The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04083i- 74- b O3ARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT 108 Eighth Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Coloradof 81601 Phone (970) 945-8212 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT 444°83 Permit Assessor's Parcel No. 4 0 :3 PROPERTY ff rS.- �J -41 ¶V Owner's Namen �I ! �'zC.,• M` ar(;� ..]i' �Pmsnent Addresg / , La 5C14 - This {}Q, �( System Location Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No SYSTEM DESIGN /lrc /5 :tel7t7- 62- o -07\3 This does not constitute a building or use permit. Phone C 71° - �d Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: D - �� Date Inspector Other Number of Bedrgoms (or other) --?T / [l4, J / 1 W i i — FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation ) 2 j < 9, System Installer Septic Tank Capacity /COO Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area /-4e° Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Nn/�aw ;-6 pet Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements i/ y) Other ✓j Date 7e 7- 0 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 specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class 1, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine -6 months in jail or both). INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER oc ES ADDRESS 11`1 (-' A. 5 e -i 4 ¶ fir r PHONE 21 to -SZZ O CONTRACTOR ( cc k\cio u ADDRESS 'V-\ �eF1 CvM- PHONE %lb Sttb q PERMIT REQUEST FOR OO 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 l2 . Size of Lot cp---�`t% Legal Description or Address fl\i„(, koc-ll,.. .vrLCJ.Qµl S.ue. WASTES TYPE: (X) DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER—DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: S: Number of' Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons \ S v (75. Garbage Grinder ('X) Automatic Washer ( ) Dishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (j4 WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: - •r• 1`'t3*o,) &L \ mss DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: ( } n 4 Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? )1/4.30, A site a lan is re s uired to be submitted that indicates the followin MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: Septic Tank to Well: Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 100 feet 50 feet 50 feet Septic System (septic tank & disposal field) 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 Percent Ground Slope TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: (X) SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING;, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET( ) OTHER -DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: (x) 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? kJ O 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. _ Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE 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. I / _ r•, Signed � r - Date 5 PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! JU_-20-2005 14:44 r H -P CtUItCH HEPWORTH • PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Hi wn.n_i-FawLt4 Oeon::ruc. 5010 Ciamty Rru 154. CilenWUk! Spriupo. Calnra.• SIOP1 Phone: 9?P-Wi-74SNN fax 97:-945.n4 r4 erne il: Ii ee hpeconch .,rn FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 3, SUN MEADOW ESTATES COUNTY ROAD 216 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 105 363 JULY 19, 2005 PREPARED FOR: CARIBOU) CONSTRUCTION ATTN: FRED COOKE 734 MAIN STREET SILT, COLORADO 81652 Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719.633.5562 • Silverrhorne 970-468-1989 P.02'13 Ja.-20-2005 14:44 H -P GEOTECH P.03/13 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION -1- SITE CONDITIONS - 2 - FIELD EXPLORATION - 2 - SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.. - 3 - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS - 3 - FOUNDATIONS - 3 - FLOOR SLABS - 4 UrNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - 5 - SURFACE DRAINAGE - 5 - PROFILE BORING 4- 6 - LIMITATIONS 6 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2- LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3- LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS JiL-2e-2905 14;44 HP GEOTECH PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located at Lot 3, Sun Meadows Estates, County Road 216, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreernent for geotechnical engineering services to Caribou Consttuction dated May 3.2005. Ilepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical Inc., previously performed a preliminary geotechnical study for Sun Meadow Estates (formerly Mamms View) and reported our findings under Job No. 100 169. dated March 28, 2000. A field exploration program consisting of one exploratory boring in the building area and one profile boring in the septic disposal area was conducted to obtain information on the 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 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 considarations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed residence will be one story wood frame construction above a crawlspace with an attached garage. Garage floor will be slab -on -grade. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 2 to 4 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If bailding loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report robNA. 