The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutGeotechnical Engineering Investigation 09.29.2021tr CTL I THOMPSON @ GTLITHOMPSON YEARS FOUNDED IN 1971 RECEIVED [,tAY I 3 202| gARFIELD COUNTY COMfJUNITY DEVELcPMENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATTON JABLONSKY RESIDENCE 306 COUNTY ROAD 340 GARFIELD COUNry, COLORADO Prepared For: SGM, INC. 118 W. Sixth Street, Suite #200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attention : Jeff Simonson Project No. GS06603.000-1 20 September 23,2021 (revised Septembe r 29, 2021) \ A*.-=oqJ .=E LT $\ E ]s T I I I rrllIrIIrlll fJI -lll rrlL ffi TABLE OF CONTENTS scoPE........ SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS SITE CONDITIONS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTTON ............... GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HMARDS. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS...,...... EARTHWORK.................. Excavations Subexcavation and Structural Fill..... Foundation Wall Backfill. FOUNDATION ................. SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION . CRAWL SPACE CONSTRUCTION..... FOUNDATION WALLS.... SUBSU RFACE DRAINAGE................. SURFACE DRAINAGE coNcRETE ...1.........,..,,.,. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ., GEOTECHNICAL RISK LtMtTATIONS ................. FIGURE 1_VICINITYMAP FIGURE 2 _ AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH FIGURE 3 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURES 4 AND 5 _ FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN CONCEPTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING sGM, rNC. JABLONSKY RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. G306603.000-{ 20 REvtsED 'l 1 2 3 3 3 5 5 5 b 6 ffi SCOPE CTL I Thompson, lnc. (CTL) has completed a geotechnical engineering in- vestigation for the Jablonsky Residence proposed at 306 County Road 340 in Garfield County, Colorado. We conducted this investigation to evaluate subsur- face conditions at the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommenda- tions for the proposed construction. The scope of our investigation was set forth in our Proposal No. GS 21-0218. Our report was prepared from data developed from our field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and our expe- rience with similar conditions. This report includes a description of the subsurface conditions observed in our exploratory pits and provides geotechnical engineer- ing recommendations for design and construction of the foundation, floor system, below-grade walls, subsurface drainage, and details influenced by the subsoils. A summary of our conclusions is below. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS Subsoils encountered in our exploratory pits consisted of about 1 foot of sandy clay "topsoil" underlain by sandy clay and sandy silt with scattered gravel and cobbles to the total excavated depth of 8.5 feet. Groundwater was not found in our exploratory pits at the time of our subsurface investigation. Geologic mapping and our engineering experience indicate the soils at this site have the potential for significant consolidation when wetted under building loads. We judge a footing foundation is ap- propriate for the Jablonsky Residence, provided the soils are subexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below planned footings and re- placed as densely-compacted, structural fill. Slab-on-grade floors are likely to be constructed in basement and garage areas of the residence. To enhance potential floor slab per- formance, we recommend subexcavation of the soils below floor slabs to a depth of at least 2 feet and replacement as densely-com- pacted, structural fill. sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REVTSED 1 2 3 1 ffi A foundation wall drain should be constructed around the perimeter of basement and crawl space areas to mitigate surface water that infiltrates backfill soils. site grading should be designed and con- structed to rapidly convey surface water away from the building. SITE CONDITIONS The Jablonsky Residence is proposed on Morissania Mesa at 306 County Road 340 in Garfield County, Colorado. A vicinity map with the location of the site is included as Figure 1. The property is an approximately 10.7-acre parcel northeast of the intersection of County Road 301 and County Road 340. Single- family residences and out-buildings are on adjacent parcels to the north and south. An aerial photograph of the site is shown on Figure 2. Ground