Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.630 W Hopkins Ave.0052-2020-BRES (47) I( A Kumar&A te G nicaland Materials Engineers 5020 County Road 154 and Environmental Scientists Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 phone:(970)945-7988 fax:(970)945-8454 email:kaglenwood@kumarusa.com An Employee Owned Company www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver(HQ),Parker,Colorado Springs,Fort Collins,Glenwood Springs,and Summit County,Colorado April 6, 2020 S2 Architects Attn: Joseph Spears 215 South Monarch Street, Suite G-102 Aspen, Colorado 81611 joseph@s2architects.com Project No. 20-7-128 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design,Proposed Basement Footings and Light Well Walls, 630 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, we are providing the results of a subsoil study and recommendations for design of foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted as additional services to and in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to S2 Architects dated January 22, 2020. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The proposed improvements include new footing pads below the slab- on-grade floor at basement level and new light well retaining walls to the west side of the existing residence shown on Figure 1. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by drilling one exploratory boring at the approximate location shown on Figure 1. The log of the boring is presented on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered,below the asphalt pavement, consist of relatively dense, silty sand, gravel and cobbles with probably boulders. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a combined sample of the sand and gravel (minus 11/2-inch fraction) obtained from the boring are presented on Figure 3. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling and the soils were moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the REp! VE re) exploratory boring and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread footirl6/3 0/2 0 2 0 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT - 2 - placed on the undisturbed natural granular soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 psf for support of the proposed basement level loadings and exterior window well walls. The soils have low compressibility potential and post-construction foundation settlement should be minor. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose disturbed soils and existing fill encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavations should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural granular soils. We should observe the completed excavations for bearing conditions prior to placing concrete. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade can be used at this site. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for the on-site granular soil as backfill excluding rock larger than 6 inches. A sliding coefficient of 0.50 and equivalent fluid passive earth pressure of 450 pcf can be used to resist lateral loading on foundations. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, 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 runoff can 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 placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1%to a suitable gravity outlet or into the natural granular soils below the basement level. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2%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 PA feet deep. Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the improvements have been completed: RECEIVED 06/30/2020 Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No. 20-7-128 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT - 3 - 1) Inundation of the 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 95%of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90%of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with at least 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface along the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 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 boring drilled at the location indicated on Figure 1 and to the depth shown on Figure 2, 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 boring 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 at once so 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 recommendati RECEIVED 06/30/2020 Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No. 20-7-128 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT -4- 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. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance,please let us know. Respectfully Submitted, Kumar & Associates, Inc. RE Steven L. P vl P15222 % Rev. by: D + ' � � �Zr1o ��, �® • . SLP/kac 'h188/ONALe= Attachments: Figure 1 —Location of Exploratory Boring Figure 2 —Log of Exploratory Boring Figure 3 —Gradation Test Results RECEIVED 06/30/2020 Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No. 20-7-128 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT BORING 1 • j 1 ..-. —___..—_.y..._-1_._.t.._ 'J 1 _ — — __ _ h -S • --_._..*' _. _._.. -= - -4 -I ii 1 i i i I i Li b , _ 1 ! PROPOSED FOOTING 1 I '�` —_ t PROPOSED WINDO e 1 PADS (TYP) : r� � ,,,�" I. WELL WALLS (TYf) s+.*� 4 i t � 1if 1 al it t 1 ._ _.. ....... ... _ ---r Q i lA t i .. t i 1 I • 1 } i i -1 IT i i ( i - ------ --_ — I I i _'' 1 II 1 I . ._ i t i ►--#, I • ; n. 630 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE Z. 5 0 5 10 APPROXIMATE 5CRETTIVED o£ 20-7-128 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING O6;43O/2 020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT BORING 1 EL. 7934' LEGEND 0 (3) 4,7 (3) ASPHALT PAVEMENT; THICKNESS IN INCHES SHOWN IN PARENTHESES TO LEFT OF THE LOG. 00 20/12 SAND, GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GM); SILTY, PROBABLE ISO BOULDERS, MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST, BROWN. 5 v 028/12 DRIVE SAMPLE, 1 3/8-INCH I.D. SPLIT SPOON STANDARD — PENETRATION TEST. 0 WC= .4 — WC 5. 20/12 DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 20 BLOWS OF cL A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED wo— -200=21 TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES. — 10 22/6, 50/2 t PRACTICAL AUGER REFUSAL. NOTES 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS DRILLED ON FEBRUARY 10, 2020 15 WITH A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS FLIGHT POWER AUGER. 2. THE LOCATION OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY TAPING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 3. THE ELEVATION OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATION BETWEEN CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATION AND ELEVATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED. 5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOG REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL. 6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORING AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. 7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS: WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D 2216); +4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASTM D 6913); -200 = PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (ASTM D 1140); Ea osRECEIVED 1 20-7-128 Kumar& Associates LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Fi 2 O1 ti 2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 24 MR5 7 MRS 100 45 MIN 15 MIN 60 IN 1941N 4M04 11IN 1200 #100 #50 140#30 #16 in #4 -- 4 . 4" 1 1 2" 3' §E' fro 1 --- -_ _lam--. — _ - I - 1-- 90 __ _ -- � __- - - _�--____ ---_1-. __ __� 10 80 20 1- -_ � I — I-- _ __—I --- - -I—_ -- ..0 70 I 30 -__� - _ -_ _--♦-- - _ --.-I-. _. __ 7J77 c� 60 ---. - - - --_ ..- -. —1._._ _ _I_- - _ --_ _ I `I - ..- __ - - - ----- - .i. - _. I - _ _ _ _ _--__- 50 - - - - -- -'- - -_ - - - - 1 -- - _ -- ~� 50 b 40 I I - ----- - — I_ 60 ' — —— 20 - - ---- -- - - - -- r - - - -- --- -- - - - -- - , — 80 I I: - - — - _— 10 F I 1 90 1 f o ---71 1-. 1.1 I I _ 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 II ---I II-I- 11 I I I 1 1--1 I IllF - I I I- 1 I I-III I 100 .001 .002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .075 .150 .300 I .600 1.18 12.36 4.75 9.5 19 38.1 76.2 127 200 .425 2.0 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS I SAND GRAVEL CLAY TO SILT COBBLES FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE GRAVEL 36 % SAND 43 % SILT AND CLAY 21 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel FROM: Boring 1 0 5' & 10' (Combined) IF These test results apply only to the ° samples which were tested. The Ed testing report shall not be reproduced, except In full, without the written oS approval of Kumar & Associates, Inc. I N Sieve cco analysis testing is performed in D accordance with ASTM D6913, ASTM D7 «o ASTM C136 and/or ASTM D1140. 3 r i y 0. i� 6 R�`J:3 1!'.1 �e 20-7-128 Kumar& Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 0670/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT