HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.234 W Francis St.0118-2020-BRES (68) I(+A �, , g
Geotechnical and 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
cost&Associates 4€:
y a�s
•
www kumarusa.am
1489-2O1
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED ADDITION
234 WEST FRANCIS STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 19-7-496
SEPTEMBER 11, 2019
PREPARED FOR:
STEVEN ELLS
do 1 FRIDAY DESIGN
ATTN: DEREK SKALKO
P. O. BOX 7928
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
derekA l frida_ydesign.com
RECEIVED
10/22/2020
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - 1 -
SITE CONDITIONS - 1 -
FIELD EXPLORATION - 2 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - 2 -
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS - 3 -
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS - 3 -
FOUNDATIONS - 3 -
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS - 4 -
FLOOR SLABS - 5 -
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - 6 -
DRYWELL - 6 -
SURFACE DRAINAGE - 7 -
LIMITATIONS - 7 -
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING
FIGURE 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
FIGURE 3 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 4 -GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE 2-PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
RECEIVED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Incorrect address,
revise to be W
Francis St.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
o - •e results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located at 234
West Bleeker Street, - .pen, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of
- •• • . o .e•- op recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted
in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to 1 Friday Design, dated
August 19, 2019.
A field exploration program consisting of an exploratory boring 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
addition 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 construction consists of an addition connecting the existing historic buildings on
the property. The addition will generally be 2-story wood frame construction above a basement
level. Ground floors will typically be slab-on-grade. Grading for the structure is assumed to
involve cut depths up to about 12 to 15 feet. Excavation shoring could be needed to maintain cut
slope stability. We assume relatively light to moderate 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 property is occupied by a two-story residence with an attached garage and a detached single-
story carriage house, all to remain and be renovated. The ground surface is relatively flat and
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
-2 -
gently sloping down to the northeast with about 2 feet of elevation difference. Vegetation
consists of lawn, landscape planter beds and mature trees.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on August 30, 2019. One exploratory boring
was drilled at the approximate location shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions.
Drill rig access to other parts of the property was not practical due to site features and soft, wet
ground. The boring was 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 1%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 sr -` -cribed by ASTM Method D-1586.
Identify the NRCS soil
The penetration resistance values a. type. ive density of Per the soils report
requirements outlined
subsoils. Depths at which the samples were take and the penetration resis in the URMP
shown on the Log of Exploratory Boring, Figure 2. The samples were - . Appendix A, hydraulic
for review by the pr, : .-- 1_.,- ,i•.-
conductivity needs to
be included as well as
the testing method.
SUBSURFACE CONDITION
A graphic log of the ► A,iA 4 •,6:„ �►� ;, • - n on Figure 2. The
subsoils, below about 2 feet of topsoil, consist of about 3 feet of natural, stiff slightly sandy clay
underlain by relatively dense, silty sandy gravel and cobbles with probable boulders down to the
boring depth 16 feet.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the boring included natural moisture
content and density and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on
a relatively undisturbed drive sample of the clay, presented on Figure 3, indicate low to moderate
compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting and a low expansion potential when
wetted under a constant 1,000 psf surcharge. Results of gradation analyses performed on small
diameter drive samples (minus 11/2-inch size fraction) of the coarse granular soils are presented
on Figure 4. The laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1. RECEIVED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496 ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 3 -
No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly
moist to moist.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The natural granular soils encountered below the topsoil and clay materials are adequate for
support of spread footing foundations. The topsoil and clay should be completely removed from
beneath the proposed building area. The new building as planned is above a full basement and
the excavation is expected to extend down below the clay material. Further evaluation of the
extent of clay should be performed at the time of excavation.
The City of Aspen requires an engineered excavation stabilization plan if proposed foundations
are within 15 feet of a neighboring structure or public travel way. The plan is not required if
excavations are less than 5 feet below existing grades 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 micro-piles
and soil nailing should be feasible at the site. A shoring contractor with experience in the area
should provide design drawings to support the proposed excavation slopes. 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 building 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 3,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect
settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will
be about 1 inch or less.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and
2 feet for isolated pads. RECEIVED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 4 -
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 12 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, clay soils, debris 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 compacted.
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 50 pcf for backfill consisting
of the on-site granular soils or imported granular materials. Cantilevered retaining structures
which are separate from the building 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 or imported granular materials. The backfill should not contain debris, topsoil,
clay or oversized (plus 6-inch)rock.
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
RECEWED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 5 -
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 placed in pavement and
walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95%of the maximum standard Proctor density.
Care should be taken not to over compact 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. Increasing compaction to at least 98% of standard Proctor
density could be used to help limit the settlement potential.
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 400 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 be a relatively well graded granular soil
compacted to at least 95%of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near
optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural granular soils encountered below the topsoil and clay soil 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 dr ' r E 1VE D
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 6 -
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 devoid of debris,topsoil and rock larger than 6 inches.
