HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Reporttr CTL I THOMPSONm
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
LOT 24, CORYELL RANCH
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Prepared For:
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
129 Ëmma Road, UnitA
Basalt, CO 81621
Attention:
Galen Hoover
Architect
Project No. GS064 45.A0A-12A
February 19,2020
tr
TABLE OF CONTENTS
scoPE........
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
SITE CONDITIONS
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ...........
srTE GEO1OGY...............
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS...
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS...,.....^.
SITE EARTHWORK.....,..,
Subexcavation and Structural Fi11.................
Foundation Wall Backfill
FOUNDATTON .................
SLABS-ON-GRADE....,..
STRUCTURALLY.SUPPORTED FLOORS,....
TOUNDATION WALLS
SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE...............-
SURFACE DRAINAGE
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS .
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES .....
GEOTECHNICAL RISK
LTMTTAT|ONS .................
FIGUREl-VICINITYMAP
FIGURE 2", AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
FIGURE 3 - PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
FIGURE 4 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS
FIGURES 5 AND 6 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURES 7 AND 8 _ FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN CONCEPTS
TABLE I- SUMMARY OË LABORATORY TESTING
HARRY TEAOUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. c506¡145.000-120
C:lusers\.craig\SoxlProjooß\Glonwood 6prlngs - ProJects\GS08¡¡45.0OO"Au9ust Toðgue Res¡dencs\120U. Roports\GS06¡f4g,000 lzO R1dôcx
1
I
2
3
3
4
ffi
SCOPE
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investiga-
tion for the August Teague Residence proposed on Lot 24, Coryell Ranch in Gar-
field County, Colorado. We conducted this investigation to evaluate subsurface
conditions at the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for
the planned residence. Our report was prepared from data developed from our
field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and our experience
with similar conditions. This report includes a description of the subsurface con-
ditions observed in our exploratory pits and presents geotechnical engineeríng
recommendations for design and construction of foundations, floor systems, be-
low-grade walls, and details influenced by the subsoils. A summary of our con-
clusions is presented below.
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
Subsoils encountered in our exploratory pits were about 6 inches of
topsoil over 2.5 to 4.5 feet of sandy clay underlain by slightly silty
gravelwith cobbles and boulders to the maximum explored depth of
10 feet. Groundwater was not found in our exploratory pits during
our subsurface investigation.
Our exploratory pits indicate the silty gravel and cobble soil, which
has good foundation support properties, is near the ground surface
in the area of the proposed residence. We recommend construcl
ing the building on a footing foundation supported by the undis-
turbed, silty gravel and cobble soil. Where clay soils are found at
planned footing elevations, the clay should be subexcavated to ex-
pose the underlying gravel and cobble soil. Foundation elevations
can be re-attained with densely-compacted, granular structural fill.
Design and construction criteria for footing foundations are pro-
vided in the report.
3.Floors in basement and garage areas are planned as slabs-on-
grade. The sandy clay soil at the site possesses relatively poor
slab support characteristics as compared to the silty gravel and
cobble. We recommend removal of clay soils below the building
floor slabs to a depth of at least 2feet and replacement wíth
1
2
1HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GS06445.000-120
ffi
densely-compacted, granular structural fill. Additional discussion is
in the report.
A perimeter foundation drain should be constructed around below-
grade areas in the residence. Site grading should be designed and
constructed to convey surface water away from the building.
SITE COND¡T¡ONS
The August Teague Residence is proposed on Lot 24, coryell Ranch in
Garfield County, Colorado. A vicinity map with the location of the site is shown
on Figure 1. The lot is an approximately 2-acre parcel bordered by coryell
Ranch Road at the northwest and Spirit Mountain Drive at the north and east.
Vacant residential lots are adjacent to the property on all sides. An aerial photo-
graph of the site is included as Figure 2. A rock-lined irrigation ditch borders the
property at the west. No struotures are prcscnt on the subject lot. Cround sur-
face is gently sloping to the northwest at grades less than 5 percent. Vegetation
consists of grass and weeds. A photograph of the site at the time of our subsur-
face investigation is below.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENGE
PROJECT NO, GS06{45,000-,l20
4.
- ¡ r.,
2
Looking south across the site
ffi
PROPOSEÐ CONSTRUCTION
We were provided with progress architectural plans for the August Teague
Residence by Harry Teague Architects. The proposed building footprint is shown
on Figure 3. The plans indícate the residence will be a one and two-story, wood-
framed building with an attached garage. Basement and crawl space areas are
planned below the main level in living areas. Slab-on-grade floors are proposed
for basement and garage areas. Maximum excavation depths in basement areas
will likely be about I to 10 feet. We expect foundation loads along perimeter
walls to be between 1,000 and 3,000 pounds per linear foot. Maximum interior
column loads of about 30 kips are anticipated. We should be provided with con-
struction plans, as they are developed so that we can provide geotechnical/geo-
structural engineering input.
