HomeMy WebLinkAbout03991PeiB
ti�n
�� �• �iGARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit No 3991
109 6th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No.
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT
PROPERTY 11 1Vl1/� /t�1
Owner's Name1NI,
System Locatio
Locatio
Phone (303) 945-8212
419 Ctok--
PresentAddresser 1' Uu lic
This does not constitute
a building or use permit.
Phone - 6 ` o)
COG- 4Mc a.
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel NoQ -' 31 - 8 -
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 C
Date I7-.5/0,84Gc,S Inspect5Elb.-. G --w
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 materiel
variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6
months in jail or both).
While - APPLICANT Yellow- DEPARTMENT
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER \t ( I -.11"-•
ADDRESS )31 C t&r M W S. CO PHONE 3e'4-6Lioo
CONTRACTOR IUunL u, -S k,'a Lki
ADDRESS 15oK (7t1 S CO PHONE 4($-ti59�
PERMIT REQUEST FOR (X 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 1 r u. 4 0-4
Legal Description or Address t b+ t 6 !-t(12-, Cer i U1 tl r (24 t �j w S , o °,3i
WASTES TYPE: OQ DWELLING l ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER—DESCRIBE
Size of Lot G'` -"b
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: CIA "RK' 11
Number of Bedrooms ' .1- FLAIA ac on, ia-s«^- Number of Persons 3
(4 Garbage Grinder (.1 -Automatic Washer ('''Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: V) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier:
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: 11 I c
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? n !es
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following 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:
Depth to first Ground Water Table
Percent Ground Slope
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:
()C) 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? "4O
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: WPe4 oT
je(xi qui - Mt t sjvzo t/9I t rIJ, Co
Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and
additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant
or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is
subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made,
information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to
be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of
health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any
falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based
upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Signed"— ""� Date �(�bdV
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
HP
Gtech
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
December 9, 2002
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
479 Mancos
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Fax: 970-945-8454
email: hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Job No. 102 767
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 16, Teller Springs, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hanlon:
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 you dated November 27, 2002. The data obtained and our recommendations based
on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in
this report. Evaluation of potential geologic hazard impacts on the site are beyond the
scope of this study.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a two story post and beam
structure with strawbale walls. Ground floor is proposed to be shallow thickened edge
concrete slab -on -grade Cut depths are expected to range between about 2 to 3 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 southeast of the 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: Lot 16 is located on the northwest corner of the Lariat Lane and Spur
Drive. The ground surface in the building area is relatively flat with a slight slope
down to the northwest. Elevation difference across the building area is about 2 feet.
The lot is vegetated with grass and weeds. An existing irrigation ditch parallels Spur
Drive along the property.
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 logs of the pits are
Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthome 970-468-1989
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
December 9, 2002
Page 2
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about i foot of topsoil, consist of
slightly sandy silty clay. Results of swell -consolidation testing performed on relatively
undisturbed samples of the clay, presented on Figs. 3 and 4, indicate low
compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading. The sample from
2 feet deep at Pit 1 showed a low expansion potential when wetted. The sample from 5
feet deep showed a minor 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 to moist.
Subsidence Potential : The Teller Springs Subdivision is underlain by Pennsylvanian
Age Eagle Evaporite bedrock. The evaporite contains gypsum deposits. Dissolution of
the gypsum under certain conditions can cause sinkholes to develop and can produce
areas of localized subsidence. During previous work in the area, sinkholes were
observed in the Teller Springs Subdivision. Sinkholes were not observed in the
immediate area of the subject lot. The exploration pits were relatively shallow, for
foundation design only. Based on our present knowledge of the site, it cannot be said
for certain that sinkholes will not develop. In our opinion, the risk of ground .
subsidence at Lot 16 is low but the owner should be aware of the potential for sinkhole
development.
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the
proposed thickened slab should be placed on the undisturbed natural soil and designed
for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,200 psf for support of the proposed
residence. The soils have variable settlement/heave characteristics after wetting and
there could be some post -construction foundation movement. Isolated footings separate
from the thickened slab should be a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls
and 2 feet for columns. The strawbales should be placed on a leveling course of 3/4
inch road base compacted to 95% standard Proctor density at a moisture content near
optimum. Loose and 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 soils. The proposed shallow thickened slab edge should be
insulated against frost. The insulation can consist of 2 inch thick rigid foam insulation,
2 feet wide placed around the building perimeter. Any other exterior footings should be
provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection.
H -P GEOTECH
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
December 9, 2002
Page 3
Placement of footings at Least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this
area. Continuous foundation walls (if any) 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 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
clay soil as backfill. A perimeter underdrain should not be needed for the proposed
slab -on -grade foundation.
Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. 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 act as a leveling course. 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 ata moisture content near optimum. Required fill
can consist of the on-site clay soils or imported road base type sandy gravel devoid of
vegetation and topsoil.
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. Drying could increase the expansion
potential of the soils.
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.
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 pavement
H -P GEOTECH
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
December 9, 2002
Page 4
and walkway areas.
