HomeMy WebLinkAbout03642~ ~"Ji~/~J-, -,;;;~· 5-0·:·c&•~ ~ •, c • " •. , n• • -'' ,,,,,,, •.•. r ~,. . . .,,. . , . -~ •
. ~.
I t
I
I
I
I
I
'
'
OARFIELD COUNTY BUILDINO AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit N~ ~642
109 8th Street Suite 303 A88e88or's Parcel lllo.
• Olenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
. INDIVIDUAL SEWAQE DISPOSAL PERMIT
This does not constitute
a building or use permit. ii Phone (303) 945·8212
: PROPERTY C./ 0 ~fiC<-tt'\ Poi.< th 1
} Owner's Nam:hl'\K~f''\e"".1 Te ff~ l\ Present AddressP.o. &./. '5~5 Bel~; f~1 Tx.· ~h?n~0 J:' ~~'./. :. l System Location_""Q.~Ob_~::___:C._.'-'-i/Z""---'('-'~"--r'/-'-----!b~(e.ILll/\u.iW~O>~&~<S~f~~ll.!jv,4j;;...S ...i..OJC.¢gll5..J(L!!!IJ>~J ___ qCfS_-G.C.l'{
J Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. ------,::--::---=~::---;;--::--:~=-----------------[ ) 7rr, nccv<-Lf'~(/.l~O'J :: Cfo7 SG. Ff.
' SYSTEM DESION l E A c 1-1 C' H A M /j i! r;.. {){ [J :: $l;'J lSl. _ :l,. Cf U ~I I 7 J ! I 1...r:AcH<-HAMt>Gfl'f(ltNcncs'"ts31>J-; ?...l..f u1--1 11 5 f
'
Mll.J~~I :O~O~O~-Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
1
;
I'/. lL Ml>I \
I i AVC , it. Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) NUmber of Bedrooms (or other) -----
I ~
I
t ,
I :
Required Absorption Area • See Attached
Special Setback Requirements:
Date ____________ Inspector --=.AL'-l~==:U'-----------------------
l
I •
, FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as Installed)
•!
' I
f
I
I .
l
!
t
I
' ~
• ,;
'i
.1
I
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
A~.
Syster'n Installer OJ A"""< '> L.:_~
Septic Tank CapacitY'----'l-"aQJ<..::,..,,,0->:q:p:Aa._Q"'----------------------------
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name -'C'-''°f"'t'-e"""Q,.a...,.,.><Jo~&.,.,·,.' ----------------------
Septic Tank Access within 8". of surface -'t4;'f"a:=---=-------,-=~----------------
Absorption Area '?o ~(3xb) ~ ~J.[s /2Mtr>-tfl i]
Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name ___1JJ.~::µ..1 'f...4'-"'gt"""'!U<a.,i@C£>"------------------·
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requlrements-'jl."'a::_ ________________ _ ...
Other------------------~----,.-----~~--f-----------
Date __ '_,,!/L~~-J/'-"'0"-'1-_____ lnspector _..L/jJ,.,Q<.,;~c.·=-~"-.. ""J-~'--'-'==--"<t."'£-""==-----------···_· _
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE
•CONDITIONS:
..
I
l
f • t
r,
f • ' I
' i
l
' ;
1. All Installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health lndlvldual 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 bulldlng requirements. Con~ :
nectlon to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a l'
requirement Of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation Of the permit. e
3. Any person who constructs, alters, or Installs an Individual sewage disposal system in a manner which Involves a knowing and material f
variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine - 6 l
months In jail or both). ~
White -APPLICANT Yellow -DEPARTMENT ~
i
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
PERMITREQUESTFOR (~WINSTALLATION ( )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).
LOCAIION OF PROPOSED~ .,
Near what City of Town ~ Sjze of Lot 'tt;, b ct, #J
Legal Description or Address :z::t;~tJi~ f&..,,.,.Q.2 ]3/' ~~~ O ltJ •J ,,3 U/
WASTES TYPE: ( t(i)'WELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( )OTHER-DESCRIBE. _______________ _
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE:__,~"--~-_,,_f_~ _ _,_-'~---v<e.-------------
Number ofBedrooms _~3~-----------Number of Persons _c._:.> ____ _
( ) Garbage Grinder ( ) Automatic Washer
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (//) WELL
( ) Dishwasher
( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: _______________ _
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: U~ ------------~
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? __ IYlc ____________ _
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: (septic tank &leach field)lO feet
YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT
A SITE PLAN.
GROUND CONDITIONS:
f'(UVV ~ Depth to first Ground Water Table. ______________________ _
Percent Ground Slope. __ rt.-....k~_LJ_6/-_t> ____________________ _
2
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED
( ~SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POT ABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER -DESCRIBE
FINAL DISPOSAL BY:
( v( ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EV APOTRANSPIRA TION
( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER
( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND
( ) OTHER -DESCRIBE
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? __ /Yl{~~) ___ _
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, ifthe Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes. ___ :J.~o-.per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes --~--_,per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes __ __c.2_' D_per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO._
Name, address and telephone ofRPE who made soil absorption tests: _______________ _
Name, address and telephone ofRPE responsible for design of the system: _____________ _
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
S• d I -<.,,_') Jl,v',_Q _ 1gne __ B_'___,-v,__ __________ _
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
C&l .:/J .3 7 q -z 1 '3 t/ # ,.d ... j~-.P ruul -t!u., ~ 1 ~ v "O ~"7;-·.
3
\
Designate North Arrow ~R&, 137 .
J-.. ~ 1 i:W;; Your Plot -Shape to Fit
~~ ~ ~ (No Scale)
• w1t
Your Neighbor's ~ Name & Address l°D"f-/ ffoVK... Your Neighbor's
~d~.u~ Name & Address
~ I
100+-
1:J~ ~
~
Locate well, all streams, irrigation ditchs, and any water courses. Draw in your house,
septic tank & system, detached garages, and driveway.
If a change oflocation is necessary, you must submit a corrected drawing, before a
Certificate of Occupation will be issued.
County Road (Note the Road Number and Name)
eric c:\wpwin6<11.wpdoc.11'1otloe
l 3ftJ
July 29, 1999
Terrell and Patty Tankersley
c/o American Overseas Pet. Ltd. (RUMBAI)
P.O. Box 770249
Houston, Texas 77215-0249
,. .... r"-·•·· --.. ·-·--
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Fax: 970-945-8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Job No. 199 512
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Testing, Proposed
Residence, Parcel l, Simmons Subdivision, Canyon Creek Area,
Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Tankersley:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for
foundation design at the subject site. Percolation testing was also conducted to evaluate
the infiltration characteristics of the subsoils for design of the on-site septic disposal
system. The study was conducted in general accordance with our proposal for
geotechnical engineering services to you dated June 17, 1999. The data obtained and
our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions
encountered are presented in ihis report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed construction includes a single family residence
over a walkout basement and a guest cottage, located on the site as shown on Fig. 1.
Cut depths are expected to be up to about 8 to 10 feet. Foundation loadings for this
type of construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type
of construction. An septic disposal system is proposed to be located northeast of the
proposed main residence as shown on Fig. 1.
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 is located on a southwesterly facing hillside near the
confluence of Canyon Creek and East Canyon Creek. The ground surface in the
building areas is relatively flat with a strong slope down generally the south. Beyond
the west, south and east sides of the building sites the slope becomes steep down to East
Canyon Creek. There are several shallow abandoned irrigation ditches on the site.
Vegetation is mostly grass and weeds with scrub oak and brush on the steep slopes.
---
Terrell and Patty Tankersley
July 29, 1999
Page 2
Cobbles and boulders up to several feet in diameter were observed on the ground
surface.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating two exploratory pits in the proposed. building areas and one profile pit in the
proposed septic disposal site at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs of the pits are
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1 !lz to 2 feet of topsoil,
consist of slightly silty sandy gravel and cobbles with boulders. Some of the boulders
observed in the pits were up to about 5 feet in diameter. Results of a gradation
analysis performed on a sample of the gravel (minus 5 inch fraction) obtained from the
site are presented on Fig. 3. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of
excavation and the subsoils were slightly moist.
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread
footings placed on the undisturbed natural gravel and cobble soil designed for an
allowable bearing pressure of 3..QPP_psf for support of the proposed buildings. Footings
should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. ----All topsoil and loose or disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level
within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to
the undisturbed natural granular soils. Voids created by boulder removal should be
backfilled with compacted gravel_ or concrete. 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 reinforced top and bottom to span local
anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10 feet. Foundation
walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth
pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for the on-site soil,
excluding vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock, as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural granular soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly to moderately loaded slab-on-grade construction. To reduce the effects of some
differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls a..'ld
columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab
control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The
H-P GEOTECH
-----
Terrell and Patty Tankersley
July 29, 1999
Page 3
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 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 granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized
rocks.
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 also create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction,
such as retaining walls, crawlspace 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 1h feet deep.
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 s.tandard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
H-P GEOTECH
Terrell and Patty Tankersley
July 29, 1999
Page4
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 buildings should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement
and walkway areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on July 8, 1999 to evaluate the
feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile pit and three
percolation holes were excavated at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The test holes
(nominal 12 inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow
backhoe pits and 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 sandy gravel and cobbles with boulders. The percolation test results,
presented in Table I, indicate average percolation. rates at the test sites of from 8 to 20
minutes per inch. 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. 1 and to the depths shown on Fig. 2 •. the proposed type of
construction and ou·r 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.
H-P GEOTECH
Terrell and Patty Tankersley
July 29, 1999
Page5
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 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,
HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
David A. Young, P.E.
Reviewed By:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
DAY/ksm
attachments
H-P GEOTECH
--------------------
L£GEND
• b,.
