HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoil StudyI Crt iåffiifi'ffifffiiniiiiå
*' "
An Employcc Owncd Compony
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
phone: (970) 945-7988
fax: (970) 945-8454
email : kaglenwood@kumatusa.com
www.kumarusa.com
Offrce Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwoocl Springs, and Summit County, Colorado
RECEIVED
"lUi,. i n 'ttl"t'Ì
GARFIELD COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR F'OUNDATION DESIGN
PRIDPOSED RESIDEI\ICE
LOT 21-4, GRAND HOGBACK IEXEMPTTON
COUNTY ROAD 23'7
GARFIELD COUNTY, C()I,ORADO
PR.OJECT NO.21-7-925
IFEBRUARY 1,2021i
PREPARED FOR:
SURPRISE VALLEY 1, LLC
A'TTN: JIMMY TARìUI
5444 COAI{TY ROAD 226
NEW Cr\STLE, COLORADTO 81647
it@,tebuilders.net
TABLE C)F CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPI] OF STUDY
PRIf,POSED CONSTRTICTION
SIT'E CONDITIONS.....,..
FIF)LD EXPLORATIONI.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
FO LINDAI'ION BEARING CONDITIONS
DESIGN RECOMMEN]DATIONS
I'OUNDATIONS
IIOUND,ATION AND, RETAINING WAL]LS
T'LOOR SLABS
IJNDERDRAIN SYS'TEM
SIURFACE DRAINAGE...,
LII\4ITATIONS
FIC}URE 1 . LOCATIOhI OF EXPLORATOI{Y BORINGS
FIC}URE 2 . LOGS OF I]XPLORATORY BORINGS
FIC}URE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIC}URES 4 and 5 - SWIELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESUI,T;S
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LAI]ORATORY TEST RESULTS
-l-
-1-
-1-
-') -
_') -
,...,,'..2.
3-
3-
4-
5-
6-
6-
-7 -
Kumar & Associates, Inc. @ Project N0.21-7-925
PUTì.POSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
T'his report presents the r:esults of a subsoil sttrdy for a proposed residence to be located ,cn
Lot 2l-4, Grand Hogback Exemption, CounQr Road237, Garfield County, Colorado. The
pro.ject site is shown on lFigure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for
the foundation design. T'he study was conducted in general accord¡mce with our proposal for
geotechnical engineerin¡¡services to Surprise Valley 1, LLC dated December 10,2021. A
secrcrid boring was adde<l to the original single boring scope in the proposal.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsuLrface conditions. Sarnples of the subsoils obtaineclduring the f1eld
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 analyzedto develop recommend¿rtions for foundation rlypes, depths and allowable
prerssures for the proposod building foundation. This report sumrn¿rizes thrl data obtained during
this study and presents our conclusions, desig:n recommendations and other geotechnical
eng,ineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED CONST'RUCTION
Plans for the proposed rersidence were concep'fual at the time of our study. The proposetl
residence is assumed to lle a one or two-story structure with attached garage and possibl'y over a
walkout lower level. Gr,cund floors could be slab-on-grade or structural over crawlspace.
Grading for the structure is assumed to be relertively minor with cut depths between about 2 to
6 feret. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of ihe proposed type of
con.struction.
If building location, gradling or loading information is significantly different than described, we
should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
T'he subject site was vac¡rnt at the time of our fïeld exploration. 'fhere were dirt access roads
through the site and cobbles and boulders visible on the surface. T.he ground surface rvas sloping
down to the west-soutll;i'est at a moderately steep gta<le. A creek is flowing through the lot
bet,veen the proposed bu.ilding area and Harvoy Gap Road. Vegetartion consists of grass and
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 21-7-925
a
weods with sagebrush in the building area wifh some pinyon and juniper trees outside of'the
building an:a.
FIELD E]KPLORATION
The field exploration f'or the project was conducted on December 22,2021. Two exploratory
borings wele drilled at the locations shown onrFigure 1 to evaluate the subsurface condil,ions.
T'her borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-
mounted CME-458 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar &
Assiociates, lnc.
Sarnples of the subsoils 'rere taken with l%-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers
were driven into the subr;oils at various depthri with blows from a 140-pound hammer fatling 30
inches. This test is similar to the standard perretration test described by ASTM Method lD-1586.
