HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.725 Cemetery Ln.0045-2019-BRES (32) I(+A Komar
Geotechnical&Associates,A and Materialss 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
oiot y Associates 4
(3Qj
wwwkumanea.corn
1989_Zal9
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED DUPLEXES
725 CEMETERY LANE
LOTS 1 AND 2,HUTTON LOT SPLIT
ASPEN,COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 19-7-347
JUNE 26, 2019
PREPARED FOR:
APSEN STARWOOD, LLC
ATTN: TIFFANY PHIPPS
623 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
tiffany(a,aspenstarwood.com
Reviewed by Engineering
03/16/2020 3:29:26 PM
"It should be known that this review shall not
relieve the applicant of their responsibility to
comply with the requirements of the City of
Aspen.The review and approval by the City is IE C E IVE Dl
offered only to assist the applicants
understanding of the applicable Engineering
requirements."The issuance of a permit based
on construction documents and other data shall 10/17/2 01 9
not prevent the City of Aspen from requiring the 7
correction of errors in the construction
documents and other data. ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT TMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - 1 -
SITE CONDITIONS - 1 -
FIELD EXPLORATION - 2 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - 2 -
SLOPE STABILIZATION - 2 -
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS - 3 -
FOUNDATIONS - 3 -
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS - 4 -
FLOOR SLABS - 5 -
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - 5 -
SURFACE DRAINAGE - 6 -
DRYWELL - 6 -
LIMITATIONS - 6 -
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 AND 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE 2-PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
RECEIVED
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc. Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for two proposed duplexes to be located in the
area of the existing residence which will be razed. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The
purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was
conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Aspen
Starwood, LLC dated May 30, 2019.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field
exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification 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 duplexes will be two-story wood frame structures over a full basement level.
Basement floors will be slab-on-grade. 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 the proposed type of construction.
If building loadings,location or grading plans change significantly from those described above,
we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is currently developed with a two-story wood frame house. The site slopes gently to
moderately down to the east. There appears to have been minor cut and fill for the existing
development. Vegetation consists of landscaped lawn, shrubs and trees. The adjoining parcels
to the north, west and south are developed with condominiums. Cemetery Lane is east of the property. RECEIVED
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 2 -
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 7, 2019. Four exploratory borings
were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The
borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-
mounted CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar&
Associates, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 13/s-inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was 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 of the subsoils. Depths at
which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the
project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The
subsoils consist of up to about 31/2 feet of organic silty gravelly sand fill overlying relatively
dense, silty sandy gravel with cobbles. Drilling in the dense granular soils with auger equipment
was difficult due to the cobbles and possible boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the
deposit.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture
content and gradation analyses. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive
samples (minus 11/2-inch fraction) of the coarse granular subsoils are shown on Figures 4 and 5.
The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were
slightly moist to moist.
SLOPE STABLIZATION
The City of Aspen requires an engineered excavation slope stabilization plan if proposed WED
foundations are within 15 feet of neighboring structures or public travel ways. The plan is RE '�
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 3 -
required if excavations are less than 5 feet below the existing grade or further than 15 feet from
travel ways and less than 15 feet deep. Slope bracing through use of a variety of systems such as
grouting, micro piles and soil nails should be feasible at the site. A shoring contractor should
provide design drawings to support the proposed excavation slopes where needed. Other City
requirements may also be applicable.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of
the proposed construction, we recommend the buildings be founded with spread footings bearing
on the natural granular soils.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing
foundation system.
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for
an allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect
settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will
be less than about 1 inch.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and
2 feet 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 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this
area.
4) 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
lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls"
section of this report.
5) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and
the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively dense natural granular soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compRECEIVED
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 4 -
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to
undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure
computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for backfill consisting
of the on-site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the
duplexes 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 granular soils.
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 90% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement and walkway
areas should be compacted to at least 95%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. Backfill should not contain organics, debris or rock larger
than about 6 inches.
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 0.50. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the
sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 375 pcf. TEE „WE D
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 5 -
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 be a granular material, compacted to at least
95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on-site gravel soils, exclusive of organic sandy fill soils and topsoil, are suitable to
support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential
movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion
joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to
reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab
reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab
use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free-draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level
slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least
50%retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2%passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-
site granular soils or a suitable imported gravel devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
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, crawlspace and basement areas,
be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above
the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of
excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1%to
a suitable gravity outlet, drywell, or sump and pump. Free-draining granular material used in the
underdrain system should contain less than 2%passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50%pR E IVE D
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 6 -
the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at
least 1'h feet deep.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all
times after the duplexes have been completed:
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.
