ffitJf5i:lt Tifl * rrrehtrv sirt¡ medÎum dcnse to dcn¡q
þ f Þlomcter hond drivan lhcr nomplc'
I
i
¡¡o,3413iìU p, l3 l4
Dl¡turbod bulk somPlc.
I =
Frcc sotcr leræl ln Þlt gt timc of cxcowting'
NOTE$
t. Erplorotory plts wcrc ¡xclvo[ed on Auguet 3' 2000 uith o bockhoe'
I z. Locotlon¡ 6f grplorotory pïts ter€ mcosured opproxlmately by poclng from featurec
I on ttrc ¡itc Plon Providcô
3. Elcvotioas ol arplorotory pltc røro not meoel¡tôd ond laEr of uplorotory pits ora úom to dopth'
I n. *" cxplorotory plt lôÊotlont shruld be considorc'd cccurote only tc the dagree
lrnplleo bY the- method u¡sd.
r q th¿ ltn¡ç bctrcen r¡olcrloh ehcrn on the crplorutüy p! logs raptorant thc spproxlnote
I
* ÅÏ"äà;t-Ëü; ,;ioih tnon ond tronrliions moy þc arcduol-
6. lvoter lô|,ol reodlltgs ehorn on the loge wcre f¡qdô ot thr tlme qnd under thc aondftlons indieoted'
I Frustuatlon¡ in wJtcr lcvel moy ocÈur sith tftna'
I
7. LsborotorY Testlng Retults:
WC¡WqterContent(Z)I oo - D¡v Densìtv ( pcf )| ++ - Pórcent retoincd on Nô, 4 slcw
-200 - Perc¿nt poerlng No' 200 sleva
I tt :¡ Llquld Umlt ( U )I Pl - Plo'sticlty lnder ( f )
I
I
J
LEGEND AND NOTESHEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC,100 627 Fì9. 3
Jun, 6, 2006' 4:O9Plfi n¡t;,nn, .)l(lit llo, 3453 ö P, 14 l
MoieturE Content c 25,2
Þry DensltY = 93
Sornplc ofi VorY sondY Silt
Þersent
pcf
Pltgot2Fect
0
2
N
c
,9!,
a,ttâc
oo
J
+
5
6
r0
AppUED PRESSUÊE - L¡rf
100
I
No movcmcnt
UPôn
\il
\lt
il
il
il
il
1t
il
It
o.1 1.O
F¡g- 4SWELL-CONSOLIDATION'IEST RESULTSIIEPWORTH _ PAWLAK
ôËorrcnnlcAl. lNc.100 627
Jun, 6, 2006ô 4: I0P[4M adr ienne urui ltjo,145 rlU o 1ñl-t' lJ Ih
g¡¡¡ ¡ltllna ôDo9Ì¡Gl
7. 5lL1 ANo CLAY 1 7'
PLASNqTY INDEX 7,
ÊROMI Pit I ot 4 thru 5 lrcet
c¡ja¡ tolr.¡! P.l,llls
t
TrÊ i¡¡r¡ur
1¡É ft^ôllcs
¡¡,ß í¡¡orE EE9
.lf,A JS
0lAt'IEIER OF ÞARTICLES IN MITUMEIIRS
d
¡0
tt
Cl tr
z
{.0l-l¡,&¡ù
t-z¡¡J te()
û,LJ 71a,
t0
IG
¡t
!0
to c)7roøv,
lo o-
z¡0t
L'v!oH
tô
,ù
r0
0
¡!r ,ü ,!úi .üt "tr¡
cr.A? t0 s.r
GRAIEL 7B 7, SAND 21
LIQUID LIMIT Z
SAMPLÉ OF: Sondy Grovd with Cobbles
cùSu5
7 rúô
s0
f0
to(,
z6!8
!!È
z{! l¡.¡9roH
¡!
t0
0
r{¡4
Ui Sfi¡aq¡¡ lÊlE
J50
DIAMETER OF PARÍICIES IN MIIJIM
0
tt
tt
âlôtz-¡{oF
l¿J&' to
Þz|'t) l0l)
IELt ,aÀ
!c
âô
roû .Étt .rD¡.otf ,6'
--l.....+-:::=l'-:
---z- ::={:::::::::::-t-----{=-
- l--{-*rt--r-ffi
------l:- l-;l ¡ì
_.J-------1-----1---1
+--æ
nG, 5CRADA'NON TEST RESULTSHEPWORTH _ PAWLAK
ûEOTÊCHNICAL, INC.100 527
¡ü.ltô^t fo ,lll
GRAvgL 82 / SAND 16
Ltoulo Lt¡,llT 7
SAMPLÊ 0F: Sondy ôrovcl with Cobble¡
I $LT AND CLAY 2 T
PLASnqw ltilDEx 7l
FROM: Pít 8 at 5 thru 4 Fect
HEPWORTH+AWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, tn¡c'TABLE ISUMMARY OF LABORATONY TÉST RÊSULTSJOB NO. 1()0 627c;'Ilv<-Õ6I€€<=;-C.-Q:-3,Þ.gæE612c¡I41¡oRrHır^rFl,¡ Lor¡tlolrlYa23-41Yz4-5OEPIHlú'ttl3.425.212.2t¡âfìriÃLr.t9tslurEoDf9lEllflil949592il¡rtßotgrfÞsrl8278c¡^rll.trtEâ¡rrtütl1o21t¡tDlll55ES23l19E¡C¿UlFÀSS¡(¡i¡C, tODSEVE20uoglDflinlt*raY¡tFi¡nG u¡¡llfs2ttÀgl¡ÊIr¡¡É¡IrlurEofìtfll¡ÊDDÞüpNlSlltvSaftãtctfilrSRVerY Sandy SiltVsry SandY S¡ltSandY Gravel withCobblesorganic Silty SandSandY Graval withCobbles¡otl oRÈoñbcl. TYPE
Jun, 6. 2006; 4:'l0Pi¡l adr ienîe )RSI
Not¡l
HEPWORTH.PAWTAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
l\Jo. 3453 u P. li Ú
JOBNO, 100 627
Page I of 3
Parcolation hole number cgrfespgnds to exploratory Pit number lFig' 1 l' Percolation holes
were hand dug in bottom of ihallow plts and soaked on August 3. 20OO' Percolatïon
testi wefe conducttd on August 4, 2OOA, Average percolatiOn rat66 are based on the
last 2 reading of each test.
HOTE NO.}IOLE DEPT}I
llr¡cHESt
IEÍ{GTH OT
If{fEßVAL
lMrN)-
WATEß DEPTH
ATSTANT OF
r¿TENVAL
(tNç{lE6}
WATEB DÉPTH
AT END OF
INTËRVAT
rNqEEËI
oRoP ll¡
WATER
rEVgI
ilNC¡{Esl
AVERAGE
PEf,COI.ATION
RAlË
üvttN.rlNCH)
P-t 20 15
¡¡flll
r.fll
rdl$
refill
av 2y,1
10
eu,31Â 3
Glr 3 á/.3
e%I ol.1%
1./,2 r/.2
ElA ây,1
EW {1Yt
1 2%'l y.
P.2 20 15
rclill
rcfill
r¡flll
relill
rel¡[
refill
ô 2Yr g%
{
7 3y,3'a
6:À 3%z'/.
7 3%3Y.
7 t/,:4 ?%
ay.2U^314
7 3tt 3'.ô
P-3 30 1E
relíll
Ë'¿o v,
20
o âh Yr
5Yt art I
t./t 7Y'1Y,
7Y^AY't
cra 8*Tt
gY.5 t/.
Jun, 6, 2006; 4:l0Piû1 ¡drienne )RSI
Note¡
HEFWOBTTI.PAWTAK GEOTÊCHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLAT¡ON TÊST RESULTS
ll0,3453t P. IBY
JOBNo,10a627
Page 2 of 3
parcolation hole number corrqsponds to exploralorv p¡Î number (Fig' t )' Percolatioñ holes
were hand dug Ìn boi|g¡r of 'shallow ¡i-.rt'o" pits "n¿ soaked on August 3' 2000'
porcolation re3ts w;;-con¿r"ted on August 4, 20OO' Average percolation rates Êre
based on the last 2 readings of caoh tast'
HoLE NO,HOIE DEFÍH
(ü,lCfE8l
tgll6TH OF
A{THVAL
liililt
ïVATEN DEPÎH
AT START OF
INTERVAI
ürcHEsl
WATER PEPTH
aÎ ËilD OF
INTEhVAI.
{NCHESI
DtoP ll¡
ti/ÂfER
Ltr/EL
ltt{cHEsl
AVÊRAOE
PSCOLÂTION
FAfË
(MlN.[ilcHl_
P-O 30 15
rct¡ll
ñm
refll
¡cfü
2X 2h
E
5yr 3Yr 2
3%lVr 2
5 2y.2Y.
Ett 3V.2Y.
6Y:3Y.2
lTt rtil 2
P.3 3B 15
rsfiÍl
al 61.2y,
30
ô!¿âY.I
6Yr 4y.I
7%Al.t
3%AY.Yt
6%5rß tt
p.B 30 15
refdl
þtill
nlül
6 I Ë
10
6 3 3
6l 4Y,2
lYt 3 th
â Ita 1r,
Jun, 6, 20061t 4:llp¡f[l ¡drienne lUl{l'I ¡¡0.3453iìup, t92t.)
HEPWONTH_PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PEBCOTATION TEST RES U LTS JOgNO. 140 627
Page 3 of 3
Nore; Percolarion hole number corrosponds to exploratory pit number {Fig. 1}. Percolation holes
were hand dug ln bottorn of shallow baekhoe pits and soaked on August 3, 2000.
Percolation tctts wôrg Conducted on August 4, 2OOO. Average percolation rates êre
based oñ th6 loet 2 raadings of each test.
l{OLÈ lrlo HôtE DEPÏI{
ilNCHESt
T€NGTII OF
INTERVAL
{MINI
WÑTND!PR{
A1 6TA¡1 OF
IÎÚTERVAI
ft!¡cHE$
WATEß ÞEPIH
At ÊilD OË
NTËNVAL
ilNêt{Egt
DROP ¡f{
wÀÎEn
I"EVEL
flNClrEgr
AVËRAGÉ
PERCOTATION
RATÊ
{MtN-/tNCHr
?.7 26 't6
rpflll
r¡flll
r¡tit
rollll
r.ñl
I 2 0
3
I 2 0
7 1 6
E 3 6
g 3 ã
7 z 5
P-8 20 tl gYt ,A
40
I 7T,Yt
7v,7 lt
7 6N Y,
6.lA 6 Yt
6 6lt r
P-9 24 t5
relîl
rrfill
27t lY.1 Yl
E
5 2V 2T
Z Y..t 1 Y..
ßY.2Yt 2Yt