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%passing
the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at
least 1%2 feet deep.
DRYWELL
Drywells and bio-swales are often used in the Aspen area for site water runoff detention and
disposal. The natural granular soils encountered below the fill soils are typically relatively free
draining and should be suitable for surface water treatment and disposal as needed. The results
of .er olation esting pelf./ ed in Boring 1,presented in Table 2, indicate an infiltration rate of
ab► +t 2 minutes per inch fo the soils below basement level. Bedrock and groundwater levels are
x e•W,LCKOgi5: 'c' • •ep,a ,a at :ff-ct a • 1 or i'o w.l- d-.i:Ja. f. d►y,,-ll 's s.a
shoe Infiltration.rate is 2• ' -1 to at least 2 feet be1o4'basement floor level with perforations
belt min/in here but Table Per the URMP
2 says perc rate is 2 Section 8.5.4.2
min/in. Are these Drywells, a perc rate RECEIVE
terms being used as less than 3in/hour is
synonyms in this not acceptable for - 10/22/2020
report? d rywe I l s. Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 7 -
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all
times after the building has 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 6 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
covered with filter fabric and capped with at least 2 feet of finer graded soils to
reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5
feet from foundation walls.
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
principles and practices in this area at the time of this study. 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,
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
RECEIVED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496 ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
- 8 -
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.
Robert L. Duran, E. I.
Reviewed by:
\\
o ® RE&
..0....�® 111
CO 15222
Steven L. Pawla �/ s
, °eo• s/qi
RLD/kac 1,I.e•�c[/� 0".
1 .os.eos
DiVAL ENr�
RECEIVED
10/22/2020
Kumar&Associates,Inc.® Project No.19-7-496
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
ti
•
- Alley
Edge of Alley _____(20' R.O.W.)
4 > N 75"97 1" F 90.00'
SQ"toncrete Pad - ��•�,
r.°h D M •--
ii
,=1"0 e,0 0 1
1 ry.
scoo
7",.1. 1ti m a 10 I arid`'P tsnow 1 ` ` 1 ti J--
r coyer)pool 1 ' 1, 5 1
1 10.7' 6.7' ; 1 R1M Aga40� ' t
I V , O,'
l' h I 1 7.1' ar°a,, BORING 1 1
O{
0 1 1 y
.3.1 .6. n -� I OOP',.
t p0 S4 Ft 1 L O t .24 i
i Cb Erick walk >
��uu c°�:0 9,� 1 Pc•
A;/. 0.2ai, 4
55'5-11.
j�� 0 460 O — I y _ 9.1' 01
0 0.5' 1 4 ®-
3 @ 3 1 C 9.5' c° `''
d D 2 Store • c , < N (
74N-9
� - Fri 11,0' i�co H �e 1
�l78 Cov 78838 lh
1 Story
1 _
6° � 6.5 F_��Porcp..ji*ILk�w-olk 1\y �8gs ��R}o98 0.2�_j
oo never — d 1 AeaaBs• Nause 0.2 ri
a6
0
1 1 0 1 29.6'
I 1 0.9' o X6.5 1 c d 5 4i —� +—�1.4
'
4 `�"o - 0 4�. 0 ';ievecl}3 1 1 Corc Window �
'�.7 �. - 0 ro - 1 Porch Well -I
C --• Cov d 18.6' 1— I �._ forked
~ Porch "'s•4 1 sus �I f
6li L 29' 7g� '- R' 0 —r�- Rot' waii
2o.a 1( L �` 4,
"1"'
( 7886.78' __1 J 1 b'loCk1 1 y ,r?5,..ir2"0
wo )
52'49" W ° -- 1 „ I - ,'ti:��A: _ —--
31.32' fs, 6"a M S 76"09'»"A'--90.00' / 1 .I S 69.57.22.E
68) 7886 qr. .1 /B8 B9 7._687 c
l Basis of Bearing -- ,_
0 s
�0 is —_-. - I rm -,-I\
788E S7, N 'i ---- �04,
r i� m .�
_I
756 .41' �'�9 r� ^00 f
0 --
0 \s,
E ge of Pavement --- - -
78ea` t,86,sQ. R ��� 9-
9 6
6y'h '1�0�,p^ �0�69 ^��t 1�96�6
7888 63 `.:_.S '100
C rest Francis Street
E
, ,:.,.
,,,,,
1
L,
im 10 0 10 20
APPROXIMATE SCALE—FEET
Lii
RECEIVED
19/2 /2020
s 19-7-496 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING Ig.
"' ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
BORING 1 LEGEND
EL. 7886'
0 •�' TOPSOIL; ORGANIC, CLAY, SLIGHTLY SANDY, TRACE GRAVEL,
` STIFF, MOIST, BROWN.
•
10/12 //CLAY (CL); SLIGHTLY SANDY, TRACE GRAVEL, STIFF, MOIST,
_
/ WC=22.3
/] DD=101 //BROWN.
