The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03897!<:fof' " --. _, ·.-...--. •···. ' , I ;• " ' \ { i • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT 109 8th Street Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone (303) 945·8212 Permit N~ 3897 Assessor's Parcel No. • INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT This does not constitute a building or use permit. • PROPERTY " : Owner's Name z;~ 3 fer, Doro /cl Present Address $</ '{ 1fo_ve/' Tfi:. ,' ( (;;<;. '( {'Jf Phone q <./;: -9'65~ 319-/:;l.~O i System Location ___ ~._."?"'-/-=0:.=5..;;:3=-_tfw'-'----'Yl---'<Q~_._(\,,_, -f---'(.(,-=---=Gv"'--"¥c.:./-=.~.:...=.--------- l' Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. -----A>-'~,,_,,,.._,t.._t.,~{ __ ,_/ ___ __,,o2"-"-/_?'(:...J._-__,0:::.;:5""-'3""-"-'--"'Q"'01..:~'-"'00""-?-+--- I ~ SYSTEM DESIGN --'7-"-5-'()'---Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) ______ Other --'/_) ___ Percolation Rate (minutes/inch} Number of Bedrooms {or other) J -f / Required Absorption Area -Sae Attached J / 3 c;b tJ / / & ? fl S Special Setback Requirements: ./ / Date /-I 7 -oo/ Inspector ----4/..:.~4_.,,2--'--~""'~"""""'/'---.<~~/.,,· ·,,_.~-------- FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as instal:) ~ Call for Inspection (24 hours notice Before Covering Installation / r' System installer-1.7""'-"""'::'...<i:...o"""'o;;"--'-.L.2Ll."""~-'------------------------ ' \ Septic Tank Capacity __ ,_,,t__.l.<0-------------------------------- ' ' \ ; t i • ~ ' ··1~ Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name-\'.-_-<:~~-==::....----------------------- Septic Tank A.ccess within 8'' of surface _!.~~L------------------------- Absorption Area -+?_.e ... ·,.~""'*"'"""'o."'"J."--'------------------------------ Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name -l.~="a.<'l~/""~a""+"'~"':i.,~""'""'-""~------------- Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requlrements_~~~·.41J,.:;..1.R'""----------------- Date /-73 -rJt{ I ~-Inspector -tfA22;2:1.,t5.'µ.~.&:.~;z _______________ _ RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CON •CONDITIONS: 1. 2 . 3. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25. Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or• requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual seWage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine - 6 months in jail or both). Whtte -APPLICANT Yellow· DEPARTMENT • • ' • • ' • • ' , ' f I ' • INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER ~Al~ ~(!,(EfL ADDRESS~05" .<; R.:f't, LO e<JtJ \ PHONE '17o 37'/-/ (~() CONTRACTOR lJ, l !1~/'t\.S (olV!>']R_v t..:rt-r- ADDRESS Q.:fc, W PHONE9?o{otf-50<13 PERMIT REQUEST FOR (.{"NEW INST ALLA TI ON ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY: Near what City ofTown~...,Q~·~{(_C,~ __________ ,Size of Lot efr l}c12g Legal Description or Address ~ o.Ac..L .Q, 3105? Afw7 tO /(;f(<-- WASTES TYPE: (~LLING ( ) TRANSIENTUSE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE:_/J~O~i/~------------------ NumberofBedrooms _.-= __________ N.umber of Persons_=z_ ___ _ ( q/oarbage Grinder ( ) Automatic Washer ( ) Dishwasher SOURCEANDTYPEOFWATERSUPPLY: ( )WELL (efF"RING ( )STREAMORCREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM:_!/_,___./n-'-=1¥3=-,,____ _____ _ Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? __,_M'"''O~----------- A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the followin& MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System (septic tank & disposal field) to Property Lines: 10 feet YOURINDMDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT A SITE PLAN. GROUND CONDITIONS: Depth to first Ground Water Table_~~===-----""Sc:o.:..;1L=-S...__-"<?E'=?G=0""--'=:....<2:_:\ ___________ _ Percent Ground Slope ___ ~=g:e-~-~S°"""'\l""R.~ll~RJ=---t------------------ ,. ( ' TYPo/INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: M SEPTICTANK ( ) AERATIONPLANT ( ) VAULT ( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE ______________ _ FINAL DISPOSAL BY: ( ) ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT (~UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) EV APOTRANSPIRATION ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) WASTEWATERPOND ( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE, _______ ~---------------- WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE?_,_i..,.0_,,_o __ PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes ____ _,.er inch in hole No. 1 Minutes _____ _,.er. inch in hole No. 3 Minutes ____ _,,er inch in hole No. 2 Minutes er inch in hole No. Name, address and telephone ofRPE who made soil absorption tests: __ Cou.;;;';;;;..o.-rv'--'T,_...,_,__i .... 131-"'sq-=-f'.._.1""-c""'Q"'"'"_ Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. Signed..,. ~ Date. _ _,tJc..:::'f:..:.;~:::...."3_,,_ ____ _ PLEASE D~URATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! ,, Designate North Arrow Your Neighbor's Name & Address '-5-.e <2 Your Plot -Shape to Fit (No Scale) z,(·e-sL ~ Topo'l,...,._P:.._,c.... '"J'fj.,~f( Locate well, all streams, irrigation ditchs, and any water courses_ Draw in your house, septic tank & system, detached garages, and driveway. If a change oflocation is necessary, you must submit a corrected drawing, before a Certificate of Occupation will be issued. ' l. Your Neighbor's Name & Address County Road (Note the Road Number and Name) -.