HomeMy WebLinkAboutB13-0552 Soils Report Aug 2013 t * � y
�, 1 Ic�� �r��a-( �,l F�yt,A� ������'l�rt¢,:.�1,iw�i�.
�,w+�\ „ '�' .. 95-� '� ttidl �l �CS €l`�'
w` �� � ��
� {7�c te i t �,`S t3 �L z�c�C,t�{Ci�"^i�Ct\��
.�' �°� ��� ��� I'-1�� �ie >i�', "{x i,!t��
s_.���x�,ap�rz-�-r� 6`�,.�i,;a,.r� ��� !.wt � „r-��-? '.ti`���;�I ,.
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED ZEKELMAN RESIDENCE
LOT 5,BLOCK 4, VAIL VILGAGE 3`d FILING
463 BEAVER DAM ROAD
VAIL, COLORADO
JOB NO. 112 330A
AUGUST 30, 2013
PREPARED FOR:
KH WEBB ARCHITECTS
ATTN: KYLE WEBB
710 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE, SUITE A
VAIL, COLORADO SIb57
I�vleC�khwebl�.cam -
�������
� � � � V �
D
�;�.� �C 2�13
TOWN OF VA1�.
['Ktrl��i- �1�� ��I-71 [�> � ('r,lc7��t��:lc, ��,�-ir��r�; 7l'.�-(��3��i�i(�� � ;�il�-i�rtlzt,r•x��. �>7i�-�liti-I�)r';�)
� 13
- ossa
T I
TASLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY........................................................................- 1 -
BACKGR4UND INFORMATION............................................................................ - 1 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION...................... .......................................................- 2 -
SITECONDITIONS................................................................................................... 2
FIELDEXPLORATION............................................................................................ - 3 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIDNS.................................................................................. - 3 -
ENGINEERINGANALYSES.................................................................................... -4-
DESTGN ItECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................. - 5 -
� FOUNDATIONS.................................................................................................... - 5 -
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS.........................................................- 6-
FLOORSLABS...................................................................................................... 8
' UNDERDRA,IN SYSTEM...................................................................................... - 9
SITEGRAI7ING .................................................................................................. - 10-
SURFACEDRAINAGE....................................................................................... - 10-
LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................ - 11 -
FIGURE 1 - LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY B�RINGS
FIGURE 2 -LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
F.IGURE 3 -LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 and 5 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 6 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 7-WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
� A.PPENDIX A- GANSER LUJAN &ASSOCIATES REPORT, JULY 3Q, 2013
, .
PURPOSE AND SCQPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a supplemental subsoil study for the proposed
ZekeIman residence to be located on Lot 5, Block 4, Vail Village 3`d Filing, 463 Beaver
Dam Road, Vail, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure l. The purpose of the
study was to develop recon�nendations for the foundation design. The study was
performed as additional services to our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to
KH Webb Architects dated Apri130, 2012. •
A field exploration pxogram cansisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obta�in
information on the subsurface conditzons. Sam,ples ofthe subsoils and bedrock obtained
during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification
and other engineering characteristics. The results ofthe field exploration and Iaboratory
testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and
allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report swnznarizes the
data obtain.ed during this study and presen.ts our conclusions, design recommendations
and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and
the subsurface conditions encountered.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical previously conducted a subsoil study for a conceptual
praposed residence on the site and submitted our findings irz a report dated October 25,
2012, Job No. 112 330A. After preliminary design of the residence, additio,nal deeper
borings to the proposed relatively deep basement elevations and temporary monitoxing
welIs constructed for"slug"testing to determine hydraulic conductivity of the subsoils
were needed and the supplemental study were requested. The subsequent hydraulic
conductivity testing was performed by Gansex Lujan &Associates with the results
provided in their report dated July 30, 2013. The Ganser Lujan repoz-t has been provided
to the design and construction team for the project and is attached to this report for
reference.
Job No. 1 I2 330A ��h
, .
- 2 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
Tlie proposed construction has changed since our previous study. The residen.ce will be �
located on the lot as shown on Pigure 1 and include relatively deep basement levels. The
residence will be a two to three story wood frame structure over one ta two basement
levels. The western portion of the residence will have two levels below grade with a
lowest level finrsh floor elevation of about 8134 feet. The eastern portion of the residence
wi11 have one level below grade with a finish floor elevatzon of 8150 feet. The lower
floor elevations are shown on Fzgure 2. The excavation will requixe cut depths of about
20 to 40 feet. We assume xnoderate foundation laadings for the proposed type of
constivetion. The existing residence on the lot will be removed for the new construction.
It is planned to shore the excavation cut slopes, probably with soii nazl walls. Temporary
dewatering of the excavation for construction and a penmanent uxiderdrain system axound
and below the building are alsa plaizned. Grading the site down soxne before excavation
is planned to reduce the shoring heights.
If conditions are significantly different from those described above, we should be notifxed
to xe-evaluate the recommendations contained in this repart.
SITE CONDITIONS
The si�e is occupzed with a two story residence over a walk-out basement level. The site
has been previously graded with cut and fill depths up to about 10 feet possible adjacent
the residence. Boulder landscaping features line the driveway and a boulder walI retains
a minor cut slope along the south portion ofthe main parking area. A retaining wall
about 8 feet taIl is Iocated at the north side ofthe courtyard area. The grouxzd surface
across the site is generally moderately to strongly sIoping down to the north with
relatively steep slopes at the boulder wa1l areas and north of tne west side of the driveway
pavement area. Elevation difference across the proposed residence is about 25 feet and
Jab No. 112 330A C"'�GCPtE:Ch
+ ,
� - 3 -
across the lot is about 40 feet. Gore Creek is located about 300 hundred feet to the north
af the lot and estimated at about 40 ta Sd feet lower in elevation.
� FIELD EXPLORATI(]N
The field exploration for the supplerr�ental study for the project was conducted between
May 14 and 16, 2013. Two exploratory borings (Borings 3A and 4)were drilled at the
loca#ions shown on Figure 1 to evaluate#he subsurface conditions. The borings were
advanced with ODEX down-hole hammer and rotary drill methods powered by a#ruck-
xnounted CME-55 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Locations o:Four three previous borings drilIed on the site are
also shovvn on Figure �. Access for borings on the north side of the residence was not
possible due to the irregular terrain and existing walls and stairs.
. Samples of the subsoils and bedrock were taken with 2 inch and 13/s inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven iuitv the subsoils and bedrock at various depths with
blows from a 140 pound hammer fallin.g 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard
penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration reszstance values
are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils and hardness of the
bedrock. Depths at whzeh the samples were tatten and the penetration resistance values
are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Boruags, Figure 2. The samples were returned to
our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing.
