HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Study Reportlfrn$ffiffi'lfd***5*ä* tæ*nty Road f 54
*le*iry*e¡d Spring*, üCI 8':#*1
pheine: {$Tü} S4S-?S8€
fax: {üTt} 945-Í}4*}4
*ma il : kaglenwo*dQkurulrlåsä.Ë#rrr
ån fñHoysr Oum*d Connpony *f år*w. k u r¡tå r't ¡ se} " mm
#ffic* Lo*aåi*¡w: *env*r {å{G}, P*rker, ü<¡lar**o Springs, Fq¡rl C*llins, *lenwe:od $g:rir:gs, a*<l $¡;mmit Çoung, *al*rndo
February 14,2023
Rocky Mountain Steel Structures
Attn:Jerry Rusch
353 East Vista Drive
silr, co 81652
{en$s€).s*$.tis.çiet Froject No. ?2-7-283
Subject: Update of Subssil Study, Proposed Residence, Lot 2û, High Aspen Raneh,
1743 High Aspen Ðrive, Garfield Caunty, Colorado
Dear Jerry:
As requested by Brian Kurtz, we have reviewed our previaus subsoil study report condueted on
the s*bject site fcrr s*itability of the curuent proposed development plan. The review was
performed in accordanee with our professional services agreement with Rocky Mountain Steel
Structures, dated April 12,2t22. Kumar & Associates Inc. pu'fonned a subsoil study for the
property and presentcd our ñndings in a report, dated August 8,2ü??, Project No. 22-7-283.
This update is based on a review of cu:rent project information, including updated proposed
construction infurmatjcn pravicled by Kurtz & Associates, Inc. on Febnrary 12,2A23.
Propased Development: Ths current proposed cons8uction includes develapment of the site
with a single-story residence over a lower walkout basement level. Construction is proposed to
includc steel-frame with structural floors over"an unfinished basement level up to l1 feet deep
with slab-on-grade floor. Struetural loads are anticipated ta be generully r-elatively light with
moderate paint loads of 25 t<¡ 35 kips.
Conclusions and RecommendstÍons: Although the current proposed residence construction
differs somewhat frcm ths previous proposed single-story building, the gcneral location of the
building and the antieipated strucfural lcads are sonsistent with those anticipated in our previous
report, and the recommendations presented in our August 8,2022 report can be used for the site
development and building foundation desigri. We should obserue completed building
excavations fì:r bearing conditions to confirm the reeommendaticns presented in our report.
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are lateraliy supported anel can be expected to
undergo anly a slight amount cf dBfiection should be desigriod for a lateral earth pressure
ccmputed on the basis of ân equivalent tluid unit weight of at least 5û pcf for backñll consisting
of the on-site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence and
can be expected to deflest suff?ciently to mobilize the full active earth pressure conditicn shculd
be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of ¿n equivalent fluid unit weight
of at ieast 40 pcf ftrr backfill consisting of the on-site soils. Backtill should bc devoid of topsoil,
organics and rock larger than about 6-inches.
;
I
i
i
I
i
Racky Mountain Steel Stfl¡ctures
February 14,2t23
Page 2
All foundation and retaining structures shoulcl be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and
surcharge pressures such as adjacent factings, traffic, construction materials and equiprnent. The
pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal
backfïll surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will
increase the lateral pressurs imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. ¡\n underdrain
should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure builclup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 9û% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill placed in pavement and
walkway areas shauld be compacted ta at least 95% of the maximum standarel Proctor density.
Care should be taken nat to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall, since
this could cause exeessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall
backfill shauld be expected, even if the rnaterial is placed correctly, and cc,uld result in distress to
facilities constructed cn the backfill"
The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall fcotings will be a combination of thc
sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against
the side af the f.ooting. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated
based on a caefficient of füetion of û.45. Passive prçssure of compacted hackfill against the
sides of tho footings can be ealculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 375 pcf" The
cacfficient of *iction and passive pressure values reccrnmended above assume ultimate soil
strength, Suitable factors of safety should be ineluded in the design ta lirnit the shain which will
orcur at the ultimatc skengfh, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against
the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum standard Proctar density at a moisture content near optimum.
Recommendations for floor slabs, foundation drains aud surface drainage presented in our
previous rðprrt sh<¡uld be feillowed for the proposed construction.
If you have any questians or need further assistance, piease call our office.
Sincerely,
Kturnwx" &,4sselai*Ées,
James H. Parsons,
Rev. by: StP
JHP/kac
cc: Kurtz & Associates, Iuc. - Brian Kurtz - hUg"tø-ç¡:Sl*gqr yake.ç*nt
r|
/t¡ l.ttvttu
Kr¡¡nar &,&ssoeiates, in*. o Froj*ct ldo. å2-?"283
l(+rtHffi ,ffifffir*r[Ë'**"
.ân Bnplrycc Orffi Corpany
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
phone: (970) 945-7988
fax: (970) 945-8454
email : kaglenwood@kumarusa.com
www.kumarusa.com
Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fott Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED STEEL BUILDING
HARKINS PROPERTY
LOT 20, HIGH ASPEN RANCH
1743 HIGH ASPEN DRIVE
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO.22-7-283
AUGUST 8,2022
PREPARED FOR:
ROCKY MOUNTAIN STEEL STRUCTURES
ATTN: JERRY RUSCH
353 EAST VISTA DRIVE
SILT, COLORADO 81652
rmss@sopris.net
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS
FIELD EXPLORATION
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
FLOOR SLABS
IINDERDRAIN SYSTEM ......
SURFACE DRATNAGE..........
LIMITATIONS
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
........-2 -
a
a
a-J-
,,.- 4.
...- 4 -
...- 5 -
5
I
......- I -
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-283
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed steel building to be located on
the Harkins Property, Lot20, High Aspen Ranch, 1743 }{igh Aspen Drive, Garfield County,
Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop
recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our
agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Rocky Mountain Steel Structures dated
April12,2022.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field
exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or
swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory
testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable
pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during
this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical
engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed building will be a single-story, metal frame and steel skin structure with a slab-on-
grade floor. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between
about 2 to 4 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of
construction.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above,
we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site was vacant at the time of our field exploration. The site terrain is variable with
slopes ranging from gentle to moderate generally down to the south as indicated by the contour
lines shown on Figure l. The elevation difference across the proposed building site is about
3 feet and about 70 feet across the property. Vegetation consists of sagebrush, flowers, grass and
weeds in the building area with scrub oak on the surrounding slopes.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 22-7-283
a
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 7, 2022. Two exploratory borings
were drilled at the client designated locations shown on Figure I to evaluate the subsurface
conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered
by a truck-mounted CME-458 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar
& Associateso Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with l%-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers
were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30
inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-I586.
The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the
subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are
shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our
laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The
subsoils encountered, below about 2to3 feet oftopsoil, consist ofabout 1 to 3 feet ofvery stiff,
sandy clay with gravel overlying dense, clayey sandy gravel with scattered basalt cobbles and
possible boulders down to the maximum explored depth of lTYzfeet. Drilling in the dense
granular soils with auger equipment was diffìcult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling
refusal was encountered in the deposit.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture
content and density and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on
a relatively undisturbed drive sample of the sandy clay, presented on Figure 4, indicate low
compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading and a minor expansion
potential when wetted. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples
(minus l%-inch fraction) of the coarse granular subsoils are shown on Figure 5. The laboratory
testing is summarized in Table 1.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were moist
below the topsoil.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The upper clay soils possess low bearing capacity and low to moderate settlement potential. The
underlying gravel soils possess moderate bearing capacity and typically low settlement potential.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-283
-3-
At assumed excavation depths, we expect the exposed soils to consist of sandy clay in shallower
cut areas and clayey gravel in deeper cut areas. Foundation elements that transition between
different bearing materials will have a risk of differential movement due to the differing bearing
conditions. If the proposed building is sensitive to movement, we recommend removal of the
clay soils and placing the foundation entirely on the underlying gravel soils. In areas where clay
soils are sub-excavated, the foundation bearing level can be reestablished with structural fill or
the foundation bearing level can be extended down to the underlying gravel soils.
DESIGN RE COMMENDATIONS
FOLTNDATIONS
Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of
the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing
on the natural soils.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing
foundation system.
l) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for an
allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect
3)
settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will
be about I inch or less.
