HomeMy WebLinkAbout20003107.tiff PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
AND
SEPTIC SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS
PART OF THE SEX OF SECTION 18,
T.6N. , R. 64W. OF THE 6TH P.M. ,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
FOR
MIKE JONES
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
LOVELAND, COLORADO
PROJECT NUMBER
00-0426
FEBRUARY 14, 2000
2000-3107
CEngineering Corporation
February 14, 2000
Project No. 00-0426
Mr. Mike Jones
33153 WCR 51
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mike,
Enclosed is the report you requested of the percolation test
results and septic system recommendations for the proposed
building to be located on part of the SE'/a of Section 18, T. 6N. ,
R. 64W. of the 6t' P.M. , Weld County, Colorado.
The site is suitable for the construction of the proposed
septic system, provided the design criteria and recommendations
given in this report are met.
If you should have any questions concerning the information in
the report, please feel free to contact this office.
Respectfully,
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
Reviewed By: CLW
0` o Robert R. Greenwald II, E.I.T.
y J. Wer; inin, NE. ;
RRG/add ".�
Enclosures
165 2nd Street S.W. • Loveland, CO 80537 • (970)667-8010 • Fax: (970) 667-8024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Letter of Transmittal i
Table of Contents ii
Scope 1
Site Investigation 1
Site Location and Description 1
Subsoil and Groundwater Conditions 1, 2
Percolation Test Results 2
Combination Absorption and Evapotranspiration Area
2, 3
Required Septic Tank Size 3
Septic System Recommendations 3
Conclusions 3
Location of Test Borings Drawing No. 1
Symbols and Soil Properties Diagram No. 1
Log of Borings Drawing No. 2
Combination Absorption and
Evapotranspiration System Drawing No. 3
General Maintenance Recommendations Appendix I
ii
1
SCOPE
This report provides percolation test results and septic
system recommendations for a proposed building to be located on
part of the SE'/a of Section 18, T. 6N. , R. 64W. of the 6th P.M. , Weld
County, Colorado.
SITE INVESTIGATION
A field investigation, performed on January 19, 2000,
consisted of digging one (1) test hole to a depth of eight and one
half feet (8'h' ) and six (6) percolation holes to an average depth
of thirty (30") . Percolation tests were performed on January 20,
2000. The Location of the Test Holes is shown on Drawing No. 1. A
Log of Borings are shown on Drawing No. 2 .
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site is located northeast of The City of Greeley, Weld
County, Colorado, south of the Town of Galeton. The site is
relatively flat, and vegetation consists of various grasses and
weeds.
SUBSOILS AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Topsoil - Approximately six inches (6") of topsoil overlies the
site. The topsoil should be stockpiled and used as backfill over
the absorption field.
Sandy Lean Clay- Brown, medium stiff, slightly moist to moist clay
was encountered beneath the topsoil to a depth of five feet (5 ' ) .
Sedimentary Bedrock Sandstone- Brown-green, weathered, slightly
moist sandstone was encountered beneath the sandy lean clay to a
depth of eight and one-half feet (8'h' ) , where drilling operations
ceased.
Groundwater was encountered in the test holes twenty-four (24)
hours after drilling at a depth of seven feet (7 ' ) .
2
PERCOLATION TE T RESULTS
A total of six (6) percolation tests were run on the site,
using the Standard Test Method, as described by the Weld County
Health Department . Percolation test holes were presoaked on
January 19, 2000, and the test was performed on January 20, 2000 .
Test results varied between 30 and 120 minutes per inch with an
average of 72 minutes per inch.
Percolation Hole Percolation Rate (MPI )
PH 1 30
PH 2 60
PH 3 80
PH 4 80
PH 5 60
PH 6 120
Avg. 72
COMBINATION ABSORPTION AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AREA
STANDARD DESIGN
From Pages 28 and 35 from the I .S.D. S.R. for Weld County:
Absorption Area (Aa) = Q_,/a x 1 .3, and
3 . 5
Evapotranspirations Area (Ae) = O x 586
Lake Evap. rate (in/yr)
Q = Estimated maximum quantity of sewage flow
in gallons per day = ADF x 150%
T = Percolation Rate in minutes per inch = 72 min/in
Lake Evaporation rate at the site = 46 in/yr
Since the percolation rate is 72 min/inch and only 60 min/in
can be used for absorption, 60 min/inch
72 min/inch
. 83 = 83% of the flow can be used for absorption.
Therefore, 17% must be used for evaporation.
3
Therefore, 17% must be used for evaporation,
Therefore,
Aa ( . 83) Q / T x 1 . 3, and Ae = ( . 17) Q x 586
3 . 5 46
The proposed structure is to be a office/warehouse facility
with approximately ten (10) employees .
Therefore, Q= 10 workers x 15 gpd/worker x 150% = 225gpd
Therefore, the recommended septic field size is :
Qt Absorption Area (Sq. Ft)
225 1076
REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK SIZE
Minimum Tank Capacity (gals . )
1, 000
SEPTIC SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommended is a compartmented septic tank of the required
size to be followed by a combination absorption and
evapotranspiration field with a bottom area of 1200 square feet.
The bed should be constructed in accordance with Section 5. 6 and
6. 2 of the I.S.D. S.R. for Weld County (see Drawing No. 3) . To
maintain the minimum four feet (4 ' ) of suitable soil between the
bottom of the bed and any limiting zone (bedrock) , the bottom of
the bed should be limited to one foot (1 ' ) below original grade.
Therefore, the bed area will need to be mounded a minimum of one
foot (1 ' ) . A vertical liner per the I.S.D.S.R. for Weld County is
required around the bed area, where the bed gravel is placed above
original grade. The bed should lie a minimum of ten feet (10 ' )
from property lines and twenty feet (20 ' ) from the proposed
residence. This system is to meet all rules and regulations set
forth by the Weld County Health Department. The system is to be
inspected by a representative of the Weld County Health Department
prior to backfilling.
4
CONCLUSIONS
All future owners are to be directed to information in
Appendix I (General Maintenance Recommendations) of this report .
The findings and recommendations of this report have been obtained
in accordance with accepted engineering practices in the field of
Geotechnical Engineering. There is no other warranty, either
expressed or implied.
• BORING LOCATION PLAN
PART OF THE SE 1/4, SECT. 18, T. 6 N., R. 64 W.
WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO
WCR 51
MONO M€Tq_ &JRDNG
♦
L J
no
♦
3
• ♦
PH5
• PH
♦
01 0° PgoED POS
5EPTIG
Flax
LOC&TI OM
SCALE: NTS PROJECT NO.: 99-0426
DATE: 2/3/00 CDS Engineering DRAWING NO.: 1
LD BOOK: Corporation
REVISION NO.:
DRAWN: RRG 165 2nd St. S.W. CLIENT: MIKE JONES
Loveland, CO 80537
CHECKED: AJW Tele: (970) 667-8010 SHEET 1 OF1
S'I B0LS AND SOIL PR0PEn TIES
0 i:G?4M NC. 1
SOIL AND POCK.
S AMPS
V
CLAY (CL, OL,MH, CH,CH) CALIFORNIA
/
SILT (ML,OL ) THIN-WALLED
/
SAND (SW,SP,SM,SC) '
•
SPLIT BARREL
•
Seq GRAVEL (G'M,GP,GM,GC)
yI BAG SAMPLE
WEATHERED ROCK
PITCHER
EEO
SHALE & CLAYSTONE
JAR SAMPLE
•
SANDSTONE
PENETRATION RESISTANCE FOR COHESIONLESS SOILS ON STRENGTH CLASSIFICATIONS FOR COHESIVE SOIL
BASIS OF THE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST -
NUMBER OF BLOWS
PER FT. , N * RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY
COHESION, KSF**
0 - 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT
LESS THAN 0.5
4 - 10 LOOSE FIRM
0 .5 - 1 .0
10 - 30 MEDIUM STIFF
1 . 0 - 2.0
30 - 50 DENSE VERY STIFF
2 . 0 4 . 0
OVER 50 VERY DENSE HARD
GREATER THAN 4 . 0
'` BLOWS PER FOOT - BLOW OF 140" LB, EQUIVALENT TO PP/2 AND OU/Z
HAMMER DROPPED 30 IN. TO DRIVE
2- INC. SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER ONE
FOOT (ASTM OL586-67 ) ,
rg = LOG OF BORINGS
fedy�
W G
'(pia PHI PN7 Pkr5 1414 PNS PAL
0 ........y ;Pra rea vio ro v �B TnPSn1/. • (, IuZ
ealifFeistiti
iNtItxsiniTAar WOW.
SAwnrei0z-tztvitirvw,p,
-=T. ava ►uem!,
nicOst
— lo-
IVILLAs 1-n-CO,
DRAWING
N0.
--
..1,LEeta tactile LAW- VI Pe.5 Awe o e_ Ak.