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 10 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
capped with about 2 feet of the on-site soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
DRYWELL
Drywells and bio-swales are often used in the Aspen area for site runoff detention and disposal.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service has identified four hydrologic groups (HSG)in the
Aspen area and the site is located in Type C soil having a moderate infiltration rate. The results
of percolation testing performed in Boring 3,presented in Table 1, indicate an infiltration rate
between about 2 to 5 minutes per inch. The bedrock is generally known to be relatively deep in
this area and groundwater level was not encountered to the boring depth of 16 feet. The drywell
should have solid casing down to at least basement level and perforation below that level.
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 obt C E IVE D
� 0/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347 ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 7 -
from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of
construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the
presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing
in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of
practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the
subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so
that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
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
or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation
of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of
the geotechnical engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kumar& Associates, Inc.
p;D0 /
Daniel E. Hardin, • 0 24443 z
DEH/kac , 41}s1(� <?,"
cc: Thunderbowl ett Greene garrett( thunderbowlarchitects.com
Thunderbowl Arc `= yan Doremus ryan(athunderbowlarchitects.com
RECEIVED
10/17/2019
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-347ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
1 \
fND.S/b'REBAR N01 CAP�� _,.
MS
..sO,•r ..,.: Y CONOOMI n 2g� •
n , FPIR P 8- 14
���11�1111L-LL-��� `�,k PIPi W R� Y_ ��_. q
LLL---�� Z6 p0 E ''p OR WP R ( $4 (\
11 i4 CEt N 76 -(z10.0�7 PSpHPIT // _ SL '1 1
OURS• \ II c.w/6GP� 1.1 \i ..�=. NT a /`��'- g i
PEN G01.F G �` $ ""•.c fv-. "Mc+L'¢x�sPP sosT a.('.�n/✓ is ' ,.,I
CITY OF PS oW�Psnc cr.P _zc N(P Ogg A3A�*------ ,'A,i t R .\ ,I
i11D Sig __.. — u
SnC CAP l5 e3ASR5 ./.,fI�WPY f�- BORING 2 N W y " 1
Fµp.SI�RED 1 G 024�-66 - L dR'. PPVEO ORNE '���.I..� 59.54' ..1"P. `A `
°��° LOT 1 .. 6
LNo.gl� s g'' '�_s fNt ?. ns -.�"� � GROSS AREA = 22,023t SQUARE ET J� i�O.
1 ill ,I v
\ ...-•:-: 4.4.
`•• ,, \,nb • TEMPORARD �i �_ "f• (�
AIRS -
,JI $�u�$•� BORING 1 PLATINRp i \ � .. „.a;
t.
,.. -.K1 SEPTIC uD® 1'1 1 4 _
n\ ) 1 2-LEOEI REAOENTIAI%OqJ FRAMED HOOSE •- i� _ 1
C \ HOLDEN MARCLT DITCH EASEMENT )y \s
• (PER RECEPTION;626319
m ••p g7,
IRONWOODS CONDOMINIUMS it\ \\ u w.iii 90X t '1,
PER PLAT BOOK 26 PACE 17 F•. \ �/1111
1 p�'(�S,k
v
\ LW LINE
�C P.N) j�`'!Y_rF DMNiwwn.Mo .!pj1
x \ ,/, s \ LOT 2 I
\ • GROSS AREA= 17,681t SQUARE FEET
-, �0,: \\\ BORING 3 agORING 4 1
s
m 00, •, ,\ \\ HOLDEN LIAROLT DITCH EASEMENT ..+' •
\.` ,e(PER RECCAPER A0263,9) /g301*1
..\\__„_______
111 S 76'26tr„" W CONOOPP t5\/ 9°
,.U 1 lP k PµA1Jg00K, /
\' 1 T CpRNER /
0'P,,AS C0?5 TO�O /
+‘MO5/8 -%OAR /'
'_ RIG
I /
Tzz.3o GOURSE I /
S 76Kfi OO M 1 /
CITY OF PSPEN G04F //
FND.5/4'1ELLOW PLASTIC CAP IS tzebu ^
/'
/
/
/
,s0 .<61;9 oT
Al
i
T
F
1
II
ei
g
25 0 25 50
m7 APPROXIMATE SCALE—FEET RECEIVED
,,
�= 17/2D19
" 19-7-347 Kumar &Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS -rig. 1
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3 BORING 4
EL. 107' EL. 103' EL. 107' EL. 100'
0 0 /1 (2)� 0
ri 12/12 62/12
-200512 17/12 LA 11/12 -200= -
-200=14
0- o.550/2 6°'.`•- 30/4, 9/0 31., 25/2 50/45WC=5-8 p-
1
-200=19 WC=3.9
- _ +4=51 _
L -200=15 w
w- -w
u_
= 10 - 1 0 4
- 50/4 70/12 -a
w w
0 0
0
15 30/3 15
20 20
3.
