HomeMy WebLinkAboutObservation of Excavation 05.29.2015I i, ¡".r,,riìt-l'.rr: i.rk t.ìt-,,¡.'¡l¡¡¡¡,. ,1. ¡,-,-i,.ljll t.i*u:r:i |ir,.;.Ì Ii-l
{, ì !r :rg ir', I }1.ii ¡rt.. t.-ì rl, ¡r,,.1,, S I r'.rtl I
l'iì,rn! : rJ;!)-i.)i i- ;tii¡
HEPIVORTH-PAWLAK G EOTEC I.{ N ICAL
l,',, r, rl i".. -)_i i_.,ì.] 1.]
rrr::'il: h:.:t,'il hl.a(r]ìr'clr..r :tì!
May29,2015
Doolen Construction
Attn: Dave Doolan
3838 County Road 243
New Castle, Colorado 81647
clavç, rlgolë¡(A¿ysheg, qtl$
Job No. ltí Z2BA
subject: observation of Excavatiofl, proposed Bath House, Turtle Tracks
Resort,36l CountyRoad 3ll, Silt, Colorado
DearMr. Doolan:
As requested, a repiesentative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the
excavation at the sudect site on May 2I,2015 to evaluate the soiis exposed for
foundation support. The fîndings of our observations and recommendations for thefoundation design are presented in this report. The services rtrere performed in
accordance with our agreement forprofessional services to you, OãteC Uay ZO,Z0lS.
The proposed bath house is 20' by 30' in size and designed to rest on seven, 2 footdiameter'bigfoot'pads supporting 10" diameter 3' talfconcrete columns. The
'bigfoot' pads are.reportedly resting on the native ground,
At the time of our visit to the site, the footing location in the middle of the southwest
wall 1a¡ exposed for observation. The remaining footing areas were covered with fiIl
around the "Big Foot" forms and the sonotubes had rebarin them. Soils at the
observed footing location consisted of very silty sand. An area excavated
immediately adjacen! to this footing location showed free water at a depth 3yz feet
below the proposed footing elevation. Relatively d.ense sandy gravel was observed atthis depth also. Results of swell-consolidation testing performãd on a sample taken
from the observed footing location, shown on Figure l, itdirut. the soils häve low to
moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting
considering the conditions exposed at the singre footing location (middle of
southwest side) and the nature of the proposed construciion, *prruà footings placed on
the undisturbed natural sandy soil designed for an allowable sãil bearing pi.r*ut" or
2,000 psf can be used for support of the proposed bath house. The
"*pJråa
soils tend
to compress under load and there could be some post-construction setilement of the
foundation. Footings should be a minimum width of 2 feet for colum¡s. Loose and
disturbed soils and existing fill in footing areas should be removed and the bearing
H
Parker l0l-841-7119'CaloracloS¡rrings ?19-633-5562 r Silvemhome g70-1168"lggg
Doolan Construction
May 29, 2015
Page 2
level extended down to thc undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be
ryoyi{9! with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevations for ãost proiection.
Backfill placed around the structure should be compacted and the surface þO"O toprevent ponding within at least l0 feet of the building.
The recommendations submitted in this letter are bæed on or¡r observation of the soils
exposed within the single foundation footing location only and do not include
subsurface exploration to evaluate the subsurface conditions within the loaded depthof foundation influence. This study is based on the assumption that soils beneath the
othe'r footings have equal or better support than those expósed. The risk of foundation
Po]/ement may be greater than indicated in this report because of possible variationsin the subsurface conditions. [n order to reveal the nature and extEnt of variations inthe subsurface conditions below the excavation, drilling would be required. It ispossible the data obtained by subsurface exploration
"or.l¿
change thã
recommendations contained in this letter. Our services do not iñclude determining thepresence' prevention or possibility of mold or other biologícal contaminants ltUOËC¡developing in the fliture. If the client is concerned about tvtOgC, then a profàssio¡al
in this special field of practice should be consulted.
If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerel¡
HEPWORTH _ PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Thomas C Brunner, StaffEngineer
Reviewed by:
Daniel E Hardin, P. E.
TCB/ksw
attachment Figure I -Test Results
cc:Garfield County Building Dept. - Jirn Wilson (jwilson@garfield-countv.cornì
I(urtz & Associates - Brian Kurtz tt ulte*gi,r.ffi
JobNo. l15228A
Gåçtech
Moisture Content = 1g,i þercentD_ry_Density: 106 þði--200 - 47%
Sample of: Very SiltySand
l-rom: Center Footing, Footing Grade, Southwest
Side of
il
il
lt
(.Compressionupon
wetting
il(
il
1 ,
I
I
il
I
lt
\oo\
=o'øc
CÚo-xllj
I
c
.9(t,
U'o
o_
Eo(J
0
2
3
4
10
APPLIED PHESSURE - ksf
0.1 1.0 100
1152284 SWELL-CONSOLI DATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1