The footings should have a minimum width of l8 inches for continuous walls and
2 feet for isolated pads.
Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with
adequate soil cover above ther bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement
of foundations at least 36 iúhes below exterior grade is typically used in this
area. ,/
Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies and resist potential differential movement such as by assuming an
unsupported length of at least 14 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining
structures (ifany) should also be designed to resist alateral earth pressure
corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for the onsite
granular soils as backfill.
The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the fìrm natural soils. The exposed soils in
footing area should then be moisture adjusted to near optimum and compacted. If
water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before
concrete placement.
2)
> glot0
-{b 4)
s)
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 22-7'283
-4-
A representative ofthe geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade
construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be
separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained
vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage
cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the
designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4-inch layer of free-
draining gravel should be placed beneath slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should
consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50%o retained on the No. 4 sieve and lessfhan2Yo
passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fîll materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95o/o of maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-
site granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
We recommend vapor retarders conform to at least the minimum requirements of ASTME1745
Class C material. Certain floor types are more sensitive to water vapor transmission than others.
For floor slabs bearing on angular gravel or where flooring system sensitive to water vapor
transmission are utilized, we recommend a vapor barrier be utilized conforming to the minimum
requirements of ASTM 81745 Class A material. The vapor retarder should be installed in
accordance with the manufacturers' recommendations and ASTM 81643'
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in
the area and where clayey soils are present that local perched groundwater can develop during
times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a
perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls,
crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by
an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above
the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of
excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum l%oto
a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should
6)
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 22-7-283
5
contain less than 2%o passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50olo passing the No. 4 sieve and have a
maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least lVz feet deep and covered
with filter fabric such as Mirafi l40N or 160N.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all
times after the building has been completed:
l) Inundation ofthe foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided
during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas
and to at least 90/o of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface sumounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to
drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum
slope of 6 inches in the first l0 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of
3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be
covered with filter fabric and capped with about 2 feet of the on-site finer-graded
soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least
10 feet from foundation walls.
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied.
The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of
construction and our experience in the area. 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. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the
subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so
that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project N0.22-7-283
-6-
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not
responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we
should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and
monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verifr that the recommendations
have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis
or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation
of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of
the geotechnical engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
.
Kuna*r & Åssçeåatese läc.
p"rrrtf'X ?*a¿*¿¡aa,¿
James H. Parsons, P.E.
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak,
JHPlkac
15222(t
Kumar &Assçciates, ln*. ø Pmject No. 22"7"283
"...\"-*Ç$Þ'
o
*.tos
o
NON
N90.00'00'E
1 TRAIL R
:ô .os
I
dtôo
\**
8t40
BORING 1 BORING 2
J
É.l--
ba
I
1743 HIGH ASPEN DRIVE
LOT 20 HIGH ASPEN RANCH
50 0 50 100
APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET
8130
22-7 -283 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 1
ı
Ê
a
BORING 1
EL. 81 37'
BORÍNG 2
E1.8135'
0 0
e/12
12/12
q
8/6, 20/6
WC=39.8
DD=78 550/s
22-l
I
/6,50/1
t-IJ
LrltL
I-l-fLt!ô
t0 50/6 10
t-
t¡JtdtL
ITt-IL
L¡Jô
4s/6, 50/5
15 50/ 1
15
20 20
WC= 1 6.8
+4=23
-2OO=43
22-7 -283 Kumar & Associates LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fis. 2
6
Ê
¡
LEGEND
TOPSOIL; ORGANIC CLAY, SLIGHTLY GRAVELLY, SANDY, FIRM, VERY MOIST TO MOIST, DARK
GRAY BROWN.
CLAY (CL); SANDY, SILTY, SCATTERED GRAVEL, VERY STIFF, MOIST, SLIGHTLY CALCAREOUS,
MIXED BROWN. MEDIUM PLASTICITY.
GRAVEL (CC); S¡NOV, CLAYEY, SCATTERED COBBLES, POSSIBLE BOULDERS, BASALT
FRAGMENTS, DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST TO MOIST, MIXED BROWN, SLIGHTLY CALCAREOUS.
!