Factory slotted 2 inch diameter PVC pipe with sand backfill was installed in Borings 3A
and 4 to allow monitoring of the groundwater level and fox the hydraulic conductivity
testing by Ganser Lujan&Associates. The wells are refened to as NIW-3A and NNV-4 in
the Ganser Lujan report. Depths that tl�e pipe was installed in the borings are shown on
the boring logs, Figure 2. The well constx-uction summary is provided on Figu,re 7.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2.•
The subsoils encountered,below about 1 foot of topsoil at Boring 3A and ab�ut 3 feet of
Job No. 112 330A GeCPf�Ch
. .
� -4-
�11 at Boring 4, consisted af inedium dense to dense, clayey silty sand with gravel,
cobbles and scattered boulders underlaizi at depths from about 11%2 to 12£eet by mediuxn
hard, weathered claystone. Below the weathered cIaystone at depths from about 17 to 20
feet,hard to very hard Iimestone bedrock was encountered to the inaximum depth drilled
of 40 feet. Drilling in the limestone�vas difficult due to its hardness and drilling refusal
was encountered in Boring 4 in the deposit. The upper subsoils encountered in the
previous borings at the site axe more variable than the current borings arzd consisted of
clayey silty sand, silty clay, and sandy gravel and cobbles below a variable depth of fi]l.
Laboxatory testing performed on samples obtained from the bozings included natural
xnoisture content and density, gradation analyses and Atterberg lirnits. Resuits of swell-
consolidation testing performed on�elatively undisturbed samples of the weathered
claystone,presented on Figures 4 and 5, indicate law to moderate connpressibility under
conditions of loading and wetting. One sampie showed a minor swell potential when
wetted under a constant light surcharge. Results of gradation analyses performed on
� small dianneter drive samples (muius 1%2 inch fraction) of the granular subsoils are shown
on Figure 6. The laboxatory testing is summarized in Table 1.
Free water was encountered in the borings at the tizne o£drilling ar�d when cheeked one ar
xnoxe days later at depths from about 19 to 25 feet. The subsoils were slightly znoist to
rnoist and the bedrock was moist vvith wet zones near an.d belor�the free vc�ater level.
ENGll�TE�RING ANALYSES
The excavatzon may be up to aUout 5 to 15 feet below the groundwater]evel at the site
arnd groundwater level nnay be higher in other years than measured for our study during
spruag and early summer runoff. Temporary dewatering of the excavation fox
construction and permanent dewatering will he needed. We expect it rnay be feasible to
control the grour�dwater from within the excavation with trenches to gravi#y outlet and/or
suznps where the water can be collected and pumped, depending on the time of year the
Job No. 112 330A C�P,��h
,
, � - 5
excavation is rnade. The Ganser-Lujan &Assaciates report should be referred to for
information regarding estimated dewatering flow volumes.
Soil nail walls appear feasibte for shoring of the excavation. Reinforced grout columns
(micro-piles)placed along the proposed shoring face in soii areas prior to excavation for
the soil nail walls can be used to limit the risk of slumping of the cut face prior to
construction ofthe soil nail wall. The shoring should be design/build by a qualzfied
contractor with experience in the area. .
The natural granular soils and bedrock possess moderate bearing capacity and relatively
low settlement potential. A spread footing faundation bearing on the natural coarse
granular soils or bedrock should be suitable for support of the building. If fine grained
soils are encountered at design subgrade Ievel, we expect subexcavation and extending
tha footings down or replaceinent with a Iimited depth of compacted coarse granular soils
will be needed, and we should further evaluate tlais condition at the time of construction. �
Some soft soi]s may also be encountered requiring subgrade improvements pirior to
constructing the foundatzon.
DESTGN REC�MMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Corasidering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratoty borings and the
nature of th�proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread
. footings bearing on the natural granular soils or bedrock.
The design and construction criteria presented be�ow should be observed for a spread
:footing foundation system.
1) A spread footing foundation placed on the undisturbed natural granular
soils or bedrock can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of
3,000 psf. For footings bearing a rrzinimum 20 feet below the ground
Job No. 112 330A y
C�Ptech
- 6 -
surface, an alIowable bearing pressure of 5,00�psf can be used. Based on
experience, we expect settlement of faotings designed and constiucted as
discussed in this section wi11 be up to about 1 to 1%z inches. There could
be some differential settlem.ent betvveen soil and bedxock bearing a�eas.
2) The spread footu�gs should have a rninimum width of 24 inches.
3) Exterior footings a�d footings beneath uz�.heated areas should be provided
with adequate sozl cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection.
P2aceznent of foundations at least 48 inches belaw exterior grade is
typicaliy used in the Vail axea. �
4) Continuous foundation walIs should be well reinforced top and bottam to
span 1oca1 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) All existirag fill, debrzs, topsoil, fine-grained soils, and loose or disturbed
materials should be remaved and the footing bearing level extended down
to the relatively dense natural graziuIar soils or firm bedrock. Water
seepage encountered in the footi�g areas should be ren�oved before
conerete placement. Stabilization afthe subgrade soils may be needed in
areas due to the wet soils. The stabilization can pxobably be accozxiplished
by sub-excavation of 1 to 2 feet of the subgrade soils and re�lacement with
imported screeneci rock.
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINTNG WALLS
Foundation walls and retaizling structures which are laterally supported and can be
expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed far a lateral
earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent £[uid unit weight of at least 55 pcf
for wa�ls up to 12 feet laigh for backfill consisting of impoited granular soils. For
Job No, 112 330A �P��h
� � - �-
laterally supported walls taller than 12 feet,the wall should be designed fox a unifozm
Iateral earth pressure of 27.5 H in psf where H is the wall height ui feet for backfill
consisting of imported granular soils. Cantilevered i•etain�ing structures up to 12 feet
which are separate fronn the building up and can be expected to rleflect sufficiently to
mobzlize 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 45 pcf for
�ackfill consisting of iznported granuiar soils. Cantilevered retaining structures tallex than
12 feet in height which are separate from the building and can be expected to deflect
sufficiently to �nabilize the full active earth pressure condi�ion should be designed for a
un.iform Iateral earth pressure of 22.5 H in psf where H is the wall height in feet for
backfill consisting of imported granular soils. The imported granular wall backfill should
have a maximum size of 6 inches, more than 50%retained on the No. 4 sieve and less
than 15%passing the No. 200 sieve. The imported granular soils should be separated
fiom the onsite soils and weathered claystone wi#h filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N. It
may be feasible to use some ofthe on-site granular soils as backfitl ifpr�perly sorted and
sto ckpzled.
AII foundation and retainirag 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 coriditians behind the
walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behixid a waIl or an upward '
sIoping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or
retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure
buiidup behin.d walls.