surface at the site generally slopes down to the north at grades visually estimated at less than 5 percent. The site has historically been irrigated hayfield. A photograph of the site at the time of our investigation is below. Looking northeast across site sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GSo6603.000-l 20 REvtsED 4 2 ffi PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Architectural plans for the residence were not developed at the time of our geotechnical engineering investigation. The residence is proposed as a two-level, wood-frame structure with an attached garage. Basement and crawl space areas are being considered. Floors in garage and basement areas would likely be slabs-on-grade. We anticipate perimeter foundation loads between 1,000 and 2,000 pounds per linear feet and interior column loads of less than 75 kips. We should be provided with architectural plans, as they are developed, so we can provide geotechnical/geo-structural engineering input. GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS we reviewed the geologic map by the U.s. Geology survey (usGS) tifled, "Geologic Map of the Rulison Quadrangle, Garfield county, colorado", by yeend, Donnell, and smith (dated 1988). The subject property is locaied in an area of Morrisania Mesa that is mapped as alluvial-terrace and fan-gravel deposits of the Pleistocene Epoch. These deposits are described as sandy gravel, poorly-sorted, poorly-stratified rock fragments with a matrix of clay and silt. The soils found in our exploratory pits are generally consistent with the geologic mapping. Due to the depositional method, the soil deposits have not been subject to significant ge- ologic loads. These soils are prone to consolidation when wetted under building loads. We judge sandy clay and sandy silt have potential for moderate to high amounts of consolidation when wetted under building loads. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions for our geotechnical engineering investigation were investigated by observing the excavation of two exploratory pits (Tp-1 and Tp-2) at the site. The pits were excavated with a trackhoe at the approximate locations sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REVTSED 3 ffi shown on Figure 2. Exploratory excavation operations were directed by our rep- resentative, who logged subsurface conditions encountered in the pits and ob- tained samples of the soils. Graphic logs of the soils found in our exploratory pits are shown on Figure 3. Subsoils encountered in our exploratory pits consisted of about 1 foot of sandy clay "topsoil" underlain by sandy clay and sandy silt with scattered gravel and cobbles to the total excavated depth of 8.5 feet. Groundwater was not found in our exploratory pits at the time of our subsurface investigation. PVC pipe was installed in our pits, prior to backfilling, to facilitate subsequent checks of ground- water. A photograph of the subsoils encountered in our exploratory pits is below. Subsurface conditions exposed in TP-1 Samples of the soils obtained from our exploratory pits were returned to our laboratory for pertinent testing. Engineering index testing on two samples of the soils indicated low plasticity with liquid limits of 39 percent and non-liquid (NL) and plasticity indices of 17 percent and non-plastic (Np). These samples con- tained 84 and 52 percent silt and clay size material (passing the No. 200 sieve), Laboratory test results are summarized on Table l. sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-t 20 REV|SED 4 ffi EARTHWORK Excavations Based on our subsurface investigation, excavations at the site can be ac- complished with conventional, heavy-duty excavation equipment, such as a me- dium-size trackhoe. Sides of excavations deeper than 5 feet must be sloped or braced to meet local, state, and federal safety regulations. The sandy clay and sandy silt soils will likely classify as Type B soils based on OSHA criteria. Sides of excavations in Type B soils should be sloped no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical). Contractors are responsible for site safety and providing and main- taining safe and stable excavations. Contractors should identify the soils encoun- tered and ensure that OSHA standards are met. Free groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory pits at the time of our subsurface investigation. We do not expect excavation for the proposed construction will penetrate a free groundwater table. We suggest excavations be sloped to a gravity discharge or to a temporary sump where water from precipita- tion can be removed by pumping. Subexcavation Structural Fill Geologic mapping and our engineering experience indicate the soils at this site have the potential for significant consolidation when wetted under build- ing loads. We judge a footing foundation is appropriate for the Jablonsky Resi- dence, provided the soils are subexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below planned footings and replaced as densely-compacted, structuralfill. We recommend a subexcavation and replacement process of at least 2 feet below interior slab-on- grade floors. A more uniform structural fillwould result by subexcavating to the same depth (e.9., 3 feet below footings) below the entire residence footprint. The sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENGE PROJECT NO, GS06603.000-120 REVTSED 5 ffi subexcavation process should extend at least 1 foot beyond the perimeter of the residence footprint. The excavated soils can be reused as structural fill, provided they are free of rocks larger than 4 inches, organics, and debris. structural fill should be placed in loose lifts of 8 inches thick or less, moisture-conditioned to within 2 per- cent of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least g8 percent of stand* ard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Moisture content and density of structural fill should be checked by a representative of our firm during placement. Observation of the placement and compaction process is necessary. Foundation Wall Backfill Proper placement and compaction of foundation wall backfill is important to reduce infiltration of surface water and consolidation settlement of backfill soils. This is especially important 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, organics, and debris can be reused as backfill adja- cent 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 standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Moisture content and density of the backfill should be checked during plaeement by a representative of our firm. FOUNDATION The soils at this site have the potential for significant consolidation when wetted under building loads. We judge a footing foundation is appropriate for the sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GSo6603.000-120 REV|SED 6 ffi Jablonsky Residence, provided the soils are subexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below planned footings and replaced as densely-compacted, structuralfill. The structural fill should be in accordance with recommendations in the Subexcava- tion and Structural Fill section. Some amount of subsurface wetting is inherent after a building is con- structed. The recommendations in the SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE and SURFACE DRAINAGE sections will be critical to reduce the amount of subsur- face wetting below the building and enhance the potential performance of foot- ings. Recommended design and construction criteria for footings are below. These criteria were developed based on our analysis of field and laboratory data, as well as our engineering experience. 1 The residence can be constructed on a footing foundation that is supported by a 3-foot thickness of densely-compacted, structural fill. The structural fill should be in accordance with the .s ubexcava- tion and Structural Fill section Footings on the structural fill can be sized using a maximum net al- lowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. The weight of backfill soil above the footings can be neglected for bearing pressure calcula- tion. Continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of at least 16 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimum 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 to span undisclosed loose or soft soil pockets. We recommend rein- forcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance 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 2 SGM, INC, JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REVTSED 3 4 5 7 ffi county building department should be consulted regarding required frost protection depth. SLAB.ON.G RADE CONSTRUCTION Slab-on-grade floors are likely to be constructed in basement and garage areas of the residence. Exterior concrete flatwork is likely to be constructed adja- cent to the building. To enhance potential performance of interior floor slabs, we recommend subexcavation of the soils below floor slabs to a depth of at least 2 feet and replacement as