HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication- PermitGARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING'AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permk %in 3 6 3
Assessor's Parcel No.
109 8th Street Sulte 303
Glenwood Sorinys, Colorado 81801
Flute (303) 945-8212
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT
This does not constitute
a building or use permit.
PROPERTY I /�� Draft
�(� ��i^�^��y/11���� -�y/ J t]�/ �Jj�� Iteyl//1 �' +may/
Owner'e Nems 1 �r o k) Cf C a f v ' " Present Address ' g EO' ` G" — P ne I ' 5 - /Dcj w
System Location L! `"(1 LQ I Us. HAI iU if 3 4 (•) o g i l tV i
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No
SYSTEM DESIGN
,1
Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other)
Required Absorption Area - See Attached
Special Setback Requirements:
Date Inspector
FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
, Call for Inspection ($4 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer
Septic Tank Capacity 7L T1cti AL'Li-t2 C Arfel
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface
Absorption Area
Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements
Other
V l
Date Inspector "4S 12-0-!4/K/taz-fj 1r�'y /4(Qc `t_ %/ICL --_,i
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE J - 7 0
*CONDITIONS:
1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter
25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984.
2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con-
nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a
requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit.
3. Any person who constructs,alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material
variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6
months in jail or both).
White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER c 'tum
ADDRESS eo go.c., Isaac, aLosco. ,iGaba PHONE Cif(— I DZ.
CONTRACTOR A�l..
ADDRESS PHONE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR tS NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR
Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable
building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4).
LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY:
Near what City of Town &Lti.`LSockm Spas . Size of Lot 5 77 a�G+
Legal Description or Address 4.4 -?!0 I v S inn c.,ikwPn C OA- CAWS • h tom'
WASTES TYPE: ( ) DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
(0 COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE:
Number of Bedrooms -N_ % Pt Number of Persons 47gefriNt-
( ) Garbage Grinder ( ) Automatic Washer b,Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: 4Q WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier:
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: —7 MIL S.
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System?
A site elan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMUM distances:
Leach Field to Well: 100 feet
Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet.
Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet
Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet
YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT
A SITE PLAN.
GROUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to first Ground Water Table eDsliena 16 6 -
Percent Ground Slope U. 5 - 101/47,. S°7o
2
i
TWE Or INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
�. r
0.1 SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE .b..l & i c.eis
FINAL DISPOSAL BY:
(p0 ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER
( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND
( ) OTHER- DESCRIBE —
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? MiC)
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes-4Cper inch in hole No. 1 Minutes — 10 per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes 3 4-.4:26 per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _
Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: N P C#o-( - iocs' Abtei fowl
svzO CD is+ & S. Co 51boi 14:t7-1�e�
Name,.acyress and telephone of RPE
�/responsible fode�siignn of the J�system: 2. s t1/416 -,i
( 5 cWl m s1 - /t3 '-Oca-mf0-th Mct . 'bkz3 7o±o J
Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and
additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant
or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is
subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made,
information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to
be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of
health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any
falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based
upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
PLEASE DRAW
Due l
CCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
t
r
January 7, 2003
Pastor Mark Bintliff
New Creation Church
206 Center Drive
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: As -Built Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS) for the New Creation Church.
SE Job No. 98010.01
Dear: Mark:
Pursuant to County Regulations, this letter provides documentation that the new Individual Sewage Disposal
System (ISDS) recently installed is in compliance with the permitted design. Sopris Engineering has
performed site visits to measure, inspect, and document the as built conditions of the constructed system.
We have coordinated our efforts with the contractor that built the system. The various components of the
system were inspected prior to backfilling and after all installations were completed. The as -built
conditions and installation of the new ISDS components is in compliance with the design specifications for
the system. The specified 132 chambers were installed in a bed configuration in native soils. The as -built
location of the new ISDS is within the general orientation and location as delineated on the record drawing
dated 11/8/01.
A 2500 -gallon dual compartment septic tank was installed with an 8" effluent filter in series with 1000 -
gallon dual compartment septic tank with a 3" dosing siphon system. The absorption field was
constructed as delineated on the site plan. Each bed was installed level utilizing specified materials
installed according to design. Inspection ports were installed on the end chambers. The minimum setback
distances have been maintained.
The septic tanks, dosing siphon assembly, distribution riser with a hydro splitter distribution manifold, and
absorption bed installation are in accordance with Garfield County Regulations, the design presented in the
Sopris Engineering Report and the design drawing, dated November 8, 2001.