The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the
subsoils. Depths at which the samples rvere t¿tken and the penetrati.on resistance values ¡lre
shown on the Logs of .E>rploratory Borings, Fìgure 2. The samples were returned to our
laboratory fbr review by the project engineer imd testing.
SUBSURFA(]E COI{DITIONS
Cirarphic logs of the subsurface conditíons enc,ounterecl at the site are shown on Figure 2. The
subsoils encountered below about Vz foot of topsoil consist of medium dense/stiff to very stiff,
sand and clay with gravel to between t6 and 17Vz feet deep overlyi:ng medium dense to dense,
silfy sand and gravel dovvn to the maximum e:rplored depth of 26 fi:et.
Latroratory testing per.flormed on samples obtarined from the borings included natural moisture
content and density and :finer than sand grain size graclation analyses. Results of swell-
consolidation testing performed on relatively'undisturbed drive sanrples, presented on Figures 4
and 5, indicate low to moderate compressibilify under existing low moisture conditions and light
loarfing and a nil to low rlxpansion potential'n'hen wetted under constant light surcharge. The
labrrratory testing is summarized in Table l.
No free wat;er was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling; and the subsoils were
slig,htly moist to moist.
FOUNDATION BIIARING CONDITIIONS
The upper sand and clay soils encountered at t.he site possess a low bearing capacity and
relartively minor expansir:n potential when r,vetted. The underlyirrg sandy gravel soils possess
Kumar & Associates, lnc, @ Project No. 21-7-925
-3-
mo,úerate bearing capacify and [pically low settlement potential. ,tt assumed cut depthrs we
expect the fbundation excavation to expose the upper sand and clay soils. The swell potential of'
the clay soils can probably be mitigated by load concentration to reduce or prevent swell.ing in
the even of wetting belo'r the foundation bearing level. Alternatively, 3 feet of the onsile soils
can be sub-excavated frc,m below the proposed footing grade and r,:placed as structural iill.
Footings constructed as described above will lnave a low risk of movement primarily if the
bearing soils become wetted. Surfase runof.f, landscape irrigation and utility leakage arerpossible
sources of rvater which could cause wetting.
A l,twer risk option would be to extend the bearing level down to the underlying gravel rioils
with a deep foundation system such as micro-piles or helical piers. Provided below are
recommendation for â spr¡s¿d footing foundation system. If a deep foundation system is desired,
we should be contacted to provide design recommendations.
DIISIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FO'LINDATIONS
Considering the subsurf¿rce conditions encountered in the exploratc'ry borin.gs and the naÍure of
the proposed construction, the btrilding can be founded with spread footings bearing on the
nat¡rral soils or compacted structural fill. The soils exposed at desi¡gn cut depth should be further
evaluated for expansion potential at the time of excavation to further assess the need for a
minimum dead load pressure.
The design and constn¡ction criteria presentedl below should be observed for a spread footing
foundation system.
l) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils can be designed for an allowable
bearing prressure of 2,500 psf. The footings should also be designed for a
minimum dead load pressure of 800 psf. In order to satis$r the minimum dead
load pressure under lightly loaded areas, it may be necessary¡ to concentraJe loads
by using a grade beam and pad system. Wall-on-grade construction is not
recommended at this site to achieve the minimum dr:ad load. Footings placed
entirely on a minimum 3-foot depth of compacted slructural fill (or non-expansive
onsite soils) can be designed fcrr an allowable bearin,g pressure of 2,000 psf.
2) Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of'footings designed and
constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could
be additic,nal movement of around I inch if the bearing soils were to becc¡me wet.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 21-7-925
-4-
3)The footirrgs should have a mirrimum width of 16 inches for continuous vvalls ancl
2 feet for isolated pads.
Exterior fbotings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provideilwith
adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation :[or frost protection. Placement
of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior glacle is typically used in this
area.
Continuor¡s foundation walls should be heavily reinllorced top and bottom to span
local anotnalies and resist diffe,rential movement su<;h as by assuming an
unsuppofied lenglh of at least li4 feet. Foundation vralls acting as retaining
structul'es should also be desigrned to resist lateral earth pressures as discurssed in
the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report.
The topsc,il and any loose or disturbed soils should lrc removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the firm natural soils. The exposed soils in
footing area shouLd then be rnoistened and compacted.
A representative ofthe geotechnical engineer shoukl observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placemenf to evaluate bearing conditions.
4)
FO I.INDATION AND RETAINING WALI.S
Foundation walls and re{aining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to
unilergo only a slight arnount of deflection shr:uld be riesigned for a lateral earth pressunt
conrputed on the basis oJlan equivalent fluid urnit weight of at least 55 pcf for backfill consisting
of the on-site soils. Cant;ilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence and
can be expected to defle¡:t sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure conditiotr should
be rlesigned for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight
of ¿rt least 45 pcf for b¿ckfill consisting of the on-site soils. Backfitl should not contain organics
or rock larger than about 6 inches.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic arrd
surr;harge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffrc, construction.materials and equipment. The
prertsures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizolrtal
backfill surface. The bu:ildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will
increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or reta.ining structure. An underdrain
should be provided to pnevent hydrostatic pre$sure buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placerf in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximurn
starrdard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. BacLi.fill placed in pavement and
5)
6)
7)
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.21-7'925
5
walkway areas should bc compacted to at least 95%;o of the maximum standard Proctor d,3nsity.
Clare shoulcl be taken not to overcompact the baokfill or use large equipment near the wall, since
this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall, Some settlement of deep foundation wall
backfill should be expecrled, even if the mater:ial is placed correctly, and could result in clistress to
faciilities constructed on the backfill.
The lateral resistance of foundation or retainirrg wall f'ootings will be a combination of the
slid.ing resistance of the :looting on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure a,gainst
the side of the footing. I(esistance to sliding ¿rt the bottoms of the fbotings can be calculated
based on a coefficient of'friction of 0.40. Pasrsive pressure of compacted backfill against the
sidos of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weighl: of 375 pcfì The
coefficient of friction an,f passive pressure vallues recommended at'ove assume ultimate soil
strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will
occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive res,istance. Fill placed against
the sides of the footings to resist lateral loacls should be compacted to at lea,st 95o/o of th<¡
ma:rimum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optinrum.
FL()OR SLABS
The on-site soils possess an expansion potential and slab heave cou.ld occur if the subgrade soils
were to become wet. Sl¿rb-on-grade construction may be used pror,'ided precautions are taken to
limit potential movement and the risk of distnxs to the building is accepted by the owner. A
positive way to reduce the risk of slab movem.ent, which is commonly used in the area., is to
construct structurally supported floors over crawlspace.
To reduce the effects of some differential movementn nonstructutal floor slllbs should be
separated fiom all bearin.g walls and columns with expansion jointsrwhich allow unrestrained
verlical mo'vement. Intsrior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs should be prov1ded with
a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves, the nnovement cannot be
transmitted to the upper rstructure. This detail is also important fitr wallboards, stainvtryri and
docrr frames. Slip joints which will allow at least 1 %-inches of verf;ical movement are
recommended. Where sllabs ove.rlie non-expansive soils, the slip joint detail should not lbe
needed. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage crac,king.
Slab reinforcement anrJ control joints should be established by the rlesigner based on experience
and the intended slab use.
A nninimunr 4-inch layer of free-draining gral'el should be placed immediately beneath basement
levol slabs-on-grade. This material should co:nsist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 50o/a
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No. 21-7-925
-6-
passing the No. 4 sieve and less thanZYo pass:ing the No. 200 sieve, The free-draining gravel
will aid in clrainage belo'w the slabs and should be connected to the perimeter underdrainL system.
Required fill beneath slabs can consist of the on-site gravelly soils 'or a suitable imporlecl
granular material, exclucling topsoil and oversized rocks. The fill should be spread in thin
horizontal lifts, adjusted to at or above optimum moisture content, rmd compacted to atleast95o/o
of the maximum standar,l Proctor density. All vegetation, topsoil and loose or disturbed soil
should be removed prior to fill placement.
The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive sc¡ils underlying slabs-
on-grade become wet. F[owever, the recommendations will reduce the effects if slab he¡we
occurs. All plumbing lirres should be pressurt: tested before backfillling to help reduce the
pot,ential for wetting.