Backfill should be placed iu1 uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90%of the maximum
standaxd 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 wal1, since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some
settlement of deep foundation waIl backfill should be expected, even if the xnaterial is
Job No. 112 330A GeCPtt�Cf„t
- 8 -
. placed coxrectly, and could result in distress to facilities constructed an the backfill. Use
of a select granular fill material, such as road base or cnzshed rock, and incxeasing the
compaction to at least 98% standard Proctor density can be done to reduce the settlement�
potential. The specified minus 6 inch size granular backfill matenial in the above
paragraph is also suitable as select granular backfill.
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. Reszstance 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
weigh.t of 400 pef for moist condition and 250 pcf for submerged condition. 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 ultirr�ate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance.
Fill placed agains# the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a suitable
granular material compacted to at least 95% of the maxirnum standard Proctor density at a
mozsture content near optimuna.
FLOOR SLABS .
The natural on-site soils and bedrock, exclusive of topsoil, are suitabie to support lightly
loaded slab-on-grade canstruction. The minor swe11-potential encountered in one of#he
� weatk�ered claystone sannples can probably be neglected in the design but the expansion
potential should be fiuther evaivated at the time of construction. To reduce the effects of
some differential movement, non-structural floor slabs should be separated from all
bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrairned verticai
movement, �Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage
cxacking. The requiretnents for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be
established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 6
inch layer of free-draining gravel snould be placed beneath basexnent level slabs to
Job No. 112 330A �-+('
C�cstech
� - 9 -
facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least
50%retazned on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2%passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for suppart of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95%of
maximurn standard Proctox density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can
consist ofthe on-site granular soils devoid of vegetatzon, topsoil, debris and oversized
rocks,or a suitable imported gru�ular material suc1�as screened rock, �
UNDERDR.AIN SYSTEM
Free water was encountered during our explaration above proposed excavation depths
and it has been ottr experience in mour�tainous areas that groundwater level can rise
and/or perched groundwater deve�op duti��g times of heavy precipitation or seasonal
runoff. Frozen ground dur�ing spring runoff can also create a perched condition. We
recommend below-grade construction, sueh as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement
areas,be pxotected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain
system. The drair�s should be provided for both excava#ion dewaterizzg and a permanent
building drain systern. It may be feasible to incorporate the excavation dewatei�ing
drain(s) with the pernaanent drain system. For tennporary dewatering, gravel filled
trenches should be constructed outside footing areas at least 1 �oat below excavation
grade and sloped to a suitable gravity outlet ar a sump where the watex can be collected
and pumped.
The permanent drains shouid consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of tk�e wall backfill
and surrounded above the invert level wzth free-dra�ining granular rr�ate�rial. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below iowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimurn %z%to a suitable gravity outlet or a sump where the
water caxz be collected ar�d pumped. Izaterior lateral drains on abou� 1 S to 20 feet spacing
should be provided below the basement floor slabs and connected with the perimetar
drains. Drain pip�should consist of minirnum 4-inch diameter rigid PVC pipe. Free-
draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2%
Job No. 112 330A C�(�tE?Ch
� � - �o-
passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 5Q%passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maxin�um
size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill shouZd be at least 2 feet deep and extend ta
above any seepage in the adjacent excavation face. The drain gravel shauld be separated
from the wall backfill with filter fabric such as Muafi 14QN. We should revievs�the
�ermanent underdrain plan prior to or at the tune of excavation.
SITE GR.ADING �
There is a risk of constz-uction-induced slope instability due to the relatively deep
excavatiozi cuts planned and groundwatar expected to be encountered in the excavation.
We understand that shoritag of the deeper cut slope areas is planned which should act to
reduce the potential for cut slope failures. In the shallower cut areas and in areas where
the excavation cut sIopes can be laid back to a stable grade, temporazy cut slopes shouId
be graded no steeper than 1% (horizontal)to 1 (vertical). If water seepage is encountered
in the cut slopes, fiatter slopes on the order of 2(h)to 1 (v) may be needed. We should
review the site grading and shoring plans prior to constzuction.
Permanent unretaiz�.ed cut and fi11 slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or
flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. The risk of slope
instability will be increased if seepage is encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be
necessary. If seepage is encountered in permanent cuts, an investigation should be
conducted to deterixiine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut slope stability.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following draix�age precautions should be observed during constructian and
maintained at all times a$er the building has been compl�ted:
1) Inundation ofthe foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum nnoisture and
compacted to at least 95%of the maxiinum standard Proctor density in
Job Nv. 1 I2 330A �-+P
Gecatech
� � � - x� -
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90%of the maximuzn standaxd
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
recomrr�end a m�inimum slope of 6 inches in the first l.0 feet in unpaved �
areas and a minimum slope of 2'/2 inches in.the first 10 feet in paved axeas.
Free-draining wall backfill should be capped with filter fabric and at least
2 feet o£the on-site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
� backfill.
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
� engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either
express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are
based upon the d.ata obtainec3 from the exploratory borings clrilled at the locations
indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of constnzction and our experience in the area.
Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or
other biatogical contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. Tf the client is
concerned about MOBC, then a professional zn this special field of practice should be
consulted. Our fxndings include interpolation and extrapolation af 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 constructzon appear d'z:fferent froir�those described in this repoxt, 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 nat responsible far technical interpretations by others of our anformation. As the
project evolves, we should provide continued consultatzon and field services during
constz�uction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
Job No. 112 330A C�CPt6Ch
� a ,
• ' ���
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the reearrunendations
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.
Respectfulty Subinitted,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK���s�F�'��iICAL, INC.
� p{����sa��
� , .... ,�, o*i
� ��
e
e e
s •
.�, � Q., w_
:. ;O q• ::
David A. Young, P. �,�: 2-218 �
''r�I�~����`�1`
Revrewed by: s���s�Ipt�1�,��`
�,il�^L''"'1-/�- ' �.�..�.-�
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
DAY/ksw
ce: KH Webb Arehitects - Stacy Goering (stacy cr,khwebb.coFn}
MartinlMartin Engineers - Sean Molloy(SMolloy�marti��martin-mtn.com)
RA Nelson&Associates - Jason Morley{jmorle�cr,ranelson.com)
Job No. 112 330A �t�Ch
i�`'��
p � �`'�� ,:�
� M`�, . ', ��.
� ��
I � ;� ��� .
;`-� �'�i ' ..
� r � ;�� «
/ I . I . y,� , � . M�...% ,� lQT 4
�"�.,�� I .W.,.�.�-`^.....-..:�...,:..,..,.�,��� �.�4 .�
� :4" �...
i I � � " o �� �..�..
� I 'd ' � . `�y` M �
�' ' � BORING 1 �
.I � - � � „�, ,
� - �.. ,
, ``��� /
�� i ���� ,. `� a ;
�, ��.., - -`I
,— .� �...�.�„ .«�»o- �• 7
�� a�,�.,� � ,�.� I j�
��� f. ,�.,;„-,; � ,. "" � � � .-:�s
�� � 463 BEAVER � � �` �'.i
�'F� �1 DRM ROAD 9;� � � BORING 4 •- ;� '�• ``
� - - ,kb , e„a°:�; °
� �- r � � , ��
� ,d„e,__- �
r I �
� I L � �-{ ��_ ...,..,...-, � °�":' ".. , ` ;� a.^...