ISDS Operation and Maintenance
The engineered system shall be inspected on a regular basis and be properly maintained. The system and
responsibility for repair and maintenance of the system will remain with the Owner. The owner shall retain
the services of qualified personnel to inspect the ISDS and to perform all maintenance and repairs
necessary to ensure that the system is in good operating condition and is in compliance with the
manufacturers performance requirements. The operating components of the ISDS will be inspected within
30 days of being placed into operation and thereafter every six months. The dosing siphon assembly and
filter shall be maintained when the tank is pumped or as needed. We recommend a periodic inspection and
maintenance procedure be performed every 6 months.
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313
SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC
civil consultants
r
Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
January 7, 2003
Page 2
The ISDS system should require minimal maintenance. Several factors influencing the need for
maintenance include: actual wastewater flows versus design flows, the volume of kitchen/domestic waste
(excluding human waste and toilet paper), excessive household chemicals and other toxic liquids. The
tank, absorption field and other applicable treatment system components should be visually inspected bi-
annually for debris, wear, damage, leaks, or other potential problems. In general, for a properly utilized
system, septic tanks should be pumped and inspected every 2 - 4 years. The effluent filters should be
cleaned every six months and at the time of pumping. Absorption fields should be maintained with
suitable cover and kept free of root invasive plants. Positive surface drainage away from the absorption
field should be maintained.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
/c717
Paul Rutledge
Cc: Dana Yerian
Sun \yd\9801Qws6ull-indddoc
March 9, 2000
Pastor Mark Bintliff
New Creation Church
206 Center Drive
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS ) and Water Distribution System for Phase 1 of
the New Creation Church Development.
SE Job No. 98010.01
Dear: Mark
Attached herewith is a report of our findings and includes a design for the subject site improvements. The
design is based on engineering evaluations pertaining to the phased redevelopment and new development
associated with this project. We have utilized a report from Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (HP
Geotech) date November 23, 1999 Job No. 198 152 —1, a report from Zancanella and Associates dated
July 24, 1998, and the proposed site plan from Ernest C. Delto, Architect which includes survey
information from Richard L. Holsan. Our attached proposed Site plan,(Exhibit A) water and ISDS design
incorporates pertinent features from the above referenced sources.
Project Overview
The project consist of two phases in the development of the New Creation Church. Phase I includes the
remodel construction of the main church facility incorporating the existing building A. An ISDS system
will be constructed for the peak usage of this facility only. A new Transient, non -community water system
will be installed to serve the peak requirements of the Phase I development as well as phase II. Phase II
includes the remodel construction of a schoolldaycare facility incorporating the existing building B. A
separate ISDS system will be designed and installed to accommodate this facility. A water main
extension will be constructed to provide potable and fire flow water to the facility. The water system will
be classified as a transient, non community water system.
Alternatives Considered
The conceptual design for water and sewer improvements have been ongoing for two years. The initial
conceptual plan involved connecting water and sewer services to the Canyon Creek Estates system located
approximately one mile to the east adjacent to Canyon Creek This existing water and sewer system
currently serves the subdivision with 59 lots online.
The Average daily water use for the subdivision is 23,450 gallons per day with a maximum of 50,000
gallons of storage. In order to utilize the water system the church would be required to share the cost to
provide for an upgrade to accommodate the subdivisions ultimate build out as well as accommodating the
required additional storage for fire flow and in house needs at the church. The increased cost of providing
treatment, distribution and storage for approximately 102,000 gallons is cost prohibitive. The distribution
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313
SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC
civil consultants
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 2
would run approximately 5000 feet and include a water course crossing. The total additional cost between
constructing an onsite system versus utilizing the off site system is approximately $106,612.
The current average daily wastewater flows for the subdivision is 16,000 gallons per day with a maximum
plant capacity of 21,000 gallons per day. It has been determined that the wastewater treatment plant at
Canyon Creek has the capacity to treat the additional wastewater from the church, however the plant needs
some maintenance work. Zancanella and Associates estimated the cost to the church at $12,000. The
increased cost of providing treatment plant maintenance, distribution and lift stations is cost prohibitive.
The Sewer line would run approximately 5000 feet, include a water course crossing and lift station. The
total additional cost between constructing an onsite ISDS system versus utilizing the off site wastewater
treatment plant system is approximately $133,132.
The total additional cost between constructing onsite water and ISDS system versus utilizing the off site
systems is approximately $239744. Due to economic constraints scheduling and legal agreements a
decision has been made to forego connection to the off site water and sewer systems and construct the
proposed water and ISDS systems presented in this report. However the church will retain the option to
connect to a future regional water and sewer facilities if the engineering and economic realities are
favorable.
Site Location
The Site is located in Section 35, T 5 S., R 90 W. of the 6`s P.M. at 44761 U.S. Highway 6, Garfield
County, Colorado. The subject site is located approximately 500 feet north of the Colorado River and
approximately 3/4 mile west of Canyon Creek. The site is bordered on the south by U.S. Highway 6 and the
northwest by County Road 335. Latitude is 39 deg 34' 19" and Longitude 107 deg. 27' 32"
Sewer System
Wastewater from Building A will be discharged into 2 individual septic tanks connected in series, which
discharges into a lift station and dosing tank configured for alternate dosing. The lift station will pump
effluent through one of two individual force mains which will distribute the effluent to one of two alternate
leach fields located along the northwest property boundary of the site. Based on a previous discussion with
Dwayne Watson, State Health Department it was our understanding the effluent from Building A would
best be treated by alternate dosing of wastewater between two leach fields. Wastewater from Building A
will flow to two individual 2500 gallon septic tanks and one 1000 gallon septic tank/dosing tank connected
in series. We have designed the system to allow for dosing which would alternate discharge evenly over
two separate fields.. Based upon soils reports and Garfield county requirements we have calculated the
leach field areas for Building A to be 2770 square feet each. The total calculated volume of required septic
tank volume is 6000 gallons and the peak dosing volume is 800 gallons. We recommend setting float
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 3
controls to alternate a dosing volume of approximately 350 gallons to insure adequate disposal of effluent
from the tanks during non peak days.
Existing Site Conditions:
The site was previously occupied by a boat and recreational vehicle storage and maintenance facility. A
one story pre -fabricated steel structure and a one story wood frame over a waikout basement/garage exist
near the southwest and southeast corners of the site respectively. A shallow pond is located near the east
central portion of the site. The ground surface is relatively flat in the southern portion of the site and
continues with a moderate grade up to the northem most point on the site. The overall slope is slight to
moderate with decreasing grade from north to south. Approximately 35 to 40 feet of elevation difference
exist across the site. Vegetation typically consist of grass and weeds. The southern portion of the site is
covered with gravel and road base along with two existing structures and large concrete slabs. The
northern portion of the site where the proposed absorption fields will be located consist of undisturbed
pasture grasses that have been irrigated in the past. The existing sub surface materials at the proposed
ISDS location consist of fill overlying sand and silt
Proposed Site Condition:
The existing Building A will be remodeled and added on to create a new church facility with associated
parking and driveways. The project phase 1 intends to serve a maximum of 950 people at the church
facilities for Sunday services. Water will be supplied by an existing well in the south portion of the
property and is shown on the attached site plan. We have based our design on a peak day, design flow of 5
gallons per day per person to accommodate a maximum of 950 persons on the peak day once a week. The
attached Water Usage Demand Requirements table (Exhibit B) delineates peak day and average water
requirements for Phase 1 and 2 incorporated into the design.
Subsurface Conditions:
Attached herewith are the results of the subsurface investigation and percolation tests conducted by HP
Geotech dated October 22, 1997 Job No. 197 490 (Exhibit C). The subsoil encountered at the site consists
of 0 - 5 feet of fill overlying sand and silt. Silty sandy gravels containing cobbles and possible boulders
was encountered at depths between 5 and 16 feet. The ground water was not encountered at the time of the
investigation and is not expected to be encountered at a depth which may influence the design of the
proposed absorption system. The absorption rate of the soils on site were measured to be 28 to 45 minutes
per inch with an average of 34 minutes per inch. W recommend using 34 minutes per inch for design
purposes. The system will be installed in natural soils below any fill encountered.
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No, 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 4
System Design:
A site plan is provided to detail the various components of the proposed sewage disposal system. Please
note that the size of the proposed leach field system is based on Garfield County's peak flow per person
per estimated institutional usage rates. The following pages detail the technical criteria utilized in design
of the proposed system. We recommend using a conventional absorption bed system.
Design Criteria:
The proposed system is designed to serve a church facility containing 425 seats or 950 people maximum
per peak day once a week. The design flows are calculated as follows
Institutional unit — peak day per person usage = 950 persons.
Design flow (Qd) = # of people X 5 gal/person/clay
Qd = 950 X 5 = 4750
Septic Tank Design:
Volume (v) of tank = Design flow (Qd) * 1.25 ( 30 hour retention )
V = 4750 X 1.25 = 5938 gallons
Use 6000 gallon septic tank volume, two individual single compartment tanks of 2500 gallon capacities
each plus a 1000 gallon double compartment tank. The tanks will be installed and operate in series. The
first tank will be a single compartment tank a will hold the majority of the solids. The second will also be
a single compartment tank and will serve to meet peak volume capacities and insure adequate detention
time of the effluent. The third tank will be a double compartment tank that will store the dosing volumes
and accommodate the dual pump, alternating dosing package system. This system will incorporate a
maintainable filter to collect any additional suspended solids that may be present in the effluent.
An alternative may involve increasing the detention time by up sizing the first tank and dosing the fields
with a filtered duplex dosing pump system installed in the secondary chamber of the second septic tank.
Percolation Test Results;
As mentioned above, ground water was not encountered and natural soils on the site are adequate to
provide effective percolation within normal ranges. Therefore, a conventional absorption disposal system
is recommended for this site. Average percolation rate is 34 minutes per inch (HP report).
a
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 5
Absorption Field Disposal System Design:
Average percolation rate is 34 minutes per inch
A (SF) = (Qd)/5 *v t: where A = area Qd = (gal/day)
v t = square root of time of absorption rate (min/inch)
This design will give a recommended minimum absorption field area:
A = 4750/5 x v 34 = 5540 sq. feet
Use two separate 2770 SF fields with alternating dosing 3 times per day. The system will provide
pressurized alternating dosing to individual distribution boxes located at the mid point of the individual
fields. The effluent will gravity flow to separate headers laid across the beds and distribute through the
perforation distribution laterals extending lengthwise from either side of the headers.
Dosing Tank
The third septic tank in series will be a double compartment tank that will store the dosing volumes and
accommodate the dual pump, alternating dosing package system. This system will incorporate a
maintainable filter to collect any additional suspended solids that may be present in the effluent.
The force mains from the dosing tank to the individual fields shall be 1 1/2 inch in diameter to provide a
minimum velocity of 4.7 fl/sec. The total peak day design volume of effluent is 4750 gallons and the peak
dosing volume is approximately 800 gallons based on 6 dosing cycles per day. We recommend setting
float controls to alternate a dosing volume of approximately 350 gallons to insure adequate disposal of
effluent from the tanks during non peak days. This will also insure that adequate capacity is available to
detain waste water during peak use on Sunday mornings. We believe that daily flows will be limited far
below the design flow and recommend that the system provides a minimum dosing once a day.
Alternating Duplex Dosing Pump System
We recommend installing an Orenco Systems Inc., Biotube pump vault system or equivalent in the
secondary compartment of the third septic tank. The advantages to this type of system include additional
filter treatment to increase longevity of absorption bed and reduce wear on pumps and controls. The
complete installation package includes all valves, controls, alarms, electrical and communication
components. The systems have easy access and maintenance design. and are well suited for this
commercial application.
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 6
Site Improvement Layout:
With respect to the current conditions, all septic tanks and sewage lines must be watertight. A peak dosing
volume of 800 gallons will most likely be required due to the alternating dosing to the dual absorption field
system. However a minimum dosing cycle may be incorporated to control potential odors from stagnate
effluent stored in the system during non peak days. The separate fields will allow for better treatment and
recovery within the absorption beds. The dual pump system will be needed to pump sewage to the
distribution field and sufficiently sized to maintain a discharge velocity of 5 feet per second. The two
pumps are required on commercial systems to insure the uninterrupted distribution of waste water to the
fields in case one pump stops working or needs to be serviced. The system shall be configured so that
either pump will provide the alternating dosing. The dosing/septic tank will be gravity fed from the second
(2500 gallon) septic tank. The septic tanks must be watertight therefore, it is recommended to install one
piece tank units or factory sealed two piece units to prevent seepage out of the tanks. If the tank pieces
have to be joined in the field extra care shall be used to insure watertight seams. A pressure test is require
to insure maximum resistance to infiltration.
General Notes:
1) All materials and installation practices shall conform to the Garfield County ISDS regulations.
2) All sewer lines in the system shall be schedule 40 or SDR 35 PVC unless specified otherwise on
the plan.
3) The contractor shall ensure that the concrete septic tank and sewer lines are completely watertight.
4) The absorption fields shall be planted ( sod or mulch seeding ) with suitable vegetation cover.
5) Two-way clean out on the service line from the church facility.
6) The bed areas must be protected to prevent damage from vehicular or livestock traffic and must be
crowned to divert drainage away from the beds.
7) All septic and dosing tanks will require anchoring where groundwater is present.
Our design and recommendations are based upon data supplied to us by others. If subsurface or site
conditions are found to different from these described in this report, we should be notified to evaluate
the effect it may have on the proposed ISDS. If the County Environmental Health Department requests
changes or modifications to this design, we should be contacted to evaluate the effect on the ISDS.
Water System
The existing well has sufficient flow (24 gpm) to easily meet the needs of the church. On site storage will
be required to meet fire flow requirements. Water treatment will be required for drinking water. Filtration
and disinfection by use of a chlorination system is required. In addition a reverse osmosis system will be
utilized to supply drinking water fixtures within the church facility at selected locations.
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 7
The water will be supplied by an existing well located on the southem portion of the property east of the
old dairy building. Water will be pumped via pipeline to a 50,000 gallon storage tank proposed to be
constructed at the north end of the property. An 8" D.I.P. water main will be installed along the northern
edge of the property from the tank to the church facility. The distribution system will supply water for
domestic use, irrigation and fire protection to Building "A". An additional 420 lineal feet of water main
across the southern property line is required to extend service to Building "B".
The storage tank location will only provide 20 psi water pressure to Building A and 26 psi to Building B.
A small booster pump may be required to provide adequate pressure to the buildings for sprinkler
requirements.
Water Storage Tank
The water storage tank should be installed at the location shown on the plan at the northem most area of
the site. This area provides a good location for placement and is at the highest elevation (5033) to provide
adequate pressure to the water distribution lines. The storage volume in the tank has been calculated to
provide the required fire flow plus two day average in-house demand volume of 50,000 gallons. The tank
shall be a welded steel tank designed and constructed per AWWA standards. Shop drawings and
specifications shall be submitted to the engineer for approval. The tank shall be vented to prevent
differential internal and extemal pressures. The tank shall be equipped with an inlet riser to deliver fresh
chlorinated well water near the top of the tank to promote mixing and adequate chlorine dispersion. The
tank outlet will discharge near the bottom of the tank and be equipped with a riser approximately 12 inches
above the bottom to prevent any accumulated sediments from entering the distribution system. Flush type
clean outs shall be provided to allow for cleaning and initial disinfection. Other accessories may be
required by the Water Control Division.
Storage Tank Foundation
The tank shall be supported on a ring wall, footing, concrete slab, or structurally compacted granular berm.
Excavation, soil preparation and compaction shall conform to accepted engineering practice for the bearing
pressures predicted. Site grading around the tank shall provide for positive drainage away from the tank.
The top of the foundation shall be a minimum of 6 inches above the finished grade. Foundation depths
shall be designed for appropriate frost protection.
Disinfection
The potable water system must maintain a detectable chlorine residual at 95% of the system extremities. A
chlorinator must deliver available chlorine to maintain 0.2 mg/1 of free chlorine residual and provide a
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 8
minimum of thirty minutes contact time at maximum flow rates. Chlorine will be applied at the detention
basin inlet utilizing an automatic liquid chlorine solution chemical feeder. The system will required an
adequately sized insulated heated building to accommodate supply line inspection loop, with appropriate
valving , disinfectant injection port, hose bib, chemical feed pump, two 50 gallon solution tanks, controls,
testing equipment and supplies. Other accessories such as a flow meter or irrigation bypass plumbing and
controls could be incorporated into this system. Access to the structure .would be from the adjacent county
Road. Groundwater systems may apply for a waiver from contact time and/or chlorination if monitoring
results indicate a waiver is appropriate. The recommended system is a Culligan Chem Feeder B 911-392
SI with a chemical storage tanks model # 26350 The chlorinator has a daily output of approximately 68
gallons per day.
Water Quality
A water sample from the water supply source, the Dairy Basement Well, was collected and analyzed in
May of 1998 An additional sample was collected and analyzed in February of 2000. The lab results from
the two sampling events present similar concentrations of constituents contained in the well's water. The
parameters tested indicate a naturally soft, alkaline water with relatively high concentrations of sodium,
chloride and bicarbonate which constitutes the majority of the total dissolved solids. Sodium, Chloride and
TDS exceed the maximum containment levels (MCL) for drinking water however they are all secondary
parameters that are not enforceable by the CDPHE It is recommended that drinking water be treated for
limited usage at selected locations only. All primary parameter test results indicated concentrations below
drinking water standard MCL's. The concentration of fluoride is elevated but is below the limit. The
Bacteriological test indicated zero colonies of coliform. The turbidity at the time of sampling was slightly
high, however we do not anticipate any adverse effects associated with the chemical or mechanical
treatment of the water. It is noted that the sample was collected in conduction with a well aquifer pump
test after an extended period of well inactivity. We anticipate that any elevated levels of suspended solids
will only be present during maximum pumping demands and will settled out in the storage tank prior to
distribution. No filtration is recommended at this time. Other parameters tested are within acceptable
ranges precluding the need for additional treatment.
Water Treatment
Water treatment shall consist of chlorination as mentioned above and reverse osmosis (RO) to treat and
store limited amounts of drinking water only. The RO water would be distributed via separate supply lines
to fixtures at select locations within the building. No other treatment processes are anticipated at this time.
R.O. System
The R.O. system will be a central unit that will include the RO Filters with automatic pre an post treatment
controls, and associated plumbing. A 37 gallon pressure tank will store treated water for distribution to the
selected fixtures. The system is estimated to process approximately 125 gallons per day. The drinking
Pastor Mark Bintliff
SE Job No. 98010.01
March 9, 2000
Page 9
next to the kitchen sink. If desirable additional small gooseneck fixtures may be installed in the primary
public restrooms for limited use drinking only. If more dedicated drinking water is desired or needed for
peak day use, an additional pressure storage tank can be installed.
The recommended system is a Culligan B -1L plus or approved equal.
Water Quality Monitoring
The management of the system shall include a periodic water quality monitoring program. The program
shall have a schedule to collect water samples from designated sampling points for testing of specific
parameters as required for transient, non -community public water systems. The system will be considered
a non transient, non -community water systems The Water Control Division will establish the monitoring
frequency during the compliance period and allow for waivers when test results indicate a waiver is
appropriate. The parameters that must be monitored for this system include but are not limited to
bacteriological, nitrate and nitrite. Phase two of the project, when the day care/school facility is
constructed, will change the system to a Non transient, non -community water system, and will require
additional parameters to be tested. When a treatment process will effect the corrositivity of the systems
potable water, a lead and copper assessment must be completed. The independent R.O. distribution
system shall utilize plastic pipes.
Fire Protection
The water distribution system will be distributed in 8" mains. Two fire hydrants will be installed to serve
the church facility. A booster pump will be required to provide for interior sprinkler systems. An
appropriate plumbing installation shall separate the potable and fire protection systems in the building.
Irrigation system.
Several options exist for providing irrigation water to the property. The well pump may be utilized to
supply pressure for irrigation purposes or to fill a reservoir. A by pass valve, distribution pipes yard
hydrants may be installed at the well head and or at chorine/ control building adjacent to the storage tank
which would provide for irrigation needs independent of the storage tank. We would recommend that non
chlorinated water be utilized for irrigation purposes. If ditch water is utilized in an irrigation system then
provisions shall be made to prevent any cross connection with the potable water system.
stions or need any additional information, please call.
Y • � ichol, P.E. e! Paul Rutledge
Proj = ineer �A4��` Design Engineer
?80/0.0 i
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax 970 945-8454
Phone 970 945.7988
PRELIMINARY SUBSOIL STUDY
AND PERCOLATION TEST
PROPOSED CHURCH FACILITY
44761 US HIGHWAY 6 & 24
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 197 490
OCTOBER 22, 1997
PREPARED FOR:
BURGE BUILDERS
ATTN: RIFF BURGE
P.O. BOX 165
NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
October 22, 1997
Burge Builders
Attn: Biff Burge
F.O. Box 165
New Castle, Colorado 81647
Job No. 197 490
Subject: Report Transmittal, Preliminary Subsoil Study and Percolation Test,
Proposed Church Facility, 44761 US Highway 6 & 24, Garfield County,
Colorado.
Dear Mr. Burge:
As requested, we have conducted a preliminary subsoil study for the proposed church
facility at the subject site.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed
building areas generally consist of nil to 5 feet of fill overlying loose to medium dense
sand and silt. Relatively dense silty sandy gravel containing cobbles and possible
boulders was encountered in Borings 2, 3 and 4 at depth between 5 and 16 feet.
Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling.
Development in the proposed building areas should be feasible based on geotechnical
considerations. The proposed buildings can be founded on spread footings placed on
the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf for the
upper sand and silt and 3,000 for the lower dense gravel soils.
The report which follows describes our exploration, summarizes our findings, and
presents our recommendations. It is important that we provide consultation during
design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation
of the geotechnical recommendations,
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Jordy Z. • on, Jr., P.E
Rev By: L
JZA/ro
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a preliminary subsoil study for a proposed
church facility to be located at 44761 US Highway 6 & 24, Garfield County, Colorado.
The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop
recommendations for the foundation design and percolation rates for septic disposal
system design. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for
geotechnical engineering services to Burge Builders dated August 7, 1997.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings and percolation
testing was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the
subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine
their classification, compressibility and other engineering characteristics. The results of
the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations
for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building
foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents
our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering
considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
At the time of our study, design plans for the buildings had not been developed.
A one story addition with a walkout basement is planned for the existing building
located at the west end of the property. Basement floor will be slab -on -grade. Three
other areas are planned for future development. Grading for the structures is assumed
to be relatively minor with cut depths up to about 6 feet. We assume relatively light
foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction.
When building loadings, location and grading plans have been determined, we
should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
H -P GEOTECH
-2 -
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is currently occupied by a boat and recreational vehicle storage and
maintenance facility. A one story pre -fabricated steel structure and a one story wood
frame over a walkout basement/garage are present near the southwest and southeast
corners of the site. A concrete pad and dry shallow pond are located near the middle of
the property. The storage area essentially covers the rest of the property and consists
of gravel surfaced parking. The ground surface is relatively flat in the southern portion
of the site and hilly to the north. The overall slope is slight to moderate down to the
south. There is about 20 to 30 feet of elevation difference across the site. Vegetation
typically consists of sparse grass and weeds.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on August 26 and 27, 1997.
Four exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous
flight augers powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51HD drill rig. The borings
were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with 13/e inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows
from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard
penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values
are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which
the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review
bythe project engineer and testing.
H -P GEOTECH
-3 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Fig. 2. The subsoils generally consist of up to 5 feet of fill overlying loose to medium
dense sand and silt. Relatively dense silty sandy gravel containing cobbles and possible
boulders was encountered in Borings 2, 3 and 4 at depths between 5 and 16 feet.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included
natural moisture content and density and gradation analyses. Results of consolidation
testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figs. 4 and 5,
indicate low compressibility under existing moisture and light loading conditions and a
low collapse potential (settlement under constant load) when wetted. The samples
showed moderate compressibility upon additional loading after wetting. Results of
gradation analyses performed on a small diameter drive sample (minus 1'A inch
fraction) of the natural coarse granular soils are shown on Fig. 6. The laboratory
testing is summarized in Table I.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the
subsoils were slightly moist to moist.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are suitable for preliminary design of the
buildings at the site. When building locations, configurations and grading plans have
been determined, we should review the information and conduct additional analysis as
needed for site specific recommendations.
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and
the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the buildings be founded with
spread footings bearing on the natural subsoils.
H -P GEOTECH
-4 -
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a
spread footing foundation system.
1) Footings placed on the upper natural sand and silt soils should be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf and footings
placed entirely on the underlying gravel soils should be designed for an
allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. Based on experience, we
expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in
this section will be about 1 inch or less.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous
walls and 2 feet for isolated pads.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided
with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost
protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior
grade is typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least
12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be
designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent
fluid unit weight of 50 pcf.
5) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be
removed and the footing bearing level extended down to natural subsoils.
If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered
before concrete placement.
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly
loaded slab -on -grade construction. There could be some post -construction slab
movement due to wetting and settlement of the subgrade soils. To reduce the effects of
H•P GEOTECH
• -5-
some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and
columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab
control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The
requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the
designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of
free -draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate
drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50%
retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 %
of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required
fill can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the buildings have been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the fust 10 feet in paved areas.
Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the
on-site soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
H -P GEOTECH
-6 -
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation tests were conducted in the western portion of the property for
expansion of the existing septic disposal system. One profile boring (Boring 1) and 3
percolation test holes (P-1, P-2 and P-3) were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1.
The test holes were drilled with a 6 -inch diameter auger and were soaked the day prior
to testing. The soils exposed in the test holes were similar to those encountered in
Boring 1, shown on Fig. 2 and consist of about 21/2 feet of' fill overlying sand and silt.
The tests were conducted in the natural soils. The percolation test rates, summarized in
Table II, varied from 28 to 45 minutes per inch with an average rate of 34 minutes per
inch. The percolation rates were based on the last three readings of the tests. The site
appears suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. The system
should be based in the natural soils beneath the existing fill.
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 expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at
the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience
in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface
conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions
encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we
should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design
purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our
information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and
field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our
recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately
H -P GEOTECH
-7 -
interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications
to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of
excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a
representative of the geotechnical engineer.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOT CHNICAL, INC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
JZA/ro
cc: Ernst Delto
H -P GEOTECH
Z
APPROXIMATE SCALE
= 100'
�'
/ /
/ EXISTING ..'• ....\
` BUILDING / `
P1Q:ORING/ \ k
AP 3 \\
A t-....,
/ P 2 // , \\\
/ / /
rya Q{c // \ \
' / e , \`
v
BORING 2 / ' /ft o
Eil/ 5u / `\ o
\\
DRY • BORING 4
SHALLOW
BORING 3
r 1 POND
/ 1
EXISTING / ,
BUILDING /
/•
-J
f!I(
11
197 490
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 1
• e
e
0
0
5
— 10
15
20
25
BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3 BORING 4
ELEV. = 101.9' ELEV. = 99.6' ELEV. = 93.0' ELEV. = 117.4'
11/12
S1101 2.7
DD -112
9/12
WC -7.4
OD -100
-200-37
10/12
4/6.10/6
7/12
WC=12.6
00=105
—200=59
7/12
6/9
11/12 51/12
WC=2.5
+4=43
—200=10
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. 3.
27/12
7/12
WC=6.0
00=102
—200=35
0
5
12/12 10
WC=5.4
DD=113 _
9/6.16/0
20/12
15
20
25
Depth — feet
197 490
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL. INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 2
i
CCGEND:
h
7/12
NOTES:
FILL; sandy silt with gravel. clayey, loose to medium dense, slightly moist, brown to reddish brown.
TOPSOIL; silty sand, organics, loose, slightly moist. dark brown.
SAND AND S1LT (SM—ML); occasional gravel, loose to medium dense, slightly moist to moist, brown,
slightly calcareous.
GRAVEL (GM); silty, sandy, with cobbles, possible boulders. dense. slightly moist. fight brown.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2—inch 1.D. California liner sample.
Drive sample; standard penetration test ( SPT ), 1 3/8—inch I.D. split spoon sample. ASTM D — 1586.
Drive sample blow count; indicates that 7 blows of a 140—pound hammer falling 30 inches were
required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches.
Practical rig refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates that multiple attempts were
made to advance the boring.
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on August 26 and 27, 1997 with a 4—inch diameter continuous flight
power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown
on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark
shown on Pg. 1.
4. The exploratory boring locutions and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied
by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered in the borings of the time of dnlling.
Fluctuation in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results
WC = Water Content (% )
DD = Dry Density ( pef )
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve.
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
197 490
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LEGEND AND NOTES
Fig. 3
0
te
8
2
a
E
8 3
0
1
Moisture Content = 117 percent
Dry Density = 112 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silt
From: Boring 1 at 5 Feet
No movement
upon
wetting
0.1
0
tt
1
n
u
2
n
0
v
3
4
1 0 10
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
100
Moisture Content = 7.4 percent
Dry Density = 100 pcf
Sample of: Silty Sand
From: Boring 1 at 10 Feet
oNN
Compression
upon
wetting
01
-J
1 0 10
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
100
197 490
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK SWELL—CONSOLIDAT1ON TEST RESULTS Fig. 4
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Compression %
Compression %
0
1
2
3
4
Moisture Content = 6.0 percent
Dry Density = 102 pcf
Sample of: Silty Sand
From: Boring 4 at 5 Feet
1
Compression
upon
wetting
01
0
1
2
3
10 10
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
100
Moisture Content = 5.4 percent
Dry Density = 113 pcf
Sample ofi Sandy Silt
From: Boring 4 at 10 Feet
Compression
upon
wetting
0.1
1 0 10
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
100
197 490
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK SWELL—CONSOUDAT{ON TEST RESULTS
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Fig. 5
•
• •
• RCENT N
F
24 1*. 7 M
451114
100
50
60
70
op
50
40
76
m
I0
0
N113RCSIE1371 ANALYSIS
711E IIE6pg6
60 1.1.15 105. 4 MW. 1 Iw.
POO
006
SINE /JULT60:
USST740NIO SEWS
CPM =ARE OPa.105
00 00 05 15 $ 7/111/2'3/4 11f2
Elm Sea
r
5Yr
__or —a��
OEMS
---
_Stlf
_•
•
r •SI
SI' JOS
FYISr SA S
—a
Sam
St Se SS
—al IS al
MI S\ SS
•��—.�
SINIS
a•
a�Y
IS 4OM
S IM One
a Se
S SOW SIS
Mr SS OM
•
IS /aISSS
arel•___ _
�� i
S al _
i
-w
• d,
N
T
0
0
2
J
Q
2
X
0
W
H y
O
NJ —0
C7wi-
m ¢
J }" m
5
a o
1— cc
O i
a N
W
X
TEST RESULTS
SOIL OR
BEDROCK TYPE
Sandy silt
Silty sand
Very sandy silt
Silty sand and gravel
Silty sand
—
T
His
ATTERSERQ LIMITS 41
x
om
a =
37
59
0
in
M
a
m
4 c X
C
rIn
N
r
O
r
O
r
O
r
r
r
%
i 18
N.
N
r
a
7...t.
CO
N
•
N
o
0
11'1
DEvix
uwl
5
10
tf)
N
10
r
N
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 197 490
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN./INCH)
P-1
41
10
30
25
24%
1
45
24'%
23%
1
23'%
22%
1
22%
22
%
22
21%
7
214
20%
°
P-2
47
15
30
22
20%
1'
28
20%
18%
2
18%
17
1'%
17
16
1
16
14%
1'/.
14%
13%
1
P-3
46
10
30
21
18A
2'%
18'%
15'%
3
15'4
13%
1%
13%
12%
1%
12%
11%
%
11%
10%
1
30
Note: Percolation tests were performed in 6 -inch diameter auger holes drilled and soaked on
August 26, 1997. Percolation tests were conducted on August 27, 1997.