I.INDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our expedence in
the area ancl where clay soils are present, that local perched groundwater can develop during
times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during sprirrg runoff can create a
perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls,
cra.wlspace and basement areas (if any), be protected liom wetting and hydrostatic press'ure
buildup by an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the rvall backfill surrounded above
the invert level with free-draining granular material. lfhe drain should be placed at each level of
excavation and at leasl; 1 foot below lowest adjacent fi.nish grade arrd sloped at a minimumlo/oto
a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain systern r;hould
contain less than 2%opassing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a
ma:rimum size of 2 inchr¡s. The drain gravel backfill should be at least llzfeet deep. Arr
irnpervious membrane such as 20 mil PVC should be placed benealh the drain gravel in a trough
shape and aftached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent w,stting of'the bearing soils.
SURFACE DRAINAGE,
Providing and maintainirrg prope)r surface drainage to prevent ponding and wetting of ths
subsurface soils will be critical to the long-term, satisfuctory performance of the propose:d
residence. The followin¡g drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
majrntained at all times after the residence has been completed:
Kumar & Associates, lnc, @ Project No.21-7-925
-7 -
1)Excessiver wetting or drying of the fourrdation excavations and underslab areas
should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion
potential r¡f the clay soils.
Exterior trackfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and cornpacted to
at least 9!;Yo of the maximum standard Proctor densi.ty in pa'vement and slab areas
and to at l.east 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscaprs âr€âs.
The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the truilding should be sloped to
drain arvay from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minirnum
slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of
3 inches in the first 10 feet irr F,aved areas. Free-draining wall backfill sh,ould be
covered v¡ith filter fabric ancl capped with about 2 f<¡et of the on-site soils to
reduce surface water infiltration.
Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well lleyond the limits of all
backfill.
Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigatiorL should be located at least
l0 feet from foundation walls.
2)
3)
4)
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
prirrciples and practices j.n this arrea at this time. We make no warr:rnty either express or implied.
The conclusions and recr:mmendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained
fioln the exploratory borings drilled at the locations irLdicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of
construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the
prersence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing
in the future. If the clien.t is concerned about.MOBC, then a prof'essional in this special field of
pra,otice shc¡uld be consulted. Our findings in,:lude in1;erpolation an.d extraprolation of the
subsurface conditions idrmtified at the explora,tory borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encounl;ered
during construction appear different from tho¡ie described in this report, we should be nc,tified so
thaf re-eval'uation of the recommendations may be made.
T'his report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. \1'e are not
res¡ronsible for technical interpretations by others of our informatic,n. As the project evolves, we
should provide continuerl consultation and lield services during cotrstruction to review and
monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendartions
5)
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No, 21-7-925
8-
have been appropriately interpreted. Significant des:ign changes may reqrtire additional analysis
or modifir:ations to the recomm.endations presented herein. Vy'e recommernd on-site observatiort
of excavarlions and foundation bearing $trata and tesling of structural fill try a rçresentative of
the geotecrhnical engineer.
Respectfu lly Submitted,
Kumar & Associates, Ine.
James H. Parsons,
Reviewed by:
*-,:{-
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
JHP/kac
tl.
þ
sSli6ll
Kumar & Associatcs, lnc. Þ Project tlo. 21-7-925
I
ã
\)I
l
I
.I-RACT A
t
tl
F:(Jo
)n
II
tt
lt
il
å
å
À
ú1
.Þ.
C''ì.1\É
-217 "76', [ì:900.00'
l\-Jo
: iiO,61 ', R:1 080.00'
a- 2.68
s89" 07', 47',8
A== 13.86
s16" 55' 45"8
296 77'
11 12',
o
LOT 21-A
LOT 22
SZI "2
SE
SE l+
BLì,
ccp
6',,Ët1'4
11 22.14,
Dosd Line by RN 779(
ond RN 829i
LOT 21-A
36.133 AC.
o
\SE,
APPRCIXIMATE L
OF FUTURE SiTR
t
89" 07' 47',W Prhrste Accsss Esm't
(By Scpcrotc Documont)
Itl LOT 23
APPROXIMATE SCALE_FEET
BORING I
4ö4.29'
21 -7 -925 Kumar 8, Associates LOCATION OF TXPLORATORY BORING1S Fig. 1
i
I
BORING 1
EL. 100'
BORING 2
EL. 95.7'
0 0
14/12 13/12
5 11/12
WC=8.0
DD=97
5e/ 12
W(l=7.0
Dtt=95
-1100=4336/ 12
10 10
16/ 12
WC= f 0.0
DD=99
25/ 12
W{l= 1 0.9
Dtt= 1 14
t-l¡lt¡l
LL
Ift-fL
t¡Jcf
15 38/12 1s/6, 50/3
W(l=9.9
Dtl=113
-Í100=49
15
l-l¡l
L¡ll!