• .--~~~~~~~-'-~~-'-~~~~~~~~~~---'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ me c·\wpwin60\wpdocslploUoc l3A) . ''· ....s { :J: t' i.l '§I~~ " IV' ( ~ I I { <) d: .::t ¢ ~ ::(. M VI 0 -\Vl ., ' . ~ I I fllllll lllll llllll llllll Ill llllll llllll Ill lll°ll 11111111 818558 12/12/2112 12:24P 81418 P851 ft ALSDORF 2 0, 2 R 11.11 D I.II GARFIELD COUNTY co File No. 0208030-R EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL 1 A parcel of land previously described in Book 662, Page 770 of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office situate in the SW1/4SW1/4 of Section 5, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P.M., County of Garfield, State of Colorado, said Parcel of land being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest Corner of Section 5, Township 6 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P.M., County of Garfield, State of Colorado, and aluminum cap LS 13238 in place; thence North 89°40'50" East along the Southerly line of said Section 5, 777.10 feet to a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence departing said Southerly line North 31°56'23" West 187.95 feet a rebar and cap LS No. illegible found in place; thence North 51°40'23" West 423.90 feet a rebar and cap LS No. 5933 Found in place; thence (llorth 66°43'37" East 440.69 feet to a point on an existing fence line a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place; thence continuing along said fence line the following six courses: 1. South 20°28'09" East 19.58 feet to a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place; 2. South 52°26'01" East 83.68 feet to a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place; 3. South 23°41'18" West 114.21 feet to a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place; 4. South 35°14'22" East 283.50 feet to a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place: 5. South 36°48;34" East 224.50 feet to a point on the Northerly right of way of Highway 6, a rebar and cap LS No. 36572 set in place; thence South 86°20'57" West along said right of way 165.15 feet to a point on the Southerly line of said Section 5, (whence a concrete right of way marker bears South 83°38'08" West 9.61 feet); thence departing said right of way South 89°40'50" West along said Southerly line 133.42 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • Hepwo."th-Pawlak Georechnical, Inc. 5020 Couruy Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNlCAL Fax: 9i0-945-8'454 ' email: hpgeo@hpgeorech.com SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCES AND CABINS TWO PARCELS OF LAND AT WEST OF SILT, 31053 HIGHWAY 6 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 103 127 . FEBRUARY 21, 2003 PREPARED FOR: PEREGRINE DEVELOPMENT ATTN: DON ZIEGLER P.O. BOX849 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989 ~r ~ > • ' ' , TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ..................................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ......................................... 1 SITE CONDITIONS .................................................. 2 FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................... 2 SUBSURFACE CONDmONS .......................................... 3 . FOUNDATION BEARING CONDmONS ................................ 3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................• 4 -FOUNDATIONS ............................................... 4 FLOOR SLABS . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S SURF ACE DRAINAGE .................................. : . . . . . . . S LIMITATIONS ..............•....................................... 6. -. FIGURE 1 -LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 -LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 -LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 through 7 -SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Job#103 127 . ' l ' • PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for two proposed residences and two cabins to be located on two parcels ofland at 31053 Highway 6, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Peregrine Development dated January 22, 2003. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed residences will be two story wood frame structures with attached garages. Ground floor will be structural over crawlspace for the residences and slab-on-grade for the garages. The proposed cabins will be single story structures over crawlspaces. The cabins will be 20 by 30 feet in size. Grading for the structures is assumed~ be reladvely minor with cut depths of about 3 to 4 feet We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed types of construction. Job# 103 127 G~tec:l 1 ' ' • -2- If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those descnoed above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE CONDIDONS The site is a small ranch with an existing single story residence. The existing residence is a single story wood frame structure. Several sheds are located on the property. The sites of the proposed structures is relatively flat with gentle slopes down to the south. A gully with a small creek is located through the center of the property approximately between Parcels 1 and 2. The gully is approximately 15 to 20 feet deep. An existing pond is located in the northern portion of Parcel 2. An existing wetlands is located in the northeast portion of Parcel 1. Some minor cuts and fills for construction of the existing driveway and the pond are located on the property. Vegetation consiSts of scattered cottonwood trees, brush, sagebrush, grass and weeds. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on January 28 and 29, 2003. Four exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the . . subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck mounted CME-4SB drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils. were taken with a 2 inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative • density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. Job# 103 127 , . - 3 - The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils consist of about V. to 1 foot of topsoil overlying medium stiff to stiff, stratified, sandy to very sandy silt and clay. Relatively dense, silty sand and gravel containing cobbles and boulders was encountered beneath the silt and clay in Boring 4 at a depth of 40lf.: feet. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit. Laboratory tes_ting performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density, Atterberg limits and finer than sand size gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the silt and clay, presented on Figures 4 and 5, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading. The samples generally showed a minor to low cbllapse potential (settlement llnder constant load) when wetted. The clay samples from Boring 2 at 5 feet and 15 feet showed a low expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. Groundwater was encountered in Boring 4 at a depth of 39 feet at the time of drilling. No free water was encountered in the other borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were typically slightly moist to moist. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS • The silt and clay subsoils at the site possess low bearing capacity and generally low to moderate settlement potential. Spread footings bearing on these soils should be feasible for foundation support of the residences with some risk of settlement. The risk of settlement is primarily if the bearing soils become wetted. Sources of potential wetting Job# 103 127 . . , • -4- include surface water ponding, excessive irrigation and utility line leaks. Site specific evaluations of the bearing soils should be made for the individual building such as observation of the foundation excavations. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FO~ATIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural subsoils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. • 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural subsoils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could be some additional movement if the bearing soils become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be Job# 103 127 , -5- designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of 50 pcf. 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the firm natural subsoils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted. 6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer shollld observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to eval~ate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab- on-grdde construction. The subgrade should be evaluated for settlement/heave potential at the time of construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of sand and gravel should be placed beneath slabs-on-grade for subgrade suppo~. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctt>r density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation and topsoil. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residences and cabins have been completed: Job# 103 127 ,, , - 6 - 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior 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. 3) 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 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, should be located at least S feet from foundation walls. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical -engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed types of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. 1f conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations 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 Job# 103 127 .. .. , ., . • - 7 - the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes 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 engineer. Respectively Submitted, Jordy Z. Adamson, Reviewed by: JZA/ksw • Job# 103 127 ,. ., . • BORING 1 PROPOSED CABIN) \ \ BORING 2 • (PROPOSED RESIDENCE) .t.:S11NG PONO • -....... ~--..... --.,. --PARCEL 2 ---------- ..... -..... "' \ \ EXIS11NG WE1lANOS \\ \ \ BORING 3 \\ . ------''O \\ ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... // / TO MILLER LANE {COUNTY ROAD 227) PROPERTY LINE \ \ \ \ EXIS11NG "\. "\. RESIOEN CE '"' EXIS11NG GRAVE!.. "\."' "\. OR'Z. "\. '\ ( '\ "\. ~"'' '"' ,, \ \ \ ~ /'-~, BORING 4'' (PROPOSEO '":::_' CABIN) '\. \ APPROXlt.!A TE SCALE ,. -100' 103 127 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. INC. \ \ \__ HIGHWAY 6 LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 1 \ I I .1 I I I I " ' IJ ·5 10 15 -• • 20 ... J:: -Q, • c 25 .30 35 40 45 103 127 • · BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3 BORING 4 12/12 WC-S.3 8/12 8/11 5/12 00-101 -200-"3 wc-11.