HomeMy WebLinkAbout03889GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT
109 8th Street Suite 303
Glenwood Sprlnga, Colorado 81601
Phone (303) 945·8212
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT
Permit N~ 3889
A11a1aor'1 Parcel No.
This does not constitute
a bulldlng or use permit.
PROPERTY
Owner's Nam,Ccfb.s, ')thrrvti-Co~\~. _/::Z!ft.~i_K~g;J
System Location oi'b'\ I f!R__
(p",}5-4~7
163-m~
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 ~JCfl"E~ ~'WfjAtl(/
septic Tank capacity' ______ ,,.,s=}-11"'U:""'..,_ ___ _Jfrn'-l-~9"J:l_,,_,,_..,.o'""6./)u.4"'------------------
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 _____________________ _
0th••----------------~~~---------~---------------
~ Date _____________ lnspector_.:::1~3,,1;'..l'!:ilft~..,Lb::}__~~~.d._~i,,Lll.~c!._~~.l..!<!,,!,.¥-{l..~t£)1()'~
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE~1'f4G
•CONDITIONS:
1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter
25, Article 10 C.R.S, 1973, Revised 1984.
2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con-
nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a
requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit.
3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material
variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine -6
months in iail or both).
White· APPLICANT Yellow -DEPARTMENT
i
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER. ___ ..pt~~.......Ltl:J:Jrzcz!~'.........,.--~~.--------~
ADDRESS. ___ ~'d.!!.._J;!.J,2¥.~~+ll.,fll,t.M2f;J,!,.~
CONTRACTOR._-A~LlJ4a...--,i(f:IJ.!.ez~1'.(Q~~::__~~~~~~~~
ADDRESS _ __.,.Uti..Jr2b.....(JLl.'&j!!.t'.ld:..kfJl!.µ~~l...A-~~ PHONE /o25-'f 667
PERMITREQUESTFOR ¥ NEWINSTALLATION ( )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).
Near what City ofTown1 __ JJ.:.~~----------:
Legal Description or Address • "3 '2..-o ~
WAS TES TYPE: '0 DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
()OTHER-DESCRIBE _______________ _
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: _ __,Pc..~=="-'--'=>---'f2=~==· ~~----------
Number of Bedrooms Number of Persons :2...--=---
(f;, Garbage Grinder ~utomatic Washer Fshwasher
~~URCEANDTYPEOFWATERSUPPLY: ( )WELL ( )SPRING ( )STREAMORCREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: /( ;}}.,_ 04 1JJ~
1
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER svsfkM: ~· ~oeo
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? (,/.M,
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the folllwint: MINIMUM distances:
Leach Field to Well: 100 feet
Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet
Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet
Septic System (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: I
Depth to first Ground Water;~~~ '3 ~
Percent Ground Slope ~ ~
' f :i
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
~ 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:
<'(A ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EV APOTRANSPIRATION
( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER
( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND
( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? ~ ----
PERCOLATION TEST RES UL TS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, ifthe Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes er inch in hole No. 1 ----~ Minutes er 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: __,/l:f-'MB....,J .. ~=o:.""""......, ______ _
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 din legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Date <§; · I \ · 0 ~
CCURA TE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
.. -.
HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc .
5020 Councy Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Fax: 970-945-8454
email: hpgco@hpgeotcch.ccm
SUBSOU.. STUDY AND PERCOLATION TESTING
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
LOTS 74 AND 75, WILLOWS SUBDIVISION
COUNTY ROAD 320, EAST OF RIFLE VILLAGE SOUTH
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 103 252
MAY29,2003
PREPARED FOR:
HARRY COLBORN
C/0 HARR.Y'S HEAVY HAULERS, INC.