I-FfL
l¡Jo
20 2035/12 18/12
25 2i'/ 12
25
50 30
Fig. 2LOGS OF TXPLORATORY BORINGS21-7-925 Kumar & Associatese
I
È'
LEGEND
N
TOPSOIL; ORGANI0 SAND AND CLAY, Sll..TY, FIRM, MOISÏ, TAN
t.../tr)
I t: :lu
SAND AND CLAY (SC-CL); SILTY, GRAVIILLY, CLAY LENSES, MEDIUM DENSE,
STIFF TO VERY STIFF, SLIGHTLY MOIST TO MOIST, TAN.
SAND AND GRAVE.L
DENSE, SLIGHTLY M
(sM-GM):
OIST, PALE
SILTY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY, MEDlUlvl DENSE T0
_TAN.
F
i
DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I,D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
DR|VE SAMPLE, 1 3/8-INCH l.D. SPLIT SPOON STANDARD PENETRATIoN TEST.
a, '1ı DRIVE SAMPLE BI-OW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 14 BLOWS 0F ,A 140-P0UND HAMMEFI
'^'/ '' FAL.LTNG Jo TNcHES wERE REQUIRED Tcl DRtvE 'rHE SAMPLER 12 tNcHEs.
NIOTES
1. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON DECEMBER 22,:2021 WITH A 4_INCH DIAMEÏER
CONTINUOUS-FLIGhIT POWER AUGER.
2. THE LOCATIONS OT'THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURTD APPROXIMATELY BY PACING
FROM FEATURES SIIOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIÐED.
5. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY EIORINGS WERE MEASURED BY INSTRUMENÏ LEVEL AND
REFER TO BORING 1 AS ANI ASSUMED l CIO FOOT ELEVATION.
4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS ANID ELEVATIONS SHOT'LD BE CONSIDERED ACCI.JRATE
ONLY TO THE DEGIIEE IMPLIED BY THE VIETHOD LISED.
5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN I)N THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESE:NT THE
APPROXIMATE BOUì.IDARIES BETWEEN MATIERIAL TYFES AND TI.IE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROLINDWATER WA:' NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT ÏHE TIME OF DRILIING.
7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
wc = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (PCt) (ASTM D2216',h
-200= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (ASTM D1140).
21 -7 -925 Kumar & Assoclates LEGEND AND NOÏES Fig. 3
SAMPLE OF: Sqnd <rnrJ Cloy
FROM:Boringl@5'
WC = 8.0 %, DD = 97 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANÏ
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
1
0
^ '-1
às
Jô| -'z
t¡J
=Ø
r _.5zotr
ôj -'4
o1/lzoC) -.5
-.b
-,7
-'8
-9
I 10 100
21 -7 -925 Kumar &. Assocíates SWELL_CONSOLIDAI'ION TTST RESULTS;Fig. 4
e
I
E
ii
¿-
I
E
I
È
SAMPLE OF: Sond ond Cloy
FROM: Boring 1 @ l0'
WC = 1O.O %, DD := 99 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER C:ONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON V/ETTING
ñ
JJl¡I3¡n
I
'2,o
t-
ll
Jo
1n'zo()
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
t f,0 PRESSìURE -100
¡s
JJt¡l
=Ø
I
z
C)Ë
É¡
=oØzo()
2
1
0
-1
-2
- KSF f0
SAMPLE OF: Sond ond Cloy
FROM:Boring2@t0'
WC = 1O,9 %, DD '= 114 pci
EXPANS|ON UNDER C:ONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON V/ETTING
lhc
of
nDt ba{¡lftdl
21"7-925 Kumar &. Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TTST RESULTS;Fig. 5