densely-compacted, structural fill, The structural fill should be in accordance with recommendations in the Subexcavation and Struc- tural Fillsection. Based on our analysis of field and laboratory data, as well as our engineer- ing experience, we recommend the following precautions for slab-on-grade con- struction at this site. slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members with slip joints that allow free vertical movement of the slabs. The use of underslab plumbing should be minimized. Underslab plumbing should be pressure tested for leaks before the srabs are constructed. Plumbing and utilities which pass through slabs should be isolated from the slabs with sleeves and provided with frexible couplings to slab supported appliances. 1 2. 3. sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REVTSED 4 Exterior concrete flatwork should be isolated from the building. These slabs should be well-reinforced to function as independent units. Movements of these slabs should not be transmitted to the building. Frequent controljoints should be provided, in accordance with American Concrete lnstitute (ACl) recommendations, to reduce problems associated with shrinkage and curling. 8 ffi The International Building Code (lBC) may require a vapor retarder be placed between the base course or subgrade soils and the con- crete slab-on-grade floors. The merits of installation of a vapor re- tarder below floor slabs depend on the sensitivity of floor coverings and building to moisture. A properly installed vapor retarder (10 mil minimum) is more beneficial below concrete slab-on-grade floors where floor coverings will be sensitive to moisture, CRAWL SPACE CONSTRUCTION Crawl spaces are contemplated below the main levelfloor in parts of the residence. Where structurally-supported floors are installed over a crawlspace, the required air space depends on the materials used to construct the floor. Building codes normally require a clear space of at least 18 inches between un- treated wood floor components of the structural floor and exposed earth on the bottom of the crawl space. For non-organic systems, we recommend a minimum clear space of 12 inches. 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 lines. 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 con- trol humidity involve the use of a vapor retarder or vapor barrier (10 mil minimum) placed on the soils below accessible subfloor areas. The vapor retarder/barrier should be sealed at joints and attached to concrete foundation elements. lt may be appropriate to install a ventilation system that is controlled by humidistat. sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GSo6603,000-120 REVTSED 5 9 ffi FOUNDATION WALLS Foundation walls which extend below-grade should be designed for lateral earth pressures where backfill is not present to about the same extent on both sides of the wall, such as in basements and crawl spaces. Many factors affect the values of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors include, but are not limited to, the type, compaction, slope, and drainage of the backfill, and the rigid- ity of the wall againsi rotation and deflection. For a very rigid wall where negligible or vcry littlc dcflcction 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 appropriate. our experi- ence indicates typical below-grade walls in residences deflect or rotate slightly under normal design loads, and that this deflection results in satisfactory wall performance. Thus, the earth pressures on the walls will likely be between the "active" and "at-rest" conditions. For backfill soils conforming with recommendations in the Foundation Wall Backfill section that are not saturated, we recommend design of below-grade walls at this site using an equivalent fluid density of at least 45 pcf. This value as- sumes deflection; some minor cracking of walls may occur. lf very little wall de- flection is desired, a higher design value approaching the "at-rest" condition using an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf may be appropriate. These equivalent den- sities do not include allowances for sloping backfill, surcharges or hydrostatic pressures. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Water from precipitation, snowrnelt, and irrigation frequently flows through relatively permeable backfill placed adjacent to a residence and collects on the sGM, tNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. cso5603.000-t20 REvtsED 10 ffi surface of less permeable soils at the bottom of foundation excavations. This pro- cess can cause wet or moist conditions in below-grade areas, such as base- ments and crawl spaces, after construction. To reduce the likelihood water pres- sure will develop outside foundation walls and the risk of wetting in below-grade areas, we recommend provision of a foundation wall drain around the perimeter of below-grade areas of the residence. The foundation wall drain should consist of 4-inch diameter, slotted PVC pipe encased in free-draining gravel. A prefabricated drainage composite should be placed adjacent to foundation walls. Care should be taken during backfill op- erations to prevent damage to drainage composites. The drain should discharge via a positive gravity outlet or lead to a sump where water can be removed by pumping. Foundation wall drain concepts are shown on Figures 4 and 5. SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs, and concrete flatwork. Site grading should be designed to rapidly convey surface water away from the residence. Proper suface drainage and inigation practices can help control the amount of surface water that penetrates to foundation levels and contributes to settlement or heave of soils that support foundations, slabs, and other structures. Positive drainage away from the foundation and avoidance of irrigation near the foundation also help to avoid excessive wetting of backfill soils, which can lead to increased backfill settlement and possibly to higher lat- eral earth pressures, due to increased weight and reduced strength of the back- fill. We recommend the following precautions. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the residence should be sloped to drain away from the building in all 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. 1 sGM, lNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GSOG6O3.OOO.I2O REVISED 11 ffi Backfill around the foundation walls should be moisture-treated and compacted pursuant to recommendations in the Foundation Wall Backfill section. We recommend the residence and existing building be provided with roof gutters and downspouts. The downspouts should dis- charge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks and/or extensions should be provided at all downspouts so water dis- charges onto the ground beyond the backfill. Landscaping should be carefully designed and maintained to mini- mize irrigation,. Plants placed close to foundation walls should be limited to those with low moisture requirements. lrrigated grass should not be located within 5 feet of the foundation. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of foundations. Plastic sheeting should not be placed beneath landscaped areas adjacent to foun- dation walls or grade beams. Geotextile fabric will inhibit weed growth yet still allow natural evaporation to occur. CONCRETE Concrete in contact with soil can be subject to sulfate attack. Our experi- ence in the area of the site indicates the soils contain low levels of water-soluble sulfates. ACI 332-08, "Code Requirements for Residential Concrete", indicates that any type of cement can be used for concrete in contact with the subsoils that have low levels of sulfate concentration. ln our experience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly-permeable concrete, even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze-thaw deterioration, the water-to-cementitious mafarialc ralin ohnnl'.| ^^+ a-^^^I n En t^- ^^^^-^t^ :- ^^^l^^r,-.:rL ^^:r- rL-ai i i€riEi rc.rr i <ttiu 5l iuLiiu i iUt 9XUCtjU v.OU iOi COnGi-ele in COnlaCl Wim SOiIS Inai afe likely to stay moist due to surface dr"ainage or high-water tables. Concrete should have a total air content of 6 percent +l- 1.5 percent. We recommend all founda- tion walls and grade beams in contact with the subsoirs be damp-proofed. 2 3 4 SGM, INC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REvtsED 12 ffi 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 al- low 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 beneficial to projects, from economic and practical stand- points, when there is continuity between engineering consultation and the con- struction on materials testing phases. GEOTECHNICAL RISK The concept of risk is 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 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 are not a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and the proposed structure will lead to performance as desired or intended. The engi- neering recommendations in the preceding sections constitute our estimate of those measures necessary to help the building perform satisfactorily. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client for the purpose of providing geotechnical design and construction criteria 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 sGM, tNC. 4a JABLONSKY REIDENCE I V PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-120 REVTSED ffi 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 provide a reasonable characterization of subsurface conditions below the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by the pits will occur. We should be provided with architectural plans, as they arc developed, so we can provide geotechnical/geo-structural engineering input. This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers currently practicing 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, INC Reviewed tu 2o2\ Ryan R. Barbone, E.l.T Project Engineer RRB:JDK:abr sGM, rNC. JABLONSKY REIDENCE PROJECT NO. G506603.000"1 20 REVtSED ames D Division Ma 14 ffi 0 1500 J000 NOTE: SC{LE; 1'- 3000' sGM, lNC. JABLONSI(Y RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GSO6603.OO0-1 20 SATELLITE IMAGE FROM GOOGLE FARTH (DATED JUNE 17, 2016) Vicinity Map JABLONSKY RESIDENCE Fls. 1 LEGEND: TP_1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFI EXF,LoRAroRY PtT NOTTS ffi 0 50 SCALE: 1' = 100' 100 1) SATELLTTE TMAGE FROM GOOGLE EARTH (DATED JUNE 17, 2016) 2) LOCATTONS OF EXPLORATORY P|TS ARE APPROXIMATE *s :TP.:?J:f I , l-s : :i i: r.i ilo{+,IF.) 1" I jlT) 1r \-' l^ lev ll>. t\- 1lin lL)'1 ..i-.! I ', 1r. 'S' .. .t'- ".t'. :'i sGM, lNC. JABLONSIfT, RESIDENOE Aerial ,-f l. hh^ TFA-rn\r\rEv I lY(J. t.:Duo9uS.uuu-] zu Fhotograph Fig. 2 TP-1 10 15 sGM, rNC. JABLONSKY RESIDENCE CTLIT PROJECT NO. GS06603.000-1 20 ffi Summary Logs of Explorat6ry FIG. 3 rP-2 5 0 LEGEND: 'TOPSOIL' CLAY, SILT, SANDY, MOIST. BROWN. CLAY, SILT, SANDY, SCATTERED GMVEL AND COBBLES, SLtcHTLy MO|ST, TAN. (CL, ML, CL-ML) INDICATES HAND DRIVE SAMPLE. INDICATES BULK SAMPLE FROM EXCAVATED SOILS- NOTES: EXPLOMTORY PITS WERE EXCAVATED WITH A TMCKHOE ON JULY 7 , 2021 . PITS WERE BACKFILLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EXPLOMTORY EXCAVATION OPERATIONS WERE COMPLETED, 2. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT FOUND IN EXPLORATORY PITS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING EXCAVATION. PVC PIPE WAS INSTALLED IN OUR PITS. PRIOR TO BACKFILLING, TO FACILITATE SUBSEQUENT CHECKS OF GROUNDWATER. 3.THESE LOGS ARE SUBJECTTO THE EXPLANATIONS LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THIS REPORT. F UJ LrJ TL IFI u,lo F F F UJ Lr.ll! -Fo-l!o 10 15 tr SLOPE OSHA PER SLOPE DRAIMGE coMPosm (IilRADRA|N 6000 oR EAUVAt.Sfi) k:-r 2-3', SHEENNG BELOW-GMDE WAI.I. SUP JOINT ATTACH PI.ASTIC TO FOUNDATION MINIMUM 8, MINIMUM OR BEYOND ENCASE PIPE IN GRA\EL DOEND AI'ID AT TEAST ENNRE TRENCH sGM, tNC. JABI.ONSIflRESIDENCE PROJECT NO. cSo6603.OOO_1 20 Foundation Wall Drain Concept 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOONNG (wHtcHEvER s cnemen) l.Ilgt!-_or4mErER PERFoRATED RtGtD DRATN ptpE. THE ptpE sHourD sE plAcED n e rniftEir wmr 4-g!olE gf AT tFASr 1,/S-|NCH DROP pER FOOT OF DMIN. 1/2'TO 1-t/2. SCREENED GRAVEL IATERAIIY TO FOONNCt/2 HAG'fi oF FooTtNc. Rtt WIIH GRAVE. NOTE !TE-BO.TI'O! OF T}IE gR/\IN-9[OUID BE AT tEASr 2 NCHES BELOW BOTTOM OFPoI'!NG.{T-I-HE NrcNESr.-POr'N AIID SLdiI_DOUI,ITYARD TO A FOS]ITI,E GRAUTYorrrLEr oR To A suMp wHEne wAirn-cmr-aE iiiilibvEo'#'p,LirnNe. Flg.4 tr NOTE: QININ SlOUt"D BE AT rEAsr 2 tNcHEs BELOTY BOTTOM OF FOONNG AT THE -- llclF_r potNT Ar,tD SLOPE OOWnWnno TO_A POSITVE GRAVTTY OUnEr oR TbA SUMP TTHERE IVATER CAI.I BE REIIOIED ET PUMPING. SLOPE MIMDRAIN GzOON OR EQUMATNT ATTACH PTASIIC SHEETING TO FOUNDATION wAttSLOPE osltA sGM, tNC. JABTONSKY RESIDENCE ProJect No. GSO66O3.OOO-1 20 //- CRAWY 3PlgE _/ PER FOONNC OR PAD VAPOR BARRIER E. MINIMUM OR BETOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING (mHtcHEvER ts cREATm) f]lrc! _QnunER PERFoR TTED DRATN ptpE. THEPIPE SHOULD BE PIACED IN A TRE}iC'i-ifITiH A ILOPE gr AT uASr l,/S-tNcH DROP pER FoOTOF DRAIN. Foundation Wall Drain Concept STRUSTRAL FLOOR *:i Fls.5 TABLE I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING PROJECT NO. GSo6603.000-120 ffi DESCRIPTION CLAY. SANDY (CL) SILT, SANDY (ML) PASSING NO.200 SIEVE (%\ 84 52 SOLUBLE SULFATES (o/o': ATTERBERG LIMITS PLASTICITY INDEX (o/oJ 17 NP LIOUID LIMIT (%\ 39 NL DRY DENSIry (PCF) MOISTURE CONTENT e\ DEPTH (FEET) 7-8 7.5-8.5 EXPLORATORY PIT TP.1 TP-2