EXPLORATORY PIT
PERCOLATION TEST HOLE z \.
PROPOSED
I
I
)
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1" m 120'
RESIDENCE "'" .... ,,-~~~~-+-~-•~~~Jtwt:»~K-..-..------~
PROP~ '' '----..,...' •
GUEST
,.. 5679-_ ..§68 COTTAGE
/ ,,,,,,.:::---....... /57005710 57205730 I
// / -/ I\
,,,,,, --,.5690 ~ ~
/ I / I ,.. / ~EXISTINQ
\ I I I PIT ..-... WELL I
' ' L -~ PIT 1 '-1·
' '' ...
....
--.... ' I I -, ' ' p 1 ~PROFILE PIT /
....~-----P-3 / P2 /
....
SEPTIC
DISPOSAL
SITE
I
I
,,_..,.,.,.,.. /
/
/
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
\ I
\ I
I
I
I
I
/
(
,__,..
I
I
/
199 512 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS
PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
Fig. 1
•
I
:::;
~
0
0
5
10
LEGEND:
PIT 1
ELEV. = 5716'
GUEST
HOUSE
I +4-66 _ ... -200-7
PIT 2
ELEV. = 5708'
I _ ...
MAIN
RESIDENCE
PROFILE PIT
ELEV. -5710'
SEPTIC
SITE
0
5
10
~ TOPSOIL; silty eand with gravel, cobbles and boulders, medium dense, slightly moist, brown,
with roots and organics.
m ~
t--1 . I __ ...
T
NOTES:
GRAVEL, COBBLES, AND BOULDERS (GP-GM); sandy, slightly silty, dense
to very dense, sllghtly moist, brown, primarily subrounded to rounded rocks
to about 4 or 5 feet In diameter.
Disturbed bulk sample .
Practical digging refusal with backhoe.
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on July 7, 1999 with o backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features an the site
plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were approximated by contours on the site plan provided.
Pits logs are drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree
Implied by the method ueed.
5. The lines 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 exc.avatlng.
fluctuations In water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
+4 • Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
199 512 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
. -
Cl z
Vi
Vl < CL
I-z
LU u a::: ~
HVDROME'TER ANAL YStS llE'llE ANALYSIS
U.S. STANDARD SERES I Cl.EAR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 HR. 1 HR
45 MIN. 15 MIN. 80 MIN.18 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 tr.IN. "200 f100 fl50 f30 f11 f8
100
,. •/&'1/2"•1•" 1 1/2" ,. •••• ...
••
..
70
••
..
..
20
10
0
.001 .002
10
20
30
..
..
..
70
IO
..
100
.Q05 .OOI .011 .037 .074 .150 ~ .IOO 1.18 2.38 4.75 l.&125 18.0 37.5 71.2 1J52 203
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
a.AV TO 51..T HNE '•* I OOB8l£S
GRAVEL 66 % SAND 27 % SILT AND CLAY 7
LIQUID LIMIT %
SAMPLE OF: Slightly Siity Sandy Gravel
with Cobbles
PLASTICITY INDEX %
FROM: Pit 1 at 7 thru 8 Feet
%
0
LU z
~ a:::
I-
~
ffi
IL
199 512 HEPWORTH -PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL. INC.
GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
• • •
•
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE I
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 512
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHES I INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION
(MINI INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE
(INCHES I (INCHES I (INCHES I (MIN./INCHI
P-1 48 10 9 . 7 1/2 1 1/2
7 1/2 7 1/2
7 8 1/4 3/4
8 1/4 6 1/2 3/4
6 1/2 4 3/4 3/4
4 3/4 4 1/4 1/2
4 1/4 3 3/4 1/2
3 3/4 3 1/4 1/2
3 1/4 2 3/4 1/2
2 3/4 2 1/4 1/2
2 1/4 1 3/4 1/2 20
P·2 38 10 6 3/4 6 1/2 1 1/4
6 1/2 4 3/4 3/4
4 3/4 4 3/4
4 3 1/2 1/2
3 1/2 3 1/2
water added 7 6 1
6 6 1/2 1/2 .
6 1/2 6 1/2
6 4 1/Z 1/2
4 1/2 4 1/2
4 3 1/2 1/2 20
p.3 62 10 9 1/2 4 3/4 43/4
4 3/4 2 1/2 2 1/4
water added
8 6 3/4 2 1/4
6 3/4 3 1/2 2 1/4
3 1/2 1 1/4 2 1/4
water added 8 6 1/2 , 1/2
8 1/2 6 1 1/2
6 3 1/2 , 1/2
3 1/2 2 1/2 1
2 1/2 1 , 1/2 8
NOTE: Percolatlon hole• were hand dug kl bottom of shallow backhoe pits and pro-soaked on July 7, 1999. Percoladon teat9 were performed
on July 8, 1999 by H-P Geotech. The average percolation rates were based on the last three readings of each test.