Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.264328203006 (1990)'-03-004, %r ASPEN*PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT 'INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT NO. TY E OF PERMIT: Initial Construction ( )Emergency Use ( )Repair Work,(Pievious Permit t .) ( )Alteration of an existing system, or installation (Preva us Permit ! ) ( )Use Permit as a result of Sala ( )Othor3 ISSUED TO: DATE OF ISSUE Owner_SUSAN( 4ND //M leve i -L Home Phone �,2'j� i0 Business Mai ]_ in g 61601�— Address Agent_ Ma il.ing Address Sewage Disposal System Work to be performed by --NrUTSMfIr/ _ Phone This permit valid /only for premises location by the fo lowing gal des tiption: �C�l-r.7 1 LLC'I-"r- S(LE -2-+ fipr< WATER SUPPLY S AVERAGE PERCOLATIO`) RATF. (ST,2fcT cn This Individual Sewage Disposal Pernit is granted with regard to the following use: CLE fHALY &nEA- Nufabcr oft Dedreoms �,q_ Lofts Garbage Disposals_ t Dishwashers J Clothes Washers CALCULATED AVERAGE DAILY WASTE LOAD 45-0 GALLONS. HE NATUIRE OF THE SYSTEM INCLUDED UNDER THIS P_ERiiIT: `-"- Typ.n of Tank or Treatment Units ' 1CANl::� method of Final Disposals IY srC•NTI�JLGwaa&s Absorption 1 11 b d if an ) of other equipment or appurtnancess Tank Capacity. VL2Q _Callon Hinimua Area 2�Zy Square Feet Minimum Descrip_ion ( nc ud ng ran nam., z --r Toe = v� -Ess-�-,e�.✓��r �s7�t G4%�rir! P C-�� .Other Conditions or Spccificationse 0,ie 133..• SQ, � OF TA [-rRA7-oR �' � .1AI�A & F / STAGES REQUIRING INSPECTION BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT: ( )Before Excavation ( )Upon completion of excavation and prior to placement of gravelBefore covering distribution system of absorption field )Prior to backfill of anycomponent( )other, Specifyt JQIA _ -- Plans and specifications of the proposed sewage disposal system have been reviewed andare considered satisfactory. Perris...-;1an is hcreby granted to the owner or his o.^.ent to perform the work indicated above in a::c•ordanco with the Pitkin County Indivi.lual Sc4�a;o Disp^sal Rc,nilations in cffo,:t on the e:�tc of issue. In addltton to general provision. _ci fort: or: vvcrnc ':eller, this Permit is subject to the following additional terms and co litions: Aspen/Pitkin Environnv tt l rPPROVED FOR ISSUE BY ,. N (title) Health OfficerT /�-/✓ �v+ 'fes -1,c. atxwe in.iividunl sc%tago disposal syntem lnstallcd by /9!v_ ir..s b:cn la for use by .. rcpro3.:nt.1t1ve cf the Agl!ca:/'lt .in !nviron.T.i.tal ,.•.nai rc:;pons:bili1ty in cayc of failure or inaJ 'q uacy of El u scu yu diapQual aystern. ComnIcLu ax -Guilt :;raving attacnod. DATE OF INAL INSPEC I Aspen/Pitkin Environmental TITLE Health Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8161'1 303/920-5070 CC ASPEN*PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL•PERMIT Name of OWNER E T)wN' , V fa PHONE Address of OWNER 3,5 `i 5 H-spev\ ,SCJ Name of APPLICANT SJSa PHONE `P- PF.RMtT TO BE: ( )Picked Up - (/sled tot TYPE OF PERMIT: /New Installation ( )Repair (Owner ( )Applicant ( )Emergency Use ( )Alteration NOT due to failure LOCATION OF PROPOSED SYSTEM: ILegal Description 1 Q er� hrhe- Size of ot Lot S BlockTiling Subdivision acres TYPE or STRUCTURE: (y'Single Family Dwelling ( )Others Do you plan any further additions to the residence? ( )YES ( )NO No. of bedrooms No. of Lofts No. of Garbage Disposals i No. of Automatic Dishwashers No. of Automatic Clothes washers I WATER SUPPLY: ( )Private Wall, Depth or ( Public, Name of System ( )Spring ( )Stream or Creek TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED, ( Septic Tank/Absorption Field ( )Aeration Plant/Absorption Field ( )Composting Toilet ( )Incineration Toilet ( )Mound (')Recycling, potable use ( )Recycling, other use ( )Vault Privy ( )Other: The initial site inspection must be arianged with the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department (925-2020, 8:30-9:30 a.m.) before s permit can be issued. The individual sewage disposal permit must be issued before a building permit can be obtained. FINAL INSPECTION APPROVAL MUST BE GIVEN BY THE ASPEN/PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO BACKFILLING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSTEM. Application for an individual sewage disposal permit is hereby submitted. The undersigned acknowledges that the above information ''is true and that false informati n will invalidate the application and any subsequent permit. Signature of Applicant = A" `l"'`- DATE S-1 D 1I y� ' (This application becomes. invalid 1I months from the above date.) NOTE: PLOT PLAN must be filed with this application. Please locate the following items by measured distances: 1. Property lines and dimensions. 