1605 AIRPORT ROAD
RIFLE, COLORADO 81650
Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989
.. '
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CONDffiONS ..•...........................•.•................. 2
F1ElD EXPLORATION ................................................ 2
SUBSURFACE CONDffiONS . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 3
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................•.........••• 3
FOUNDATIONS ............•..............................•••. 3
FLOOR SLABS . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 4
SURF ACE DRAINAGE . ~ . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
PERCOLATION TESTING . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 6
LIMITATIONS ........................•............................. 6
FIGURE 1 -LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 -LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 -LEGEND AND NOTES
. FIGURES 4 and 5 -SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE 2 -PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study and percolation test for a proposed
residence to be located on Lots 74 and 75, proposed Willows Subdivision, County Road
320, East of Rifle Village South, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown
on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the
foundation and septic disposal designs. The study was conducted in accordance with
our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Harry Colborn c/o Harry's Heavy
Haulers, Inc. dated April 11, 2003. We previously performed a gamma radiation survey
for the proposed subdivision and presented our findings in a report dated May 6, 2003,
Job No. 103 252.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsurface conditions and percolation testing was performed to
obtain soil percolation rates. 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, laboratory testing and percolation testing were analyzed to develop
recommendations for foundation and septic disposal sy~tem designs. This report
summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design
recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the
proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed residence will be a one story wood frame structure over a.crawlspace (or
possibly slab-on-grade) with an attached garage located in the area of the exploratory
borings shown on Figure 1. Ground floor in the garage will be slab-on-grade. Grading
for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 3 to
4 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of
construction. Access to the residence will be from a proposed private subdivision road
Job #103 252 C~i
-2-
to the south. The proposed septic disposal area will be to the northeast and downhill of
the residence.
If building loadings, location or grading plans or septic area location change
significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the
reco=endations contained in this report.
SITE CONDffiONS
The site was vacant at the time of our field exploration and the subdivision is currently
undeveloped. Proposed utility alignments for the subdivision were staked in the field
south of the proposed building area. A rough graded dirt road provides access to the
subject lots from Village Drive to the west and they are located in previously irrigated
pastures. Previous grading consisting of a shallow cut on the order of 1 foot deep was
observed over a small area in the north end of Lot 75, near the staked locatiou of the
proposed septic disposal area. Helmer Gulch borders Lot 74 to the west and a seasonal
irrigation ditch (flowing at the tinle of our site visit) is located to the north of both lots.
The ground su!face is relatively flat with a gentle slope down to the north. There is
about 4 feet of eleva~on difference across the subject lots. Vegetation consists of grass
and weeds.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on May 8, 2003. Two exploratory
borings were drilled in the area of the proposed residence at the locations shown on
Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The approximate center of the residence
was field staked by Mr. Colborn prior to our arrival to the site. The borings wete
advanced with 4-inch diameter continuoU11 flight augers powered by a. truck mounted
CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak
Geotechnical, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils in the borings were taken with 1 3/e inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from
Job#103 252 cFli'tec1 •
-3 -
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 next to the logs of
exploratory borings. shown on Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory
for review by the project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDmONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings are shown on
Figure 2. The subsoils, below about 'h foot of topsoil, generally consist of sandy silt
and clay with occasional gravelly zones down to the maximum explored depth of 50
feet at Boring 1.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural
moisture content, density, percent finer than sand size gradation analyses and Atterberg
limits testing. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively
undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figures 4 and 5, indicate low to moderate
compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light surcharge loading and a
minor expansion potential when wetted. Atterberg limits testing indicates that the
subsoils have low plasticity. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1.
Free water was .encountered in Boring 1 at a del'tli of .about 33 feet during drilling. The
subsoils above the water level were slightly moist to moist with depth.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the
nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with
spread footings bearing on the natural subsoils. Precautions should be taken to prevent
post-construction wetting of the bearing soils.
Job#t03 252 C$$tec:J I
•
-4-
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system.
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural subsoils should be designed
for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Based on experience, we
expect initial settlement of footings designed and constructed as
discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. Additional
foundation movement could occur if the bearing soils become wetted.
The settlement/heave potential of the bearing soils should be further
evaluated at the time of construction.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous
walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. A perimeter underdrain should not be
needed for the proposed shallow crawlspace provided that the "Surface
Drainage" section recommendations are followed.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided
with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost
protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior
grade is typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least
12· feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures, if any, should
also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an
equivalent fluid unit weight of SS pcf.
S) Topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the
footing bearing level extended down to undisturbed natural soils.
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-
on-grade construction. Post-construction wetting of the subgrade soils could cause slab
distress. The subgrade should be further evaluated at the time of construction. To
Job#103 252
'• •
- 5 -
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 fre~-draining gravel should be placed beneath interior slabs. This
material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the
No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill
can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation or excessive drying 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 landsC:ape areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 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, finer-grained soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4)
Job #103 252
Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
•
5)
-6-
Sprinkler heads and landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation
(such as sod) should be located at least 5 feet from foundation walls.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation tests were conducted on May 15, 2003 by a representative of Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal
system at the site. The approximate center of the septic disposal area was field staked
by MI. Colborn prior to our arrival to the site. One profile pit and three shallow pits
were excavated with a rubber-tire backhoe at the locations shown on Figure 1. The
profile pit was backfilled at the conclusion of our observation. A relatively undisturbed
liner sample was obtained from the profile pit at a depth of 4 feet. The Profile Pit log is
shown on Figure 2. The soils observed in the profile pit, below about V. fop! of topsoil,
consist of stiff slightly clayey sandy silt to the bottom pit depth of 8 feet. Percolation
test holes (nominal 12-inch diameter by 12 inches deep) were hand dug at the bottom of
the three shallow pits and soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils expdsed
in the percolation test holes are similar to those observed in the profile pit. The
percolation test results are presented in Table ll. The percolation test results indicate
infiltration.rates between 10 and 20 minutes per inch with an average infiltration rate of
14 minutes per inch. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the Profile Pit
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 express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this
report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled and profile
pit excavated at the locations indicated on Figure 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 pit, and variations in
Job#103 252
- 7 -
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 reco=endations 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 reco=endations, 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 reco=end on-site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer.
Respectively Submitted,
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
Trevor L. Knell
Reviewed by:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
TLK/ksW
Job#103 252 C:~l
'
~ :z
Q
l"1
VI _, ....
'° VI
::ii ....
~ ,...,
"tJ
'° 0
"tJ
&1
l"1 s
103 252
" " z \
' )
' ' APPROXIMATE SCALE ' r· = 40· ' ,y~<.t,, ' " \' ~-9 " Gulc,y ' '' ' " \\
' \\ ..... ' ..... ' \\ OPEN SPACE \
I \ \
\ \ I \ I EXISING I DIRT I
ROAD I I I I
I I I I \ BORING 1 I
I I • I
I
LOT 74 I I I 11 I
I II
I II
6 I I
O> 11 O>
BORJNG 2 I I
.Jt..J-
.6. p 1 I
I
I
PROPERTY \
P 2 .6. • PROFILE BOUNDARIES \
\ PIT .
\
\
\ p 3 .6. LOT 75 \
\
\
\
\
\
I
L----- ---.....,--~,\ - ----'"1
LOT 76
I
\
\
\
\
\ LOT 77
' ' ' '
'',,, \
t
5 :e
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOCA TlON OF EXP LORA TORY BORINGS
\----
\
\
\
I
k ' \
I
I
I
\
I
DITCH
LOT 78
Figure 1
0
10
20 .... ., .,
"-
.c ....
2" c 30
40
50
103 252
BORING 1
ELEV.=991'
12/12
16/12
llC=6.9
00-100
-2()()o83
17/12
WC-9.3
00-l~ WC-7.4 -200-511 7/1 2 LL•21
Pl•!5
9/12
8/12
6/12
BORING 2
ELEV.=990'
7/12
WC-17.5
00o108
13/12
24/6.32/3
24/12
PROFILE PIT
ELEV.=988'
0
10
20
30
40
50
Note: Explanation of symbols ls shown on Figure 3.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND Figure 2
PROFILE PIT
-.,
"' "-
.c -c.. .,
Cl
•
LEGEND: •
TOPSOIL; sandy clay, soft, moist, dark brown.
CLAY ANO SILT (CL-ML); sandy with sand lenses, stiff to very stiff, slightly moist to moist with
depth and wet below water toble, brown, slightly porous. Less clayey at Profile Pit.
GRAVEL (GC-GM); sandy, silty, slightly clayey, with cobbles, loose to medium dense, slightly
moist, brown, basalt fragments.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch l.D. California liner sample.
Drive sample; standard penetratlon test (SPT), 1 3/8 inch l.D. spilt spoon sample, ASTM D-1586.
16/12 Drive sample blow count; Indicates that 16 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 Inches were
required to drive the California or SPT sompler 12 inches.
Hand driven liner sample In Proflle Pit.
Free water level in boring when measured at time of drHling.
Depth at which boring had caved when measured on May 14, 2003.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on May 8, 2003 with a 4-lnch diameter continuous flight power auger.
