HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication- PermitGARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT
108 Eighth Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, Coloradof 81601
Phone (970) 945-8212
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT
PROPERTY
Owner's Name
System Location
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No
SYSTEM DESIGN
Permit
4012
Assessor's Parcel No.
This does not constitute
a building or use permit.
resent Address&! 55te -k) Sb St QEhone31 9 389(c)
6, /- /ez
7/ OJO
Lot IO tJa-Five. Sr fly atbct.
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 (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer
Septic Tank Capacity
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
Date
5/31
Inspector
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE
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 specif ications contained in the application of permit commits a Class 1, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6
months in jail or both).
w6M ACCT I"ACm' v 0 no- n•rer.. I.... Me
0
y
%prim _LS TS
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER /CPC*.
ADDRESS a� &.(11< )i i PHONE_ _
CONTRACTOR LLl 2' CMCO Qct c Q(_
ADDRESS ai5i 1?d a t 5 L4- PHONE R1Th'w) U call 319- 80/0
PERMIT REQUEST FOR 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 FA(CILITY:
Near what City of Town n Size ofLot 5. 17,Q hett
Legal Description or Addres� itjcl� i tJP S prt Dr, , 1 t .Pcp , Co 206:17)
WASTES TYPE: (tj/DWELLING
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER—DESCRIBE
( ) TRANSIENT USE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: Si n � awJ\ u
Number of Bedrooms 3 umber of Persons s _
('4' Garbage Grinder (VcAutomatic Washer ( "Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( /WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier:
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: (L&oY) U ?FYI . Sprrp
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? Nj(n �3 rytki I
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMUM distances:
Leach Field to Well:
Septic Tank to Well:
Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course:
Septic System (septic tank & disposal field) to Property Lines:
100 feet
50 feet
50 feet
10 feet
YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT
A SITE PLAN.
GROUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to first Ground Water Table
Percent Ground Slope
•
7.
r r
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
(t( SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET( ) OTHER -DESCRIBE
FIN,L DISPOSAL BY:
( 16 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?
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole No. 3
Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole No. _
4 ° Gwf e tk
Name, address and tel one of RPE who made§941 absorption tests:
5bac� _P2154 G s Xi6or
Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: (to -f e c`" 1
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.
Signed CSCrt,l.A--nCii_./ Date g J I q C
Li -
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
00'SLZ
Co
CO CO
91,92.00 N
235.00'
,
V- _ 235.00'
.00 9z Z 1
3 « 61 92.00 S
/V6i4 jr44Yartce
s
•
I
Gtech
Aar kI' 10 Nal kit Sprior 'awe')
142402,01- No»Jo & Ouslopmeta Ccs•, CLc
Hepworth-Pawlal: Geotechnical. Inc.
5020 Count.Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Pax: 970-945-8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY
PROPOSED NATIVE SPRINGS SUBDIVISION
COUNTY ROAD 221
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 100 460
JANUARY 16, 2001
PREPARED FOR:
JIM AND PAUL LUGINBUHL
P.O. BOX 950
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1
SITE CONDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SETTING
FIELD EXPLORATION 3
S 11B SURFA CE CONDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT 5
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 6
FOUNDATIONS 6
FLOOR SLABS 7
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 7
SITE GRADING 7
SURFACE DRAINAGE 8
PERCOLATION TESTING 8
LIMITATIONS 8
REFERENCES 10
FIGURE 1 - GEOLOGY MAP AND BORING LOCATIONS
FIGURES 2 & 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 5 & 6- SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
H -P GEOTECH
PURPOSE SND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the
proposed Native Springs Subdivision, County Road 221, Garfield County, Colorado.
The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the
geologic and subsurface conditions and their potential impacts on the project. The
study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering
services to Jim and Paul Luginbuhl, dated May 14, 2000. We previously conducted a
radiation survey of the property and presented our findings in a report dated June 7,
2000, Job No. 100 460.
A field exploration program consisting of a reconnaissance, exploratory borings
and percolation testing was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsurface
conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in
the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other
engineering rharacteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing
were analyzed to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design.
This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions
and recommendations based on the proposed development and subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The 60 acre parcel will be subdivided into 11 lots between 5 and 7 acres in size
and located as shown on Fig. 1. The development will consist of single family homes.
The building area will generally be in the front part of each lot. A private road will
access the building sites from County Road 221. We assume the residences will be
typical of the area and be two to three stories with a partial or full basement. The
development will be serviced with individual wells and septic disposal systems.
