HomeMy WebLinkAboutEngineer's Design Plans and Spec Sheet-Original 07.06.2023*SGM
COMwww.sofïì"tnc
February 7,2Q23
PaulSalmen, M.D.
1504 Midland Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE:Salmen OWTS
1506 Midland Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
OWTS Design
Dear Paul,
The purpose of this letter is to transmit the design regarding the onsite waste water treatment system
(OWTS) for you to be located at 1506 Midland Avenue, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Assessor parcel
number 21.851.6204001. The property is accessed by a shared driveway north and west of the property
off of Midland Avenue. The address is yet to be determined. The specific location of the property in
question is located in Figure 1.
*f
*{
I 1 r:,5 I 1-il !.. -ríl 1?
;
l
Ê
]*æ f
tigure 1- Vieinity Map
This onsite wastewater treatment system is intended to serve a new four bedroom house. As you will see
on the drawings and information attached, the home will be provided with a gravity service from the
home to a minimum sized 1,250 gallon septic tank that can be either the standard poly tank (manufacturer
Accounl i.::j'j:il
ûwne¡ j å-i,1Ë'.,/ PE.: ;lJ Ci-{ F A.l!1 i!i llU;i
Physicol Add¡ess I ¡c' Ð,ûicr ¿
1: tr .!ti,!lU lrtrts 1¡!:lr ¡ ¡L/
Moiling Address l5¡l'¿ l;11ú:ål'iD A\,r: '31:' ,',f ar'irÛ
: ts r. :: . L L, -r ¿t,t - !t,,::ù
Acres,J.i,2Í
20.19 Mill l"evy /i,iti3t--,
PrH 21851úã¡4{l0r
E¡.p-r tIa Ëff€5 El$r.f
T
GLËNWOOD SPRlNG5 I lB West Sixth St, Suiie 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO Bló01 | 970.945.1O04
ESGM
www.Sgfn-lnc.com
provided) or a precast concrete septic tank. From the septic tank, the effluent supernatant will be
transported to an Advantex Treatment System (AX25RT) to provide a treatment level 3 effluent prior to
being pumped to a soil treatment area consisting of two 76 foot long chambered trenches. The
chambered trenches are noted as lnfiltrator Quick 4 units with 19 units per trench. Standard end caps are
proposed on the end of each trench along with inspection ports/air vents serving a dual purpose. The
piping from the home to the tank and between the tank and treatment units shall be a minimum diameter
of 4" diameter ASTM 3034 PVC. Locations of the new tank, treatment unit and infiltrator trenches will be
specified in the attached drawing plan of this package in an area located just south and east of the
proposed building honoring property line, building, and river setbacks.
The desktop research that was performed to gain insight on the specific soils parameters utilizing the
NRCS WebSoil survey identified that the on site soils are consistent with the Ascalon-Pena complex which
is a sandy clay loam. The exhibits attached to this letter identify the information that was researched to
help determine the expected LTAR (Long Term Acceptance Rate) for the STA (SoilTreatment Area) for the
design of the new disposal field.
Exhibits are listed as follows:
L, Exhibit A:
2. Exhibit B:
3. Exhibit C:
NRCS Soils Report
Kumar and Associates Sub Soil Study of a/9/20
OWTS Design and Details
Based researched data and Kumar's site investigation, the on-site soils are a Type R-2 Sandy Loam with a
LTAR of 0.60 gallons per day per square foot for TLl" (Treatment Level L). However, by using an
Advantex Treatment Unit to achieve a Treatment Level 3 effluent quality, the LTAR for this site and the
soil treatment area sizing is 0.80 gallons per day per square foot. With this data, the STA (Soil Treatment
Area) is 656 square feet. Because we will incorporate the use of lnfiltrators chambers and pressure
dosing we have employed the size adjustment factors (for use of chambers only) and reduced the trench
cizp hv thp followins:
For using chambers, a 0.7 factor is applied, thus resulting is an area of 459 sf. This results in two
infiltrator Quick4 chamber trenches of dimension 76' in length. When adding end caps, the overall
length is78.7lf. The attached calculations identify the thought process in the design of this system
Because this system is in the Type R-2 soils, a 2%foot depth of sand with an effective size ranging from
0.15 to 0.6 nrm, a unifornrity coefficient of less than or equal to 7.0 and passing l"he #200 sieve being less
than or equal to 3.0 will be required to be placed under the lnfiltrator Quick 4 chambers. You will also
note that for the lower trench, given its proximity to the 1:L rock faced slope, the downhill side of the
trench will need to have a 10 mil PVC liner installed to mitigate the potential upper soil wetting (through
GLENWOOD SPRINGS l lB West Sixth St, Suite 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO Bló0,l | 970.945.10O4
ESGM
www.sg m- rn c. co m
capillary rise) of the native soils. The bottom of the sand below the chambers will be located at an
elevation of 5772.5 which, when the sand is placed, puts the elevation of the disposed effluent at a
depth of 54" below the bottom of the adjacent toe of L:L rock faced slope.
The design and layout of the system is shown on the attached drawing following this letter
Upon your receipt and review, if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call
Respectfully,
SGM-lnc.
W
Jefferey S. Simonson, PE
Principal
äs1$2
2/7/23
GLENWOOD SPRINGS I lB West Sixth St, Suite 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO 81ó01 I 970.945.1004
OWTS Design Report and Calculations
Client PaulSalmen Project Location;
1504 Midland Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
1506 Midland Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO
Date 18-Sep-20
Flow Data for the OWTS Design
l" Home Use (4 Bedroom Home)525
Total=525
For Home Use, 2 persons per bedroom and 75 gallons per day per person, BOD5 = 0.06
#/person/day for up to 3 bedrooms and L person per bedroom there after
Home Use 525 gpd 0.48 #/day
Totals:525 gpd 0.48 #/day
Soil Data for the OWTS
2 Data from Kumar tact¡le soil analysis:Classified as a Sandy Loam, Soil Type R-2
At a depth of 8', neither bedrock or groundwater are expected to be encountered
Data from the web soil survey indicates an Ascalon-Pena complex exists,
Given the consideration of all data, the Long Term Acceptance Rate to use is 0.8 gallons/sf/day
for treatment level 1 (TLl)
For Treatment Level 3 (TL3) use a loading rate of 0.80 gallons /sîldaV
(in order to achieve TL3, install Advantex AX25RT - 38)
Septic Tank Sizing
3 Flow calculated from above 525 gpd
48 hour detention time for septic tank sizing;Volume= L050 gpd
lnstall a 1-250 gallon tank.