The Profile Pit was excavated on May 14, 2003 with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory borings and the pit were measured approximately by pacing from the features
shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings and pit were obtained by interpolation between contours shown an the
site plan. The logs are drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory borings and pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials 13hawn on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transltlons may be gradual.
6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( 3 )
DD • Dry Density ( pcf )
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
LL -Liquid Limit ( 3 )
Pl • Plasticity Index ( 3 )
103 252 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 3
. . • " • . •
• •
Moisture Content = 6.9 percent
Dry Density = 100 pcf
N Sample of: Sandy Cloy and Slit
c From: Boring 1 at 5 Feet 0 u; 1 c
0 Expansion Q. x upon ......_ w
t--."' I 0 wetting
"' c .... ~ 0
"iii ........... Q) 1 E
Q. ~ E
0 0 2 '
' 3
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf
Moisture Content = 9.3 percent
Ory Density = 107 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Clay and Slit
From: Boring 1 at 10 Feet
N
~ ·;; 1 c
0 Expansion ~ upon r-...... .... wetting < ,...
I 0
~
.....,
' ~ .. 1 f
Q.
E
0
0
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf
103 252 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 4 GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
• •
• •
Moisture Content = 17.5 percent
Dry Density = 1D8 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silty Cloy
From: Boring 2 at 5 Feet
~
c .2
DI 1 c
Cl Expansion 0.
)( upon w wetting "-I 0
I' c r--' 0 r--.... p iii ....... ' .,
1 ..... ~ " .. --0. ~~ ~ r---.. E
0
0 2 ' ' ,
3
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf
103 252 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, 1Nc.
TABLE 1 .
JOB NO. 103 252
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
•
SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL NATURAL GRADATION PERCEN'T A'Tl'E~6ERG UMtTS AASHTO HVEEM
BORING DEPTH MOISTURE DRY GRAVEL SAND PASSING LIQUID PLASTIC SOIL .•. SOIL OR
lf••t) CONTI:KT OENSITY {%) {%) NO. 200 LIMIT INDEX CLASSIFICATION STABILOMETER BEDROCK TYPE •
{%) {pcf) SIEVE {%) {%) ..
1 5 6.9 100 83 sandy clay and silt •
10 9.3 107 sandy clay and silt
15 7.4 55 21 5 sandy clay and silt with
gravel •
2 5 17 .5 108 sandy silty clay -
~ .. .
HEp"WQRTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
'
TABLE 2
PERCOLATION TEST RE SUL TS JOB NO. 103 252
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHES) INTERVAL AT START OF DEPTH AT WATER PERCOLATION
(MIN) INTERVAL END OF LEVEL RATE
!INCHES) INTERVAL (INCHES) (MIN./INCHJ
!INCHES)
P-1 62 10 107/a 9% 1
9% 9 o/.
9 8% o/.
8}14 73/.i.% y,
7% 7% y,
7Xi 6o/. y,
6o/. 614 y, 20
P-2 61 10 11 % 10% 1
10% 96/a 11/a
96/a 8% 7/s
8% 7% 1
7% 7 %
7 6% '/.
6% 5Y, '/. 13
56 10
11 y, 9 2Y,
P-3
9 7V4 1%
water added 116/a 911a 1%
9'/s 8 7/s 1
87/a 7% 16/a
7% 6 1 y ..
6 5 1
5 4y, % 10
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of shallow backhoe pits and soaked
on May 14, 2003. Percolation tests were conducted on May 15, 2003. The average
percolation rates were based on the last three readings of each test.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
May6, 2003
Harry Colborn
c/o Harry's Heavy Haulers, Inc.
1605 Airport Road
Rifle, Colorado 81650
Hepworth-Pawlak Georechnkal, Inc.
50ZO County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phon., 970-945-7988
Fruc970-945-8454
em.;;.il: hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Job No. 103 252
Subject: Gamma Radiation Survey, Proposed Willows Subdivision, County Road
320, East of Rifle Village South, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Harry:
As requested, we have performed a radiation survey at the subject site. The findings of
our work are presented in this report. The study was done in accordance with our
proposal for professional services to you, dated April 11, 2003.
Site Conditions: The subject site is about 30 arces located north of County Road 320 and
east of Village Drive. The site is vacant of structures and appears to have been used as
pasture land. Several piles of boulders and imported soil were located in the middle of
the site west of the drainage. An ephemeral drainage crosses the site from the southwest
to the northeast. The ground surface is relatively flat with a gentle slope down to the
northeast. Vegetation consists of grass and weeds with willow brush and cottonwoods
along the drainage.
