Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutObservation of Excavation 05.09.16~tee HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL May9, 2016 Tom Jurmu 1902 County Road 214 Silt, Colorado 8 I 652 tomjurrnu@gmail.com H.:r\\Unh P.m I 11. v.(llLcl1111c.1I. lnL' 5020 Coum)· Ho ,J 15-4 Gkmc,)(1\1 Sprmi:,, ColllnJ11 81601 Pli11nL 970 9~; 793 ·~ F.1 970 9-45 Hi4 (.ffi ul hr :•w~hrl!L<l!Lch c11m Job No. 114 505A Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Residence, Lot 3, Dutch Major Exemption, 997 County Road 229, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Junnu: As requested, a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the excavation at the subject site on May 2, 2016 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated November 26, 2014, Job No. 114 505A. We understand that the proposed walkout basement was eliminated and the lower level will be slab-on-grade. At the time of our visit lo the site, the foundation excavntion had been cut in one level from I Vl to 3 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of medium stiff to stiff, sandy silt and clay. The exposed footing subgrade had been compacted. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample taken from the site, shown on Figure I, 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. No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are consistent with those previously encountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. An underdrain system should not be needed for the proposed slab-on-grade lower floor level and we recommend that it not be installed. Site grading around the house should drain away on all sides as described in the S111face Grading section of our previous report. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. Parker 303-841-7119 • ColorndoSprings 719-633-5562 • Sihenhornc 970468-1989 Tom Jurmu May9, 2016 Page2 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 u professional in this special field of practice should be consulced . If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL , lNC. Rev. by: SLP DEH/ksw attachment Figure 1 -Swell·Consolidation Test Results cc: Albright & Associates -Jack Albright iiack@albri ghHt >~ociatcs.com Job No . 114 SOSA Moisture Content ,., 12.1 percent Dry Density = 106 pcl Sample of: Sandy Silt and Clay From: Foot .ng Grade Near Southeast Corner of House 0 ---... i---i... 1 ~ .. ~ ~ -;...---" -,, • Compression j~ t _1-:.."-upon ~ 2 weltlng c I\ 0 ·u; ' UI 3 ~ a. [\p E 0 (.) 4 5 0 I 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE • ksl 114 505A ~ SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1 Hmiwcrih-Pawlak lioolechnfcal