2. Proposed and existing water wells on subject property and adjacent property. 3. Domestic water service lines. 4. Proposed and existing buildings, driveways, and other structures. S. Streams, lakes, ponds, irrigation ditches, and other water courses. 6. Proposed and existing individual sewage systems on subject property. , SUBMIT A REVISED PLOT PLAN PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION IF INSTALLATION IS TO BE CHANGED FROM ORIGINAL PLAN. The undersig:�hereby acknowledges receipt of this individual sewage disposal pert: rt ap lieation and a permi t� it/ the amount 1/ of S , Receipt Number , Date Fee Received by Administrative Officer '130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado B11611 303/920-5070 Date Rei Bill To , 0%`4 DL Mt, -.4 . am 4 1;L/ / Check/Receipt' Number Inspection Requested By, Original Report To Be Sent To Copy Of Report To Be Sent To Property Owner Parcel ID Number Legal 1/4, Loth=, B1oq, OM; 1 V inca / -, SubdivWon_ Building Occupied Vacant Age Of Building Date Septic Tank Last Pumped # Bedrooms DEPARMW R3001RDS• Permit Number Year Issued G No Records Found Septic Tank Capacity (Gallons) Septic Tank Materi Leach Field Size (Sq. Ft.) Leach Field Type _ Date Of Inspection or Soil Conditions: D Saturated Snow Covered Other Septic System: Functionuliq Satisfactorily V- Not,Functigning Comments 11� l7 � �� � ,G�1 J-� - al �( .�C,�fi�� Water Supply: Public: Name / ( IF Private: Well , Spring , Cistern , Surface , Other Well Construction And Location: Approved Unapproved Because_ Bacteriological Water Test: Lab Number Acceptable Other A.P.E.H.D.:4/87 Date i ASPEN*PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT FIELD TEST DATA SHEET Legal decription: / "�e Name of Owner: Address: # & st. / p.o. box) ity)/ (state) (zip) Name of Agent: �1114 Water Supply: Public Utility SubdivisionXPrivate Well Lot Area: ,24 11% Distance to Nearest Surface Water ft. Dates Observations Made: Soil Borings: by - ® ,�/jQ� r" Percolation Te ts: by SOIL BORING TESTS 'iv': Jot i`u��t kv` smit :ot .fin' 7ft 7R SR X2 Nt Sx � d2 SOi 5:2 in 59 R: R¢ irax � A2 J� flt AR Rt AR SR R2 1R SOt R2 iX k2 7R JU N2 fmw 1ft Se: fai 7ti SX `w�..S�s'. At fr? W )GT .��' £2 ai i3c i.Y P;: S: ':�: rtfT »uMf<+ roT+L ot•r» Jt[* IDl•TN TO awOUND w.T[+, r[tT cN AA AC T[+ or fCIL wITN TNTC AN of IN 1[[7 [fnM+TTo wIc B-1 r(' ,o/f�3[•v[o �e►� e MIN VT[! i JrE T i>iG`T B-2 �J T[Sl N VM DCA OC •TN IN CNCS CNA+ACT[+ O/ SOIL TNIc.NC33 IN INCNCS SIN CC NO Iw wOIC IST .11 wIG»T Y}O��f�Sqq/]�pp�t Yy�� ggfO Yye�t(�3N3N 1[CO— TO LAfT •C+100 ��ggk� gg�� yyqq �5 �( �[ gyp(fi�ee(( 7R 7R lOT Rt 7R 9.0 �Sppt yy�� �S�( ��!! �t �Spq ��55 ��t( ��{C fit+yytt ��ttc yytt �^tRt %C 9.2 A2 At R2 TR At Si At TA Ak Ri lXt: iOt T.'. Si: Wt ii 7v# i:: J3.�'.(' �'c >S: Sit ]'t. Y.'t hti PERCOLATION TESTS Y �t fiC TOT £2 T�oC SR Mi�GC 7.2 Nt RC TQ k27d �TQ Rt flt %C %t A[SR RC JR AC Sd2 At SR At Rt PR 1ft >�>`R 7R t4 iO(�1�SA 32%2ffif�2 See b2 �Y i�OC SQ :JT iUI�ii 7a Sok 'ik iiC SR MOY+1 MAT[+ TCST TIUC o+o• I rvA T[+ L[v[L. IN CN[f MIN VT[! �J T[Sl N VM DCA OC •TN IN CNCS CNA+ACT[+ O/ SOIL TNIc.NC33 IN INCNCS SIN CC NO Iw wOIC IST .11 wIG»T NT(+VAL w INVTLS 1[CO— TO LAfT •C+100 N[fT TO CAlT •C IMOD LAST •[+IOD TO TALL OMC IN CJI P-1 kjX?, � I r P-2 iL 36 2kd 7i-- P-3 �1 P-4 Pla Dat Average Rate: -51 minutes/inch to on the back Signature"r, 8106 NELSON AV, ECv/PITKIN SANiTARiAN 130 S. GALENA CO 815 1 1 0 P. \ I /60,\ ' �\ • \� \, \ \\ ` \\ '` \\ \ \\ \ `����\ � \ \ \ \, \ `\, \ \\ \\ � \ - - LOT 5 � • •,\ \ `.,`. \ \ \.,off \ \ V \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ � \ \ \ \� \ \ \ \\ CDC —60 New C_ia�vr�;T \00 10 • \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ �--- — .—= iii /�,� / $+o i ,rte 'mm T ChenN rthern Inc.� o , 0 (".I lu ql I_rnpnccrs ar rc l :i�.icnt r.K 50801ie:id 154 Gies IWOUt ISjgwn ls. Colorado 111601 303 945 7458 3039.15 23631:rrsanne SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESSIDENCE IIT 5, BLOCK 4, BRUSH CREEK VILUIGE, FILING 1 PITKIN CCCRM, COLORADO Prepared For: Tim Terral P.O. Box 3595 Aspen CO £31612-3595 Job No. 4 2£37 90 it nxvnlxrr td lht` VIII �pntrpttl crxnl>.uxtls May 7, 1990 17r TABLE OF CONTE 14TS CONCLUSION PURi'CSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY PROPOSED 00N9=CTI0N SITE CONDITION FIELD EXPLORATION SUBSOIL CONDITIONS FOUNDATION RECC114ENIATIONS FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS FLOOR SLABS UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM SURFACE DRAINAGE LIMITATIONS FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FI=E 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 AND 5 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RLSUEM TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LADDRATORY TEST RESULTS • 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CONCLUSIONS The proposed building should be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils and designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 4000 psf and a minimum dead load pressure of 1000 psf. other design and construction criteria relating to geotechnical aspects of the proposed residence are presented in the body of the report. This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located on Lot 5, Block 4, Brush Creek Village, Filing 1, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the fouixiation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineerim services to Tim Terral, dated March 20, 1990. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop reconure-ndations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in the report. This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engineering considerations related to construction of the proposed residence are included in the report. Geologic conditions which Now imik". -2- may affect the site have previously been addressed by Nicholas Lampiris in a letter dated April 24, 1978 and are beyond the :cope of this study. PROPOSED OONSTRUCTION The proposed residence will be a two-story structure of wood frame construction with the lower level a walk -out type basement. Ground floor is proposed to be a combination of slab -on -grade and structurally supported over crawl space. Foundations may be stepped down the hillside and grading for the structure is expected to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 8 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type construction. The garage will be separate From the residence structure as shown on Fig. 1. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE OONDITIONS The lot is located in the south-central portion of Brush Creek Village near Medicine Bow Road. The site is located on a northeasterly sloping hillside and occupied by an existing barn/stable which is not shown on Fig. 1. Grades across the lot are moderately steep becoming steep above the garage area, ranging from about 20% to 350. Elevation difference across the proposed residence is about 10 feet and elevation difference across the lot is on the order of 60 to 70 feet. Vegetation consists of weeds, brush and scrub oak. -3- FIELD 10(PLORATION R The field exploration for the project was conducted on March 27, 1990. Two exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The pits were excavated with a backhoe arra were logged by a representative of Crier -Northern, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken by disturbed and relatively undisturbed methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Lags of Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSOIL CONDITIONS The subsoil profiles encountered at the site are shown graphically on Fig. 2. The subsoils consisted of about 2 feet of organic topsoil overlying stiff to very stiff sandy clays which are medium plastic. At depths of 6 1/2 to 9 1/2 feet in the pits, very stiff to dense clay and gravel containing cobbles was encountered. The lower deposit was similar to the overlying clays except for considerable gravel.and cobble size material. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural moisture content and dry density, gradation analyses and liquid and plastic limits. Results of swell -consolidation tests performed on relatively undisturbed hand driven liner samples of the sandy clays, shown on Figs. 4 and 5, indicate the upper, porous clays are coiipressible and the deeper clays possess a low to moderate expansion potential under low to moderate surcharge and wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation and the subsoils were slightly moist. (I w1l Nord icri 1. h iu. -4 - FOUNDATION RECCHMEND 1TIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we reconmend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils below the upper porous soils. There is some risk of movement if subsurface wetting of the bearing soils were to occur. To help mitigate the heave potential of the swelling soils, a minimum dead load pressure on the footings is also reconmended. Surface drainage as discussed later in this report should also be followed to reduce the potential for wetting. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. The construction criteria should be considered when preparing project documents. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 4000 psf and a minimum dead load pressure of 1000 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch. Additional movement of about 1/2 to 1 inch is possible if wetting of the bearing soils were to occur. 2) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose, disturbed or porous soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to firm natural soils. The footings should bear a mininnim of 3 feet below the natural ground surface. 3) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 4) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost -5 - protection. Placement of foundations at least 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 5) Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies and better withstand differential movement. 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. 6) If a pad and grade beam system is used for foundation support, a void form should be provided below the grade beam to concent. -ate loads and reduce damage if heave occurs. 7) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footirxl excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WAILS 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 55 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site gravelly soils and 45 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular materials. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the main structure and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure co puted on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils and 45 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular materials. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate surcharge pressures such as adjacent buildings, traffic, construction materials INI.ii1L. CDC 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. 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 0.30. Passive pressure against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 250 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, par- ticularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. We recommend d imported granular soils for backfilling foundation walls and retaining structures because their use results in lower lateral earth pressures and the backfill will be incorporated in the underdrain system. Subsurface drainage relations are discussed in more detail in the "Underdrain System" section of this report. Imported granular wall backfill should contain less than 20% passing the No. 200 sieve and have a m-iximum size of 8 inches. The on-site soils are expansive and there is a risk of heave for slabs bearing on these soils. A positive approach to reduce the risk of movement is to construct the slabs as structurally supported over crawl space, as is C li it I\it)lilll'1i1_Iiic. proposed in parts of the residence. If slab -on -grade construction is used, the owner should be aware there is a risk of movement and distress. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Slip joints should be provided for partition walls bearing on slabs -on -grade so that if the slab heaves the movement is not transferred to the upper structure. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for control joints and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A mini_mwn 4 -inch layer of base course gravel should be placed immediately beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 -inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be con-pacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock, however, these soils will be expansive when placed in a compacted condition and moisture -density control during placement will be important. The above recommendations will not prevent heave of slabs -on -grade should the underlying expansive soils become wet, but should help reduce the damage if movement occurs. Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may C h i1 0 -3- develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can also create a perched condition. We reccnunend below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawl space and basement areas be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drain tile 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. Free -draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 500 passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 2 feet deep. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence 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 or above optimum moisture and compacted to at least 950 of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 900 of the maximum standard Proctor density in larK1scape 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. 0 icil ='No rtl1!21-,1,(1w. -9- 4) Utility lines should be pressure tested for leaks and repaired as necessary prior to backfilling. 5) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on Fig. 1 and the proposed type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not become evident until excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We reconmend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. sincerely, Qli-NORIHERN, INC. BY David A. Young Reviewed By Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. DAY/ec cc: Arnold Gwathmey Pratt, Attn: Graeme Means Barry Maggert & Associates, Attn: Harry Cole �'hc lNor(hcni,hic- d \ \ \ PIT 2 \ \ \ \ \ PROPOSED\ \ \ \ HOUSE \ \ \ \ \ PIT I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ IN, \ \ \ PROPOSED \ \ \ \ \ \ \ GARAGE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 110 17-3 PROPOSED \ F DRIVE a \ \ \ E \ PARKING \ \ \ F \ \ \ \ 9 \ \ S4 \ S6 V \ APPROXIMATE SCALE 1/16 = I 14 287 90 I ChenONorthem,Inc I LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. I I 45 40 Ui 30 25 Test Pit 1 Elev. = 43' 7-7 WC=6 DD= 104 -200=56 WC=9 DD= 107 ,o Test Pit 2 Elev. = 37' LAW M Note: Explanation of symbols presented on Fig. 3. 25 4 287 90 ChenONorthemInc I Logs of Exploratory Pits Fig. 2 Assumed Lower 'L Floor Level 35 0 + -200142 > LL=34 PI=17 w 30 WC=10 DD=104 71 Note: Explanation of symbols presented on Fig. 3. 25 4 287 90 ChenONorthemInc I Logs of Exploratory Pits Fig. 2 Moisture Content = 9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 107 _ pcf Sample of: Very Sandy clay From: P l t 1 at 5 feet Moisture Content = 6 percent p s Dry Unit Weight = 104 pcf Sampleof: Very sandy clay o constant due to p wet es in ur From: Pit 1 at 3 feet c 0 1 N N S.- a 2 E 0 Additi nal compress n U under -ons-an- Lre 3 4 5 6 7 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf c 0 N c a x w i oe 0 c 0 1 N N v s-. E 2 O U 3 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 4 287 90 Chen -Northern, Inc. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIs• 4 Moisture Content = 9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 107 _ pcf Sample of: Very Sandy clay From: P l t 1 at 5 feet p s constant due to p wet es in ur Moisture Content = 9 percent Dry Unit Weight = 107 _ pcf Sample of: Very Sandy clay From: P l t 1 at 5 feet constant due to p wet es in ur r" .'4"' . .'F ts: U. 1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 4 287 90 Chen -Northern, Inc. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESI, 5 CA -1A-79 Moisture Content = 10 percent Dry Unit Weight - 104 pcf Sample of: very sandy clay From: Pit 2 at 8 feet xp ue nscn t nder constant ing p s je�. U. 1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 4 287 90 Chen -Northern, Inc. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESI, 5 CA -1A-79 Chen -Northern, Inc. T A B L E I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 4 287 90 SAMPLE IOCATION NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT I%) NATURAL DRY DENSITY IPC0 GRADATION PERCENT PASSING NO eta SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (PSI) SOIL OR BEDROCK TYPE PIT DEPTH peel) GRAVEL 1'I SAND (°�) LIQUID LIM11 (•.) PLASTICITY INDEX I%) 1 3 6 104 56 very sand clay 5 9 107 very sandy clay 2 4 10 42 34 17 very clayey sand 8 10 104 1 very sandy clay Lj I LEGEND: , F EjTopsoil; silty clay, organic, soft, very moist, black. (CL); medium plasticity, very sandy to very clayey sand, stiff to very ©Clay stiff, slightly moist, yellow-brown to dark brown, upper few feet porous. Clay and Gravel (CL -GC); with sandstone cobbles, sandy, very stiff to dense, ° slightly moist, yellow brown, medium plastic fines, angular rock fragments. �q Hand driven liner sample. i Small disturbed bulk sample. J NOTES: 1: Exploratory pits were excavated on March 27, 1990. 2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by taping from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory pit 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 pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) DD = Dry Density (pcf) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve LL = Liquid Limit (%) PI = Plasticity Index (%) 4 287 90 I Chen0N0rtheMjnC. Legend and Notes Fig. 3 e