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION TN7wEcT W_ 0426
COMBINATION ABSORPTION AND ' EVAF
4 ' PVC PERFORATED (TYP)
ALL ENDS INTERCONNECTED
ALL LINES
TO LAY
LEVEL
}C
•r <
• A ..--T a
DISTRIBUTION BOX /'
INLET. --s .
18 36 .
6' MAX.
r
2 % SIDE SLOPE. 1
if
"`��.WIC1tINQ I 12"tMIN. �t
C SEE NOTE 3 SAND I W'CNING m
SAND M
2 " MIN. e.
:to;�'c5': ;¢d4%:: p4: •ty. 00 6' MIN et c
nUb'a I to. O 12 MIN 4I O AML-. 3/4' TO 2 1 /2 ' WASHED PERFORAt r IONS
ROCK OR EQUIVALENT FACING DOWNWARD
SECTION A- A
C _
TRANSPIRATION SYSTEM
1. Bottom surface of bed should be roughened before con-
struction of bed and trenches to avoid having a pene-.
tration resistant interface between natural soil and
fill .
2. Distribution pipes should be laid level . The pipes
should be interconnected for beds.
3. A layer of straw or paper shall be used between the
gravel and backfill . Four inches (4") of "pea" grav-
el may be substituted for the straw or paper.
4. Backfill shall consist of natural on-site material . -
Heavy clays should not be used as backfill . The up-
per four inches (4") shall be suitable soil for sup-
porting vegetation.
5. Top of bed shall be side-sloped about two percent
(2%) and promote positive drainage away from bed.
The maximum slope for any septic system is thirty
percent (30%).
6. Surface of bed not usable under traffic areas, eith-
er animal or machinery. Vegetation over bed should
be durable and tolerate both wet and dry periods.
7. Surface of bed and trenches should receive sunlight.
Shade trees near system not recommended.
8. This system to meet all applicable WO County
Health Department Rules and Regulations set forth in
the Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations.
9. A representative of CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
and the W2LO County Health Department should
be contacted for inspection prior to placement of
backfill . Inspections by the Engineer are an addi-
tional charge.
. BED—TRENCH AREA(S.F.)
-Cil4iirfro.- C wbves vnol toe taoo
lutnct,S 5wk.
REMARKS : 1 wattw.fa;k 4 wj, . 5o j4aLle fe,'I be1MM, osl
card bedrock, +Le bo SS. e.C +(e bed Sl4.4(4 Le
L:vt 4-at kD (` below on,yiie.l n.b. -ir,c.o ' E 1,4 wdi 1q?
vMoa4 I V4,14. (' ev'4.Y.i 1."tw• Ireptee, aroand Ides wke�
above orJ�?wr.( yette.
CLIENT: ANC. 501E5
PROJECT NO. : 05- % wag
•
DRAWING NO.: 3
CDS ENGINEERNG CORPORATION
APPENDIX I
GENERAL MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
The following recommendations, if followed, should help increase
the lifetime of the system:
1 . Septic tanks should be pumped a minimum of once every
four years .
2 . Septic tanks and distribution boxes should be checked at
least once a year for sludge accumulation which may clog
the leach area if overflow occurs .
3 . The leach area should not be used for grazing, sports
activities, traffic, or other activity which may compact
the soils .
4 . Schedule 80 pipe should be used if lines are to be placed
under driveways .
5 . Trees should not be planted near the leach area so as to
prevent roots from clogging the system.
6 . If trees are to be planted nearby, they should be located
so that the leach area is not shaded.
7 . Overuse of strong chemicals, which may kill the bacteria
in the system and inhibit decomposition of the sewage,
should be avoided.
8 . Positive drainage should be maintained over and around
the absorption field area to prevent pooling of water.
9 . Lines to the tank or leach area should have sufficient
ground cover to prevent freezing.
REV 07/10/96
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PART OF THE SEX OF SECTION 18,
T. 6N. , R. 64W. OF THE 6TH P.M. ,
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
FOR
MIKE JONES
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
LOVELAND, COLORADO
PROJECT NUMBER
00-0426
JANUARY 26, 2000
CDSEngineering Corporation
January 30, 2000
Project No. 00-0426
Mr. Mike Jones
33153 WCR 51
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mike,
Enclosed is the report you requested of the geotechnical
investigation for the proposed structure to be located on part of
the SE'''A of Section 18, T. 6N. , R. 64W. of the 6th P.M. , Weld County,
Colorado .