m
RECEIVED
E
y - g. z
//17 2D19
19-7-347 Kumar & Associates LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LEGEND
(1) Viz:' SCREENED ROCK, THICKNESS IN INCHES SHOWN IN PARENTHESES TO LEFT OF THE LOG.
lorsFILL: SILTY GRAVELLY SAND, ORGANICS, MEDIUM DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, DARK BROWN.
7
X GRAVEL (GM); SANDY, SILTY WITH COBBLES, DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, BROWN.
IDRIVE SAMPLE, 1 3/8—INCH I.D. SPLIT SPOON STANDARD PENETRATION TEST.
I
12/12 E BOUDTES A 12 BLOWS OF A 140—POUND HAMMER
FALLING 30SAMPLE INCHESLOW WEREC NT.REQUIRED IN INDICATES TO DRIVETHT THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
t PRACTICAL AUGER REFUSAL.
NOTES
1. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JUNE 7, 2019 WITH A 4—INCH—DIAMETER
CONTINUOUS—FLIGHT POWER AUGER.
2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING
FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
• THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED BY HAND LEVEL AND REFER
TO THE GROUND SURFACE AT BORING 4 AS ELEVATION 100.0 FEET.
4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE
ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.
5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216);
+4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASTM D6913);
—200= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (ASTM D1140).
._.
R RECEIVED
19-7-347 Kumar & Associates LEGEND AND NOTES —'F/1712019
ig. 3
'`' ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 HRS 7 HRS
100 45 MIN 1¢_111N _. IN /914IN 4MIN IMIN #200 /100 *50#40 'Q ��]�1$-_j4 3/8' 3 4" 1 1 2' 3" 1'8' ¢'0
90 _ — J —1 _—_ _ _ —_ _I _ 1D
_ 1 I — I
i 1
70 1- _- I - - --__--_ - 1 _ 30
1 = 1 - i V
1- 1 _ - I
50 . 1--- T 1 . 50 `4
~ -- — -
4. ao I -I -- 60
�— - r i
- I _ -
30 ' f -- - - I- 70
- _ -1_ __ -1 -_ _L
zo __ _ - 1 — 1 - —
- - -
10 - — - - - - - I - - 1 so
1 ! 1
0 -- -_ - T I _1J_1-.I 1 1-- 1._i_I 1I I 1 -:1_--_. III 1 I 1 J-.__ I_-I_ _1 1 T7_J.1-- - I -f 1 1 1 1 1 T1 -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 127I 200
.425 2.0 152
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL COBBLES
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
GRAVEL 65 % SAND 23 % SILT AND CLAY 12 %
LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Gravel FROM: Boring 1 0 2.5'
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S.STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 HRS 7 HRS
100 45 MIN 15 MIN 60MIN 19MIN 4MIN MIL_#200 '' 5. 40 • 1= 1. 4 -
1 I - - - I
-_- _ - - T- - 1 - - - 1
90 1- ___- -_._ _ --_ _ - -
F_.110
1 -= I_ - I
80 _ _ - - - - - - _- 1- - - _ -_-- L_ _ - .. -- L- 20
-I--
70 30
1 I 1 -
- I I
I
60 -L- _ I- I 40
1- -1 - - B
? i _ I _ 1 _
so 1—
-I I J=- g
40 — I — I - 60
—
_ _ _—_ _. - - _-.____ _ _-_ -- -_=-i-- _-- -___ _ - -1---
__
a
20 Er_ -_ - -- - -__- -_--- -__.. -_� 80
lir7
_ _ _ 1 - _�_ _ ___ _ _ = 1--
i 10 - -. ,--II- so
10I - Tit I 11 J-LJ 1 T 111 1- TI T -1IIJ —1__1__1 1 1 1 1 71 1 -r TTf-I I I 1 100
.001 .002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .075 .150 .300 I .600 1.18 12.36 4.75 9.5 19 38.1 78.2 127 200
{ .425 2.0 152 I
t I DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
E
SAND GRAVEL
CLAY TO SILT COBBLES
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
GRAVEL 51 % SAND 34 % SILT AND CLAY 15 %
iil LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX
These test results apply only to the
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Gravel FROM: Boring 3 CO 5' & 10' (Combined) samples which were tested. The
testing report shall not it reproduced,
except in full, without the written
>^ approval of Kumar & Associates, Inc.