If development plans clip ve significantly from those described, we should be
notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
H -P GEOTECH
-2 -
SITE CONDITIONS
The proposed Native Springs Subdivision is located on the north side of the
Colorado River about two miles east of Rifle. The 60 acre property covers parts of the
northern half of Section 11 and the southern half of Section 2, T. 5 S., R. 93 W.
County Road 221 borders the property on the south and County Road 210 borders the
property on the northwest. The Colorado River is located about 3,000 feet to the south
and about 50 feet lower in elevation than the property. The general topography in the
area is shown by the contour lines on Fig. 1. The ground surface over most of the
property slopes down to the southwest at about 2%. Moderately sloping, small alluvial
fans are present in the northwestern part of the property. The fan slopes are typically
between 5% and 20%. To the northwest of Road 210 the alluvial fan slopes abruptly
transition to a very steep terrace escarpment. Slopes on the escarpment average about
80%. Major drainages do not cross through the property. The drainage basins above
the alluvial fans are small and restricted to the 160 foot high terrace escarpment. At the
time of our study the property was irrigated pasture. Several irrigation ditches are
present on the property.
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The project is located in the Piceance Basin. This regional geologic structure
was formed during the Laramide orogeny about 40 to 70 million years ago. In addition
to the main basin structure there are other northwest trending secondary folds in this
part of the basin (Shrcba and Scott, 1997). The folds have very small amplitudes in this
part of the basin and bedding is essentially horizontal. Major faults have not been
mapped in the project area. Surficial soil deposits consist of colluvium and alluvium.
Formation rock in the area is the Wasatch Formation.
FORMATION ROCK
Regional geologic mapping shows that formation rock in the project area is the
Shire member (Tws) of the Eocene and Paleocene Wasatch Formation (Shroba and
Scott, 1997). The rock is covered by surficial soil deposits and outcrops are not
I4 -P riPnTPrH
•
present. It is expected that formation rock is relatively shallow on the terrace
escarpment to the northwest of County Road 210, but elsewhere rock is expected to lie
well below typical residential foundation depths. The Shire member consists of varied
colored claystone, mudstone, and siltstone interbedded with less abundant coarse-
grained sandstone (Shroba and Scott, 1997). The claystone, mudstone and siltstone are
usually firm but non-cemented. The sandstones are usually cemented and hard. Joints
are commonly present in the cemented rock. The beds occur as complex lenses with
limited horizontal continuity.
SURFICIAL SOIL DEPOSITS
The project area is located on a low river terrace (Qtl) that is about 5 to 10 feet
above the modern Colorado River channel near the river. At the project site relatively
deep upland alluvium (Qua) covers the low river terrace alluvium. River alluvium was
enconntered in Borings 1 and 4 at depths of 33 and 45 feet below the ground surface.
The river alluvium is a silty to clayey sand and gravel with cobbles. The low river
terrace alluvium is in part late Pinedale glacial outwash and younger Holocene river
alluvium (Shroba and Scott, 1997). The overlying upland alluvium (Qua) consists of
interstratified silt, clay and silty sand. Small alluvial fans (Qaf) cover the upland
alluvium in the northwestern part of the property. To the northwest of County Road
210 the alluvial fans transition to shallow colluvium (Qc) on the high terrace
escarpment. Bull Lake and older glacial outwash underlies the terrace surfaces at the top
of the high escarpment.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on August 1, 2000. Six
exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Pig. 1 to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with4 inch diameter continuous
flight auger powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51HD drill rig. A percolation
test hole was drilled next to each boring with a 6 -inch diameter auger. The borings
were Iogged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
N -P f;anrrrw
Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1% inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven inw 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, Figs. 2 and 3. The samples were returned to our laboratory for
review by the project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Figs. 2 and 3. The subsoils consist of about 11/2 to 2 feet of topsoil overlying stratified
sand, silt and clay. The upper soils are slightly moist to moist and medium dense/stiff
to wet and soft generally below 5 to 10 feet depth. Dense, silty to clayey sandy gravel
and cobbles with boulders was encountered in Borings 1 and 4 at depths of 33 and 45
feet, respectively. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult due
to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included
natural moisture content and density, finer than sand size gradation analyses and liquid
and plastic limits. Results of swell -consolidation testing performed on relatively
undisturbed drive samples of the upper soils, presented on Figs. 5 and 6, indicate low to
moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The samples showed
minor settlement/heave potential when wetted under a relatively light constant load.
The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I.
Free water was typically encountered in the borings at a depth of about 10 feet at
the time of drilling. When checked the next day, the borings were dry and had caved at
depths of 5 to 10 feet which could be just above the stabilized groundwater level.
Boring 3 was dry to the drilled depth of 20 feet.
u a ra„rcr„
•
-5-
GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT
Development of the property as proposed should be feasible based on the
geologic conditions with some considerations in the project planning and design.
Geologic conditions that should be considered in project planning and design are
discussed below.
FLOODING AND SURFACE DRAINAGE
Large off-site drainage basins are not tributary to the project area. Channels on
the alluvial fans in the northwestern part of the site are poorly defined and the fans
could be the site of high sediment concentration sheet flooding associated with intense
thunderstorms. The flood potential on these fans should be considered by your
hydrologist as part of the storm water management and drainage plan for the
development. The potential for irrigation ditch blockage and overflow should be
included in the hydrologic evaluations.
MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS
The upland alluvium (Qua) encountered in the exploratory borings was wet and
soft below a depth of 5 to 10 feet but the upper soil was stiff and relatively dry. It has
been our experience that relatively dry soils similar to the upland alluvium (Qua) and
alluvial fans (Qat) at the site can be moisture sensitive and experience relatively large
settlements if they become wetted after construction. Consideration for residential
foundations are discussed in the Preliminary Design Recommendations section of this
report.
CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY
Slopes in the proposed building envelopes do not exceed about 15%. We do not
expect problems with construction related slope instability associated with grading
typical of most residential construction in the proposed building envelopes. Grading is
not recommended on the steep terrace escarpment to the northwest of County Road 210
unless evaluated by a geotechnical engineer.
u D rcn-rcru
-6 -
EARTHQUAKES
The project site could experience moderately strong earthquake ground shaking
of Modified Mercalli Intensity VI during a reasonable service life for the development,
but the probability for a stronger ground shaking is low. Intensity VI ground shaking is
felt by most people and causes general alarm, but results in negligible damage to
structures of good design and construction. The occupied structures should be designed
to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to
collapse under stronger ground shaking. The site is located in the Uniform Building
Code Seismic Risk Zone 1. Based on our current understanding of the earthquake
hazard in this part of Colorado, we see no reason to increase the commonly accepted
seismic risk zone of the area.
PRE.IMTNARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the
proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings,
and our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for planning and
preliminary design but site specific studies should be conducted for individual lot
development.
FOUNDATIONS
Bearing conditions will probably vary somewhat due to the stratification of the
subsoils and the typical shallow groundwater condition. Based on the nature of the
proposed construction, shallow spread footings bearing on the upper natural soils should
be suitable for building support. We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable
bearing pressure in the range of 1,000 psf to 1,500 psf. There could be some potential
for additional differential settlement if the bearing soils become wetted. The footing
bearing level should be kept relatively shallow to avoid groundwater and soft soil
impacts. In general, the footing bearing level should be kept at least 2 feet above the
groundwater level. Full basement construction may not be feasible in some areas of the
site due to potential shallow groundwater. Foundation walls should be designed to span
local anomalies and to resist Iateral earth loadings when acting as retaining structures.
H -P GEOTECH
-7 -
Below grade areas and retaining walls should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic
loading by use of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of
36 inches for frost protection.
FLOOR SLABS
Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils.
There could be some potential for settlement/heave if the subsoils become wetted. To
reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from
all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor slab control joints should
be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. A minimum 4 inch thick layer of
free -draining gravel should underlie interior slabs to facilitate drain ge. Floor Levels
should be kept at least 2 feet above the groundwater level.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Groundwater Ievel was encountered in the exploratory borings at relatively
shallow depth and irrigation of the surrounding area will tend to keep the water level
shallow. Local perched groundwater can also develop during times of heavy
precipitation or seasonal runoff. An nnrlerdrain system should be provided to protect
below -grade construction, such as retaining wall and basement areas from wetting and
hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe surrounded above
the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at least
1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable
gravity outlet or a sump and pump. Shallow crawlspace areas should not need a
perimeter foundation urain provided the backfill is well compacted and has a positive
slope away from the building. Below grade levels of the buildings should be kept at
least 2 feet above the groundwater level.
SITE GRADING
Cut depths for the building pads should not exceed about 5 to 8 feet depending
on the groundwater level. Fills should be limited to about 5 feet deep above existing
ground surface. Structural fills should be compacted to at Ieast 95% of the maximum
standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the
H -P GEOTECH
-8-
subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil and
compacting to at least 90% of standard Proctor density. The on-site soils excluding
vegetation and topsoil should be suitable for use in embanlanent fills. The deeper soils
may be highly moist and require drying before use as bacb-filt material.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The grading plan for the subdivision should consider potential runoff from uphill
slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond
which could impact slope stability and foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing
soils next to buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive
slope away from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains
should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be
restricted.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation tests were conducted adjacent to each of the exploratory borings to
evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal systems at the site. The test
holes were drilled with 6 inch diameter auger and were soaked with water one day prior
to testing. The soils encountered in the percolation holes are similar to those
encountered in the exploratory borings shown on Fig. 2 and consist of stratified sand.,
silt and clay.
The percolation test results are presented in Table lI. Based on the subsurface
conditions encountered and the percolation test results, conventional infiltration septic
disposal systems should be feasible at the site. A mounded system could be needed in
shallow groundwater areas. A civil engineer should design the infiltration septic
disposal system at the time of each lot development.
LINIITATIONS
This study has been conducted according to 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
H -P GEOTECH
-9-
repon are based upon the data obtained from the field reconnaissance, review of
published geologic reports, the exploratory borings located as shown 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 planning
and preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations
by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued
consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation
of our recommendations. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or
modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site
observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by
a representative of the geotechnical engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
Reviewed by:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
SLP/rso/ksw
cc: Land Design Partners - Attn: Ron Liston
H -P GEOTECH
-10 -
REFERENCES
Shroba, R. R., and Scott, R. B., 1997, Geology Map of the Rifle Quadrangle, Garfield
County, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 97-852.
Tweto, 0. and Others, 1978. Geologic Map of the Leadville 1° x 2° Quadrangle,
Northwestern Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Map I-999.
H -P GEOTECH
•
EXPLANATION:
Qc - Colluvium
Qaf - Alluvial Fan
Qua - Upland Alluvium
011- Low River Terrace
0 -
100460
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
Native Springs Subdivision
Geology Map and Boring Locations
Fill
5
1
,j J " ,.�/ S// Late ' i
- ,
_Li
, ``,tae 1
' i'
10
B&1
%/QualQtl �E
,,,.
ii Lot 11 I
100460
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
Native Springs Subdivision
Geology Map and Boring Locations
Fill
0
5
10
15
v 90
1 `
a
—
0
25
30
35
BORING 1
ELEV.=5371'
BORING 2
ELEV =5378'
r
20/12
11/12
:ice WC=3.7
�•. DD=100
:'l -200=20
/l
r 4/12
WC -29.8
DD=100
-200=98
LL -31
/ P1=13
— C'• 4/12
///r
/./5/12
J
BORING 3
ELEV.=5386'
20/12
17/12
WC=9.6
DD=115
14/12
10/12
7/12
J
10
15
20
25
30
35
— 40 40
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. 4.
a
CDU -
y
0-
a)
0
100 450
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 2
4
0
W
5
— 10
BORING 4
ELEV.=5389'
/ 6/12
00=106
—200=64
LL=22
PI=7
4/12
,-.- 15 / 6/12
90 " 5/12
4
25
30 / 8/12
45
50
CHANGE IN
SOIL TYPE AT 45'
BORING 5
ELEV.=5360'
5/12
WC -20.3
00=104
—200=66
3/12
3/12
5/12
BORING 6
ELEV.=5374'
15/12
.41
/1 6/12
We=1B.2
00=110
%1
1/4
1/12
3/12
3/12
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. 4.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
45
50
Elevation — Feet
100 460
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 3
5
LEGEND:
pTOPSOIL; organic sand, silt and clay.
SILT AND CLAY (ML—CL); slightly sandy to sandy, stratified, stiff and slightly moist to soft and wet
with depth, brown, low plasticity.
SAND (SM); silty, sandy silt layers, loose to medium dense, slightly moist to moist, brown, fine to
medium sand.
pSAND, GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GM—GC); silty, clayey, dense, wet, brown.
M
6/12
--s
1
NOTES:
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2—inch I.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 6 blows of a 140—pound hammer falling 30 inches were
required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches.
Ground water level at time of drilling.
Caved depth when checked on August 2, 2000.
Practical drilling refusal.
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on August 1, 2000 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 estimated from contours on the site plan provided.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied
by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. Water level readings shown on the logs were mode at the time and under the conditions indicated.
Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. No free water was encountered in Boring 3.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( % )
DD = Dry Density ( pcf )
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
LL = Liquid Limit ( % )
PI = Plasticity index ( % )
I100 460
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LEGEND AND NOTES
Fig. 4
1
Compression
Compression — Expansion %
0
1
2
3
4
5
1
D
1
2
3
Moisture Content = 9.0 percent
Dry Density = 110 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silt and Clay
From: Boring 1 at 2 Feet
0
Compression
upon
wetting
01
1 0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
100
Moisture Content = 9.6 percent
Dry Density = 115 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay
From: Boring 3 at 5 Feet
Expansion
upon
wetting
0.1
I100 460
1 0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
100
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 5
•
s
0
1
0
N
m 2
E
0
0
3
4
Moisture Content = 18.2 percent
Dry Density = 116 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silt and Clay
From: Boring 6 at 5 Feet
Compression
upon
wetting
i
0.1
1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
100
100 460
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 6
• ', .O
0
0
6
0
U
J
Q
U
Z
V
O c
W - o
C7Lu,
Q
Q Q o
7J H
z
1—
CC
0
a
w
TEST RESULTS
SUMMARY OF
S011. On
nEDROCI( TYPE
Sandy silt and clay
'
r
CC—
N
>
C/)
>
m
—
U
>
v)
Sandy silty day II
U
J
m
--
_
v
>-
o
C
ti
U)
_
N
?
c
m
C!)
(0
CO
U
-O
m
y
_
y
T
-c
C
ti
U)
UNCONrINrn
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(PST}
N
a
CC
=
0K
z w -
G z -
I £1
N
C I -
o E-
r
CO
N
N
W- N j
= Q- 6 -
La i z
0
N
CO
O)
I G4
CO
CO
0
P
a
a
c
q
w
a*
o'
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
IRcfl
o
100 I
100
LO
CO
0
104 I
o
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
1%I
o
07
h
CO.
N
[o
Q)
C)
co
' 20.3 11
N
2
SAMPLE LOCATION
DEPTH
Ileetl
2
5
10
L()
5
l2)
L7
0
e
0
m
r-
N
CO
d'
LO
0
HEPWORTH-PAWLA}C GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO.100 460
PAGE 1 OF 2
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MINI
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN./INCHI
P-1
48
20
37
36
1
40
36
351/2
1/2
351/2
35
112
P-2
46
5
18 1/2
15 1/2
3
3
15 1/2
14
1 1/2
14
12
2
12
101/2
11/2
101/2
81/2_ 2
P-3
50
5
28
27 1/2 112
10
27 1/2
27 112
27
26 1/2 112
26 1/2
26 1/2
P-4
51
10
30
26 4
5
26
24 2
24
22 2
22
20 2
20
18 2
Note: Tests were conducted in 6 -inch diameter auger holes on August 2, 2000. The holes were
drilled and soaked on August 1, 2000. The percolation holes were drilled next to the
corresponding numbered boring (see Fig. 1).
•
h .w
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE 11
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 100 460
PAGE 2 OF 2
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH DF
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-5
46
5
refill
141/2
, 12
21/2
2
25
21
4
21
17
4
17
131/2
31/2
P-6
59
20
36112
351/2
1
20
35 1/2
34 1/2
1
34 1/2
33 112
1
Note: Tests were conducted in 6 -inch diameter auger holes on August 2, 2000. The holes were
drilled and soaked on August 1, 2000. The percolation holes were drilled next to the
corresponding numbered boring (see Fig. 1).
CIVIL ENGINEERING
May 31, 2005
Garfield County
Building and Planning
108 W. 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
An EmployccOwncd Company
Re: Lot 10 -Native Springs Subdivision
HCE Project Number 2041033.00 x 0218
To Mark Bean:
LAND SURVEYING
The following letter is to confirm the engineer's inspection of the revised septic system for Lot 10 of
the Native Springs Subdivision. High Country Engineering's field inspector performed the field
inspections. The design included a 1,000 gallon septic tank and an absorption field consisting of 31
infiltrator units configured in 2 rows of 10 and 1 row of 11 units in a trench system. The infiltrator
trenches were slightly reconfigured and moved approximate 35 -feet southwest from the design
location_ The house line, effluent line, and manifold piping were adjusted accordingly. The
contractor will backfill the system and will provide positive drainage away from the field. Including
the minor change, the system has been constructed with the intent of the plans and specifications.
If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERIN
1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
970.945.8676 phone
970.945.2555 fax
www.hceng.com
14 Inverness Drive East, Suite F-120
Englewood, CO 80112
303.925.0544 phone
303.925.0547 fax
SECTIONS 2 &11. TOWNSHIP 6 S, RANCE 93 W, 6TH P.M.
VICINITY MAP
SCALE ,• . 2000'
CORD DRAWING
MAY 31, 2005
RFIELD COUNTY
)S PERMIT #4012