SITE GEOLOGY
As part of our geotechnical engineering ínvestigation, we reviewed the ge-
ologic map by the Colorado Geology Survey (CGS), titled, "Geologic Map of the
carbondale Quadrangle, Garfield county, colorado", by Kirkham and widmann
(dated 2008). The overburden soils at the site are mapped as younger terrace
alluvium deposits of the late Pleistocene Epoch. The deposits are described as
mostly poorly-sorted, clast-supported, locally bouldery, pebble and cobble gravel
in a sand and silt matrix deposited as glacial outwash. The gravel and cobble soil
found in our exploratory pits is consistent with the geologic description. The soils
are underlain at depth by bedrock of the Ëagle Valley Evaporite formation. The
surface of the bedrock is typically irregular and contorted and not representative
of the relatively flat ground surface at the site. The geologic map shows numerous
surficíal features of sinkholes located neär the subject site.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIOENCE
PROJECT NO. GSo6445.000-t20
3
ffi
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
We also reviewed the CGS map "Collapsible Soils and Evaporite Karst Haz-
ard Map of the Roaring Fork valley, Garfield, Pitkin and Eagle counties", by Jon-
athan L. White (dated 2oo2). CGS has mapped sinkhole, subsidence, and soil
collapse features within Coryell Ranch near the subject property.
Surface subsidence in the geologic environment in the area of the site is
usually due to solution cavities that form in the underlying Eagle Valley Evaporite
bedrock. The Evaporite minerals in the bedrock formation are dissolved and re-
moved by circulating ground water. Most of the flow in the area of this site is
subflow tributary to the Roaring Fork River and Crystal River. The ground water
circulates through the permeable alluvial terrace gravel, forming solution cavities
in the Eagle Valley Evaporite. Overburdcn soils collapse into the solution cavities.
When caving propagates to the ground surface, ground subsidence and/or sink-
holes occur.
Formation of sinkholes is random and can occur anywhere and at any time
in the geologic environment at this site and cannot be predicted, The degree of
risk related to sinkholes cannot reasonably be quantified. We did not observe ob-
vious visual evidence of sinkhole/subsidence formations on or immediately adja-
cent to the subject property. We are not aware of buildings in Coryell Ranch in the
immediate vicinity of the subject site that have experienced recent subsidence-
related damage. We rate the potential risk of sinkhole development at the site as
low to moderate. We judge that the risk of subsidence and/or sinkholes is similar
to and no greater than the risk at other lots in Coryell Ranch.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by directing the exca-
vation of three exploratory pits (TP-1 through TP-3) at the approximate locations
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GS06445.000-120
4
ffi
shown on F¡gures 2 and 3. Subsurface conditions observed in the pits were
logged by our representative who obtained samples of the soils. Subsoils found
in our exploratory pits were about 6 inches of topsoil and 2.5 to 4.5 feet of sandy
clay underlain by slíghtly silty gravelwith cobbles and boulders to the total exca-
vated depth of '10 feet. Groundwater was not found in our pits at the time of ex-
cavation. Pits were backfilled immediately after completion of our field investiga-
tion. Graphic logs of the soils observed in the exploratory pits are shown on Fig-
ure 4. A photograph of soils exposed in TP-2 below.
t:
¡'ì' ;t I :t .,.
.:
Soils excavated from TP-2
Samples of the soils obtained from our exploratory pits were returned to
our laboratory for pertinent laboratory testing. Three samples of the silty gravel
soil selected for gradation analysís contained 57 to 65 percent gravel, 31 to 36
percent sand, and 4 to 11 percent silt and clay (passing the No. 2gg sieve). A
large fraction of the soils at this site are comprised of cobbles and boulders. Gra-
dation test results are not inclusive of gravel and cobbles larger than 5 inches.
Gradation test results are shown on Figures 5 and 6. Laboratory testing is sum-
marized on Table l.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. cS06445,000-120
5
ffi
SITE EARTHWORK
We anticipate maximum foundation excavation depths of about 10 feet in
basement areas. Excavations in the soils at the site can likely be made with a
conventional heavy-duty trackhoe. Sides of excavations need to be sloped to
meet local, state, and federal safety regulations. The on-site clay and gravel
soils will likely classifiT as Type B and Type C soils, respectively, based on OSHA
criteria. Sides of excavation in Type B soils and Type C soils should be sloped
no steeper than 1 to t horizontalto vertical and 1.5 to 1, respectively. Contrac-
tors are responsible for site safety and províding and maintaining safe and stable
excavations. Contractors should identifu the soíls encountered and ensure that
OSHA standards are met-
Free groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory pits. We tl<¡ r¡ot
expect that excavations for the proposed constructíon will penetrate the free
groundwater table. We suggest excavations be sloped to a gravity discharge or
to a temporary sump where water from precipitation and runoff can be removed
by pumping.
Subexcavation and Structural Fill
Our exploratory pits indicate the silty gravel and cobble soil, which has
good building support properties, is near the ground surface in the area of the
proposed residence. Where clay soils are found at planned footing elevations,
the clay should be subexcavated to expose the underlying gravel and cobble soil.
We recommend removal of clay soils below the building floor slabs to a depth of
at least 2 feet. the subexcavated clay should be replaced with densely-com-
pacted, granular structuralfill. We recommend that structural fill consist of a
CDOT aggregate base course or sintilar soil.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIOENCE
PROJECT NO. GS06¡145,000-120
6
ffi
Structuralfill should be placed in loose lifts of 10 inches thick or less and
moisture-conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Structural
fill should be compacted to 9B percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maxi-
mum dry density. Moisture content and density of structural fill should be
checked by a representative of our firm during placement. Observatíon of the
compaction procedure is necessary.
Foundation Wall Backfill
Proper placement and compaction of foundation backfill is important to re-
duce infiltration of surface water and settlement of backfill. This is especially im-
portant for backfill areas that will support concrete slabs, such as driveways and
patios. The excavated soils free of rocks larger than 4 inches in diameter, organ-
ics and debris can be reused as backfill adjacent to foundation wall exteriors.
Backfill should be placed in loose lifts of approximately 10 inches thick or
less, moisture-conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density
(ASTM D 698). Our representative should test moisture content and density of
the backfill during placement.
FOUNDATION
Our exploratory pits indicate the silty gravel and cobble soil, which has
good foundation support properties, is near the ground surface in the area of the
proposed residence. We recommend constructing the residence on a footing
foundation supported by the undisturbed, silty gravel and cobble soil. Where clay
soils are found at planned footing elevations, the clay should be subexcavated to
expose the underlying gravel and cobble soil. Footing elevatíons can be re-at-
tained with densely-compacted, granular structural fill. The structural fill should
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GSo6445.000-t 20
7
ffi
be in accordance with recommendations in the Subexcavation and Structural Fill
section
1 The residence can be constructed on a footing foundation sup-
ported by the undisturbed gravel and cobble soil or densely-com-
pacted, granular structural fill.
Footings on the gravel and cobble soil can be sized using a maxi-
mum allowable bearing pressure of dggg trt.
continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of at reast
16 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimurn
dimensions of 24 inches by 24 inches. Larger sizes may be re-
quired, depending upon foundation loads.
Grade beams and foundation walls should be well reinforced, top
and bottom, to span undisclosed loose or soft soil pockets. We rec-
ommend reínforcement sufficient to span an unsupporlecJ clista¡¡ce
of at least 12 feet.
The soils under exterior footings should be protected from freezing.
We recommend the bottom of footings be constructed at a depth of
at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades. The Garfield
county building department should be consulted regarding required
depth.
SLABS.ON-GRAÐE
Plans indicated floors in basement and garage areas will be slabs-on-
grade. The sandy clay soil at the site possesses relatively poor slab support
characteristics as conrpared to tlre silty gravel and cobble. We recommend re-
moval of clay soils below the building floor slabs to a depth of at least 2 feet and
repiacement with denseiy-compacted, granular structuralfill. Structural fill below
slabs should be placed in accordance with recommendations in the Structural Fill
section. We recommend the following precautions for slab-on-grade construction
at this site.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GS06¡¡45.000-l 20
2
3
4
5
I
ffi
Floor slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior
bearing members with slip joints which allow free vertical move-
ment of the slabs.
The use of underslab plumbing should be minimized. Underslab
plumbing should be pressure tested for leaks before the slabs are
constructed. Plumbing and utilities which pass through slabs
should be ísolated from the slabs with sleeves and provided with
flexible couplings to slab supported appliances.
Exterior concrete flatwork should be isolated from the building.
These slabs should be well-reinforced to function as independent
units.
