HomeMy WebLinkAbout03593<
'·
I~
.
'
..
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT
109 8th Street Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone (303) 945-8212
Permit N:
AsseBBor's Parcel No.
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT
' PROPERTY
This does not constitute
a building or use permit.
••
Owner's Name v'io3t (, ,f3'4 {QO Present Address '657 5 iiJnt.flrlG<. <!)-Phone 3 '6•t·o 0'-IO
11 u . rr.. . / 6t0:q. 1'1E5·"1~u3
System Location_f..:-/'-fc.u.<'--l ~.::::'i-=--_,t1_,_,U"'-"o..,b'-"1LOL'J31"(/I'"'""'---= ~=-""""'""""----"t~'-'''·"'u."')"'.5-::__ __ ?i'o.-Ji'-'ta0-i..O,_._I __________ _
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.-----------------------------------
I/ 1 SYSTEM DESIGN
______ 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 _________________ 7"'~------------------------~ (-1~"~ kttu~c>v:i 1 { J "1 2 J Date _____________ lnspector _____________ __.{\_,,,_~o~,__~/c___..:::c'~~~O'--.!. ____ _
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.$. 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
• !
f
•
•• INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
,.;
· 6~R Byron /J/jer
ADDRESS 15·7;w:erf( z :;; (t_ . PHONE3%t/-Cdlq t(y/%-f,flgf
CONTRACTOR r fb -r ops/r~. In<:.-,
ADDRESS %51 ,:ihneocye d GW-5, CP lite?! PHONE ql/3-96'~ 38*«Jc/{)
PERMIT REQUEST FOR (}C) 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 ofTown . ..,G~Vt~n=w"-'ood~""'S"'=n~'~7!-"-.s __________ _,S,,.ize""-'o.,.f..,,L""'ot'-=3_,·.;l::.c..=3-=-aL-=-r..:.:("S::.___
Legal Description or Address Loi .1/1 Lj/Ji lJi'nj /;J1.sJ-.Ba.nk. M1.s9 f';fJcc JC(o), #ue biAj<Y'
WASTES TYPE: (~WELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE 7>r.
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE ________________ ~
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE:_,_M~f..._u>=-_....h""oe.L.m~e'------------------
Number of Bedrooms Number of Persons :J: ~-----
(...('Garbage Grinder ( i.-Y/\utomatic Washer ( ~hwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: U)t.s./--ibnk Mtsc;
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM:-.a.A0"'-./-.__.,auov&""',,./,;""'h""'fe'--------
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System?_!V ...... fi~~------------
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMUM distances:
Leach Field to Well: 100 feet
Septic Tank to Well: SO feet
Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: SO feet
Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet
YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT
A SITE PLAN.
GRQUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to first Ground Water Table_"'"'j.J""'c:.-""""'fu#€~--=--w......,~ ...... =-_..,£;"'""'-~~"~-'-'-"=-r.:.-"--------
Percent Ground Slope_~l>1~o~o~Gi~b~Mi'.~---+/~b~%_+~:;1. ________________ _
2
TVP:yf· INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
-(~ SEPTICTANK ( ) AERATIONPLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE. ___________ _
FINAL DISPOSAL BY:
(vf ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT
( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL
( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL
( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
( ) SANDFILTER
( ) WASTEWATERPOND
( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE. _____________________ _
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE?_.L.;N._,v,__ ___ _
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, ifthe Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes CB per inch in hole No. I Minutes '3 ~ per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes <.. per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes er inch in hole NO.
Name, address and telephone ofRPE who made soil absorption tests: If? (~B>Tlic.H
S°Dt.C> c ... .-r .. 'io.o.o I!>!:./ 4.J.c.Js ,.,. ~IC..t.I V!:V"t.'(r-1,-aa
Name, address and telephone ofRPE responsible for design ofthe system: be..e.l.E Ke1.a$""'
111\ 3s;u. i\..c:. Gr Uu&.se..e~ lo "3t4>~'f CJ?<> -ii b=7V"''l
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 Jaw.
Date. __ <=J"-'"6.....,1'-'''+•J:_,o...,.,_1 ____ _
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
4 •
'
. -•
August 31, 2000
Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc.
Attn: Mitch Patch
857 Stoneridge Court
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnlcal, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Sprt1:1gs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945 -7988
Fax: 970-945-NS4
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Job No. 100 674
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 47, Westbank Mesa, Garfield County. Colorado.
