Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutObservation of Excavation 07.28.20151 r July 28, 2015 Kiel Williams 33 Cardinal Lane Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 ( ail.l_willir,rrr�rr'r,��rirril.���m) Job No. 115 335A Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Residence, Lot I5, Callicotte Ranch, Sopris Lane, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Williams: As requested, a representative ofHepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the excavation at the subject site on July 22 and 27, 2015 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. The services were performed in accordance with our agreement for professional engineering services to you, dated July 22, 2015. Tlie proposed residence will be a two story wood frame structure over a crawlspace. The attached garage will have a slab -on -grade floor. Foundations were designed for an assumed allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. At the time of our initial visit to the site, the foundation excavation was underway and the northeast comer of the house had been excavated along with a shallow pit near the southeast building corner. The exposed soils consisted of stiff, sandy silty clay typical of the area. Samples of the soils were taken for laboratory testing. Upon our second visit to the site, the foundation excavation was complete and had been cut in one level from 1 to 5 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of stiff, sandy silty clay. The clay soils in the deeper cut areas on the north side of the house were whitish brown. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on samples taken from the site, shown on Figure 1, indicate the soils have low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting with a minor collapse potential (settlement under constant load) when wetted. Kiel Williams July 28, 2015 Page 2 No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. Considering the conditions exposed in the excavation and the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf can be used for support of the proposed residence. The exposed soils tend to compress when wetted and there could be some post -construction settlement of the foundation if the bearing soils become wet and precautions must be taken to keep the bearing soils dry. Footings should be a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose and disturbed soils in footing areas should be removed and the bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported Iength of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf for on-site soil as backfill. A perimeter foundation drain should be provided to prevent temporary buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the crawlspace walls and prevent wetting of the crawlspace but only on the uphill side of cut depths of 4 to 5 feet. An impervious membrane, such as 20 mil PVC should be provided below the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. Structural fill placed within floor slab areas is proposed to be "pit run" gravel compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill placed around the structure should consist of the onsite soils compacted to at least 90% of standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content and the surface graded at a minimum 10% to prevent ponding within at least 10 feet of the building. Landscape that requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, and sprinkler heads should not be located within 10 feet of the foundation. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and do not include subsurface exploration to evaluate the subsurface conditions within the loaded depth of foundation influence. This study is based on the assumption that soils beneath the footings have equal or better support than those exposed. The risk of foundation movement may be greater than indicated in this report because of possible variations in the subsurface conditions. In order to reveal the nature and extent of variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation, drilling would be required. It is possible the data obtained by subsurface Job No. 115 335A GeStech Kiel Williams July 28, 2015 Page 3 exploration could change the recommendations contained in this letter. 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. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. ;a rt244 43 � W'45 t Rev. by: SLPA`FS'-----'", C� DEH/ksw attaclunent Figure 1— Swell -Consolidation Test Results cc: RM Construction Blake Piland blakc(c buildwithrm.coni Job No. 115 335A Gecgtech Compression 4 Compression % 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 Moisture Content = 7.7 percent Dry Density = 97 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Footing Grade at North Side of House Compression upon wetting 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 100 0 Moisture Content = 9.3 Dry Density = 89 Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Footing Grade at Southeast Comer of Hous@ percent pcf °N\\C_______ompression upon wetting 0.1 115 335A 1.0 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf H Hepworth—Patrlak Geotechnical SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 100 Figure 1