Sizing of Absorption Field or Soil Treatment Area
5 Going with a soil type R-2 and Treatment Level 3, LTAR =0.8 clsf/d
For a pressure dosed system, size adjustment factor is 1.0 for a bed configuration
For a gravity system, the size adjustment factor shall be 1.2 f or a bed configuration
For a gravity trench system, adjustment factor = 1.0
For a pressure dosed trench system, adjustment factor = 0.8
For use of chambers: size adustment factor is 0.7 - (Yes)
STA= Flow/LTAR 656 square feet (unfactored)
For a chamber system, adjust size to 0.7*656=
For pressure dosed system, adjust size to 1.0*459-
For a chamber system in a trench configuration, length=
(this would equate to 2 runs of 76 feet each)
459 square feet
459 square feet
L53 feet
With the effective length of a Quick4 chamber at 4', use L9 chambers per trench for two trenches
(total length of each trench is thus 76 feet long for chambers only, and 78.6 feet with end caps)
D¡schargeAssembly Size
llanspórt Length
fransport Pipe clâss
ltâr1spôtt Ltnê srzê
D¡6tributing Valve lModol
l\¡ax Eleval¡on Lift
[¡an¡fold Length
[4anllold Plpê Class
l\¡anifold P¡pe Size
NilmhFr ñf I âlêrâls nêr eêll
Laleral Length
Laleral Pipe Class
Laleral P¡pe Size
Or¡fce Size
O[¡fce Spacing
Res¡dual Head
F¡ow Meter
'Add-on' Friction Losses
Calculations
Pump Selection for a Pressurized System - S¡ngte Famity Residence projoct
Salmen Residence
PürilnêtorB
1.00
12t)
40
1.0u
None
40
1.00
2
74
40
1.00
1ta
5
5
None
0
a.')
\:
:'
I
Net Discharge (gpm)
¡nchês
rnches
leel
feet
feet
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
inches
feet
inches
inches
feet
feet
inches
feel
o
tul!
IoF
d(gor
.c
E(É
tr
o
tú
Ê
Minimum Flow Rate per Or¡fìce
Number ofOrifices per Zone
Totai Flow Rate per Zone
Number of Later¿ls per Zone
o/o Flow Differentiaì 1sl/Last Orìfìce
fransporl Veloc¡ty
Frictional Heed Losses
0.43
30
13.2
2
5.8
4.9
gpm
gpm
o/.
fps
Loss through Discharge
Loss in Trånsport
Loss through Valve
Loss in l\4an¡fold
Loss in Laterals
Loss through Flowmeter
'Add-on' Friction Losses
feel
feet
feet
f€ot
feet
feet
feet
7.4
11.1
0.0
0.2
o.7
0.0
0.0
Pipe Volumes
Vol ofTransport Line
Vol of Manifold
Vol of Laterals per Zone
Total Volume
5.4
0.4
6.6
12.4
gals
9als
gals
gals
50
M¡nimum Pump Requ¡rements
Design Flow Rate 13.2 gpm
Total Dynam¡c Head 49.8 feet
0
40 16
PumpDatâ Legend
System CuÍve:
Pump Curve:
Pump Optimd¡ange:
operafiñþoinr:
Desiftoint:
PVA1005 High Head EmueDt PuDp
'10 GPt\¡, 1/2HP
115V 1ø
PF1005 High Head Efiluent Pump
10 GPt\¡, 1/2HP
1151230V 1ø 60H2.200V 3ø 60Hz
PF1 007 Hiqh Head Efiluent Pump
10 cP¡/i, 3/4HP
23OV 1ø 60H2. 200V 3ø 60Hz
PF'1010 High Head Efìuent Pump
,IO GPI\¡ 1HP
23(N 1Ø 6o{z,20ov 3Ø 60Hz
USDA
-
United States
Department of
Agriculture
NRCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultu ral Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Rifle Area, Golorado,
Parts of Garfield and
Mesa Counties
lttttt 1
March 12,2020
Preface
soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cäses. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
porta l/n rcs/mai n/soils/hea lth/) a n d certa in conservation and en g i n eeri n g
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
scientist (http://wrvw.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs1 42p2_05395 1 ).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment stations, and localagencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
lnformation about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parentalstatus, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because allor a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 lndependence Avenue, S.W, Washington, D.C.20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Gontents
Preface.......
Soil Map...... . ................................................................,.......
Soil Map (Salmen Residence)..
Legend........
Map Unit Legend (Salmen Residence)..
Map Unit Descriptions (Salmen Residence)..
Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties.
7-Ascalon-Pena complex, 6 to 25 percent slopes..........
67-Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, steep..............
73-Water...
Soil lnformation forAll Uses.....
Soil Reports
Soil Physical Properties..
Physical Soil Properties (Salmen Residence)..
Engineering Properties (Salmen Residence)..
.2
.5
..6
..7
..9
o
11
11
12
14
15
15
15
15
20
4
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
5
Éı
*'f70 æ9500
2S560 MlD æ9580 290590
lv¿p Scale: 1:604 if prin:ed on A landscaæ (11' x 8.5") sheet.
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map (Salmen Residence)
29610 M 29æ0
2S10
2S60 æ@0 Mt)æ€650 æs60 2çS80
31. 32 11' \
39. 32'9' Fl
EI
Þ
Ê
a
HN
E
È
Iç
Fg
390 32' 11' N
39ô 32 9" N
o
R
B
F
Ð
a
s
g
ap
29Sm 2S6€0
=
ı
Ê.
-Meters
0510n30
ò
RN
A 0 1m 150
6
lv¿ppnrjectc,ßr Webf4ercator Comer@ord¡nat6:WGS84 Edgetics: UÌMZone13NWGS84
MN 2960 2ffi40 ?50 2g€o 2ffi¡0
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garf¡eld and
Mesa Counties
SurveyArea Data: Vers¡on 12, Sep 13,2019
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 24, 2015-Nov
2,2015
The orthophoto or other base map on wh¡ch the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
Area of lnterest (AOl)
Area of lnterêst (AOl)
Soils
I Soil Map Unit Polygons
#*. Soil Map Unit Lines
E soil Mãp unit Points
Spec¡al Point Features
{S¡ Blowout
H Borrow Pit
X Clay Spot
":) Closed Depression
,þí Gravel Pit
-'. Gravelly Spot
* Landfill
J". Lava Flow
,LL Marsh or swamp
:lî: Mine or Quarry
Õ Miscellaneous \ iater
ü\ Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
+ Sal¡ne Spot
..: Sendy Spot
*. Severely Eroded Spot
',. Sinkhole
i; Slide or SIìP
ø Sodic Spot
{* Spoil Area
¡, Stony Spot
.î Very Stony Spot
I Wet Spot
.,.:, other
.) Special Line Features
Water Features
-. Streams and Cenals
Transportat¡on
¡-¡.a Rails
.e lnterstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
I Aerial Photography
7
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrast¡ng soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
of unit boundaries be evident.
I
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend (Salmen Residence)
7
67
Ascalon-Pena complex, 6 to 25
percent slopes
Torriorthents-Rock outcrop
complex, steep
Water
11 76.9o/ô
2.0o/o
21 .1o/o i
r00.0%
73
Totals for Area of lnterest
Map Unit Descriptions (Salmen Residence)
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. lf included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impracticalto make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
I
Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOIMap Unit Symbol
0.3
1.5
0.0
Custom Soil Resource Report
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. lf intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts abourt the r-rnit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a sorT sen'es. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into so/ phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An associaflon is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
materialand support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Gounties
7-Ascalon-Pena complex, 6 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jnz9
Elevation: 5,000 to 6,500 feet
Farmland classification; Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Ascalon and similar so¡ls: 65 percent
Pena and similar soils: 25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and fransecfs of the mapunit
Description of Ascalon
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, valley sides
Down-slope shape: Linear, convex
Across-s/ope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 5 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 5 to 30 inches: sandy clay loam
H3 - 30 to 60 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
S/ope: 6 to 12 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage c/ass: Well drained
Runoff class; Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depthtowatertable: More than 80 inches
Frequency of f/oodrng: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.5 inches)
lnterpretive groups
La n d ca p a b i I ity cl assif i catio n ( i rri g ated,): N one specif ied
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecologicalsife: Deep Loam (R048AY292CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Pena
Setting
Landform : Valley sides, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-s/ope shape: Convex
Parent material: Calcareous alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 6 inches: stony loam
H2 - 6 to 12 inches.' very stony loam
H3 - 12 to 60 inches.' very stony sandy loam
PropeÉies and qualities
S/ope: 6 to 25 percent
De¡tth to restr¡Çtive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage c/ass; Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.60 to 6.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.1 inches)
lnterpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological slfe: Loamy Slopes (R048AY303CO)
Hydric sorT rafing: No
67-Torrio rthents-Rock o utcro p com plex, stee p
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jnz5
Elevation: 5,800 to 8,500 feet
Mean annualprecipitation; 10 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 46 degrees F
Frost-free period: 80 to '105 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Torrioñhents, steep, and similar soils: 60 percent
Rock outcrop, steep: 25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit
Description of TorrioÉhents, Steep
Setting
Landform: Mountainsides
Landform position (two-dimensionaf: Footslope
Landfarm position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, base slope
Down-slope shape: Concave, convex
Across-s/op e shape: Concave, convex
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Parent material: Stony, basaltic alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 4 inches: variable
H2 - 4 to 30 inches: fine sandy loam
H3 - 30 to 34 inches: unweathered bedrock
PropeÉies and qualities
S/ope; 15 to 70 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 4 to 30 inches to lithic bedrock
Natural drainage c/ass; Well drained
Runoff class; High
Capacity of the most limiting layerto transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of f/oodrng: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches)
lnterpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7 e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Rock Outcrop, Steep
Setting
Landform : Mountainsides
La n dfo rm po sit io n (th re e-d i m e n s io n a I ) : F ree face
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-s/ope shape: Convex
Typical profile
Hl - 0 to 60 inches: unweathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
S/ope: 15 to 70 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 0 inches to paralithic bedrock
Runoff class; Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr)
Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 0.0 inches)
lnterpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated) : 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
73-Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Esfimafes are based on observations, descriptions, and fransecfs of the mapunit.
14
II'
Soil lnformation for All Uses
Soil Reports
The Soil Reports section includes various formatted tabular and narrative reports
(tables) containing data for each selected soil map unit and each component of
each unit. No aggregation of data has occurred as is done in reports in the Soil
Properties and Qualities and Suitabilities and Limitations sections.
The reports contain soil interpretive information as well as basic soil properties and
qualities. A description of each report (table) is included.
Soil Physical Properties
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil physical
properties. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Soil physical properties are measured or inferred from direct
observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil physical properties include
percent clay, organic matter, saturated hydraulic conductivity, available water
capacity, and bulk density.
Physical Soil Propert¡es (Salmen Residence)
This table shows estimates of some physical characteristics and features that affect
soil behavior. These estimates are given for the layers of each soil in the survey
area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and
similar soils.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Particle size is the effective diameter of a soil particle as measured by
sedimentation, sieving, or micrometric methods. Particle sizes are expressed as
classes with specific effective diameter class limits. The broad classes are sand,
silt, and clay, ranging from the larger to the smaller.
Sand as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.05 millimeter to 2
millimeters in diameter. ln this table, the estimated sand content of each soil layer is
given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters
in diameter.
S/f as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.002 to 0.05
millimeter in diameter. ln this table, the estimated silt content of each soil layer is
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters
ln diameter.
Clay as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002
millimeter in diameter. ln this table, tlre estinraterJ clay content r:f eaclr soil layer is
given as a percentage, by weight, uf tlre sr.¡il nlaterial that is less than 2 millimeters
in diameter.
The content of sand, silt, and clay affects the physical behavior of a soil Particle
size is important for engineering and agronomic interpretations, for determination of
soil hydrologic qualities, and for soil classification.
The amount and kind of clay affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil and
the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink-
swell potential, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), plasticity, the ease of soil
dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay in a soil also
affect tillage and earthmoving operations.
Moist bulk density is the weight of soil (ovendry) per unit volume. Volume is
measured when the soil is at field moisture capacity, that is, the moisture content at
1/3- or 1110-bar (33kPa or 10kPa) moisture tension. Weight is determined after the
soil is dried at 105 degrees C. ln the table, the estimated moist bulk density of each
soil horizon is expressed in grams per cubic centimeter of soil material that is less
than 2 millimeters in diameter. Bulk density data are used to compute linear
extensibility, shrink-swell potential, available water capacity, total pore space, and
other soil properties. The moist bulk density of a soil indicates the pore space
available for water and roots. Depending on soil texture, a bulk density of more than
1.4 can restrict water storage and root penetration. Moist bulk density is influenced
by texture, kind of clay, content of organic matter, and soil structure.
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (l(saf) refers to the ease with which pores in a
saturated soil transmit water. The estimates in the table are expressed in terms of
micrometers per second. They are based on soil characteristics observed in the
field, particularly structure, porosity, and texture. Saturated hydraulic conductivity
(Ksat) is considered in the design of soil drainage systems and septic tank
absorption fields.
Available water capacify refers to the quantity of water that the soil is capable of
storing for use by plants. The capacity for water storage is given in inches of water
per inch of soil for each soil layer. The capacity varies, depending on soil properties
that affect retention of water. The most important properties are the content of
organic matter, soil texture, bulk density, and soil structure. Available water capacity
is an important factor in the choice of plants or crops to be grown and in the design
and management of irrigation systems. Available water capacity is not an estimate
of the quantity of water actually available to plants at any given time.
Linear extensibility refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture
content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. lt is an expression of the volume
change between the water content of the clod al 1 13- or 1110-bar tension (33kPa or
l0kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported in the table as
percent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soil
influence volume change.
Linear extensibility is used to determine the shrink-swell potential of soils. The
shrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3
percent; moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if ô to 9 percent; and very high if more than
9 percent. lf the linear extensibility is more than 3, shrinking and swelling can cause
'16
Custom Soil Resource Report
damage to buildings, roads, and other structures and to plant roots. Special design
commonly is needed.
Organic matter is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages of
decomposition. ln this table, the estimated content of organic matter is expressed
as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in
diameter. The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained by returning
crop residue to the soil.
Organic matter has a positive effect on available water capacity, water infiltration,
soil organism activity, and tilth. lt is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for
crops and soil organisms.
Erosion factors are shown in the table as the K factor (Kw and Kf¡ and the T factor.
Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by
water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation
(USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the
average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year.
The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter
and on soil structure and Ksat. Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors
being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill
erosion by water.
Erosion factor Kw indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates are
modified by the presence of rock fragments.
Erosion factor Kf indicates the erodibility of the fine-earth fraction, or the material
less than 2 millimeters in size.
Erosion factor T is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosion
by wind and/or water that can occur without affecting crop productivity over a
sustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per year.
Wind erodibility groups are made up of soils that have similar properties affecting
their susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group '1
are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group I are the
least susceptible. The groups are described in the "National Soil Survey Handbook."
Wind erodibility index is a numerical value indicating the susceptibility of soil to wind
erosion, or the tons per acre per year that can be expected to be lost to wind
erosion. There is a close correlation between wind erosion and the texture of the
surface layer, the size and durability of surface clods, rock fragments, organic
matter, and a calcareous reaction. Soil moisture and frozen soil layers also
influence wind erosion.
Reference:
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil su rvey handbook, title 430-Vl. (http://soils. usda. gov)
17
Custom Soil Resource Report
Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
-1 9-0.0- 1.5- 2.9
30-34 0.42-0.92-1.41
0.00-0.004.0
2.8
Rock or.lcrop,
st@
Torriortlenb,
steep
Itlap symbol
ald soilnane
67-
Torriort¡ents-
Rock outcrop
complec<,
steep
Pena
Ascalon
7-Ascalon-
Pena
complq, 6 to
25 percen:
slopes
4-30
04
12-æ
ê.12
0s
30-60
5-30
0-5
In
DeSh
-61-
42-
-57
42-
-57
-65-
Pct
Sand
s&-19-
-37-
-37-
18-
-1 B-
-24-
Pct
sttr
5-20- 35
12-1È29
1ç21-27
Clay
1í21-n
20-25-30
20-25-30
10-'1 5- 20
Pct
't.30-'t.40-
1.50
1.3S1.43-
1.50
1.2S1.3&
1.44
Mo¡st
bulk
density
1.2t1.33-
1.40
1.25-1 .33-
1.40
1.25-1.33-
140
1.35-1.43-
1.50
g/cc
4.23-9.17-14.11
1.40-9.00-42.00
4
4.2&23.2842.3
4
4.2?-23.2842.3
't .41-7 .76-14.11
1.41-7.76-14.11
4
4.23-23.2U2.3
4
4.23-23.2842.3
micro m/sec
Sâü¡rated
tyd¡aulic
conducüv¡ty
0.10-0.14-0.J
8
0.6{.060.0
7
0.04-0.14-0.1I
0.t7-0.08-0.0I
0.14-0.16-0.1
0.1&0.12-0.1
3
0.14-0.16-0.f
7
0.13-0.14-0.1
5
In/ln
Available
$râbr
capac¡ty
0.0. 1.s2.9
0.0- 1.$ 2.9
Linear
êxterls¡b¡llty
3.0- 4.5- 5.9
0.& 1.s2.9 l
3.0- 4.5- 5.9
0.0- 1.5- 2.9
Pct
0.0- 0.3-
0.5
0.5- 0.8-
1.0
0.G.0.&
0.5
0.5- 0.&
1.0
1.G 1.5-
2.0
0.0- 0.3-
0.5
0.5- 0.8-
1.0
Pct
1.0- 1.5-
2.0
Organ¡c
niatter
.05
10
.24
15
.2.0
Kw
.28
.32
.24
.24
15
.20
Kf
,20
1
5
T
Erosion
factorc
Wind
erodiblllty
group
7
3
38
86
UUind
erodlbility
index
Ptryslcal Soil Properties..RifloArea, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Cour¡fes
0s0 0- &.0 0.@4.05-1.40
18
Water
73-Water
Mapsymbol
and soll narng
Physkal So¡l PrÌrpêrt¡ês''ltlf,e Area, Golo¡a&, Parts of Garıeld and i,lesa Gountiæ
ln
Þepûlt
Pct
Send
Pct
s¡tt
Pct
Clay
g/cc
llloist
bulk
dem$r
micro m/sec
Saü¡rated
þdraulic
conduct¡vlty
lnlln
Available
wabr
capaclty
Pct
Llnear
e¡úeris¡b¡llty
Pct
Oqanic
mAtter
Kw
Eroelon
factols
Kf T
lltllnd
erodlbllity
g¡oup
Wnd
erodibll
lnde¡
ty
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
Custom Soil Resource Report
Engineering Properties (Salmen Residence)
This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering
properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area.
Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar
storm and cover conditions. The critêria for determining Hydrologic soil group is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://
directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba).
Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for
the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series.
Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series
names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national
list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG
using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be
maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued.
Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum
rale of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These
properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity
after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission
rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes
also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is
treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and
three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. ln the dual groups, the first letter is for
drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas.
The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at
or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
Depth lo the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the
fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is
soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay,28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand.
lf the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate
modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."
20
Custom Soil Resource Report
Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification
system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004).
The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as
construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of
the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid
limit, and organlc matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP,
GM, GC, SW Sq SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and
OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two
groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML.
The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect
roadway construction and maintenance. ln this system, the fraction of a mineral soil
that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1
through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid límit, and plasticity index.
Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At
the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are
classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection.
lf laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified
asA-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, orA-7-6. As an additional
refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group
index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to
20 or higher for the poorest.
Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches
in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The
percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in
the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected
Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil
fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves,
numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00,
0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests
of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in
the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative
Value (R), and High (H).
Liquid limit and plasticity rndex (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity
characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area
or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify
the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
References:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
21
Custom Soil Resource Report
Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estímated. The asterisk '"' denotes the represerrtative texture; other
possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.us;da.gov/
OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content= 17757 .wba). Three values are provided to identify the expecterl Low (L),
Representative Value (R), and High (H).
L-R-H L.R-H L-R-H L-R-H
70-7*4045-25-28 5-8 -10
100-1t00
-1Cro
80-8S
85
90
35-45-
50
55
25-30
80-85-35-45-25-30 ,5-10-15
90
7-Ascalon-)ena
complex, 6 to 25
perceni slopes
Ascalon
Pena
65 Fine sandy loam
5-30 Sandy clay loam
30-60 Sandy clay loam
25 A 0€Stony loam
6-12 Very stony loam
1240 Very stony sândy
loam
CL, CL-
ML, SC
SC-SM
CL, CL.
ML, SC
SC-SM
cL, cL-
ML, SC,
SC-SM
GC, GC-
GM,
sc, sc-
SM
GC-GM,
GM,
sc-sM,
SM
0-0-0 ,0-0-0
0-0-0 0-0-0
0-0-0 0-0-0
10-28-
45
0-15- 30 75-83- 70-78-
90 i85
-30
_?Ã
_1Ã
-30
-30
EÈ
65
65BO
-2560
85
85
70
70
I 00-1 00
-1 00
1 00-1 00
-100
1 00-11 00
-1Cro
50-
A-2, A-4 2548-0-25- 50 4S68-
90
A-f . A-2 2548-0-25- 50 45-68-
90
60-7&.
80
45-â5-25-28 5€ -10
40€3-35-5&2U5-25-28
''B
-r0
40s3-2543-15-25-
35
20-23 NP-3 Ê
l
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Fct of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
9roup
Depth
B 0-5
ln
USDA texture
Unified
A4
A-4
A-4
sc, sc-
SM
AASHTO
Glassification
>10
inches
3-10
inches
Pct Fragmenb
4 t0
L-R-H L-R-H
1 00-100
-1 00
1 00-1 00
-1Cro
L-P,-H
40 200
Percentage passing sieve number-
L-R-H
Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Engineering Properties-Rifle Area, Colorado, Parb of Garfield and Mesa Gountþs
22
¡lap unit symbol änd
so¡l namo
Toniorthents, steep
67-Torriorthents-Rock
outcrop complex,
steep
60
Pct of
fÍap
un¡t
Hydrolo
glc
gtþup
4-30
04
In
Depür
Fine sandy loam,
loam, clay loam
Variable
USDA texture
Unlñed
cL, cL-
ML, SC-
SM, SM
AASHTO
Classification
>t0
lnclres
0-0-0
0-0-0
L-R-H
0- 6- 20
0-1 0- 20
L-R.H
3-10
lnches
Pct Fragments
95
65-95-
L-R-H
4
90
60-90-
L.R-H
t0 40
L-R-H
200
Percentäge passlng s¡eve numbetb
L-R-H
Llquid
llmlt
Plas'
y lnr
Englneerlng Ptopertle*.Rine Arca, Colorado, Parts ot Garfteld and lláesa Courrües
Ìc¡t
ex
L-R-H
Custom Soil Resource Report
A-2, A-4,
L-R-H
D
50-65-
7080A-6
2548-'15-25
-35
o-7 -14
NP-10-2
0
Rork outcrop, deep 25
30-34
0s0
Unweathered
bedrock
bedrscl(
23
I .*rt iiffiTft,i#fÉtrn':nÊ; ; **'
An Employcc Owncd Compony
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
phone: (970) 945-7988
fax: (970) 945-8454
email : ka¡¡lenrvood@kumarusa.collr
wwwkumarusa.com
Ofücc Locations: Dcnvcr (IIQ),lar'licq Colorado Springs, Fort Collius, Clcnwood Springs, and Sununit County, Colorado
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
1506 MIDLAND AVENUE
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 19-7-697
APRIL 9,2020
PREPARED FOR:
PAUL SALMEN, MD
1504 MIDLAND AVENUE
GLtrNWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY I
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ...
SITE CONDITIONS..a
FIELD EXPLORATION .....a-L-
ST]B SURFACE CONDITIONS a
FOTJNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ......- 3 -
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ...4-
FOUNDATIONS .....-4-
FOLINDATION AND RETAINING WALLS .................- 5 -
GARAGE FLOOR SLABS .
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM..
SITE GRADING........
SI]RFACE DRAINAGE......
SEPTIC AREA PROFILE PIT EVALUATIONS
LIMITATIONS..-9-
FIGURE 1 . LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS/PITS
FIGURE 2 . LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS/PITS
FIGTJRE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURES 5 &. 6 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 7 _ USDA GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
7-
7-
8-
8-
9-
Kumar & Associates, lnc, @ Project No. 19-7-697
PURPOSE AND SCOP¡J OI'' S .UDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located at
1506 Midland Avenue, Glcnwood Springs, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1.
The purposs of thc study was to dcvelup rcL,urrunendal.ions for the fountlation tlesign. The sl"udy
was conducted in general accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to
Paul Salmen dated November 14,2019. Kumar & Associates previously provided a geologic
hazards review for the site and presented the findings in a report dated December 3,2079,
Project No. l9-7-697.
A freld exploration program consisting of exploratory borings and pits 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 residence will be a two-story wood-frame structure with a walkout basement and
detached slab-on-grade garage to the southwest of the residence as shown on Figure L Ground
floor will be slab-on-grade in both struetr.¡res. An elevated elcek a.nd site wa-lls will ex-tend off the
south side of the residence. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut
depths between about 3 to 12 feet. 'We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of thc
proposed type of construction. The treatment area of the proposed onsite wastewater treatment
system (OWTS) will be located uphill to the west of the proposed residence.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly fiom those described above,
we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this reporl.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19.7-697
a-L'
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is vacant with a flat accessible area roughly along the abandoned and backfilled
Atkinson ditch. The ground surface slope is moderately steep down to the east from Midland
Avenue to the flaf. arca and then steep from the flat area down to the east to the Roaring Fork
River. The elevation difference from Midland Avenue to the flat area is about l5 feet then about
35 feet farther down to the river. Vegetation primarily consists of thick oak brush with an
understory of grass and weeds.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on March i9 and 24,2020. Two exploratory
borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure I to evaluate the subsurface conditions
within the proposed residence and garage area. 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 & Associates, 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-1586.
The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the
subsoils.
In addition, two profile pits were excavated with a backhoe in the proposed soil treatment area at
the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The pits were logged and
disturbed samples were taken by a representative of Kumar & Associates, Inc. Depths at which
the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings/Pits, 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 in the borings, below about 5 to 6 feet of loose to medium dense, sand and clay with
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19-7-697
-3-
scattered gravel fill. consist of meclium dense" clayey silty sancl with gravel to clayey silty sand
and gravel with cobbles (alluvial lan depnsits) lo a rleplh of ahor¡1 10 lo 1?}/z feet overlying
dense, silty sandy gravel and cobbles (river gravel alluvium) to the explored depth of 41 feet. At
Boring 2, about 7 feet of medium dense, sand and silt was encountered above the dense river
gravel. The subsoils in the profrle pits, below about I foot of organic gravelly loam topsoil.
consist of very to extremely gravelly sandy loam to the depth excavated of 8 feet.
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 alluvial fan deposit, presented on Figure 4, indicate
low to moderate compressibility under loading and low to moderate collapse potential
(settlement under constant load) when wetted. Results of gradation analyses performed on small
diameter drive samples (minus lYz-inch fraction) of the alluvial fan deposits are shown on
Figures 5 and 6. Results of gradation and hydrometer analyses performed on a disturbed bulk
sample from Profile Pit 1 are shown on Figure 7. The laboratory testing is summarized in
Table 1.
Free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling at about 38 feet in depth. When
checked 4 days later, free water was not encountered and the borings had caved at 36% to 37Yz in
depth. The upper soils were typically slightly moist.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The alluvial fan deposits at the site are compressible mainly when wetted and the risk of
excessive building settlement should be considered by the design and construction of the
proposed tlevekrpmeni. Consequentiy, the nee<Í for speciai foundation systems, such as cieep
piles or piers and structural slab, are recommended with the intent to achieve an acceptable risk
of future settlement and limit building distress. Based on the proposed development plan. the
subsurface conditions encountered and the steep slope condition, piles or piers with bearing
down into the underlying dense, river gravel alluvium are recommended to achieve a low risk of
settlement and distress to the proposed residence. If other foundation types are desired, we
should be contacted to provide additional analysis and recommendations. A shallow foundation
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19.7.697
4
bearing on the upper natural soils can be used for other non-settlement sensitive structures such
as the garage and site walls provided the owner accepts the risk of settlement and structure
distress.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Deep Piles or Piers: Piles that extend down into the underlying dense river gravel alluvium
encountered at depths ofabout 32%to37 feet in the exploratory borings are feasible for
foundation support with low settlement potential. Deep foundations can consist of "screw piles"
or micro-piles. Screw piles are a heavy-duty helical pile (typically 3 to 4-inch diameter, high
strength steel shaft with single or double 8 to 10-inch helixes) that have been used in Colorado to
provide relatively high load capacity and low foundation settlement risk. Micro-piles used in
this area typically consist of high strength, hollow bar that is drilled and grouted continuously
down into the bearing soils resulting in a pile about 5 inches in diameter. The building ground
level floor slab should also be supported on the pile foundation. We expect the piles will
penetrate the dense river gravel on the order of 5 to 10 feet to achieve the desired load capacity,
but the pile installation contractor should be contacted for specific loading and design
information. We expect downward allowable pile load capacity to be around 30 to 50 kips and
will be achieved mainly by end bearing with the screw pile and by skin friction in the river
gravel alluvium for the micro-pile. Settlements under sustained loading are expected to be
minor, Yz inch or less. Lateral capacity of screw piles or micro-piles is normally provided by
battered piles. Piles should be spaced at least 3 feet from center to center to avoid reduction
from group action. At least one pile should be load tested to confirm the assigned load capacity
in both compression and tension (if used). The pile load testing should be performed under the
supervision of a registered professional engineer and a summary report provided of their
adequacy to support the design loading. A representative ofthe geotechnical engineer should
observe the test pile and production pile installations on a fulltime basis. Grade beams and pile
caps should have a minimum depth of 3 feet for frost cover and void form below them is not
needed. When the pile or pier type has been selected, we can provide additional analysis and
recommendations for the final design.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19-7-697
5
Spread Footing Altcrnativc: Considcring thc suhsurface conditions encounterecl in the
exploratory borings and thc naturç of the proposecl consl.rriol.iorr, l,he garage antl sil.e walls
separate f'rom the residcncc can bo foundod rvith sproad footings beoring on the natural soils
below topsoil and any existing fill with a risk of long term settlement and structure distress.
I he desigrt attd construction oriteria presented below should be observed fbr a spread footing
foundation system.
l) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for an
allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Based on experience, we expect inìtial
settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will
be about 1 inch or less. Additional settlements of I to 2 inches or more could
occur depending on the depth and extent of wetting.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 20 inches for continuous walls and
2 feel for isolated pads.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with
adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement
of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this
area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least l4 feet.
Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist
lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls"
section of this report.
5) The existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and
+h^ lX^+i-^ L^^-:^^ l^,,^l ^.,+^^l^J l^,,,- +^ +L^.,^ll^¡,,-L^l -^+,.-^l ^^il^ 'r'L^rllw ¡vullrré vwqrrrrÉ lvvlr u^Lvll\lçLl \l(,vvrr tL, Lltty ul¡tllùtuluçu ild'Lutdt JUll5. I llç
exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and cornpacted.
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FOLINDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to
undergo only a slight amount of detlection should be designed fbr a lateral earth pressure
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19-7-697
6-
computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting
of the on-site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence or
garage and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure
condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent
fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. Backfill should not
contain organics or rocks larger than 6 inches.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and
surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The
pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal
backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will
increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain
should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90Yo of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill placed in pavement and
walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95o/o of the maximum standard Proctor density.
Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall, since
this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall
backfill should be expected, even if the material is placed correctly, and could result in distress to
facilities constructed on the backfill.
The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the
sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against
the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated
based on a coefficient of friction of 0.40. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the
sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf. The
coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil
strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will
occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against
the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should compacted to at least95Yo of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum.
Kumar & Associates, lnc, @ Project No. 19-7-697
-7 -
GARAGE FI,OOR SI-ABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, con be used to support lightly loadcd slab-on-gradc
construction at the garage with a settlement risk and distress similar to that described above for
the footing alternative. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, non-structural 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 relatively well graded sand and gravel such as road base should be placed beneath
interior slabs for support. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least
50olo retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than l2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of garage floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95olo of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content ncar optimum. Rcquircd fill can consist
of the on-site granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered during our exploration at likely excavation depths, it
has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of
heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoffcan create a perched
condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement
areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe pla"eeel in the bottom of the wall backfil! surrounded above
the invert levelwith free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed ateach level of
excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish gradc and slopcd at a minimum l9lu to
a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should
contain less than 2Yo passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a
maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least lt/zfeet deep. An
impervious membrane such as 30 mil PVC should be placed beneath the drain gravel in a trough
shape and attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing soils.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19.7.697
-8-
SITE GRADING
The risk of construction-induced slope instability at the site appears low provided cut and fill
depths are limited. We assume cut depths for the basement level will not exceed one level, about
l0 to l2 feet. Fills should be limited to about I to 10 feet deep and not be placed on the downhill
side of the residence where the slope is steep unless supported by structural walls to retain the
earth fill. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least95o/o of the maximum standard
Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be
carefully prepared by removing all vegetation, topsoil and existing fill and compacting to at least
95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into slopes that
exceed 20Yo grade. Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at2horizontalto
I vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. This office
should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Providing proper surface grading and drainage will be critical to preventing wetting of the
bearing soils and limiting potential building settlement and distress. The following drainage
precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the
residence and garage have been completed:
l) Inundation ofthe foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided
during construction.
2) Exterior backfrll should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95To of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas
and to at least 90Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to
drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum
slope of 12 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 at least2 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.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19-7-697
9-
Lanclscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation shoulcl be located at least
l0 leel, lrnrn ftrunrlal.ion walls. Consideratinn should he given to use nf xeriscape
to reduce the potential for r,vctting of soils bclor,v thc building couscd by imigation.
SEPTIC AREA PROFILE PIT EVALUATIONS
The soils encountered in the profile pits, below about 1 foot of organic topsoil, consisted of very
to extremely gravelly sandy loam. Results of hydrometer and gradation analyses performed on a
disturbed burlk sample of the Loam soils from Profile Pit I frorn 3 to 4 feet depth are provided on
Figure 7. The tested sample (based on minus No. l0 size sieve fraction) classified as Sandy
Loam per the USDA system. Based on the subsurface conditions and laboratory testing, the soils
in the septic area have been classified as Soil Type R-2 per State regulations.
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 and profile pits located as shown 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 profile pits and variations in the
subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions
encountered ciuring construction appear ciiffèrent fiom those descri'becÍ in this report, we shouid
be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
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 verify that the recommendations
have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis
s)
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No. 19.7.697
-10-
or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on'site observation
of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fiIl by a representative of
the geotechnical engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kumar & Associates,
Steven L.
Reviewed by:
ï
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
SLP/kac
cc: John Taufer (ib@saæs,!gÐ
SGM-JeffSimonson@
15222
'tJ
Kumar & Associates, lnc. Ê Project No. 19-7-697
Ft¡¡
l¿fL!
I
t¡JJ
oØ
l¡JF.
=.xo
É,o-o.
II
u
I
ACCESS
I
(}
z
ú.4ôú
I
t
t*
rl
:l
¡
É.l¡¡
É
v'úot!
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
å
;l
't
tr
I
!
ì¡
It
STAIR5
'E8S?srOe¡W
1
øq
,i\": ...\' '
.:.{
T
1
\
¡\o,(o
Il\
Iq)
al,
c)
(ú
C)o
att
ar.
oð
Lı
E
J\l
at1tsd
Ø(9
z.
æ,o.e¡
É,o
F_
É.oJo-
><t¡l
l&o
z
U^Ë
()oJ
(',
l!
I
I
I
I
E
1
I
Ë
BORING 1
EL. 5774'
BORING 2
EL. 5773.5'
PP- 1
EL. 5783'
PP-2
EL. 5780'
0 rì
11/12 15/ 12 -l GRAVEL=61
-t SAND=21
SILT= 1 4
CLAY=4Ã -t
I
_t
q
20/12 1s/ 12
WC=5.0
DD=94
-200=22
10 10
34/ 12 27 /12
WC=6.0
DD= 1 05
*4=39
-2OA=37
15 22/12
15
60/ 12
20 20
Ft¡l
L¡ll!
I-Fo-
t¡Jo
26/6, 50/4 23/ 12
tNÇ=4.4
DD=1 14
-2OO=24
f-
lJJ
L¡JL!
I-FfLt!o
25 óËL¿
35/12
50 30
21 /12 1O/ 12
35 35
40 40
50/ 1 .5 50/ 1
45 45
WC=3.5
+4=38
-200=33
WC=5.1
+4=42
-20O=26
19-7 -697 Kumar & Associates Locs oF EXPL0RAToRY BORTNGS/P|TS Fig. 2
Fis. 3LEGEND AND NOTES1506 MIDLAND AVENUEKumar & Associates
LEGEND
ñroesorrr oRGANrc sANDy srLT AND cLAy, FIRM, Morsr, DARK BRowN.
hY
Xr¡u, s¡¡ro aND cLÁy wnH scATERED GRAVEL AND oRGANrcs, LoosE To MEDTuM DENsEj
t/sLtcHTLy MotsT, DARK BRowN.
ZIJ
ffisono (sc); wrTH GRAVEL AND
'.ATTERED
coBB-Es, cLAyEy, srlTy, MEDT'M DENSE,
lilsucxrlv Morsr, TAN. SUBANGULAR ROCK.
Fltono o*o cRAVEL (sc-Gc); wrH cosBLES, cLAyEy, srlry, MEDT,M DENSE, sucHTLy Morsr,
lãlLrcHT BRouN. suBANcuLÁR RocK.
Flsrno l¡ro srLT (sM-ML)i sLrcHrly cLAyEy, MEDTuM DENsE, vERy Morsr, BRowN.IA
Flo*ouaa (cM); sANDy, srLTy, coBBLEs, possrBlE BouLDERS, DEN'E, Morsr ro wET wrrH
lËDEPTH, BRowN, RouNo¿D RocK.
ffisaHov LoaM; vERy ro ÐÍREr¡ELy çRAVELLy, MEDTuM DENsE, Morsr ro sucHTLy Morsr,
fÍ'rlLlGlT BRowN. PRoFILE PlTs oNLY.
DRIVE SAMPI-E, 2-INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
DRIVE SAMPIE, 1 5/8-INCH I.D. SPLIT SPooN STANDARD PENETRATI0N TEST.
DISTURBED SULK SÄ,MPLE.
,r zro DRIVÊ SAMPLE BLOW COUNI. INDICATES THAT '1 SLOWS OF A 140-POUND I{AMMER"/ '' FALLTNG Jo tNcHES WERE REeutR:D To DRtvE THE saMpLER 12 tNcHEs.
.: DEPTH IO WATER LEVEL ENCOUN"IERED AT THE -lME OF DRlLLlNc.
+ DEPTH AT WHICH BORING CAVED |VHEN CHECKEF ON MARCH 23,2O2O.
NOtÊS
THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON MARCH I9, 2O2C lllIq A 4-II.¡CH-DIAVETER
CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT POWER AUGER. THE PROFILE PITS WER: DLìG ON MARCH 24, 2O2O WIHA BACKHOE.
2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMÀTELY gI
PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS WEFE OBTAINED Bì' INÍERPOLATIÛN
BETWEEN CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
4. iHE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PIT LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDRED
ÁCCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USEB.
5. THE LINES BEÍWEEN MAIERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PfT LÐGS
REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES EETWEEN MATERI"AL TYPES AND THE TP.ANSITIOFS
MAY BE GRADUAL
6. GROUNDWAIER LEVELS SHoWN ON fHE BORING LOGS WERE METSURED AT THE TIME AND
UNDER CONDITIONS INDICATED. FLUCIUATIONS IN THE WATER LEVEL MAY OCCLR WITH TIME.
7. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN IHE PITS AT IHE TII¡E OF ÐIGGING.
8. LABORATORY TESI RESULTS¡
WC = WATER CoNTENT (u) (ASTM D2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (PCf) (ASTM 02216);+4 = PERCENÌAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASIM D6913);
-2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM DII,fO);
GRAVEL = P€rcent reloÌn€d on No, l0 Si€v6
SAND = Psrcenl poss¡ng No. l0 s¡6ve ond refo¡nsd on No.325 sievB
SILT = Percenl possing No. 325 sÌeve 1o porlicle sizo .OOzmÌ
CLAY = Percênl smdller Ìhon pdrlicle sizs .002mm
F
i
t_,
I 9-7-697
t
r
E
¿;
SAMPLE OF: Silty Cloyey Sond with
Gro'vel
FROM:Boring2@5'
WC = 5.0 %, DD = 94 pcf
-2OO = 22 %
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
ì )
(
I )
Th@ td uu¡b opply onry to thr
Bompl.! lqt.d. ftå t6tlng roport
sholl not b€ repnÈuc.d, oxcrpt ln
full, s¡thout th. wdtt.n lpprcvol of
Kumor !¡d Aseclol€, lnc. Sw.ll
Cohrolldotlon t d¡ñg Fdom.d lñ
occordoñc. Ílth ASII, D-4{t48.
1
0
^-1
J
J-Z
l¡.1
=U)
r_3
zotrj-e
o
tJlzoo_5
-6
-7
-8
1,0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF t0 1001
SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 419-7 -697 Kumar & Associates
j
ú
tr
to0
90
80
70
c0
60
,+o
¡0
20
t0
0
0
t0
20
30
Æ
50
60
70
80
90
t00
r
b
tr
&
H
DIAMETER OF IN
CLAY TO SILT COBBLES
GRAVEL 3A % SAND 29
LIQUID LIMIT
SAMPLE OF: Silly Cloyey Sond ond Groval
%
PLASTICITY INDEX
SILT AND CLAY 33 %
FROM: Borlng I O 10' & 15' (Comblned)
26
f
Ee
H
lo0
so
a0
70
80
50
10
30
20
l0
0
o
'to
20
s0
¿0
50
a0
70
ao
t0
t00
E
E
Ë
DIAMETER OF IN MI
CLAY TO SILT COBBLES
GRAVEL 42 % SAND 32
LIQUID LIMIT
SAMPLE 0F: Sllly Cloyey Sond ond Grovel
%
PLASTICIÎY INDËX
SILT AND CLAY 26 %
FROM: Borlng 1 O 25' & 50' (Comblned)
Th.ro loll r.lull' opply only lo lhe
rompl€s whlch w€rc losl.d. Tht
lGrllng raport rhqll not br r.produc6d,
oroopt ln full, wllhoul tho wrlll.nqpprcvql of Kumor ù A$001016, lnc,
Slovo onılysls l.sllng l! Þårlôrmôd ln
occordonco wlth ASTM D69|5, ASTM D7928,
ASTM C136 ondlor ASIM D1l¡10.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
¡toô ¡tô ¡d ¡¡ôtô
CLEAR SAUARE OPEI{INOs
ttAra/^.11/!rr,7 HnS
I.F MIN
-t
t'---------'{--__--1-l*
r .f
--Å--
--{ | .-+-
-|+-:f=j-I
=,:1*É__
-+__----l--_
-4
ztl
----f-'l------____t____
---- -_Ll--
--fl----+1:-:-'_l__-.j:L:
---þ-i [-__l__._
.
-J-l-_ ¡ l___--+-+__--T------+------- -r----
_-t_J_r_r '-¡--r*n-ri --{-*
SAND GRAVEL
FINE MEDTUM lCOlnss FINE COARSE
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
ÏME NEADINOS
2/+ HRS 7 HRS
to ¡lôô
U.S. SIANDARD SERIES
¡lô ¡¡ô ¡tô ar6
CUR SOUARE OPEXINCS
tl^j t/^â I tfr.
r*l--
SAND GRAVEL
FINE MEDTUM lCOlnSe FINE COARSE
19-7 -697 Kumar & Aesociates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fi9. 5
I
I
SIEVE ANALYSISHYDROMEIER ANALYSIS
I CLEAR SOUARE OPENII{GS
a/Àr t/lr 1 t/t.
u.s. slailo^Ro sERtEsTIYE READINOS
2/a HRs 7 HRS !tN al
6
P
to0
to
ao
70
50
50
,t0
30
20
t0
o
0
t0
20
t0
,+o
50
60
70
80
s0
t00
6
E
E
Ë
.oo5
OF IN RS
CLAY TO SILÏ COBBLES
GRAVEL 39 % SAND 21
LIQUID LIMIT
SAMPLE OF¡ Silty Cloyey Sond ond Grovel
%
PLASTICITY INDEX
SILT AND CLAY 37 %
FROM:Borlng2OlO'
th€tô lrll r€3ull! qpply only lo lhs
sompler whlch w€ro fusl€d. Tho
lorllng roporl sholl nol b. r.produc€d,
oxcapl ln full, wllhoul tho wrlllon
qpprgvol of Kumor & Algoclqtor, lno.
Siovo onolysls losllng 19 prrforñod ln
dccırdoñôÓ wnh ASTM D8915, ASTM D7928,
ASIM C'156 qnd,/or ASTM 01140.
SAND GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM ICOARSE FINE COARSE
19-7 -697 Kumar & Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6
I
E
x
ã
I
3
g
'ı
,t
'ñ
I
HYDROMFTFN ANAI YSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME U,S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQ UARE
24r lR. 7 HR 1 Mll'I.
#325045 #140 #35 +18 #10 #4 3/8'1 3" 5" 6" 8"
t00
10 90
20 80
30 70
â
LJz.
F
LrJ
E.
t--zLIO
É.t!L
40 60
()z
U)(n
0-
f-z.
t¡JOx.LI
o_
50 50
OU 40
70 30
80 20
90 10
100 0.001 ,002 ,005 ,009 .019 .045 106 .026 .500 1.00 2,00 4.15 9,5 19.0 37.5 76.2 152 203
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
CLAY SILT COBBLES
GRAVEL 61 o/o SAND 21 %SILT 14 %CLAY 4 %
USDA SOIL TYPË: Extremely Gravelly Sandy Loam FROM: PP-1 @ 3'-4'
-^-- -t- t-t_t-',
--=+___
-- -t-'*__-t--Í-
-- t-.----'t'-/-'..'__4_^_,1-L,._
-*-_l___-.----t'-
I
I-,,1
'-t-
,-,l=
-- -:l- -_:,-l- -
_-_ I'-- [. -:
-,-,-.t---
-'_. _-:#
t.-:#{
19-7-697 Kumar & Associates USDA GRADATION TTST RESULTS Fi1. 7
IC Hiffifi,åiftrH*,yÊd**
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
P No. 19-7-697
2
Profile
Pit 1
10
5
3-4
20 4.4
6.0
5.0 94
114
105 39
3.5
5.1 32
I
42
29 JJ
("/ù
26
(%)
GRAVEL
(%)
SAND
("/"1
CLAY
38
GRADATIONSAMPLE LOCATION
BORING
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
Vrl
NATURAL
ÐRY
DENSITY
(pcr)
SILT
(%)
GRAVEL
("/"1
SAND
%t
25 artd 30
combined
l0 and l5
combined
DEPTH
(ft)
24
24
37
22
6t 2 1 14 4
Silty Clayey Sand and
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand and
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand and
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand and
Gravel
SOIL TYPE
Extremely Gravelly
Sandy Loam