Dear Mr. Patch:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and
percolation test for foundation and septic disposal designs at the subject site. The study
was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services
to Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc. dated August 21, 2000. The data obtained and our
recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions
encountered are presented in this report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single story wood frame
structure over a walkout basement level located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. The
floors of the attached garage and basement are proposed to be slab-on-grade. Cut
depths are expected to be up to about IO feet. Foundation loadings for this type of
construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of
construction. The septic disposal system is proposed to be located about 60 feet
downhill to the north of the proposed residence.
If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those
described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in
this report.
Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our field work. The ground
surface slopes moderately steep down to the northeast. The terrain becomes steeper
uphill to the southwest. The lot is vegetated with pinon and juniper trees, sagebrush,
grass and weeds.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating two exploratory pits in the building area and one profile pit in the septic
disposal area at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The Jogs of the pits are
'
••
Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc.
August 31, 2000
Page 2
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about I foot of topsoil, generally
consist of low density sandy silt and clay with layers of silty sand aad gravel with
cobbles. Medium dense clayey sand and gravel was encountered beneath the sandy silt
and clay at a depth of 4 feet in the Profile Pit. The rock is mostly sandstone and shale
fragments. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed
samples of the clay and silt, presented on Fig. 3, generally indicate low to moderate
compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The clay sample showed a
minor expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The silt
sample showed a low collapse potential (settlement under constant load) when wetted.
No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were
slightly moist.
Foundation Recommendations: The soils encountered at the site are known to be
hydrocompressive. Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory
pits and the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the
undisturbed natural soil and designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,200 psf
can be used for support of the proposed residence with a risk of differential settlement
and distress. The amount of settlement would depend on the depth and extent of any
wetting below the foundation and could be 1 to 2 inches or more. Footings should be a
minimum width of 20 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose and
disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should
be removed and the exposed subgrade moistened and compacted. Exterior footings
should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost
protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically
used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and
bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 14
feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining strucmres should be designed to resist a
lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for the
on-site soil as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. The low density soils encountered tend to
collapse when wetted, which could result in slab distress. To reduce the effects of 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
H-P GEOTECH
"
Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc.
August 31, 2000
Page 3
free-draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage.
This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50 % passing the
No. 4 sieve and less than 2 % passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be 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.
Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration,
it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop
during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring
runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such
as retaining walls and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic
pressure buildup by an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining
granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2 % passing the
No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of
2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least l 'h feet deep. An impervious
membrane such as 20 mil PVC should be placed beneath the drain gravel in a trough
shape and attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing
soils.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near 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. Free-draining wall backfill should be
capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce
surface water infiltration.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
H-P GEOTECH
•
Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc.
August 31, 2000
Page 4
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first l 0 feet in pavement
and walkway areas. A swale will be needed uphill to direct surface
runoff around the residence.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at
least 10 feet from the building. Consideration should be given to the use
of xeriscape to limit potential wetting due to irrigation.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on August 23, 2000 to evaluate
the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site_. One profile pit and
three percolation holes were dug at the.locations shown on Fig: l. The test holes
(nominal 12 inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow
backhoe pits and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in
the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and
consist of about l foot of topsoil and 3 feet of sandy silt and clay overlying medium
dense clayey sand and gravel with cobbles. The percolation test results are presented in
Table II. Percolation tests P-1 and P-2 were conducted in the gravels and test P-3 was
conducted in the overlying clay. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and
the percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a conventional
infiltration septic disposal system.
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 pits excavated at the
locations indicated on Fig. I, 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 pits 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 at once so 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
H-P GEOTECH
·.
Patch-Vinger Construction, Inc.
August 31, 2000
Page 5
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately 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.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know.
Sincerely,
Jordy Z. Adams n, J .,
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
JZA/tl
attachments
cc: Westar, Inc. -Attn: Steve Kessler
H-P GEOTECH
•. ·.
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1" =BO'
' '
<
100 674 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOT 49
. "' "'
OPEN SPACE
LOT 47
P-36
P-2.6. PROFILE
• PIT
6
P-1
PROPOSED
RESIDENCE
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS
AND PERCOLA llON TEST HOLES
I
I
Fig. 1
l .
~
I
:5
i
Q
PIT 1
0
5
10
LEGEND:
WC-7.3
00•114
PIT 2
WC-10.8
00-81
-200-52.
PROFILE PIT
0
5
10
§ TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay, scattered gravel in Pits 1 and 2, organic, laose, slightly moist.
dark brawn.