Sieve analysis testing Is performed in
Vt accordance with ASTM D6913, ASTM D7928,
la ASTM C136 and/or ASTM D1140.
N!
.a 19-7-347 Kumar& Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS _(�%g174/2019
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 HRS 7 HRS
100 45 MIN 15 MIN BOMIN_.19MIN_ AWN WIN 0200 0100 4 O y40S 0 4 6 01?tlI)_ _
I1 I _ -_1=
-I I— _
10
SO - — I — I 20
-I
70 -- - - - -- - - --I _ —I - -- - .... _ - 1--- 30
- II I - _- - __ 40 e
1 I
z
q 50 - 1 -.- --I - 50 tt
6 --.— - - -_ —_ — - �- _- _ C
— — _ i 1- E
40 1 I - L 60
=1 — i — I--
30 -- - -. I. L.- _ - - ___1_,_ 70
J -- -I I
— I
10 __.-.___-_ --�_ _ � - - _,__ � __ 90
I -
0 1-1L=1_i_L_i 1 I 1 I I I.I l l I I I I III =I __I -1-I I I I I 1 I I . I._1. 1.1 I I 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
CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL COBBLES
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
GRAVEL 56 % SAND 30 % SILT AND CLAY 14 %
LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Gravel FROM: Boring 4 0 2.5'
r.
-
b
E
_ These test results apply only to the
samples which were tested. The
1,1 testing report shall not be reproduced.
except In full, without the written
LA approval of Kumar & Associates. Inc.
a! Sieve analysis testing is performed in
"'o accordance with ASTM 136913, ASTM D7928,
is ASTM C136 and/or ASTM D1140.
a 19-7-347 Kumar& Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS _cc- /2 319
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
N-
v
M
'I-
CS)
O
Z w N G) O N
V >- Ct Ct Ct Ct
O F— s., 3•, 7•0 I.
2 o L7 L., C7 L7
w 'C 'C 'd 'd
cl ci cs �
V)
cm
5rj
=o
Cl)
H
J
I
CI) CA d o
w M gz
c J
I-- 0
CO ce
W m 1-
I— W
H J ,..._,
C/ a O o
o =U'
W J
J
Ci
H CO N —
W U W
QC.)Z y ,--I �--I
J UJ v9 p .-. .--I
LL a¢N
0 a
W
Q
Z N M eM
en
Cn
Q0
R' WJ
e N 1--I VO
ir) in
0
e
N J r
3 a�
l
C CO h Z 0
C N C
M 1-1-1
a c
klel"c o
a.-R •N
1 w b
O
IG U -
O
a
11115°7 0
F Lai
z
y, am N
e-I N CD
UM
N
�10/17 ILV 0E1AAD
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Icy4 &Associates,sEng
Geotechnical and Materials Engineers
and Environmental Scientists
Z
TABLE 2
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NO.19-7.347
HOLE HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER WATER DROP IN AVERAGE
NO. (INCHES) INTERVAL DEPTH AT DEPTH AT WATER PERCOLATION
(MIN) START OF END OF LEVEL RATE
INTERVAL INTERVAL (INCHES) (MIN.IINCH)
(INCHES) (INCHES)
B-3 137 5 79 68 11 .5
68 48 20 .3
48 31 17 .3
31 28 3 1.7
28 25 3 1.7
25 23 2 2.5
23 22 1 5.0
22 20 2 2.5
20 19 1 5.0
19 18 1 5.0
Note: Percolation test was performed in Boring 3 which had caved at about 11.5 feet. Percolation test
was conducted on June 7,2019.
RECEIVED
10/17/2019
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT