Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Study for Foundation DesignlGrtfj|,çl[,åi':'fËtrr':nÊü'** An Employcc Ownad Conrpcny 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email : kaglenwood@kumarusa.com wr¡,n,, ktt r¡t atus¿t. colll Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parkea Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado November 15,2022 Hari and Christy Dallakoti 2457 West Sunset Drive Littleton, Colorado 80120 hdal lakoti @hotrrrai l.com Job No. 22-7-581 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Lot 37 , Filing 9, Elk Springs, 0095 Vista Place, Garfield County, Colorado Hari and Christy: As requested, Kumar and Associates, Inc. performed a subsoil study for design of foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you, dated August 16,2022. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single-story, wood frame structure over crawlspace with an attached slab-on-grade garage located as shown on Figure l. Cut depths could range between about 2 to 6 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The site is vacant and vegetated with grass, weeds and juniper trees. The lot is bordered on the east by Vista Place, and on the west by a common area. The lot is near a natural hilltop and slopes moderately down to the south. The ground surface is natural with basalt cobbles and boulders visible on the surface. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating three exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure l. The logs of the pits are presented on Figure 2. Below about I to l% feet of topsoil, dense basalt gravel, cobbles and boulders in a calcareous sandy silt matrix was encountered down to the maximum explored depth of 3/z feet. Digging in the basalt rock was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and practical digging refusal was encountered in the deposit in all three pits at depths of 2% to 3/z feet. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of the matrix soils (minus 3-inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Figure 3. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist. "| Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural basalt rock soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for support of the proposed residence. Footings should be a minimum width of l6 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. The topsoil, and any loose disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Utility trenches and deep cut areas may require rock excavating techniques such as chipping and blasting. Voids created from boulder removal should be backfilled with road base compacted to at least 95olo of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum or with concrete. We should observe the completed foundation excavation for bearing conditions. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least l0 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for the on-site soil or imported gravel as backfill, excluding organics and rock larger than 6 inches. Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade 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 free-draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 50%o passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2o/o passing the No. 200 sieve. The 4-inch gravel layer placed below slab-at- grade such as the garuge can consist of t/¿-inch road base. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least95%o of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site soils or imported granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil, and oversized rock. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 22-7-58'l -3- The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill sumounded 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 frnish grade and sloped at a minimum lYoto a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2%o passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least lt/z feet deep. Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation ofthe 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%o of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 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 l2 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first l0 feet in pavement and walkway areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge wellbeyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from the building. 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 pits excavated at the locations indicated on Figure I and to the depths shown on Figure 2, the assumed 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 fìndings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identihed at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No, 22-7-581 4 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 the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verifu 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. If you have any questions or if we may be of fuither assistance, please let us know Respectfully Submitted, Kunrar'& .4ssociates, Steven L. Pawlak, P Reviewed by: Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. Attachments: Figure I - Location of Exploratory Pits Figure 2 - Logs of Exploratory Pits Figure 3 - Gradation Test Results Cc; Focal Studio - Tim Owen (tim{*ìfc¡çSlstu¡1ìearch.çc.¡ur) Kumar & Associates, lnc. "Froject No, 22-7-58',1 3 E s' mTN sm J/ 1 \60- . 41M*&r. / Bt-GPIÁsn(ì c4PlSf t57ì0 FOW !:1-.'r#reBÆ& BLGPT-ÂS1ÌC caÞ p ¡ sþ t57t0 - lotM : rRF-c'a¿f4 Þ4'%I í.*:cÐNre -Crw) r \50"'-1 1 o tf,9 ir,.: t'# ì ,:i l/'*. - ,!,4. ,,, tj \t¡,, . uu*",rr{'tt't- .,r', FOú{à r',.,.-t' ,LOT 37 :x, :;*ìt/ ,.t')$ ,''.ò ,/ .+:" -1aùo/ t¡ REnÀR& - 'sltç tßsrc _' eËRtLÀ Í *v*È"'5Ì-l; tmrc frfe.l l.ì1.,. .YELI) r.ow:,* i / c#PLSI l57fJ roD ,/ ,.>_.1 ,s rj t, 't.t,;2 : ,t)¡_oT il ,'g6-ssdDHDAMm(E I '/' - 15 m-{R ^*IJ'l!'TJffiC CÂT PL.Y IIreBLE ¡owD o.?5'Mvt GRÐE 5003060 APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET 22-7 -581 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 1 3 E PIT 1 EL. 7143' PIT 2 EL. 7144' PIT 3 EL. 71 50' 0 0 F L¡J UJ LL IIt-fL l¡Jo I +4=30j -200=19 t- UJ UJ L! I-F-(L L¡lÕ 5 q LEGEND TOPSOIL; oRGANlc SANDY SILT AND CLAY, SCATTERED ROCK, FIRM, SLIGHTLY MOIST, BROWN. BASALT COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GM); HIGHLY CALCAREOUS SAND AND SILT MATRIX, VERY HARD, SLIGHTLY MOIST, WHITE AND GRAY. DISÏURBED BULK SAMPLE I PRACTICAL DIGGING REFUSAL. NOTES 1. THE EXPLORATORY PITS WERE EXCAVATED WITH A BACKHOE ON NOVEMBER 10, 2022. 2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPL'ORATORY PITS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SIÏE PLAN PROVIDED. 3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY PITS WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATION BETWEEN CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 4. THE EXPLORATORY PIT 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 PIT LOGS REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL. 6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE PITS AT THE TIME OF EXCAVATION 7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:+4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASTM D 422); -2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM D 1 1 4O). 22-7 -581 Kumar & Associates LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fis. 2 3 t Ê E 6 too 90 a0 70 50 50 40 50 20 to o o t0 20 30 10 50 60 70 ao 90 100 ¡ ,o75 t50 .30O i .AOO l.1a i 2.36.123 2,O PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERSDIAMETER OF CLAY TO SILT COBBLES GRAVEL 30 % SANO 51 % LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE 0F: Hlghly Colcoreous Silly Sond Mdtrlx SILT AND CLAY 19 % FROM: Pil 3 O 3' -3.5' Th!s. l.sl rcsults opply only lo lho sompl.3 whlch w!ru l.slrd. Th. losllng r.pori 3holl not b. r.produc.d,.xc!pì ln full, wllhoul lho wrlll.n opprovol of Kumqr & Aagoclqhc, lnc. Slav. oñdlysls l!3llng b parformad ln occordonce wlth ASTM 059t5, ASÍM D7928, ASTM Cl36 ond/or ASÍM Dll¡10. I{YDROMElER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME RE OINOS 24 HRS 7 HRS U.S. SIANDARD SERIES CLAR SOUARE OPENI¡GS atÀ6 a/t¡ t 1/.â ' t' t'¡' -t ;t' !, t :'J'':'il: :': ; ;1: -'t'i:i'¿1 I i t | .ai tii i:,f i 'i , fi1.¡, i,;,, ; ;!1,; ljr,_ ., ¡ i i .t : ii i i i ',i I SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM IcoARSE FINE COARSE 22-7 -581 Kumar & Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3