Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutObservation of Excavation 03.19.24l(t,t lfitmr * A$qrsiats, ln*,s Ge+technical and Materials Engineers 5020 County Road 154 and Cnvir*nmental$cientists Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone. (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email : kaglenwood@kumarusa.com An fmplorycc onfr$ss coilpEny www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado March 19,2A24 James Gornick Building Specialists Attn: James Gornick 1005 Cooper Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Jeornick I 9 8 8 @,smail. com Subject: Project No.24-7-194 Observation of Excavation, Proposed Addition, Lot 8, Rapids on the Colorado, l8l Rapids View Lane, New Castle, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, a representative of I(umar & Associates observed the excavation at the subject site on March 13,2024 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our obseryations and recommendations for the foundation support are presented in this report. The services were performed in accordance with our agreement for professional engineering services to James Gornick Building Specialists dated March 12,2024. We understand that the proposed addition has been designed to be founded on spread footings bearing on the natural soils sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf assumed by the structural engineer. At the time of our visit to the site, the foundation excavation had been cut in one level from 2 to 2% feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of very sandy silty clay. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on samples taken from the site, shown on Figure 1, indicate the soils are compressible under conditions of loading and wetting. No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were moist. Considering the conditions exposed in the excavation and the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing prcssure of 1,000 psf can be used for support of the proposed addition. The exposed soils tend to compress when wetted and there could be some post-construction settlement of the foundation that could be differential to the existing residence, especially if the bearing soils become wet. Footings should be a minimum width of l8 inches for continuous walls and,2 feet for columns. Loose and disturbed soils in footing areas should be removed and the bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist alateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf for on-site soil as backfill. Structural fill placed within floor slab areas can consist of the on-site soils compacted to at least 95Y" of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near James Gomick Building Specialists March 19,2424 Page 2 optimum. Backfill placed around the structure should be compacted and the surface graded to prevent ponding within at least l0 feet of the building. Landscape that requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, and sprinkler heads should not be located within l0 feet of the foundation. The recornmendations submitted in this letter are based on oilr observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and do not include subsurface exploration to evaluate the subsurface conditions within the loaded depth of foundation influense. This study is based on the assumption that soils beneath the footings have equal or better support than those exposed. The risk of foundation movement may be greater than indicated in this report because ofpossible variations in the subsurface conditions. In order to reveal the nature and oxtmt of variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation, drilling would be required. It is possible the data obtained by subsurface exploration could change the recommendations contained in this letter. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility ofmold or otherbiological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the firture. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. If you have any questions or aeed further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, ${uxn*x*" &: Ass**N*$*s* Robert L. Duran, P.E. Rev. by: DEH RLD,{<ac Attachment:Figure I - Swell-Consolidation Test Results 67AAt Kumcr & A*so.*lates, $m6" tr Pr*Jrct ffis. ***?-tSd E : * SAMPLE OFr Very Sondy Sllty Cloy FROM: North Eosl Corner of Boitom of Excovolion WC = 16.7 %, DD = 106 pcf, -2OO = 52 % NO MOVEMENT UPON WETTING I \) Thd. toat rosulb apply only to th. Bompl@ t8t d. Tho t..ting r.port Bholl not bc r.produc.d, cxc.p[ in full. *ithoul th. vdtton dpprovol of Kumor ond Aaaociot€, lnc. Swall Conelidotion t6tin€ p.rform.d in dccordoncd si$ ASM D-4546. J J LJ =a 0 -1 -2z"otr o =oazo(J -3 -4 I AP 100 24-7 -194 Kumar & Associates SWTLL_CONSOLIDATION TTST RESULTS Fig. 1