The site is suitable for the construction of the proposed
structure, provided the design criteria and recommendations given
in this report are met .
If you have any further questions concerning the information
in this report, please contact this office .
Respectfully,
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
Reviewed By•
Robert R. Greenwald II, E. I .T
o°
- J. Wernsman, ,y.Ec
RG/add
Enclosures
165 2nd Street S.W. • Loveland, CO 80537 • (970)667-8010 • Fax: (970) 667-8024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paae
Letter of Transmittal i
Table of Contents ii
Scope 1
Site Investigation 1
Site Location and Description 1
Subsurface Conditions 2
Foundation Recommendations 2 , 3
- Continuous Spread Footing and/or Grade Beam 3
Slab Construction 3
Concrete Reinforcement 4
Foundation Drain System 4
Conclusions 4, 5
Location of Test. Borings Drawing No. 1
Symbols and Soil Properties Diagram No. 1
Log of Borings Drawing No . 2
Swell-Consolidation Test Results Figure Nos . 1-1 to 1-3
Summary of Test Results Table No . 1
Post-Construction Site
Preparation and Maintenance Appendix 1
ii
1
SCOPE
This report presents the results of a geotechnical
investigation for the proposed structure to be located on Part of
SEW, Section 18, T. 6N. , R. 64W. of the 6th P.M. , Weld County,
Colorado. The investigation was prepared by means of test borings
and laboratory testing of samples obtained from these borings .
This investigation was made to determine the type and depth of
foundation, allowable soil bearing pressures, groundwater
conditions, and any problems that might be encountered during or
after construction due to subsurface conditions .
SITE INVESTIGATION
The field investigation performed on January 17, 2000,
consisted of drilling, logging, and sampling two (2 ) test holes .
The Location of the Test Holes is shown on Drawing No. 1 . A Log of
Borings is shown on Drawing No. 2 . A Summary of the Swell-
Consolidation Test Results is shown on Figure Nos . 1-1 to 1-3 . A
Summary of Test Results is shown on Table No. 1 .
The test borings were advanced with a four-inch (4" ) diameter
auger drill . Laboratory samples were obtained by driving a two and
one-half inch (2%) California type sampler into undisturbed soils
with a 140-pound hammer falling thirty inches (30" ) and by taking
bag samples of auger cuttings .
Laboratory tests performed were - Swell-Consolidation,
Natural Moisture, Natural Dry Densities, Grain-Size Analysis,
Unconfined Compressive Strengths, and Atterberg Limits .
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site is located northeast City of Greeley, Weld County,
Colorado, south of the Town of Galeton. The site is relatively
flat, and vegetation consists of various grasses and small brush.
2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Refer to Log of Borings, Drawing No. 2 . The subsurface
conditions appear uniform throughout the site . A general
description of the soils and/or rock encountered are as follows :
Topsoil - A layer of approximately six inches (6 " ) of topsoil
overlies the site. The topsoil should not be used as foundation
bearing material, structural fill, or backfill . It is suggested
that the topsoil which has been stripped be stockpiled and used
for landscaped areas .
Lean Clay- Brown, medium stiff, slightly moist-moist lean clay
was encountered beneath the topsoil to a depth of approximately
five feet (5 ' ±) in TH 2 and, eight feet (8 ' ) in TH 1 .
Sedimentary Bedrock-Sand on - Orange, green, weathered,
slightly moist sandstone was encountered beneath the lean clay
to a depth of twelve and one-half feet (1234' ) , where drilling
operations ceased (TH 2 only) .
• Clay and Sand- Brown, medium dense, moist alternating lean clay
and poorly graded sand was encountered beneath the lean clay to
a depth of sixteen feet (16 ' ) (TH 1 only) .
Groundwater was encountered in the test holes twenty-four (24)
hours after drilling.
FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
The type of foundation best suited for a particular building
site is dependant not only on the characteristics of the soil and
rock but also depends on the type of structure, depth to
groundwater, the proposed depth of excavation, and owner
preference. The recommendations that follow are primarily based on
the type of soil encountered.
--� 3
The upper soils at the site exhibit no swell pressures and a
volume change as high as 0 . 0% when wetted. The lower soils exhibit
no swell pressures with a volume change as high as 0 . 0% .
Due to the conditions mentioned above, we recommend the
foundation be a continuous spread footing and/or grade beam
foundation.
Continuous Spread Footing and/or Grade Beam Foundations
The foundation should be a continuous spread footing and/or
grade beam foundation designed for a maximum allowable bearing
capacity of 1000 pounds per square foot (dead load plus full
live load) . The foundation is to bear on lean clay, and not on
uncompacted fill, topsoil, or frozen ground. The bottom of all
foundation components should be kept at least thirty inches
(30" ) below finished grade for frost protection. The open
excavation should not be left open for an extended period of
time or exposed to adverse weather conditions . The completed
open excavation should be inspected by a representative of CDS
Engineering Corporation in order to verify the subsurface
conditions from test hole data .
SLAB CONSTRUCTION
All slabs should be scored into maximum 225 square foot areas or
maximum dimensions of fifteen feet (15 ' ) with a minimum depth of
one inch (1" ) to localize and control any cracking due to heaving.
Slabs less than thirty foot (30 ' ) square should be scored at least
once in each direction. The minimum slab thickness should be four
inches (4 " ) , with four inches (4" ) of clean, washed gravel under
the slab. A polyethylene moisture barrier is recommended under
slabs in habitable areas to prevent moisture migration through
slabs .
4
CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT
The reinforcement listed below are recommended minimums .
Caissons should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 5 Grade
60 rebar for the full length and extending into the grade beams
with a minimum of twelve inches (12 " ) . Grade beams should be
reinforced with two (2) No. 5 Grade 60 rebar top and bottom with a
middle row of two (2) rebar for basement heights . Spread Footings
should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No.4 Grade 60 rebar.
Foundation walls on footings should be reinforced the same as the
grade beams for caissons with the exception that No. 4 rebar may be
used. Floating slabs should be reinforced with a minimum WWF 6 x
6 10/10 .
FOUNDATION DRAIN SYSTEM
A peripheral or perimeter drain system is recommended where
slabs are to be placed below finished grade. The drain should flow
by daylighting. If this is not possible, the drain should be
connected to the storm sewer, or provisions for a sump pump for
future installation.
CONCLUSIONS
The soils and rock at the site shows a low swell/
consolidation potential; therefore, future owners should be
cautioned that there is a low risk of future damage caused by
introduction of excess water to the soils and/or rock. All future
owners should be directed to those items under " Post-Construction
Site Preparation and Maintenance" in Appendix I, included in this
report . Our experience has shown that damage to foundations
usually results from saturation of the foundation soils caused by
improper drainage, excessive irrigation, poorly compacted
backfills, and leaky water and sewer lines . The elimination of the
potential sources of excessive water will greatly minimize the
risks of construction at this site.
5
The findings and recommendations of this report have been
obtained in accordance with accepted professional engineering
practices in the field of Geotechnical Engineering. There is no
other warranty, either expressed or implied. This report applies
only to the type of construction anticipated in the area tested.
The current technology is not at a stage where a guarantee of
"absolutely no damage" can be assured by design and construction
practices .
BORING LOCATION
PLAN •
PART OF THE SE 1/4, SECT. 18, T. 6 N., R. 64 W.
WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO
WCR 51 -
TH1 I 'E7(1511N6 METAL 6JLDNG
L J
1H2
♦3 Pfi4
PH5
i TPH
♦
PHI PH6
•
n -1
SCALE: NTS
DATE: 2/3/00 CDS Engineering PROJECT NO.: 99-0426
1 LD BOOK: Corporation DRAWING NO.: 1
DRAWN: 165 2nd St. S.W. REVISION NO.:
RRG Loveland, CO 80537 CLIENT: MIKE JONES
CHECKED: AJW Tele: (970) 667-8010
SHEET 1 OF1
SY`'BOLS AND SOIL PROPE TIES
DIAGRAM NO. 1
son_ AND POCK
SAMPLERS
CLAY (CL, OL,Mi, CH,OH) Q CALIFORNIA
SILT (ML,OL) THIN-WALLED
SAND (SW,SP,SM,SC) ' SPLIT BARREL
GRAVEL (GW,GP,GM,GC)
•:b. BAG SAMPLE
WEATHERED ROCK II
PITCHER
SHALE & CLAYSTONE
JAR SAMPLE
SANDSTONE
PENETRATION RESISTANCE FOR COHESIONLESS SOILS ON STRENGTH CLASSIFICATIONS FOR COHESIVE SOIL
BASIS OF THE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST -
NUMBER OF BLOWS
PER FT. , N * RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY COHESION, KSF'"'
0 - 4 VERY LOOSE SOFT
4 LESS THAN 0.5
- f0
LOOSE FIRM 0 . 5 - 1 .0
10 - 30 MEDIUM STIFF 1 . 0 - 2 .0
30 - 50 DENSE VERY STIFF 2 .0 - 4 . 0
OVER 50 VERY DENSE HARD GREATER THAN 4 . 0
* BLOWS PER FOOT - BLOW OF 140 LB. ** EQUIVALENT TO PP/2 AND QU/2
HAMMER DROPPED 30 IN. TO DRIVE
2- INC. SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER ONE
FOOT (ASTM DL586.67 ) .
