The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSubsoils StudyI (+rf ii'e;h:'triffÉtrr iiiå' *" An Employee Owned Gompony 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970)945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email : kaglenwood@kumarusa.com www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (IIQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit Cowrty, Colorado PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LAST CHANCE DRIVE AND MEGHAN AVENTIE RTFLE, COLORADO PROJECT NO. 22-7- 43s DECEMBF.Rt,2022 PREPARED FOR: ECODWELLING ATTN: FERNANDO ARGIRO 15400 NW 15rH A\rENUE, UNrT B MIAMI, FLORIDA 33169 fern ando@ ecodwellin g.us TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY .. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING FIELD EXPLORATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ... PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS FLOOR SLABS UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ............. SURFACE DRAINAGE...... PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE FIGURE I - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 through 7 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 9 - IryEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS TABLE I- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ,,,- 2 - .-2 - ,) 3 3 3 3 4 -4- 5 I I I I Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-435 PT]RPOSE AND SCOPE OF STT]DY This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed residential development to be located north of Last Chance Drive and west of Meghan Avenue in Rifle, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure l. The pu{pose of the study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and their potential impact on the project. The study was conducted in general accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to EcoDwelling, dated June 14, 2022, Proposal No.P7-22-445. A field exploration program consisting of a reconnaissance and exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the site and 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 analyzedto develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed development and subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed residential development consists of a 7l-lot subdivision as shown on Figure l. The construction will consist of single-family homes accessed by private streets and driveways. We understand the residences will be single-story steel frame structures. Ground floors will be structural over crawlspace. The development will be serviced with municipal water and sewer. If development plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The proposed project site consists of about I acres of ranchland located as shown on Figure l. Existing development includes two residences and outbuildings with associated utilities and disturbed areas from past site use. The terrain is variable and typically gently to moderately sloping down to the north with the Last Chance ditch of moderate side slopes following the south property line. The site elevation ranges from about 5360 feet to 5330 feet in the proposed building areas. Vegetation consists of field grass and weeds, brush and scattered trees. GEOLOGIC SETTING The project site is underlain by the Tertiary-age Shire member of the Wasatch Formation (Tws) The Shire member of the'Wasatch Formation consists of interbedded sandstone and claystone. Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7.435 -2- Surficial deposits at the subject site consist of older terrace alluvium (Qto), alluvial and colluvial deposits (Qac), and sheetwash deposits (Qsw) (Shroba and Scott, 1997). FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on July 6 and7,2022. Eight exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure I to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings rñrere advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a truck- mounted CME 45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1%-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were 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. 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. Beneath about Yzto I foot of topsoil or fill materials, the subsoils generally consist of roughly stratified silty sandy clay to siþ clayey sand down to the boring depths of 2l to 25 feet. At Borings I and 8, located in the downhill, north part of the property, relatively dense, silty sandy gravel with cobbles was encountered at depths of 18 to 19% feet. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included nafural moisture content and density, gradation analyses and liquid and plastic limits. Results of swell- consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figures 4 through 7, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The results of gradation and HVEEM 'R' value testing performed on a combined sample of the upper soils are presented on Figures 8 and 9. The laboratory testing is summarizedin Table l. Free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and when checked the next day at about 6 to 12 feet below ground surface. The upper soils were typically moist to very moist with depth. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions and recoÍrmendations presented below are based on the proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings, and our experience in the area. Kumar & Associales, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-435 -3 - The recommendations are suitable for planning and preliminary design but site-specific studies should be conducted for individual lot development. FOUNDATIONS Bearing conditions could vary depending on the specific location of the building on the property. Based on the nafure of the proposed construction, spread footings bearing on the upper natural soils should be suitable at the building sites. 'We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf with relatively low risk of excessive post-construction movement. The topsoil, existing fill and soft soils encountered in building areas should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down or structural fill placed to reestablish design bearing level. Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas greater than 3 feet deep and retaining walls should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading by use of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection. FLOOR SLABS Slab-on-grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils or compacted structural fill. There could be some post-construction slab movement due to the variable soil conditions. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, non-structural floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. A minimum 4-inch thick layer of free-draining gravel should underlie basement level slabs (if any) to facilitate drainage. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was generally encountered in the exploratory borings at an elevation lower than proposed finished grades, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. An underdrain system should be provided to protect below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace deeper than 3 feet and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of slotted PVC drainpipe surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum Yzo/o to a suitable gravity outlet or sump and pump. SURFACE DRAINAGE The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runoff from uphill slopes through the project andat individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond which could impact slope Kumar & Associates, Inc. @ Project No.22-7-435 -4- stability and foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing soils next to buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive slope away from the building for a distance of at least 5 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be restricted. PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN We understand asphalt pavement is proposed for the streets. Traffic loadings for the streets were not provided to us. The subgrade soils encountered at the site are generally low plasticity sandy clay which are considered a relatively poor support for pavement sections. Imported fill could be needed for the roadway construction. The import soil should be a granular soil with a minimum Hveem stabilometer 'R' value of 25. Based on our experience and test results, an Hveem stabilometer 'R' value of 5 for the native soil encountered at the site, an l8 kip EDLA of 15, a Regional Factor of 1.7 5 and a serviceability index of 2.0 (for low volume traffic), we recommend the minimum pavement section thickness consist of 3 inches of asphalt on 6 inches of base course on I inches ofgranular subbase or 4 inches ofasphalt on 8 inches ofbase course. The asphalt should be a batched hot mix, approved by the engineer and placed and compacted to the project specifications. The base course and subbase should meet CDOT Class 6 and Class 2 specifications, respectively. All base course, subbase and required subgrade fill should be compacted to at least 95Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisfure content within 2% of optimum. Required fill to establish design subgrade level can consist of the on-site soils or suitable imported granular soils and evaluated for suitabilrty by the geotechnical engineer. Prior to fill placement the subgrade should be stripped of vegetation and topsoil, scarified to a depth of 8 inches, adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95Yo of standard Proctor density. In soft or wet areas, the subgrade may require drying or stabilization prior to fill placement. A geogrid and/or subexcavation and replacement with aggregate base soils may be needed for the stabilization. The subgrade should be proof rolled. Areas that deflect excessively should be corrected before placing pavement materials. The subgrade improvements and placement and compaction of base and asphalt materials should be monitored on a regular basis by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Once traffic loadings are better known, we should review our pavement section recommendations. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted according to 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 Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-435 -5- from the field reconnaissance, review of published geologic reports, the exploratory borings located as shown on Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identi{ied at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If condilions 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 planning and prèliminary design pu{poses. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the irnplernentation of our recommendations. 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. Respectfully Submitted, Kumar & .Åssoeiateso Steven L. Pawlak, P. Reviewed by: Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/kac cc: Kuersten Construction - John Kuersten (iohn(ilkuersto$sonstruction.gs)q1) REFERENCE Shroba, R.R. and Scott, R.8., 1997, Revised Preliminary Geologic Map of the Rifle Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado, U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report OF-97-852. Kumar & Associateg, lnc.6'Project No,22.7.435 i LJ z. I(9 t¡l nÊtcÀrnN [Ás.Mttut 50 0 0 APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET DF:tt$ftÌr PCND Q'ALIÙ POND lt SF tJ 5Ê 15 t6 LOI 0.@ t2 SF t4 SF sf ta t9 sf 20 st 2t SF fø 0.07 f,266 1.",I s9å rÞ LOi o.07 Jr06 | å3" r._ I il¡s [-* ttrl I ;:;| ''": | .o, L-itlø 0-07s0t ¿ol I 24 2 LOI o.0a ¡574 I I I BöRING I 5F .tot 0,04 3S1 I I ¡ !. toT 0,07s@ 26 67 66 65 SF 60 e I ;s. f_j':r å3i f--; lsm LOI o,o7&06 tot 0.0t30la I J röt 0,07 J004 rcl o.@ 3ô03 - l.l? Æ 29 sf 6 --l G I .orut II ôo7æ IL__iî" Ii uri,'+ i I *:;n I\-.'ï'- | T .";"-l| *,åt? I'l I = t^¿ | =Sr f--.*,--l| ffeonlx [-*,'u,-l þf b.08 3ô24 l_*imt---r å:; Êt I looo J2 SF --1J ;l .olt?l-t lÐ99frxc ¡4 LO 0.07 ¡ò55 LOI 0,o7 Jr02 L0¡ 0.07 3112 LO¡ 0.0? J209 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 1 & 22-7-435Kumar & AssociatesLAST CHANCE DR ANO MEGHAN AVELOGS OF EXPLORAIORY BORINGSFis. 2BORING 1ÊL. 5554'BORING 2EL. s541'BORING 3EL. 5349'BORING 4EL. 5356'BORING 5EL- 53sJ'BORING 6EL. 55¡13'BORING 7EL. 5339'BORING 8EL. 555t'012o.36/12WC=20.912017/12WC=7.0DD=1 09-2OO=72DD=1 0220/1213/12s6/12LL=21Pl= I16/1212/12wc=11.5DD=1104/12WC=18.5DD=99-2Oo=728/ 12WC= 1 5.1DD=1 1 112=17.67 /12WC= 1 5.3DD=1f211 /125/ 12wc= 1 8.7DD=1 07s/128/12wc=l1 .2DD=f15DD=1 04-2Oo=79LL=22Pl=8UC= 1 ,200t03/122/12l0+=2/123/12wc=18.6DD= 1 04-2OO=7 12/ 121 /121 /12WC=20.8s/12+=DD= 1 02-200=68FITFÈo156/ 123/1215UIIFÈô3/12e/121o/123/122/126/122092/12206/12s/124/1 23/122/121/ 12s2/62525 : I LEGEND N TOPSOIL; ORGANIC SANDY SILT AND CLAY, MOIST, DARK BROWN. ñ FILL: SANDY SILTY CLAY, FIRM, MOIST, MIXED BROWN CLAY (CL); SILTY, SANDY, STIFF AND SLIGHTLY MOIST TO VERY SOFT AND WET WITH DEPTH, LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN, LOW PLASTICITY. SAND AND CLAY (SC-CL); SILTY, MEDIUM-DENSE/STIFF AND MOIST TO VERY SOFT AND WET WITH DEPTH, LIGHT BROWN, LOW PLASTICITY. GRAVEL (GM); SILTY SANDY, COBBLES, DENSE, WET, BROWN, ROUNDED ROCK. DRIVE SAMPLE, 2_INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE. I DR|VE SAMPLE, 1 3/9-|NCH t.D. SPLTT SPOON STANDARD PENETRATTON TEST. I DISTURBED BULK SAMPLE 671e DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 6 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER-,.- FALLING 50 INCHES WERE REQUIRED To DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES. !4 orpru ro wATER LEVEL AND NUMBER oF DAys AFTER DRTLLTNG MEASUREMENT wAS MADE. --+ DEPTH AT WHICH BORING CAVED NOTES 1 THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JULY 6 AND 7, 2022 WITH A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT POWER AUGER. 2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATION BETWEEN CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 4, THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED. 5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL. 6, GROUNDWATER LEVELS SHOWN ON THE LOGS WERE MEASURED AT THE TIME AND UNDER CONDITIONS INDICATED. FLUCTUATIONS IN THE WATER LEVEL MAY OCCUR WITH TIME. 7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS: WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216); DD = DRY DENSITY (PCt) (ASTU D2216); _2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM DlIAO); LL = LIQUID LIMIT (ASTM D4518); PI = PLASTICITY INDEX (ASTM D4318); Uc = UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (psf) (ASTM D 2166) 22-7-43s Kumar & Associates LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 3 SAMPLE OF: Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:Boringl@2.5' WC = 20.9 %, DD = 102 pcf NO MOVEMENT UPON WETTING 1 0 JJ l¡J =atl I z.otr o =ovlz.o(J -1 -2 3 4 -5 -6 1.0 APPTIED PRESSURE - KSF t0 t00 1 JJLI =]n I z.otr â =otnz.oo 0 -1 -2 -5 -4 t.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF t00 SAMPLE OF: Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:Boring2@5' WC = 15.1 %, DD = 11 1 pcf ¡ñnot b. ÈpÞducd, rithout t¡. vittln dpprovol d kociûté, lnc. S$ll NO MOVEMENT UPON WEÏTING 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4 a E SAMPLE OF: Very Silty Cloyey Sond FROM:Boring4@5' WC = 15.3 %, DD = 112 pcl rlthout thc r.lttcñ oppMl of o¡d A$ooíotæ, lnc. Sw.ll ln I :; l. NO MOVEMENT UPON WETTING l :Ì l ,1 : :l t L i. i l I I I L :a .. : t00APPLIED PRESSURE _ KSFt.01 0 J J -ll¡J =tnt-z z.otr ô o anz.oo_4 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TIST RESULTS Fig. 5 I SAMPLE OF: Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:Boring6@5' WC = 18.7 %, DD = 107 pcf NO MOVEMENT UPON WETTING às JJl4l =an I z.otr o Jo anz.o() 0 -'l 2 5 4 -5 -6 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10 t00 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates SWELL_CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6 ç I E I Ë SAMPLE OF: Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:BoringT@-2.5' WC = 11.5 %, DD = 110 pcf ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETÏING N JJ l¡J =UI I z.otr o Jo VIz.o() àq JJ t¡J =1r, I z.otr â Jo UIz.o(J 1 0 -1 2 -5 -4 1 0 -1 t,0 APPLIED PRISSURE - KSF 10 10'I SAMPLE 0F: Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:BoringS@5' WC = 11.2 %, DD = 115 pcf of EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE UPON WETTING -2 t.0 t00 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates SWELL_CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 7 rt ã ø É Ë o to 20 50 ¡a0 50 30 70 80 90 too ¡ E E H 2.O DIAMETER OF IN CLAY TO SILT COBBLES CRAVEL 2 % LIQUID LIMIT 26 SAMPLE OF: Sondy Sllty Cloy SAND 24 % PLASTICITY INDEX SILT AND CLAY 15 71 % FROM: Borings 3, 4, 5 O l'-5' Combined Th¡sc lcsl rosull3 qpply oñly lo lhr eqmplss whlch var. lcrl€d. Th€l.lllng roporl lhqll nol b. reprcduc.d, .xccpl ¡n full, wlthoul lh. wrlttonqpprcvql ot Kumor & A!!oclql!e, lnc. Slevc onolysls l.ttlng lt psrformsd lnqcsordqnco wfth ASTM D6915, ASTI¡| 07928, ASTM C156 qnd/or ASIM D1140, HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME REAOII{GS 2¡+ HRS 7 HRS at ôo a1n te u.s. slaNoARo sERtEs ¡50 a¡ô ald aíâ CLEAR SQUARE OPENIT{CS alt tt^â t lttr I I I I I j : t. .i,t i ï l' I l j I ¡ I I j 1 l j ! I ! i ¡ ¡ ì I I I SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDTUM ICOARSE FINE COARSE 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 8 ë ê TEST SPECIMEN 1 2 3 4 R -VALUE(300 psi) MOTSTURE CONTENT (%) DENSITY (pcf) EXPANSION PRESSURE (psi) EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) R VALUE LESS THAN 5* *SAMPLE EXTRUDED AROUND FOLLOWER. PER ASTM SÏANDARDS, THE SAMPLE IS ASSIGNED WITH AN R-VALUE OF LESS THAN 5 100 tlJ f,J I & 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 0 0 6 800 EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) SOIL TYPE Sondy Silty Cloy Combined LOCATI ON:Boring 5,4,5 @ 1'-5' Combined DATE SAMPLED:8-26-2022 DATE RECEIVED 8-26-2022 DATE TESTED:8-26-2022 GRAVEL:2 %SIND: 24 z PLASTICITY INDEX SILT AND CLAY 74 % These lssl rosulls opply only lo lho sqmplos which w6.. loslcd. Ths lrsllng r€porl shall nol b€ r€producod, €xc.pl ln full, w¡lhout lho wr¡ll€¡ qpprovql of Kumor il Assoc¡ql€s, lnc. R-volu! parformsd lñ occordoncr wllh ASTM 02844. All€rb.rg llmlls p€rlormsd ln occordonc. with ASTM 0,1318. SÌcvs onolys€s prrform.d ln occordqnc! wllh ASIM D122, O1l1O. 13LIQUID LIMIT: 26 22-7-435 Kumar & Associates HVEEM STABILOMETER TIST RESULTS Fig.9 Kt f imïfiTffifr:ffifni'ifü*'"TABLE 1SUMMARY OF LABORATORYTEST RESULTSProject No.22.7.435IBORING52%LOCATIONDEPTH3,4 &,5combined54J2t-52Y2105557.318.615.317.6l5.l18.520.9t20104r72t0411199102GRADATIONNATURALMOISTURECONTENTNATURALDRYDENSITYGRAVEL("/"1SAND$t22474727l7972262t22IaJIIr,200LIQUID LIMITPERCENTPASSING NO,200 stEVEPLASTICINDEXUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH5Sandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClayVery Silty Clayey SandSandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClaySandy Siþ ClaySandy Siþ ClaySOIL TYPEHVEEMRVALUE1 o12 I (+lI åffifi'.ffifr:ffin,iÍå*' "TABLE 1SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTSProject No.22-7-4358718.7107LIQUID LIIIIT6BORING5DEPTHt%lGRAVEL(%)SANDLnflTSNATURALMOISTURECONTENTNATURALDRYDENSIWPERCENTPASSING NO.200 stEvEPLASTICINDÐ(52Y2I02%tt.27.020.8l l.51151091021107268lpsflUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTHSandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClaySandy Silty ClaySandy Siþ ClaySOIL TYPE2of 2