D
I
~
SILT AND CLAY (ML-CL); sandy to very sandy, layers of silty sand and gravel with cobbles,
medium stiff, slightly moist, llght brown, sandstone and shale fragments.
GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GC); In a clayey sand matrix, medium dense, slightly inalst, brawn,
sandstone and shale fragments.
~-;
~-"
NOlES:
2" Diameter hand driven llner sample.
Disturbed bulk sample.
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on August 22, 2000 with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features
on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits ore drown to depth.
4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree
lmplled by the method used.
5. The llnes between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate
boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered In the pits at the time of excavating.
Flu'ctuatlons In water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC • Water Content ( X )
DD • Dry Density ( pcf )
-200 • Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL • Liquid Limit ( X )
Pi • Plasttclty Index ( " )
100 674 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ---------- - - - -- - - - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
' \
•
Moisture Content = 7 .3 percent
Dry Density • 94 pcf
D Sample of: Sandy SHty Cloy
~ From: Pit 1 at 4 Feet .. , '\.
1
" ~ \. ~ 2
c Exponslc n 1 a upon \ 0. .. wetting w 3
I 1
.6 \ ~ 4
' 0. s 5
6
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED P.RESSURE -ksf
Moisture Content -10.8 percent
Dry Density -81 pcf
0 Sample of: Very Sandy Slit
From: Pit 2 at 8 Feet
I
1
r----~ 2 r-....
"'
~~ • Compression
.6 upon
~ 3
wetting
'\ 0.
~ 4 \.
'
5 \
\
6
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf
100 674 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
p
•
,
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE I JOB NO. 100 67~·
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE LOCATION NA1URAL NATURAL GRADATION. ....,.,.,. ATTEAllS>G lJMITS UNCOICI AfED ,,,. DEPt1t MOIS1UIE DllY GRAVEL ....., PASSING IJQUO) PlAS11C COMPAESSIYE son. OR ·-CONTENT DENSrTY "'' .,., NO. 200 UMT IN1lEX STIIENIJTH llEDllOCIC rm
('Iii · .. - . (Stefl . . . . . . -SIEVE ""' .,., .. IPSFI . .
1 4 7.3 94 Silty Sandy Clay
2 4 7.1 95 80 29 12 Sandy Silty Clay
8 10.8 81 52 Very Sandy Silt
•
• •
' .
\ ~ ' HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC •
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 100 674
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHES) INTERVAL AT START OF ATEND OF ·WATER PERCOLATION
(MINI INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE
(INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MIN./INCH)
P·1 46 16 7% 6% 1 %
6% 4% 2
4% 2% 2
water added \
7% 6 % 1 %
water added 8 7 1
7 6% 1 %
6% 3% 2 8
P·2 48 16 7% 4% 2%
4% 2% 2
water added 8 6% 2"
6% 2% 2%
water added 8% 6% 2
6% 4% 2%
4% 1 % 2% 6
p.3 41 16 7 6% 1 %
6% 6% %
6% 4% %
water added 6% 6 %
6 6% %
6% 6 %
6 4% % . 30
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on August
22, 2000. Percolation tests were conducted on August 23, 2000. The average
percolation rates were based on the last two res.dings of each test. Tests P-1 and P-2
were conducted in the gravel soil and P-3 was conducted in the clay.
. .
FROM : PATCH tJINGER COHST PHOllE NO. 197050t:.0029 Nov. 07 2001 03: 40Pt1 P3/3
. I
-\! i NGER •CONST FROM : PAT1_H
\
·\
F'HOHE NO. 19705060029
l'
I
Q
0
r;; -
07 2001 03:40PM P3/3 Nov.
-~J
'"'~ '()
~
~!'-
\fl
lil
-~¢___-~
I~
3 --
Byron Vinger
PATCH VINGER CONST
~
GEORGE B. KELLISON
STRUCTURAL AND CIVIL ENGINEERING
1711 35TH AVENUE COUJfT GREELEY, COLORADO 80634
(970) 330· 7409
31 May 2002
1402 Huebinger Dr.
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Subject: Septic System at 1402 Huebinger Dr., Glenwood Springs, CO.
li!JOOl/001
Reference is made to my review of the "As BuilL Plans" for the subject
septic system. Please be advised that this system complies with the State
of Colorado and local (Garfield Co.) requirements for sanitary sewage
septic systems.
Respectfully