IC'TKumar & Associates, lnc.'Geotechniæl and Materials Engineersand Environmental ScientistsTABLE 1-SU¡]!M.A.F.Y OF LÂ.BORÂ.TORJ TEST RESLILTSNo.21.7.92512105SAIIPTE LOCATIONBORINGDEPTHl55l09-97.010.910.0ROIIATURALtfolsTuRECONTEHT113tt4989997lDcflNATURALDRYDENSITY(%)GRAVEL("/.)SANDGRADÀTlOlrlPERCENTPASSING NO.200 slEvE4943UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTHATTERBERG LIMITSL]QU]D LIIIÍTPLASTICIHDüSanrl and Clav--'--- "-'- ----JSOILTYPESand and ClavSand and ClaySand and ClaySand and Clay
Ë#:.å:r*1*:*Map Viewer'Èi*-rì tÌ. i¡:.¡s]&.g.rÞti!+!rt ar : årii -4i1ry:f,lra¡*r3dr1pr'i:rni.riir¿ Surface Water" All Points of lnterest,, Well Constructedw Fìnal Permit:t Geophysical LogActive Gage - Diversion* Active Gage - Reservoirêr Active Gage - StreamA.!! Sfetionsiurisciictionai Damtl HighSign¡fiæntLowNPHLivestock Water Tank/Erosion,c ErG¡on Control Dam* Livestock Water TankU1,16905851,169 FeetüThis product is for infomational putposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal,engineering, or surueying purposes. Users of this information should rev¡ew or consult the primary data andinformation sources to asceñain the usability of the ¡nfomation.Date Prepared: 51 1 912022 3:03:38 PM1:7,016
GlqPublic.net"' Garfield Corunty, CO
AccountNumber R08259ó
ParcelNumber 272724440382
Acres 109
LandSqFt 0
TaxArea O2O
2019 Mlll Levy 74.6820
D ate cr e ate d: 4 / il7 / 2Q22
Last Data Uploacled: 4/27 /2022 2:12:O5 AM
Deve roned bvl.¡l #Å.grg'df f
PhysicalAddress 0
SILT 8T652
OwnerAddress SURPRISEVALI-EY 1 LLC
5444COUNry ROAD22ó
NEW CASTLE C:.O 8!647
Overuiew
Ë
Legend
ì Parcels
Roads
Parcel/Account
Numbers
Highways
: LimitedAccess
"* Highway
Major Road
Local Road
Minor Road
Other lìoad
Ramp
- -' Ferry
Pedestrían Way
Owner Name
' , Lakes ¿l Rivers
'- County Boundary
Line
2019Tr¡talActualValue $980 Last2Sales
Dr¡te Price
9/27/2027 $O
9/27/2027 $100,000
4127122,4:25 PM qPublic.net - Garfield County, CO - Property Record Card: R082596
G)qPublic.net'Garfield County, COÀl
Summary
Account
Parcel
Property
Address
Legal
Descrlptlon
Acres
Land SqFt
TaxArea
MillLevy
Subdlvislon
R082596
212724400382
,stLT,co 81ó52
Section: 24 Township: 5 Range: 9ll THAT PARCEL OF LAND As
DESCRIBEÞ PER RECEPTION N().829257, EXCEPT 4.89ó AC. TRAI:T
OF tAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBEÞ AS "EXHIBIT EI''
PER BLAAFFIDAVIT REC, NCl.932840& QCD RECEPTION NO,
932842. ALSOA.89ó AC. TRA
ro9.L77
o
20
74.6820
2C,L9
$s7.só
Reception Number
9ó3584
:,<..fr**
Yies-@p
Owner
SURPRISEV\LLEY 1 LLC
5444COUNrY ROAD 22ó
NEWCASTLE CO 81ó47
Land
UnitType
Square
Feet
trnitTyP(r
g'quafe
Feet
UnltType
9quare
treêt
Actual Values
Assossed Year
Land Actual
lmprovement Actual
TotalActual
Assessed Values
Assessed Yrlar
Land Assessed
lmprovement Assessed
Total Assesr¡ed
Tax History
TaxYear
Taxes Billed
GRAZING TAND-AGRICULTURAL - 4147 (AGRICULTURAL
PROPERTY}
0
GRAZING LAND-AGRICULTURAT - 4T47 (AGRICULTURAL
PROPERTY)
0
GRAZING LAND-AGRICULTURAT - 4Tó7 (AGRICULTURAL
PROPERTY}
0
Click here to view th parcelsl!&.]Eaflgld Countv lreasurer's website.
Transfers
saleDate DeedTYpe
9/27/2O2T STATEMENT OF AU'I'HORITY
2021.
$2o.92
2020
$ó1.08
2021
$980.00
$o.oo
$980.00
2021
$280.00
$o.oo
$280.oo
2018
$só.3ó
2020
$3,r10.00
$0.00
$3,110.00
2020
$900.00
$o.oo
$900.00
2077
$s0.48
Sale Príce
$o
Book - P¿Be
https://qpublic.schnrlidercorp.com/Application.aspx?ApplD=1038&LayerlD=211381&PageTypelD=4&PagelD-9447&Q"'1891474205&KeyValue=R082596 113
4127122,4:25 PM qPublic.net - Garfield County, CO - Property Re<:ord Card: 11082596
9/27/2027
3/70/2020
426/2020
72/3r/2012.
!a/74/200!)
r0/74/200<.,
70/7/2009
7!/18/2008
t!/!8/2008
7r/r8/2008
7L/12/2008
9/29/2008
3/7712005
3/77/2005
7/27/2004
7/75/2004
7/75/2004
7/15/2004
7/75/20A4
7/t3/2004
7/3/2002
9/20/7e96
3/29/798s
ß/u7980
5/24/7977
4/r9/7977
7t30/!976
7/25/7976
7/25/r975
7/25/7975
7/25/7975
6/19/t975
6/tlt7975
3/t7/7974
ro/23/!9511
6/t9/7945
3/7/189!
?é35CE
932847
932840
82e252
776475
776474
77621"5
760086
760O8!
7ó0083
7ó0085
760082
671754
677153
@
ó4s602
644783
644782
644770
644771
644780
498998
360676
308105
280743
278797
274t78
27676r
276763
273552
273550
274232
274177
262787
207796
154434
12491
932842
779652
1674-99
1674-96
151t7-303
1557-305
155s-3ó0
15:t5-358
t555-244
t555-246
1555-355
0994-0343
0666-0637
0557-0210
0500-0831
o495-O9ó2
o488-0022
0491-0953
o49r-0957
048ó-0832
o486-0822
o488-02Lt
0488-0019
045ó-059ó
o32L-O270
0213-0435
oo25-4142
SPECIALWARRANT'/ DEED
Boundary Line Description/map
BOUNDARY LINE AT)JUSTMENT
SPECIALWARRANT'/ DEED
STATEMENT OFAUT'HORITY
SPECIAL WARRANT'/ DEED
BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
WARRANTYDEED
AFFIDAVIT
WARRANWDEED
AGREEMENT
EASEMENÏ
EASEMENT
QUITCLAIM DEED
QUITCI.AIM DEED
STATEMENT OF AUT'HOR¡TY
STATEMENT OF AUÏ'HORITY
WARRANWDEED
STATËMENT OF AU'f 'HORITY
DEATH CERTIFICATIJ
SPECIALWARRANI/ DEED
WARRANWDEED
GRANT DEED
WARRANTYDEED
WARRANTY DEED
QUITCLAIM DEED
QUITCLAIM DEED
QUITCLAIM DËED
QUIT CLAIM DEED
POWER OF ATTORNEY
AGREEMENT
QUITCLAIM DEED
WARRANTYDEED
COURT DECREE
WARRANWDEED
DEED
QUITCLAIM DEED
QUITCLAIM DEED
$100,000
$200,000
$30s,ooo
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$0
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$0
$o
$o
$0
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$o
$20,000
Property Related Public Documents
ç.l¡skherelq vjqw Proæ$y-ßsla!çd-Ps!'!ie-8eçsü€,8¡å
Photos
+ $."-*
No data available for the folkrwlng modules; BuildÌ ngs, Sketches.
https://qpublic.schngidercorp.com/Application.aspx?ApplD=1038&LayerlD=2í1381&PageTypelD=4&Pa¡¡ell)=9447&Q=1891474205&KeyValue=R082596 2/3
4127122,4:25 PM
gsele¡v.qcvlslicv
çBPßP[y3çv-Ne.Íçe-
taslo:talpleilf ¿A127JN22J2JLA5A\9
qPublic.net - Garfield County, CO - Property Re<;ord Card: lì082596
,,ri ,,iìì iJ,l :ìir.tì ,t.i: ,,ii ()9så.g'Bldçr
,..),.:i,.ll.; j i :l
https:/iqpublic.schnr¡idercorp.com/Application.aspx?ApplD=1038&LayerlD=211381&PageTypelD¡4&PagelÐ-9447&Q=189'1474205&KeyValue=R082596 313