I
DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
DRTVE SAMPLE, 1 3/8-|NCH r.D. SPL|T SPOON STANDARD PENETRATTON TEST.
-l otsruReeD BULK sAMPLE
I
I
q712 DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES TIIAT I BLOWS OF A 14O-POUND HAMMER-/ '- FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE THE CALIFORNIA OR SPT SAMPLER 12 INCHES
I pR¡crtclL AUcER REFUSAL.
I
NOTES
1, THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JUNE 7,2022 WITH A 4_INCH_DIAMETER
CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT POWER AUGER.
2. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED AT THE LOCATIONS DESIGNATED BY THE CLIENT
3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATION BETWEEN
CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE
ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.
5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (pcf) (ASTM D2216);+4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASTM D6913);
-2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM Dl140).
22-7 -283 Kumar & Associates LEGEND AND NOTES Fig.3
I
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy
FROM:Boringl@4'
WC = 39.8 %, DD = 78 pcÍ
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
t
)
lhcta toat ra¡ulta qpply only to thc
soñplcs lcded. thê tê3t¡ng rêpod
lholl not bé r€prcduc6d. .xc€Þt In
lull. w¡thout thâ rdtt n approvol of
Kumor ond fosocloLr, lnc. Sw6ll
Con&l¡dotioñ tdt¡nq p.dorñôd ¡ñ
ûccordoncê r¡th AsIil 0-{5+6.
1
\o
JJ
l¡J
=an
I
zotr
Õ
=olnz.o()
0
1
2
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10 r00
22-7 -283 Kumar & Associates SWELL_CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4
Ë
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
ÍIXE READINGS
24 HRS 7 HRS
u.s.
P
100
90
80
70
60
50
Æ
30
20
to
o
o
10
20
30
40
50
60
7A
ao
90
I
&
too
.125 2.O
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
r52
CLAY TO SILT COBBLES
GRAVEL 23 % SAND
LIQUID LIMIT
SAMPLE OF: Cloyey Sondy Grovel
34%
PLASTIC¡TY INDEX
SILT AND CLAY 43 %
FROM: Borlng 1 O 7' & l0' (Comblnad)
fh.!ô i.st r.!ult. dpply only lo lh.
somplrs whlch wlrc l..lad. Th!tlrllng r.porl shall not b. r.produc.d,
6xc€pl ln full, wlthoul lho wrllt€nqpprovql of Kumqr & Ar¡ooiols!, lnc.
Slôvr onolysls lcallng l! pcrfom.d ln
occordonci w¡th ASTM 06913, ASTM 07928,
ASTM C136 qñd/or ASTM Dll,lo.
SAND GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
22-7 -283 Kumar & Associates GRADAÏION TEST RESULTS Fis. 5
l{+rt
-z
rllE&åssıtrr,lnc.6
Ge0teEhnical and Matsrials Engineer$
ând Ënvironmenhl Srlênt¡st$
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
No.22-7-283
ÀTÎFRBFRG I I',ITSSAMPLILOCAT|Oil GRADATON
PERCEI'¡T
PASSING NO.
200 stEVE
LIQUID LIMIT
(ot"l tot"l
PLASTIC
INDEX
lñ.fì
UNCONFINED
COMPRËSSIVE
STRENGTH SOILWPEBORING
lfrì
OEPfi
l0Ál
NATURAL
[IOISTURE
CONIENT
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
locll
GRAVEL
(:/"1
SAI{D
(%)
Sandy ClayI439.8 78
7 &.10
Combined 16.8 23 34 43 Clayey Sandy Gravel
AUTHORIZATION TO SIGN BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND UTILITIES DOCUMENTS
August 23,2022
f, Stephen J Harkins, owner of the property located at 1743 High Aspen Dr, Glenwood Springs,
CO (lot #20, High Aspen Ranch Development), authorize Jerry Rusch, general building
contractor, Rocky Mounta¡n Steel Structures, to act as my agent to sign all Garfield County, CO
property improvement/building permit applications and all utilities applications/documents
directly related to lot improvements and construction of a new house on the property
described above.
Ste-f>4*e.w J Ha,dcja,<,
Stephen J Harkins
Owner of property located at
7743High Aspen Dr, Glenwood Springs, CO
?12312022
Date