• U.•25 DC-109 Pt-10 13/12 13/12 8/12 7/12 WC-S.5 WC-11.8 W0-7.7 W0-5.3 00•911 00-117 DD•109 00-10• -:zoo-ea -200-59 -200-36 17/12 10/12 7/12 17/12 8/12 1/12 9/12 W0-12.9 00-109 1•/12 10/12 13/12 17/12 • Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. .. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS 0 5 10 15 -20 • • ... .&:. -2-c 25 30 35 45 Figure 2 • LEGEND: ·s~ . t;;I TOPSOIL; sandy sftty clay, organic, soft to medium stiff, moist, dark brown. D ~ p SILT AND CLAY (ML-CL): sandy ta very sandy, sand la)MS, stratified, medium stiff ta stiff, slightly moist to moist, brown, slightly porous, slightly porous, slightly calcareous, low plasticity. SANO ANO GRAVEL (SM-GM}: silty, with cobbles and boulders, dense, wet, brown. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch 1.0. Califomia liner sample. 17/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 17 blows of a 140 pc_>und hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches. Free water level in boring at the time of drHling. - Depth at which boring had caved following drilling. T Practical drinlng refusal. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on January 28 and 29, 2003 with a 4-inc:h diameter continuous !light power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were determined in the field by the client. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were not measured and the logs of exploratory borings are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methdd used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in water level may. occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC -Water Content ( :ii: ) OD -Dry Density ( pcf ) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve. LL -Liquid Limit ( :ii: ) Pl • Plasticity Index ( :ii: ) 103 127 • HEPWORTI-i-PAWLAK GEOTECHNJCAL, INC. LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 3 ._,.,._,, . . -. . • <• • Moisture Content -5.5 percent Dry Density -98 pef 0 Semple of: Sandy Sfft -~ .... From:Boring 1 at 5 Feet 1 "'"r-- ''\,_ --r- 2 ...... ""' "'~ ,Compression upon 3 wetting ~ \ c .2 4 • \ • .. ... ... \ ~ 5 (.) -. 6 . 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf - Moisture Content = 11.6 percent Dry Density • 117 pef . Sample of: Sandy Clay From:Boring 2 at 5 Feet . 2 ~ .§ Ii'._ • , c Cl ........ .... ' ........, )( . ... I 0 ....... c ~ ....... .2 ~ .... .. r--~ .. 1 .. ... Expohsi°'! ... ) ~ upon (.) 2 wetting • 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf 103 127 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLI DA TJON TEST RESULTS Figure 4 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. . -. • •• • Moisture Content • 12.9 percent Ory Density = 109 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Boring 2 at 15 Feet N 8 1 Oi c 0 I d'I.. Q. " 0 w ~ !"-. I ~ ~ 1 \ ...... • Expansion l .. .. upon ... s 2 wetting u - J - - • 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf 103 127 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. - • . . .' . ' .. • Moisture Content -7.7 percent Dry Density -109 pcf Sample of: Very Sandy aay From: Boring 3 at 5 Feet 0 " 1 "' --,..~ ~ ,_Compression 8 upon 'ii 2 !'... ·wetting .. " ' ... Q. .. \ s 3· t.> \ 4 -.. . 0.1 1.0 10 10!> APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf 0 Moisture Content -8.4 percent ~ Dr)I. Density • 94 pcf 1 \""' Sample of: Sondy Silty aoy From: Boring 3 at 10 Feet 2 ' \ ~ ........ "" 3 ..... ' ~~ "'Compr-.ion \ upon 4 wetting " \ c .2 5 • \ .. " ... Q. E 8 6 ' 7 • \ 8 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf 103 127 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 6 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. . ~ . ' . . . • n • Moisture Content • 11.4 percent Dry Density • 109 pcf Somple of: Sandy Sffty Clay From: Boring 4 at 2 Feet 0 " ' I 1 .§ ~ ~~~ .Compression upon " wetting • 2 ! ... "" E 0 0 3 ' ' \ 4 - - 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf -Moisture Content • 5.3 percent Dry Density • 104 pef Sample of: Clayey Sand From: Boring 4 at 5 Feet 0 N ,, I 1 Compression .§ ............. r-upon .. wetting ., 2 .. .... ~ ... E a (J 3 " ' 4 \ • 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf 103 127 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 7 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SAMl'L~ LOCATION N~1llllAL NATURAL BORING DEml MOlS'fUlll DRY (fnl) (."QNTEHT DENllTY , .. , !f<o 1 2 5.3 101 I 5 5.5 98 2 5 11.6 117 15 12.9 109 3 5 7.7 109 JO 8.4 94 4 2 11.4 109 5 5.3 104 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, tNc. TABLE I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS GRADATION •ER<..'£HI' AlTEUERQ LIMFrS UNCONflNllD CRA\'EL SAND PASSING UQUID rt.Ame <..'OMPREISIYE "'' !'"l NO.lot UM!T !NDl<X ........ '111 SIEVE , .. , !"l (Piii) 43 25 10 80 59 ' 36 . ' • j •' -.. . " ,,. .. JOO NO. 103 127 • I SOU.OR •EDROt.1' TYrE >- very clayey sand sandy silt sandy clay sandy clay very sandy clay sandy silty day sandy silty clay clayey sand ·~ ~.