gady LOG OF BORINGS
( -It
0
n& foal t
S
fANt`( wilt) -Mn n. My San)M •y[-.FF Sh`�{a cew/pelt-
', `.1tU10PArA t %m eat -54Albsur• nca
u>41#44 .4 5/ kaisi� )
-AC
•' -k� •+•�r*- 4Cr UM 1,L (EAU (Lk A-SJD PcswGY '+4FDPi)
/0- ra LL.L.L. 5411)
4 crow r GQAp2l) 94Mb_ brr ,n, d►P�j �n Ado
vePi
/5 .t�4
zv
ui&D f- r7-co.
DRAWING
NO.
No &b frawa4- E a+red.
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION NQ ECT ( 9alO
TABLE I SHEET 1 OF 1
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS DATE: January 30, 2000
'''`ST HOLE NO. I TH 1 TH 1 TH 2
, DEPTH FT.
( ) 3 8.5 4.5
Sandy Sand Sandstone
I SOIL OR ROCK Lean and
Clay Clay
NATURAL MOISTURE (%) 18.8 23.1 21.4 1
19.3 23.6 20.6
DRY DENSITY (PCF) 111.6 103.9
108.8 102.7 104.1
I PENETRATION 107
5/6 7/6 9/6/6(BLOWS/IN.) 7/6 9/6 22/6
% SWELL @ 500 PSF 0.0 0.0 0.0
'SWELL PRESSURE (PSF)
UNCONFINED 1292 616 8480
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (PSF)
%• STRAIN
S°'`` (PPM)
LIQUID LIMIT 29 37
i PLASTICITY INDEX 7 16
% PASSING #200 29.3 48
USC SC SC
(AASHTO GROUP INDEX
I
1 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY(PCF)
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
CBR
I R-VALUE
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION, Loveland, CO Project No: 00-0426
APPENDIX I
POST-CONSTRUCTION SITE PREPARATION AND MAINTENANCE
Backfill
When encountering potentially expansive or consolidating soils,
measures should be taken to prevent the soil from being wetted
during and after construction. Generally, this can be accomplished
by ensuring that the backfill placed around the foundation walls
will not settle after completion of construction, and that this
backfill material is relatively impervious . Water may need to be
added to backfill material to allow proper compaction -- do not
puddle or saturate. Backfill should be mechanically compacted to
at least 95% of Standard Proctor around all structures, and 90% of
Standard Proctor elsewhere. Compaction requirements should be
verified with field tests by the Engineer.
Surface Drainage
The final grade should have a positive slope away from the
foundation walls on all sides. A minimum of twelve inches (12 " ) in
• the first ten feet (10 ' ) is recommended. Downspouts and sill cocks
should discharge into splash blocks that extend beyond the limits
of the backfill . Splash blocks should slope away from the
foundation walls . The use of long downspout extensions in lieu of
splash blocks is advisable. Surface drainage away from the
foundation should be maintained throughout the lifetime of the
structure.
Lawn Irrigation
Do not install sprinkler systems next to foundation walls, porches,
or patio slabs . If sprinkler systems are installed, the sprinkler
heads should be placed so that the spray from the heads under full
pressure does not fall within five feet (5 ' ) of foundation walls,
porches, or patio slabs . Lawn irrigation must be carefully
controlled.
If the future owners desire to plant next to foundation walls,
porches, or patio slabs, and are willing to assume the risk of
structural damage, etc. , then it is advisable to plant only flowers
and shrubbery (no lawn) of varieties that require very little
moisture. These flowers and shrubs should be hand watered only.
Landscaping with a plastic covering around the foundation area is
not recommended.
r-.
Check with your local landscaper for fabrics which allow
evaporation when inhibiting plant growth when a plastic landscape
covering is desired.
Experience shows that the majority of problems with foundations due
to water conditions are generally due to the owner ' s negligence of
maintaining proper drainage of water from the foundation area . The
future owners should be directed to pertinent information in this
report .
REV 06/17/85
Hello