Frequent controljoints should be provided, in accordance with
American Concrete lnstitute (ACl) recommendations, to reduce
problems associated with shrinkage and curling.
STRUCTURALLY.SUPPORTED FLOORS
Main level floors in parts of the resídence are proposed as structurally-
supported with crawlspaces below. The required air space in crawl spaces de-
pends on the materials used to construct the floor and the potential expansion of
the underlying soils. Building codes normally require a clear space of at least 18
inches between exposed earth and untreated wood floor components. We rec-
ommend increasing the clear space to at feast 24 inches to allow for heave of the
ground under the floor. For non-organic systems, we recommend a minimum
clear space of 12 inches. This minimum clear space should be maintained be-
tween any point on the underside of the floor system (including beams, plumbing
pipes and floor drain traps) and the soils.
Utility connections, including water, gas, air duct, and exhaust stack con-
nections to appliances on structural floors should be capable of absorbing some
deflection of the floor. Plumbing that passes through the floor should ideally be
hung from the underside of the structural floor and not laid on the bottom of the
excavation. lt is prudent to maintain the minimum clear space below all plumbing
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. cS06445.000-120
1
2
3,
4
I
ffi
lines. lf trenching below the lines is necessary, we recommend sloping these
trenches, so they discharge to the foundation drain.
Control of humidity in crawl spaces is important for indoor air quality and
performance of wood floor systems. We believe the best current practices to
control humidity involve the use of a vapor retarder or vapor barrier (10 mil mini-
mum) placed on the soils below accessible subfloor areas. The vapor re-
tarderlbarrier should be sealed at joints and attached to concrete foundation ele-
ments.
FOUNDATION WALLS
Foundation walls which extend below-gracle should be tlesigned for lateral
earth pressures where backfill is not present to about the same extent on both
sides of the wall, such as in crawl spaces. Many factors affect the values of the
design lateral earth pressure. These factors include, but are not limited to, the
type, compactíon, slope, and drainage of the backfill, and the rigidity of the wall
against rotation and deflection.
For a very rigid wall where negligible or very little deflection will occur, an
"at-rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. For walls that can de-
flect or rotate 0.5 to 1 percent of wall height (depending upon the backfill types),
design for a lower "active" lateral earth pressure may be appru:priate. Our experi-
ence indicates typical below-grade walls in residences deflect or rotate sligh¡y
under normal design loads, and that thís deflection results in satisfactory wall
performance. Thus, the earth pressures on the walls will likely be between the
"active" and "at-rest" conditions.
HÀRRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. OS0t443.000-120
't0
ffi
For backfill consisting of the soils excavated from the site, that are not sat-
urated, we recommend design of below-grade walls at this site using an equiva-
lent fluid density of at least 40 pcf. This value assumes deflection; some minor
cracking of walls may occur. lf very littfe wall deflection is desired, a higher de-
sign value for the at-rest condition using an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pcf is
recommended.
SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE
Water from precipitation and surface írrigation of lawns and landscaping
frequently flows through relatively permeable backfill placed adjacent to a resi-
dence, and collects on the surface of less permeable soils at the bottom of foun-
dation excavations. This process can cause wet or moist conditions in below-
grade areas, such as basements and crawl spaces, after construction. To reduce
the likelihood water pressure will develop outside foundation walls and the risk of
accumulation of water in below-grade areas, we recommend provision of a foun-
dation drain adjacent to the perimeter of basement and crawl space areas in the
building. The drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter, slotted pipe encased in
free-draining gravel. The drain should lead to a positive gravity outlet or to a
sump where water can be removed by pumping. The foundation drain concept is
shown on Figures 7 and 8.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs,
and concrete flatwork. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid
runoff of surface water away from the resídence. Proper surface drainage and ir-
rigation practices can help control the amount of surface water that penetrates to
foundation levels and contributes to settlement or heave of soils and bedrock that
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GS0644s.000-1 20
11
ffi
support foundations and slabs-on-grade. Positive drainage away froln the foun-
dation and avoidance of irrigation near the foundation also help to avoid exces-
sive wetting of backfill soils, which can lead to increased backfill settlement and
possibly to higher lateral earth pressures, due to increased weight and reduced
strength of the backfill. we recommend the folrowing precautions.
The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the residence
should be sloped to drain away from the building in ail directions.
we recommend a minimum constructed slope of at least 12 inches
in the first 10 feet (10 percent) in landscaped areas around the resi-
dence, where practical.
Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the rim-
its of all backfill. Splash blocks and/or extensions should be pro-
vided at all downspouts so water discharges onto the ground be-
yond the backfill.
Landscaping should be carefully designed and maintained to mini-
mize irrigation. Plants placed close to foundation wails shourd be
limited to those with low moisture requirements. sprinklers shoufd
not discharge within 5 feet of foundations. plastic sheeting should
not be placed beneath landscaped areas adjacent to foundation
walls or grade beams. Geotextile fabric will inhibit weed growth yet
still allow natural evaporation to occur.
CONCRETE
Co¡tcrete in contact with soll can be subject to sulfate attack. We meas-
ured a soluble sulfate concentration of 0.01 percent in a sample of the soil from
this site. For this level of sulfate concentration, ACI 332-08 Code Requirements
for Residential Concrete indicates there are no special requirements for sulfate
resistance.
ln our experience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces
of highly permeable concrete. To control this risk and to resist freeze thaw deteri-
oration, the water-to-cementitious materials ratio should not exceed 0.50 for con-
crete in contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or
1
2
3.
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GSo6¡t45,000-120
12
ffi
high-water tables. Concrete should have a total air content af 6% +l-1.5o/o. We
recommend all foundation walls and grade beams in contact with the subsoils (in-
cluding the inside and outside faces of garage and crawr spaces) be damp-
proofed.
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS
we recommend that crl I Thompson, lnc. be retained to provide con-
struction observation and materials testing services for the project. This would
allow us the opportunity to verify whether soil conditions are consistent with those
found during this investigation. lf others perform these observations, they must
accept responsibility to judge whether the recommendations in this report remain
appropriate. lt is also beneficialto projects, from economic and practical stand-
points, when there is continuity between engineering consultation and the con-
struction observation and materials testing phases.
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
CTL I Thompson, lnc. is a full-service geotechnical, structural, materials,
and environmental engineering firm. Our services include preparation of struc-
turalframing and foundation plans. We can also design earth retention systems,
Based on our experience, crl I Thompson, lnc. typically provides value to pro-
jects from schedule and economic standpoints, due to our combined expertise
and experience with geotechnical, structural, and materiats engíneering. we
would like the opportunity to provide proposals for structural engineering services
on your future projects.
GEOTECHNICAL RISK
The concept of risk ís an important aspect of any geotechnical evaluation
The primary reason for this is that the analytical methods used to develop ge-
otechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science. The analytical
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT NO. GS06/t45.000-l 20
13
ffi
tools which geotechnical engineers use are generally empirical and must be tem-
pered by engineering judgment and experience. Therefore, the solutions or rec-
ommendations presented in any geotechnical evaluation should not be consid-
ered risk-free and, more importantly, are not a guarantee that the interaction be-
tween the soils and that the proposed structure will perform as desired or in-
tended. What the engineering recommendations presented in the preceding sec-
tions do constitute ís our estimate, based on the information generated during
this and previous evaluations and our experience in working with these condi-
tions, of those measures that are necessary to help the building perform satisfac-
torily.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client for the
purpose of providirrg ger:rtechnical rlesign and constructlon cr¡teriå for the pro-
posed project. The information, conclusions, and recommendations presented
herein are based upon consideration of many factors including, but not limited to,
the type of structures proposed, the geologic setting, and the subsurface condi-
tions encountered. The conclusions and recommendations contained in the re-
port are not valid for use by others. Standards of practice continuously change in
the area of geotechnical engineering. The recommendations provided in this re-
port are appropriate for three years. lf the proposed project is not constructed
within three years, we should be contacted to determine if we should update this
report.
LIMITATIONS
Our exploratory pits were located to provide a reasonably accurate picture
of subsurface conditions. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated
by the pits will occur.
This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of
care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers currently practicing
HARRY TEAGUË ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIOENCÊ
PROJECT NO, GS08445.000-l 20
14
ffi
under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No warranty, express or im-
plied, is made. lf we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this
report, please call.
cTL I THOMPSON, tNC Reviewed By:
R
at
7-ßA,Ë-rE
Ryan R. Barbone, E.l.T
Staff Engineer
RRB:JDK:ac
HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS
AUGUST TEAGUE RESIDENCE
PROJECT N0. cS06445.000-120
sD
Manager
38298
I 6
15
ffi
0 1000 ?000
SCÂLE: l'- 2000'
HarryTeague Archlt€cts
Augurt Tcaguc Rcddanca
I\TJIL: IMAUL I.KUM GUUGI t IJqRII.i
Vicinity
MapProJect No. GSO6445.OOO-1 20 Fls. 1