D � , � � '=r t��_�. —�;�- �. ,� BORING 3_ " BORING 3� � � A
�
� � �
� u„��il !- ,;..�"� '
F � � ,. W.i� � ' �. . .. �� — -- J :i y�
i � ( I ' ... _ �i
�" 1,.:� '^, " �.�u.o�a,�,wmn � „ �� �
��... � �
� '� �;""` `� " BORING 2 �' a,
;,e�,'_'" �`�. —_ --� � _ . 1'.
I �. -- `-_°.- �
, o... :
, �.�:.�:. �.�. �, t ._.,.,._, �
, w��,.. ,r,�.a—�rzs�,— � .. �: ":,
�......��,
� ..._.. `F�' ��/'_�..�� : , k . CJ�. . . . � devwrt
��ti.�' i:
. . ..•+...� 3. .r.,
i
sroracr /� \\�ata-�;sm-+a.-+rF.�....eti� .. ,�„�NY-.,,f�r��..� ..
LEGENQ:
• fndicates exploratary boring for current study.
� Indicates expioratory boring from our previous study,
Job No. 112 330A, dated October 25, 2012.
APPROXIMATE SCA�E:
1" = 30'
112 33QA �` ��'� LOCATI(JNS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 1
NEPWC�RTH•F'AWLAK GEOTECMNICAL
Bt�RING 3A BORING 4
ELEV.=8174' ELEV.=$160'
6180 8180
��74 25/11,i 0/0 �1�p
WC=9.5
+4=38
30l0 '2a0=37
NP
8160 30/�2 8160
wC—io.o
� Qd=i 20 50/12 �j
LWL 56r� W
� 28 �
O 8150 y 31/12 WC=8.2 $150 O
Q =
r,, +4=19 ,�
-200=41 �
�`"��`� 32/12
W 30/0 WC=13.7 w
WC=23.8 DD=118
DD=106 LL=26
8140 �" 1 30/o P1=6 814a
� ` BASEMENT I.EVEL;
BASEMENT LEVEL; — ? F.F. = 8136'
F.F. _$134'
8130 813(}
812Q 8120
NOTE: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3.
112 330A � ,, ,,�"� ��� LQGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2
NEPWt7F27H•PAWtAK GE07ECJlINICAL.
LEGEiJ�:
� CONCRETE PAVEMENT; driveway surface, 6 inches measured thickness.
� F(LL;ciayey silty sand and gravei, loose to medium dense, slightly moist,dark brown to brown.
� TOPSOIL; arganic sandy silry clay, moist,dark brown.
� SAND(SGSM); clayey, silry, gravelly to very gravelly,with cobbles and scattered boulders, medium dense to
dense,slightly maist, brown.
� WEATHERED CLAYSTONE; medium hard, moist to very moist, dark brown
� LIMESTONE BEDROCK; hard to very hard, slightiy moist, light grey to dark brown. Minturn Formation
� Relatively undisturbed drive sample;2-inch I.D. California liner sample.
� Drive sample; standard penetration test(SP�, 1 318 inch I.D. split spaan sample,ASTM D-1586.
3fl�12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 30 biows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive
the California or SPT sampler 12 inches.
� Practicaf drilling refusal.
0,1,2
= Free water depth measured in boring and number of day following drilling measurement was taken.
Indicates 2-inch diameter commercial slotted PVC pipe.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled between May 14 and 16, 2013 with 5-inch diameter ODEX down-hole hammer and
rotary drill methods..
2. Lacations of exploratory borings were measured approxima#ely by pacing from features shown on the site plan
provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations shouid be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory baring logs represent the approximate boundaries between
material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditians indicated. Fluctua#ions in
water level may oecur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content(%) LL= Liquid Limit(%)
DD = Dry Densiry(pcf) PI = Plasticity Index(%)
+4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve NP= Non-Plastic
-200= Percent passing No.200 sieve
112 330A �� �e�. "� LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 3
HEF'WORTN-PAWLAK GEQTECFiNIGAL.
Moisture Content = 10.0 percent
Dry Density= 120 pcf
Sampfe of: Weathered Claystone
From: Boring 3A at 15 Feet
0
�
c 1
0
.�
ti
�
a 2
vNo movement
upan
�, wetti ng
a.i 7.0 1a iao
APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf
Moisture Cantent = 23.8 percent
Qry Density= 106 pcf
Sample of: Weathered Ciaystone
From: Boring 3A at 20'
\ 0
c
O
_�
� 1
a
E
U
2
Expansion
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10 1�0
APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf
b �
112 330A � �"� � SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 4
tiGPWORTN-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAi,
• r
Moisture Content = 13.7 percent
Dry Density= 118 pcf
Sample of: Weathered Claystone
From: Boring 4 at 15 Feet
0
� 1
0
o No movement
��, upon
v 2 wetting
a
E
0
U
3
4
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf
112 330A � ;,� �'� SWELL-CONSOLIDATiON TEST RESULTS FlGURE 5
t�cr�war�zr�a=nwi_.a�t c�r-_c�'r't�cr�?v«.,az
HYDROMETER ANALYSfS SIEVE ANALY5IS
r�.� TIME READINGS U.S.STANDARD SERIES CLEAR S�UARE OPENINGS
45 MW.15HMIN.60MINJ9MIN.4 MIN. 1 MIN. #200 �tOd #50 #30 #i6 #8 #4 3/8" 3/4" � 112" 3° 5"6" 8"
0 ��
10 so
� 20 eo
LLI �
Z 30 �o �
a �
� ao �o �
F-
�Z so � W
U U
W 60 00 W
a n-
�o �
eo p
so ,o
�o0 0
.001 .W2 .p05 .pp9 .019 .03� .074 .7W .� .� 1.18 2.36 4J5 9.5 72S 19.0 37.5 762 i5Z 203
127
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
Cl.4YTO51LT SAND GRAYA C���
HNE MEOtUM COARSE FINE COARSE
GRAVEL 38 % SAND 25 °k SILT AND CLAY 37 °/a
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Grave( FROM: Boring 3A at 5 Feet
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIME READINGS U.S.STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
45 I�.i6 MIN.60MiNi9MIN.4 M1N.1 MIN. #20a #100 #50 #3Q #16 #8 #4 3/8" 3/4" 1 1/2" 3° 5"6" 8"
0 100
10 90
� 2� BO
Z 30 7p Z
Q �
� 40 60 �
W 50 50 w
w so ao w
o- Q-
�� 30
80 20
90 iQ
100 0
.001 .002 005 .009 019 .037 .074 .150 �300 .600 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.512 519.D 37.5 76.2 �2]�52 203
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILL(METERS
SAND G VEL
CLAVTOSILT f�� MfDIUM CMfiSE FlI� COARSE ���-ES
GRAVEL 19 °� SAND 40 % SILT AND GLAY 41 %
SAMPLE OF: Very Clayey Silty Sand with Gravel FROM: Boring 4 at 1 Q Feet
112 330A �� �°�'°� GRADATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 6
HEPWORTN-PAWLAK GE07ECFI7*ltCAZ
TOP OF PIPE
GROUND SURFAGE �
F
>>. E
�s;
TOP OF BENTONfTE ;.;�
�f D
C
TOP OF SANQ
TOP OF SLOTfED SECTIQN
B
A
SURFACE DIMENSfONS(ft)
PIEZOMETER ELEVATION
,..
(ft) A B C D E F
BdRING 3A 8160 4fl 39� 10 7 4 1�
BOTTOM�F PIPE
BORING 4 8174 34 33 13 8 4 �
B�TTOM OF BORING
�
112 330A � ,�"� WELL CONSTRUCTlON SUMMARY FIGURE 7
NEi'WOR7H-PAWLAK GE4TECMNIGAL
o �
m �
m
� b
w
� °' b � V� �
o � � .-�
Z � v j o u��i �' �
� � � H cd e� � ctl
� � U U � U
� � � � �
U�
:� °' � �';� �
� � � » �
z
0
oa
x �?
� �
�
u
(J �
Z -~-� � x
� N � o � �
Q w � 4 z
U � �
z � �
z � m �
� � � �
F- � 4 n 3� N
� a �
Y �
g � o oW
� wm zZ '
� g � � � � �
a m � N o cn �r
a. Fa„ V- a ¢ n°,
y � a
� �
� Q
� � � a � N �
�u
2 v�i a
n
� � � � �
M �--�
�
� Z �' N O o�0
Qq °' � e--1 �
Z �
0
� � � � Q oo � �
� � �- ae
zo � " O� o N °O •-m-�
�
z �
p w � V� ,�-i (�y � .�-�
4 �
u
O
J
a
v�i Z m �t
`a
0
m
APPENDIX A
GL&A HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
TESTING REPORT
:r
Job No. 112 330A
• • "`� � � L �,�i�"f�tlr��r�rr��t`c�ttl�irr�.��Ota��'�6•trtt�c�t�tttP C°�r�.�irlr�rt����� •r �
, �
, . , �. " * _
.
. .,„. . .._,� . er� i a
;�lr. Dai id A. Yc�ttusz. P.F. .luh� ;�l, ?i)13
1 lep����nith-(a�yl�llk Ci�c�t�chnictil. inc.
���O C'aunt_y� Rcsa�! 15�1
C�I�n��c�od Spritt Zs,C°c�)or�d� K 1(i01
t2.c: i��l�,dr,7uli�:C'a��du�:tiuitr�T�es�u��;nnd i�*�tinaxt��.�c1 l�c�t���d�tiui� Urain ��I��u
-#(i�i �}ea��e�•llair� Rr��cl
��il.C:"olc�ractu
C)�ar 4vlr-.Y�at�t��;
t"3ai3s�i��.uidtt � AssociaCes. [,i.f'{(�;I,�I:A)has cal��plet�d l���d��uGc��nr�t�cti��itti testing�i't��o�r�unc!���ater
i7toniCarii�g ti���lls loc�ted at��C�3 13�aver- C)at�� RG�a�i u� �ail,C.'alt�r�e(c�. Ir�lclditic�n.:�n�znalt�sis of'��ary5t�•uctio��
�sCavati<`an�nc� f�xmdati�m clrain fti�ti�s has h�c��� p�:rf�:�a°�q�cl. 'fl��ubj�cti��4 c��'ki������rk«��s tc��vel�iale tht�
h��draiilic co�ldu�tii it}� ofehe subsurface mat�ri,�l iit 2�It�.+ian:n�diate vi�ii�i�}�of t[1c residence as�rell �s}�rc�vid�
�s�ii��ate�uf cc�i�s�rucli��n de����t�:r•ing and Ic�i��-lcran I�rn��7cl��tit�n���ain (�1o�t�s.
F3or��holes drillGd l��� NeE,�vc�r-tl�-�'a�vlak Gec�techa�icnl. ln�. Ck�al') inclica�te tlt�t tht sit� i�u��c#�,rlai�7 I�}�c�Icnse silt��,
�anci�n�(��ravel tiiith c��bbies��id bo►alclers t<��ppr��xii��ate�lv 1'? feet �cic,w��rc��►�►d su��P€�ce(grnd�)< We4�thei-ed
�:1��°�t�ra��v�s encountered �mderlyin�tl�c sa�3c�and grav�l tc�d�.�atlt��f l 7 tc�20 feet l�e.l<���� �rad�, 13�:1v�v the
�a�eatliere�l clay�t�t�� liE7i�sto��e bedrock c�l'tlte �liitturn T�ornt�tit�n�vas enc��u�tCer�cl tc�at Ec�st�t0 feck in d��,�tlt,
Cir����r�d4��at�r was encaunter�d at stabilic�d ciepths�fa�ap��oxi�natel��23 f��t��lo�4�� �►•o�ir�d surface.
Site Dats� Collertian
The in-sitfi h��dt•�tFlic coud�ictivit,� ��r�s ev�iluatcd L�y pwr�c�r��iiti�?'`slug'°tests��=itl�in ft�e teinpor�ry monitori���
�tells i�isCalled by�H-P. l�he���eils ����c�r��otistructed of 2-inc{i cliame�tet-PV�' «�ith factory slattecJ scr�eens aaid
c3e�re(�,peCL DnCa collected ai tlic moi�itorin�;�i�lls ��rior to tcsting aee suru�liarfzed t�e1c���°:
�'rc�rj� tt�}�of casin� �rc�►a1 �r��uiac� si�rface
TD DT1� T(�S t30� StJ 7`D D"I�«' Tt�S BOS
1�91�'-�A 41.7�? 2�.41 1 1.79 =�I.79 1.Sp 40.�9 2�,91 1 C?.29 40.29
MW-d �2.80 22.93 12.8Q ;?.8U -0?4 a3.Q�t ��.I7 13.0� i3.0=t
TD = tc�tal �-�►1 depth
DTtt�=�ci�pth t��a���ter
�TC,)S=tap�f serte�l
l34`�=�iottom r>t screen
�aU�casing sticku�above�ruta��d s��rface
C3VR'--�t-ow�cl�vater
Fle���tions([�ro�t�grouild elevations pi•ovided by H-P)
CrW TUS BOS
I�iW-;A 81ii.Q�) 3163.71 5133.71
11ltW-d 81�6.83 81�6.96 8126.46
As sfta�ti���abo�r�,�rou�iclticater elevations at tl�e loclti�n�c.�f�tl�e t�����inc���it���ria����efls t�ai��e f��om app��oxi.mately
8,1�7 ta 8.151 feet abo��=e►nea�i sea le��el on Ji�ne '?4,2013. �c�sazial tluctuations in�ro�tnd��tater eleti�ations
s[�ou(d be ar�ticip�t�d.
I2fi t t1 ��'. l�rrl��rr�����►_€�., C,'nit �"I, l,�ik����cxrxrd`, ClJ �t122r'�
.�'�').3-b'�'�-9/��'1� �C�cetas��r�r��;,�r�t���r�1`t��rt�t.c•�►�r
' • � � 1:X.'�►�:�i��".�� �.�� 's�,��;"� t�ir .�A:°"!f:°"7�� �� `�.�#►��`�'..'�R
Itt`�lr+�,;�c�r�dc���ic��14r��t�ll;'rt�•ir�rsfrrzr�=utrrf f�'t�ttacrlt�drrt.ti
filrc�A ccmc��t�t�^d in-sit�i I���dt�tl�►lic c�,7�7ductivitti� t�sts(slu�?t�sCS)c�n June ?�i. �'tll> in !�<�ritt�/t�f�V-3.� ancl
i3«�•in�;i�1\ti'-1. A r.lis��lac:e�7a�i�t t�°�e test tisim,a�t-fcaot 1������s�,Gd°`a�ti�_>�"an�.l C�r•as�t�re tr��i�sciuCLi°�ti�as�»,rfi�t'med.
!hu r�:stiltin�� �����id rat�:ol�ri;e ai7d tail i�l �hc»�ater l�;ti�el ���th� �l�iu��<��i���e�rtc�t;l a«d r•�mi7ti�GCI li~,�m tl�r�l�il �r�s
+'�c�rr�lr�1 l�� Ki preasur� transciucer an�i d�ta l���er.
1)aYa Anstiv�si�
1`!�e�iat�collect�;�! �v�s;►n<�I��ccci in�cc��rdan�c ti��itt� thu pt�l�lislied pr�,��:�iures c�e�e�'i�r��3 ht' [3��tz«�e.r���1<l I;ice
���;i��� i�hL c«mputer prour�n� �1qt�e5olv. T�he rautput is�rc���idecj u� ��Cta�:l�mtnt�1. Th��°esttlting h�ldraulic
c�ondi�cti��iti��foi�ei�.�l�t k�sts perl-ornteti in ehe t���o ti��ells nrc�uirnt��iriz4�c1 bi;i��«�;
?G3��tlifia�t�1'Ucllw I��st_'T"._„ti��� N�,�ciraulic C'�a��tl�3c�ti��it�°
t�ti'�'-3�1 i��ilin�,z,I�ead 3.fitlt�-"c�a�'�;e�t 10.2 ft,`dav)
i�•tt'��-3r1 l�allin�,11ca�1 3,9xiU'''cr�v�sec (i O,t]fUd�►��)
;'411�'-iA ri,in�Iteaci 3.Qx 10"'cm'�;rc{4.> fl'`dat)
MVV-�r1 rising I�eaci 3.�1 i0"'cm!s�c(9,<� itltiayl
i4911�`--� falli���I�e��d �.1 x 10"cn�?sec: (1 t.S lilcia�"1
l�t��'-� iallin� heac! �.1�;10�`cm,'scc{i I.; Yt!cl��)
M«'-� risiit�h�ad ;.�ix1Q"cni;���;(�1.9 fttda�'?
1�41u-�9 �•isi���h�ad �1.O�,f tl�'cEnls�c(a I.; ftlds���)
�siir�lated k;xca���Hti�a�r�rad �ou►ids�tion Drain Flur��s
Tlii�ai�alysis caf'�:;tinaateel coiastructian excavatiop and lon�-ter��� Fi�in�clatioi�drairt flt�»a i�basad oii tl�e li�i�itcd
d�ta�ol(�ctec� ti•a►�t tl�e h��dra�i[ic conducCivity testirls,3,tl�e estimat�cl�;i�e«l the ccztastructi��n e��:���ratiun.ehe
assumGd c�rs����d��«���rc��uired f'�ar c�nsteuction.and the elevaticm oi'fc�undaCion clr�ins.
�i�174�'esuirs c��I���dr�ulie canductivit}�testing indicate tl�at the sut�surtace inateri��ls t�stc�c!l�a��e an a��era��;
h}�c�rauli�:co��ducti��it}�r�f IO.S t'tldxv. T'lie perimeter ofthe��rc,pc,sed e�ca��ation belc��.��tltc 4t�rrent cuat�Er tahie
(�p}�rc�xi���atei� =110 line�a�fiee�tl��'a� basec!on a scalecl sit�e dra��in� "�{ti; fieaver t?a�1i R�<�i�i, l..ot �#5, 131ocl:4, W�il
�illa��3'�`� Filing�' Sheet r�I{?1 CZecreationai Lctiel Fla��r Plaa�; pre}�<�rtd b�z}�. ��I. ���bb,�rchit�cts, P.C. We
u»derstand th�t tl�e tc�p of fu�isi�er� floor elevatiorz fc�r the l��v�;st �uilclin�ievel(the aforemez�tioned Recreatic�na)
Level) i; 8137, �`Ia��a-outld�vat�;�•ele�ration il�easureci��n.twie 2�3,2(71 i rar��c.s f�•ntai 31 S I at tlle location�f'1��1W-
3A tc�81 i7 at t3ie Ic�catioa�of MVl'-� slopiil� fr�n�sc�utt�to norCh at a r�lati���l}�stvep gradie►�t uf 0.2=�. Tlie
a�prc�rimate n�rth h�lfc�fthe profaosed buildin��vilf be E�elol�E ttre esistin���s°�ter tat�le. T13is resuhs in ai7
ap��r���in��ztc i Gti'c7c�t�����t�ired drativdo�����of tli�gro�a�idti�ater level t���r th�northeri�pc�rti��i�ofthe structur�tvitl7
the 5e�uthc��n purtiun al�o��e tfie water table.
Based an tl�ese para�»eters ar�d usin�thc IJarcy Flo��=Eqi�atic�n «-e es�i�n�iKe t(�at ccrostru�tic��� de�a�atei•in�iitflo�+�
coulc! ra�z�e f�'om�p�r��i�7iutely 1�4,00f�to�3,Q00 c�ibic 1�cet p�r d���ar lppra:;imafely 75 to 12t�eallons per
��iinute(�;�n�)t<ar the no�-tl�ern�artion�71'tlle structure_ 1_,on�-tei7n fc�unciatioai draii� flo�1s«��:�Gi(c)be sotr�e�vl7at
less tila��caaash-��ctioi� flo���s; lik�ly oi� die order of 7� t� il)(}�pn�.
�I�f�e estimat�d tlo�ti �4i11�=Ary some�ll�at due ta scasnnal variati�ji in tt�e ground�v�ter levels. '1'he estii��ated inflo�v
is cliree:tly�t�a�d lin��rl��)related to the�t�oimd��rater elev°atio��.
F'l�ase� n��t�tl�€�t this prelimir�t�r�-estimate is l�as�d c��z limiteci aquifer test dat�. This estirnate cauld be tt►rtl�er
r-efi�aect b>° actr�itic�na( l�vdrau[ic�ca�aciuctivit��{siu�)tesrin�at the site�r,}�r��`�r�l�h, by a�urnp t�st. Slu�testing
Qa�ly��=�tluates a��en�linlit�d cxtei�t oftf�e aquifer nnd ma�� nat�'��ar�s�i�t the a�=erali aqt�ifcr cfZaract�r•istics. Foi�
t�a�a�a�ale,a I�i�i�permeal�i(it���lli�vial channel may easil��1��mis��d by a slu�test. �1 }��iEtt}a t�st e.val��ates a xt���et� r
lar�e��are�c�fth�aquifer�arc�l�idi���a f�i�;}ier lev�l of ee��taint}�than sliz�tests. A�e�n��a test wa�rlci r�duce tlie
u�icerrai»h�ia�l�erent in tlaes4 preliulinai��e,stiwnat�es,
-2-
' .' � (*�'�.;'�►��•:�� 1..i '.i.�.:"� c'�a. .���'s t )� "�.'�,'�'�:'�►
1-��'t��'���,��r'��r��,,r'c°r�d rtrtt!l;"rrrirr»tute°rzrr�t�x,�rt,�rrJtrrrtte
C'o►tetusit�r�s:ini� Recun�mcncl•►Iicrn�
I he rc�ulk�ot�t!'�e hyi�r���ilii:candi��.ti�°it��testin�� indicat� th�t thc]i}�cJraulic con�lucti��it�� m .21(u��lls te�i�rl rt�nucel
fi��i�r 3.t}r 1O' lu�#.1.�1 f1"' �m��t�c{�.5 t�� I I.� li:et,'dati�). 1b't' seleeicd �� t�aluc nf a.7ti 34m;�tc t 1(l.ti tT�dtt�') ii�r
�:�timati��;-„purp��s�s. ��"
F3a��c1<����1h�,�six.e c�i"the ��tz���c5s�d ex�ad��t'i�,��.cc�a�strttctic�n ci��cat�e€�ha;�fla��s�irc csti��iat�d t�� t�� ��it tlte cr��tl����c��
?S to 12O�.allons���,�r ia7iasutt* i�ro��� rl�e prc��a�sed f�ativer ie.�'�;l bt�ildiFi�,� fuc>t��rint a�s�miii7�;Jt���e �O l 3 �t-ot��tc��ti�at���
elc���ti�-���4. I,c�ns:-t�rn� I�c,in�rlt�ti��,ta dr�in f1��ir�s are�stittt��ted to L�c�c�t�t'he��r•der c�f ia tc� 1 C)0 c�'��m. I�Ip�vs ���ill��ary
��s th�!�roirn<I�i�ater levels ri;c an�i faMl sr:as�>i7�1i1�.
Onl��fi lii��ited secfir,i7 �i�ac�uiYer m�t�i'i��l �cas te�tec� iit�arh ave11 �lt�e to tl�e lin�it�cc�t�c�liiP����7enetration, ��s a
res�iit thes�;c(ata sh��uid b�cc»isiciered p�°�limin���y �stii���t4s oi'the cik°��ra11 Ityei�°atiiic cr�nilu4ti�vit;�� ��f the�IiaUc��v
aquif�ar���ci c�ai�sti°uctinn d����trtwrit��,linn,�-teru�stib-drlii� flc��vs,
[C'yc,u r�quirc���}r�ddi�ion�l i�ilt�i�mativit Ua'havc ariy yue�tinns }afease do not la�sitate tca eon��c1 at�e.
Sincerely,
C�,insr�r l��iian R Assucir�tt�s
� ����
r, �r�f � � z X���,!
'`'" i'''��'/,�f' ,r, f# t �
Dc>nalcl R. Glnscr. P,G�
Princip�l F-tyd���eologist
-3-
ATTACHMEN�' I--
AQ'�`ES�LV OUTPUT
• J
10.
D
i
s
K�
� 1.
�
� ~e�.�
4
m
e
n
t
p.1
(
f
t
?
a.o�
a. �20. zao. 3sa. �ao. soo.
Time (sec)
463 BEAV�R [�AM ROAQ
Dat� Set: G:i...IMW-3A in 1.agt
_ _ _
Date: 06/25l13 Time: 21°2Q:03
PROJECT lNFqRMAfiIQN
Company: Ganser Lujan &Assoc.
Client� H-P Geotech
F�roject: 13-1-463
Location: Vail, CC?
Tsst Weli: MW-3A
Test D�t�: 6I2412013
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 5Q. ft Anisotropy Ratia (Kz/Kr}; 0.1
WEL�. DATA jMW-3A in 1)
initial Displacement: 6.3 ft Skatic Water C�lumn Height: 17.38 ft
Totai Welf Penetrafiian C7epth: 17.p9 ft Screen L�ngth: 17.09 ft
Casing F2adius: 0.08 ft Weil Radius: �.Q8 f#
SOLUTlQN
Aquif�r Mod�l: Unconfined �alufiian Method: Bauwer-Ri�e
K = 1Q.22 fUd�v uQ = 9.�J6 ft
• y
�l,J
�../
'
S
P
I
a
c
e
m 1. �
�`
�
n °• ._
�
(
f
t
)
A.1
0. 160, 360. 54�. 720. 90f1.
Time (sEC}
463 ��AVER DAM ROAC?
Data Set� C;1,.,\MW-3A-out 1.aqt
Date: Q�/25/13 Time: 21:18:06
PROJ�CT iNFORMAfiION
�ompany: �anscr Lujan &Assoc.
Cli�r�t: H-P Geatech
t�roject: 13-9-463
Location: Vail, CO
�est Weli: MW-3A
Test Date: 6124/2Q13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated �'hickness� �0, ft Aniso#rQpy Ratia {KztKr): 0.1
WELL DA7A (New Weit)
lnitial Dispiacem�nt: 3.056 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.38 �
Total Weil Pen�tration D�ptFt: 17.09 ft Sereen Length: 17.09 ft
Casing Radius: Q.a8 ft Welf Radius: 0.08 fk
SOLUTIQN
Aquifer Modei: Unconftned Solution Method: B�uwer-Rice
K = $.507 ftldav vd= 5.�69 ft
. .
. �
io,
D
i
s 1.
P
I
a
c
e
m 0.1
e
n
t
(
f 0.01
t
)
o.oa�
a �a. zo. 30. 4a. �o.
Time (sec}
46� BEAV�R DAM ROAD
_
Data Set: G:1,..IMW-3A in 2.aqt
Da#�: 4�/26/93 Time: 15:54:58
PRC?JECT INFORMATION
Company: Ganser Lujan &Assoc.
Client: H-P Geat�ch
Praject: 13-1-463
Location: Vaii, C�
Test Well: 11!IW-3A
Test Date: 6124/2013
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickn�ss: 50, ft Anisatrapy Ratio (KziKr}: 0.1
WEL.L. DATA (MW-3A in 2)
Initiai Displacement: 2. ft Static Water Column Height: 17.3�ft
Tatal W�I! Penetratian �epth: 17,�9 ft Screen Length: 17 �9 ft
Gasing Radius: 0.08 ft WeI! Radius: 0.08 ft
SC?LUTIQN
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Methad: Bouwer-Rice
K = 10.95 ft/dav v0 = 2.046 ffi
. �, ..
. �
10.
D
i
� 1.
R :
i
� ..
c
e
m 0.1
e
n
t
{
f 0.01
t �� �
)
0.001
0. 80. 16Q. 24Q. 32Q. �ip0.
Time (sec)
46� BEAV�R DAM RDAC1
Data Set: C:1...\MW-3A out 2.aqt
_.____
Date: 06/26I13 _. Time� 16:22:41
PRQJ�CT INFURMATIQN
Company: Ganser Lujan &Assoc.
Client: H-P Geotech
Aroject: 13-1-463
Location: Vail, CQ
Test Weli: MW-3A
T�st Da�e: 6/2412013
AQUIFER DAi"A
Saturat�d Thickness: 60, ft Anisatropy Ratio (KzlKrj: 0,1
W�I.L DATA (MW-3A)
Initiai Displacement: 4_351 ft Static Water Column Meight: �7.38 ffi
_ ___ _
Tota( Weif Penetration Depth: 17.38 ft Scre�n Length: 17.38 ft
Casing Radius: 0.08 ft Weil F�adius: 4.08 ft
SOLUTIQN
�lquifer Mode1: Unconfined Salufion Method: Bouwer-Rice
K =9.921 ft/dav vQ =7 631 ft
� �l i
1q.
D
i
s
P
E 1.
�
�
�
m
e
n
t
{
Q.�
f
t
}
o,a�
4. 4 0. sa. �2a. �6a. 200.
Time (sec)
463 BEAV�R DAM RC�AD
Data Set: 1:1463 �3eaver Dam Rd1MW-4 in 1.aqt
Date: �16/27/13 Time: 1 Q:�2:03
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Gans�r Lujan &Assoc.
Client: M-P G��tech �
Prajeet: 1�-1-463
Location� Vail, CC7
Test We(l: MW-4
Test Dake: 6/24l2013
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 60. ft Anisatropy Ratio (Kz/Kr}: 0.1
WELL pATA (MW-4)
Initiaf Displa��ment: 2.877 ft Static Wat�r Column Height: 9.�7 ft
Total Weli P�netratian Depth: 9.87 ft Screen Length: 9.87 ft
Casing Radius: Q.Q8 ft Well F�adius: 0.C?8 ft
SQLUTIQN
Aquife�Model: Unconfined Solutian �tlethod: Bauwer-Rice
K = 11.,"�1 fflda� vf�= 3.603 ft
� �� ,
� � �
�a.
u
�
s
�
I
�
G
�
�11 �. �
� ,.
n
t �
�
f
t � -t
� � .� � _ _ w µ ..
Q.1
0. 80. 16p. 240. 320. 4Q0.
Time (sec)
463 B�AVER DRM RUAp
Data Se#: C:1,,.AMW-4 out 9.aqt
Date: 06/27113 Time; 11:14;43
PRQJECT INFQRMATION
Company: Ganser Lujan & Assoc.
Clienk: H-P Geotech
Project: 13-1-463
Loca#ion: Vail, C(J
Test Weii; MW-4
Test �ate: 6124/201�
AQUtFER �ATA
_ . _
Saturated Thickness: 8Q, ft Anisotropy Ratio {KzCKr}: 0.1
WE�,�. QATA{MW-4)
Initiai Displacement: 5.267 ft Static Water Column Mei�ht: 9.8�' ft
To#al W�ii Penetratiori Depth: 9.87�t Screen L�ngfh: 9.87 ft T
Gasing Radius: Q.a8 ft Well Radius: Q.Q$ ft
__ .
_ _
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solutian Method� Bouwer-Rice
K = 10.Q2 ftldav v0= 2.056 ft
� �� �
� � , a
��.
D
i
s y.
p 1.
a
c
e
m - :�
e
n
t
0.1
�
f
t
)
0.01
0. 8Q. 16Q. 240. 320. 400.
Time (see}
463 E3�AVER QAM R4AD
Data Set: G_1...IMW-4 in 2.aqt
Date: �6127l13 � Time: 11.25:41
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Ganser Lujan &Assoc.
Ciient: H-P Geotech
Rraje�t: 13-1-463
Location: Vail, CO
Tesk Well: MW-4
Test D�te: 6/24/2Q13
AQUIF'ER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6Q. ft Anisotrapy Ratio {Kz/Kr): Q,1
WELL DATA (MW-4)
initial �isplacement: 4.61 ft Static Water Column Height: 9,$7 ft
Tata!W�II Penetration Oepth: 9.�Z ft Screen Length: 9 87 ft
Casing Radius: 0.08 fit Well Radius: fJ.08 ft
�QI.U�'IQN
Aquifer Modei: Unconfined Solution Methad� B�uwer-Ric.e
K = 11.63 ft/dav v0= 1.3$5 ft
1 � �. �
y ' � A
10.
D
i
s
p
I ��
� _
�
�
m '
�
n
t
C1,1
�
f
t
)
0.01
Q. 80. 160. 24p. 32 Q. 400.
Time (sec)
463 B�AVER UAM RCJAD
Data Set; C:\...\MW-4 aut 2.ayt
Q�te; 06/2�113 Time: 11:40:50
PROJECT INFORMATI9N
Company: Ganser �ujan &Assoc.
Client: H-P Geatech
Project: 13-1-463
L.acation Vaif, CO
Test Weil: P�11%Va4
Test Qake: 6/24/2013
AQU�F�R RATA
Saturated ThiCkness: 60. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WEI.L DATA (New Welf)
initial Displacemenf: a.641 ft Static Wafer Column Height: 9.87 ft
Tota1 Well P�netration pepth: 9.87 ft �crean Length� 9.87 fit 4
Casing Radius: �.Q8 ft - Well Radiu�: Q.08 ft
�C,�!�l.tTkaf�l
Aquifer Model: Unconfi�ed Sc�lutic�n Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = °!1.26 ft/dav v0 = 2.815 f