Radiation Survey: A gamma radiation survey was conducted at the subject site on April
29 and 30, 2003. Gamma radiation measurements were taken on about 200 foot spacings
using a Ludlum Model 3 Survey Meter and Ludlum Model 44-9 Detector. The readings
were taken at a height of about 3 feet above the ground surface. The readings and
locations are presented on Fig. 1. The 45 readings ranged from 0.015 to 0.03 rnillirerns
per hour with an average of .024 millirems per hour. Typical background readings in the
area are 0.02 millirems per hour.
Conclusions: The gamma radiation readings taken at the site appear to be typical of
natural background levels in the area. Mitigation of gamma radiation should not be
required at this site.
If you have any questions or require further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
DEH/ksw
attachment Figure 1 -Gamma Radiation Survey
Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989 ·
' r '
z
103 252
. ~ .
7lli DAY
ADVENTIST
CHURCH
~
If
)
I
.03 I
"\ o.,,ef -"'
" )
APPROXIMA 1E SC"LE
1· -200'
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
I
I
I
--'
' RIFLE VILLAGE
l I SOUTH
.02 ' .025 I SUBDIVISION
1
,025
1
1
I I
I --(
.02 I .025 .02 .015
I I
I I PROPERTY
I I BOUNDARY
I I
I
.02 I .025 I .02 I .025
I
I I
/
I I /
cy \ /
# I
./
/ -/
.03 1..,-.02 .03 .015 I
03
\ \ I
..... ' I
' ' ..... ' ' \ \
.02 .02 \ .03
I
rl -,,,,
,-"-I ' ,_,
.025 .02 .025 .03
' \ I
I --I
I '
...... ___ -t..,,
I \
I 1 -9 so--' ~
I \
.02 .025\ .03 -.,gi5
1
I
\
' ' \ \
'
.025' . 025 I . 025 .025
\ I
\
I
' \ -.02 I --.025 .02 .025
GAMMA RADIAllON SURVEY Figure 1
z )'2_:;p---r "' ,, m § ~ ~ f-. :""'-:"-:-i-:ioj· fr-'--'--'V
~o
~
c ~--__ ..... :,
...
~ :':
' l I ~;:-
' ,'.
\~·
I~ a ,-
• • • • 11 J "I\ I I I I r 1 I
I .1
• I I
~/ I
" I
I
" I
1 !.l I 11~ I
Hll ill
I
I\
I
I
.. 1; •.. a . ,
'
!I
ji
"" ii ~~· ,.
51 l'-
' •• 1
'
I
I
i1" I --oZ , I ?~
\ Cl F'. >
y3" ~g
·" I~
I
I
I
-~~-.-~~~~~~~
'
I\
~
~ .~'II
n
:i:
c
~ r
·.
~
~~
~~
!! ..
.
~
i:o-.... > "'~ii:: Ill .... ,.,> ··~2 _r,
SI"~
? . :::~
!ilt:it ' ,§~ 'i " ~~~
/
;ii
~'.:;:
'./ "
i
~
~
I I I
I • I
• ~ I
I
',
_, __
"
'
!N3
A.Ln
, I
'1,
' I
' i
-~qUr)dl!l;r!eS ots DJlll
BOUNDARIES
UNLIMITED INC.
Consulting Engineers
July 12, 2004
L •, > '
Garfield County Building & Planning
108 81h Street, Ste. 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: ISDS for Colborn Residence: County Road 320, Silt, CO
BUI Project: Colborn Residence
To Whom It May Concern:
On July 9, 2004, Boundaries Unlimited Inc. personnel observed the construction of the ISDS
for the Colborn Residence located off County Road 320 near Rifle, Colorado. One 1000-
gallon septic tank and 21 standard Infiltrator units had been installed in a trench configuration.
No backfilling had taken place. The system was installed in conformance with the intent of
the design. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please feel free to
contact me at 945-5252.
Sincerely,
Deric J. Walter, P.
Project Manager
Cc: Harry Colborn
923 Cooper Avenue I Suite 102 I Glenwood Springs I Colorado 81601 I Ph 970.945.5252 , Fax 970.384.2833