105363 P.04/13 JUL-20-2M 14: 45 H—P ltU1tCH 2 - SITE CONDITIONS P.05'13 Lot 3 is located on the east side of North Meadow Drive and was vacant at the time of our field visit. The lot is 2.632 acres and bordered to the east by a drainage and easement. The building area is located on the west side and uphill of the drainage. Vegetation consists of scattered brush, sparse grass and weeds. The ground surface is relatively flat wi Eh a slight slope down to the east. FJPJ 0 EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on July 13, 2005. One exploratory boring was drilled in the building area and a profile boring was drilled in the septic disposal area at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck -mounted CME -45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a represented ve of Hepworth-Pawiak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 11/4 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 arc shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. Job Nat 105 363 .R1L-202805 14:45 H -P GEDTECH -3- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on. Figure 2. The subsoils at Boring 1. below about': foot of topsoil, consist of 7 feet of sandy clay and silt overlying silty sand down to 18 feet. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the boring included natural moisture content and dry density. Results of swell -consolidation testing perfumed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figure 4, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of light loading and existing moisture conditions with a minor swell potential when wetted. The laboratory testing is summarized in 1abie 1. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling and the subsoi Is were slightly moist to moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 ps£ 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. P.06/13 lob NO. 105 363 J1L-20-2065 14:45 HHP GOOTECH P.07/13 -4- 3) Exterior footings and footing beneath unheated areas should he 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 lop 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 at least 50 pet 5) All existing topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should he removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively undisturbed natural soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted 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 hearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab - on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, flour 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 oftutus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the 14o. 200 sieve. Jnfi No. 105 363 JUL-20-2005 14:46 • H—PGEOTECH P.08'13 -5- AD 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 and topsoil. UNDERDRAI N SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been nur experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runofT_ 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. A shallow crawlspace (less than 4 feet) should not require an underdrain system provided the exterior backfill is properly compacted and graded. Tf drains are installed, they should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with flee -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, dry well or sump and pump. 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 is of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 11/2 feet deep. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been (*mpleted: 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 Job No. 105 163 JU--20-2005 14:46 H -P ttnitCH -6- P.09/13 pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% o f the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. 3) The wound 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 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 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. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should he located at least 5 feet from foundation walls. Consideration should be given to use of xeriscape to reduce the potential for wetting of soils below the building caused by irrigation PROFILE BORING A profile boring was drilled in the proposed septic disposal area at the location shown on Figure 1. The subsoils encountered, below about one foot of topsoil, consisted of sandy clay and silt to the bottom hole depth of 9 feet. The log of the profile boring is shown on Figure 2. No free water was observed at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. 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 wun linty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory boring drilled at the location indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or Job No. 105363 JLL-20-2085 14;46 H -P IICTECH -7- other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory boring 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 sty that re- evaluation of the recommendations may he made. P.10/13 'Phis 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. Signi scant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation brwring strata and testing of structural fill by arepreseotative of the geotechnical engineer. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Louis E. Eller rob No. 105 363 JUL-20-2005 14 46 H -P GEOTECH P.11/13 • APPROXIMATE SCALE 80' 0 0 W 1 z z PROPOSED RESIDENCE BORING 1 • PROFILE BORING LOT 3 LOT 2 Ll 105 363 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 1 JUL-20-2005 14:46 H -P GEOTECH P.12/13 0 5 — 10 IIMIMPIP15 _ . 20 25 BORING 1 ELEV.a 97.1' 24/12 W0 2147 10-104 2a/12 78/12 21/12 14/12 17/12 PROFILE BORING ELEV.- 94.5' Note: Explanation of symbols is shorn on Figure 3. 0 5 10 15 20 — 25 mom Eir 105 363 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 JU--20-206SS 14:4? HP C OTECH P.13'13 I 0 I1 2 Moisture Content a 5.7 percent Dry Density a 104 pc# Sample oh Sondy Silty day From:Boring 1 at 2 Feet Expansion uPoll Netting 0.1 2 .0 0 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 Moisture Content - 6.8 percent Dry Density is 98 pct Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From:Boring 1 at 5 Feet 2 3 E. elan upon **Mktg 0.1 .0 10 APPUED PRESSURE — ksf 100 105 363 H EP WORTH —PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL—CONSOUDAT1ON TEST RESULTS Figure 4 TOTAL P.13