GRAVEL AND SAND (GM-SM); SILTY, SCATTERED COBBLES,
5 PROBABLE BOULDERS, MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST, BROWN.
— •,.fo. 16/12 /'ROUNDED ROCK.
DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
10 �.-' DRIVE SAMPLE, 1 3/8-INCH I.D. SPLIT SPOON STANDARD
36/12 , PENETRATION TEST.
w— f
— 10/12 DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 10 BLOWS OF
A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED
TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
15 A 41/6, 50/4 NOTES
/off 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS DRILLED ON AUGUST 30, 2019
COMBINED WITH A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS FLIGHT POWER AUGER.
WC=5.4 2. THE LOCATION OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS MEASURED
+4=41 APPROXIMATELY BY PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE
L— 20 -200=12 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);
DD = DRY DENSITY (pcf) (ASTM D 2216);
+4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (ASTM D 6913);
-200 = PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (ASTM D 1140).
C
L
k°
xx
ee RE( EIVE
rE
19-7-496 Kumar& Associates LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Et
6�2i/2 020
Yel
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
SAMPLE OF: Slightly Sandy Clay
FROM: Boring 1 ® 2.5'
WC = 22.3 %, DD = 101 pcf
1
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
0
-1 _ .
N I
-2
Z �
O I
(-) -4
These test results apply only to the _
samples tested.The testing report
shall not be reproduced,except in
full,without the written approval of I
Kumar and Associotes.Inc.Swell
Consolidation testing pertorrned in I
accordance with ASTM D-4546.
.1 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10 100
ml
Ia
m/
19-7-496 Kumar & Associates SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS _6ify22,3/2 D20
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 MS 7 MS
100 45 MIN 15 MIN 6= N 19MIN WIN 1MJN #200 I100 I = 440 030 15 010#5 #4 3/8- 3/4- 1 2' ;f' S'6' 6'0
-___ _ I -_ -♦__. - ---- _I -II
- =
90 _ �- t= _ I tr-- 10
_ — _ t— - J J--_
80 — - __I - I 20
_ I. i
30
- I— I--
_ I-
12' 80 - 1 -�-- 1 I 40
1
b SO I I 50 W
G - I -
40 I { - i eo
IV s
so V1- — 70
- 1 -
zo -- I I eo
10 --- --�-------_i— _ 90
0 ----T 1 TITS- I 1-1 1 1-1 l IT 1.- I I_I I1_I_. _ _-I:- I I .1..I I I II T-1 1I I I LI 11 100
.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
ND
CLAY TO SILT FINE SA MEDIUM COARSE FINE GRAVEL MEDIUMCOBBLES
GRAVEL 41 % SAND 47 % SILT AND CLAY 12 %
LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel FROM: Boring 1 0 10' & 15' (Combined)
e
o
These test results apply only to the
samples which were tested. The
testing report shall not be reproduced,
except in full, without the written
e" approval of Kumar & Associates, Inc.
I S Sieve analysis testing is performed In
o= accordance with ASTM D6913, ASTM D7928,
Si ASTM C136 and/or ASTM Dt140.
�i
V. 19-7-496 Kumar&Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS 162 /2020
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
co
rn
cn
o cd cd
z
0 C.
p 1- >, '0
0_ N ce czt
4-1
MI
74 CA
•.r •. 1
Ci) (i)
Z COH
LL w 0 -
oa� n
Z 0O N
D V
U)
I-
J
cs x
co
w -_
I-- 0
CO re
W m I-
w
H J
Ce— 0 a C7
W I J
_I
CO
Q 0 ~z�'
F' CO w o w_ N
J a'v)o
a Q N
Li_
0 a
Ce
a
M 2 CI)
N o0
K J
o ~
0
a)
--4
J
•W =ce W O O
F-p „..
w 2 p
CO C
.N
cogN JwH
C! 4 3 iz=w M
m E =yz Nin
•
z O O N
o
ww
big 0 c Z =
4
o w a ckt
p N
C-, O O
0 0
—}— W RECEIVED
0 E 0
N 10/22/2020
0
CO
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
IC A umar&Associates,Inc.®
Geotechnical and Materials Engineers
and Environmental Scientists
1
TABLE 2
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PROJECT NO.19-7-496
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)
60 46 14 .1
46 43 3 .7
43 40 3 .7
40 38 2 1
38 36'/2 11/2 1.3
B-1 125 2 361/2 35 11/2 1.3
35 33'/2 1'/2 1.3
33% 32'/2 1 2
32'/2 31'/2 1 2
31% 301/2 1 2
301/2 291/2 1 2
Note: Percolation testing was conducted in Boring 1, located as shown on Figure 1. The percolation test
was conducted on August 30, 2019.
RECEIVED
10/22/2020
ASPEN
BUILDING DEPARTMENT