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 5 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 December 4, 2002 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. 1. 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 slightly sandy silty clay. The test holes were protected from freezing
overnight with foam insulation. The percolation test results ranged from 80 to 240
minutes per inch with an average rate of 133 minutes per inch. The test results are
presented in Table II. Due to the relatively slow percolation rates, a civil engineer
should design the 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, 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
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
H -P GEOTECH
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
December 9, 2002
Page 5
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.
Louis E. Eller
Reviewed by:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
LEE/ksw
attachments
cc: Jeff Dickinson
H -P GEOTECH
COUNTY ROAD 109
mem
1 1
1
1 1 LOT
1 1 BOUNDARIES
1 1
1 }
1 }
1 1
1 1
1 }
l 1
11� 1
LOT 17 1y 1
1r 1
li 1
1r 1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1
l 1
l 1
I 1
} 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
l 1
1 1
1 P 3
LOT 8 11 1 P 1Q
1 1, P2LA■ PROFILE
IT
p • �zeit ( ik'' P11'f` 11 �� EXISTING IRRIGATION DITCH
' t.ie„_, 01 '— oplasS�1t' I
1
LOT 16
PIT 2
■
PIT 1
■
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1" = 100'
SPUR DRIVE ACCESS EAEMENT
1
LOT 14
BENCH MARK: BASE OF IRRIGATION
PUMP; ELEV. = 100.0', ASSUMED.
LOT 15
102 767
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS
AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
Fig. 1
0
5
— 10
LEGEND:
I
PIT 1,
ELEV.= 101.4'
WC=5.6
DD=105
—200-92
WC=6.e
OD -88
—200=96
PIT 2 PIT 3
ELEV.= 103.4' ELEV.= 101.1'
TOPSOIL; sandy silt and clay, organic, firm, moist, dark brown.
CLAY (CL); slightly sandy to sandy, silty, medium stiff, moist, reddish brown.
2" Diameter hand driven liner sample.
0
5
10
NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on December 3, 2002 with a Komatsu PC 120 trackhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features on the site plan
provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark shown
shown on Fig. 1.
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied
by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water wos encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may
occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( % )
DD = Dry Density ( pcf )
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
Depth — Feet
102 767
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS
Fig. 2
•
Compression — Expansion X
N _ O
Moisture Content = 5.6 percent
Dry Density = 105 pcf
Sample of: Slightly Sandy Clay
From: Pit 1 at 2 Feet
Expansion
upon
wetting
0.1 .0 10 100
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
102 767
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 3
Compression %
W N — O
Moisture Content = 6.8 percent
Dry Density = 88 pcf
Sample of: Silty Clay
From: Pit 1 at 5 Feet
•
6...::,.....-L,..;,...
\Cpmpression
upon
wetting
0.1 .0 10 100
APPUED PRESSURE — ksf
102
767
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK -
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig.
4
O
Z
C0
0
2
Z
J
U
Z
2
U
H I-
CD
O r
W ¢
C7wOF
COCC
Q CC O
r m
J
U-
0 0
CC}
2
2
D
0)
ST RESULTS
HEPWORTH-PAW
SOIL OR
BEDROCK TYPE
slightly sandy silty clay
silty clay
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(PSF)
ATTERBERG LIMITS
PLASTIC
INDEX
1"el
oi_
E T`
J J
PERCENT
PASSING
NO 200
SIEVE
CN
0)
CD
0,
z
0
F
0
4
ccw
0
a
0
I:
0
0
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(Pcf)
105
88
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
I%)
(D
11)
CO
(D
1 SAMPLE LOCATION
DEPTH
(feet)
N
LC)
a
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 102 767
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN./INCH)
P-1
31
15
7
6 3/4
114
80
6 3/4
6 1/2
1/4
6 1/2
6 114
1/4
6 1/4
6 1/8
1/8
6 1/8
6
118
6
5 3/4
114
P-2
34
15
7
6 3/4
1/4
240
6 3/4
6 5/8
1/8
6 5/8
6 1/2
1/8
6 1/2
6 1/2
0
6 1/2
6 3/8
1/8
6 3/8
6 3/8
0
P-3
35
15
7
6 3/4
1/4
80
6 314
6 1/2
1/4
6 1/2
6 1/4
1/4
6 1/4
6 1/8
1/8
6 1/8
5 7/8
1/4
5 7/8
5 3/4
1/8
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on
December 3, 2002. Percolation tests were conducted on December 4, 2001. The average
percolation rate is based on the last two readings of each test. The test holes were
protected from freezing overnight and were free of frost and ice at the time of testing.
September 7, 2004
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
CIO Pete Waller
Klomhaus and Waller
P.O. Box 1727
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Proposed OWS System, 0037 Spur Drive, Lot 16, Teller Springs, Garfield County, CO
SE Job No. 24060.01
Dear Pete:
Pursuant to your request this letter/report presents our findings in regard to the feasibility and design of an
engineered Onsite Wastewater System (OWS) for the above referenced Site. This design is based on our
evaluation of the site conditions with information provided by others for use in supporting your application
to Garfield County. Our recommendations are in accordance with Garfield County and the State of
Colorado ISDS Regulations. Garfield County must permit any proposed improvement to the site. We
have reviewed the information forwarded to us, conducted a site visit, formulated an OWS design and
created a site plan with construction details as part of our scope of work.
Conclusions
Based on our findings we believe that the design and installation of an approved OWS system is feasible in
accordance with the Regulations of Garfield County and the State of Colorado. We recommend that a
new 1250 gallon septic tank be installed that will discharge effluent to a 650 square foot soil absorption
trench system. The soil absorption system can be installed in natural soils and will be located within the
required setbacks down gradient of the proposed house, as delineated on the attached plan. The system
will meet all required setbacks and be installed within the general boundaries indicated on the plan. Our
Design is outlined below and delineated on the attached site plan.
Site Location and Existing Conditions
The subject site is located at 0037 Spur Drive, on Lot 16 in Teller Springs in Garfield County, Colorado.
The site is situated in Section 13, T 7 S, R 89 W of the 6`h P.M. The Site comprises approximately 6.5
acres. The site is bounded on the north and south by agricultural pasture and range lands with scattered
single-family homes. to the east. The site is bounded on the east by County Road 109 and on the east by
the Teller Springs ditch lateral and Spur Drive. The Building envelope on the site has gentle slopes (2%-
3%) toward the east. The site is covered with pasture grasses and weeds. Domestic water will be supplied
by a central water system.
Proposed Site Conditions
It is our understanding that you intend to construct a 3 -bedroom home. The maximum number of rooms in
the proposed home that could be utilized as bedrooms is 4. The proposed improvements will include a
new OWS system with appropriate site grading. The new structure is to be generally located as shown on
the plan.
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311• Fax (970) 704-0313
SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC
civil consultants
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
CIO Pete Waller
SE Job No. 24060.01
September 7, 2004
Page 2
Subsurface Conditions
A subsurface investigation and percolation test was conducted on August 18, 2004 and August 26, 2004 by
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc (HP). The subsoil encountered at the site consists of 1 foot of topsoil
overlying medium stiff to stiff, sandy, silty clay to an observed depth of 10.5 feet. Groundwater was not
encountered in the profile pit excavation.
Percolation testing utilized three test holes, which yielded similar absorption rates. The fastest measured
rate was 32 minutes per inch and the slowest measured rate was 53 minutes per inch. The average
percolation rate is 42 minutes per inch and should be suitable for a conventional absorption system.
Design Criteria
The design flow is calculated as follows:
Single family home — equivalent 4 bedroom population @ 2 person /bedroom = 8 persons.
From the Garfield County I. S. D. S. Regulation:
Max. Design flow (Qd) = # of people x (avg. flow) x 1.5 gal/person/day.
Gallons per day per person for the subject house = 75 gal/person/day
Assume 8 -person population
Qd = 8*75*1.5* =900 gal/day
Septic Tank Design
Based on Design Flow Qd.
Qd = 900 gal/day
Volume (V) of tank = Design Flow * 1.25
(30 hour retention time)
V = 900 gal/day * 1.25 days = 1125 gallons
Use one 1250 -gallon dual compartment concrete septic tank
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
C/O Pete Waller
SE Job No. 24060.01
September 7, 2004
Page 3
Soil Absorption System Design
The field is sized by using the standard absorption area equation. A soil absorption trench system,
utilizing gravelless chambers is recommended. The State allows a 50% area reduction for the use of
gravelless infiltration chambers in a trench configuration. The chamber units may be installed in native
soils. Soil replacement with sand may be used in select locations if any scattered cobbles or rocks are
encountered. We are using 45 minutes/inch for the design.
Based upon the design percolation rate, the standard absorption area equation is:
A (SF) = Qd *(t) '/ : where A = Area; Qd = Design flow (gal/day)
5 t = time in minutes
This design calculation results in a recommended minimum absorption area:
A = 900 *(45)'1` = 1207 sq. ft.
5
Apply a 50% reduction for utilizing gravelless infiltration chambers in a trench configuration.
1207 x 0.5 = 604 sq. ft.
Assume 15.5 square feet per chamber: 604 sq.ft. = 39 chambers Use 42 chambers
15.5 sq.ft/chamber(50%)
Use 651 SF of trench with gravelless chambers: Assume 3 -foot wide trenches with 6.25 -foot long chamber
units.
We recommend using a trench system composed of three 88 feet long and 3 foot wide trenches, containing
14 standard leaching chamber units in each trench. Excavate absorption trenches to accommodate a
minimum 651 SF of interior surface area.
Effluent Distribution System
A gravity distribution system will be utilized to transport effluent from the new concrete septic tank to a
distribution box and to the head chamber of each trench via an individual distribution line. An effluent
filter will be installed in the secondary compartment of the septic tank to reduce suspended solid loading to
the absorption trenches and extend the life of the treatment media in the trenches. A 4" PVC effluent line
will discharge effluent to a distribution box installed level, up gradient and adjacent to the trenches. The
4" PVC line will be installed with a minimum 2% slope. The effluent will be equally distributed from the
distribution box through individual distribution pipes to each trench in the system. The inlet in the
distribution box should have a tee or a built in baffle to dissipate the influent velocity and insure equal
distribution into each outlet discharge pipe. The discharge pipes will connect to the head of each chamber
row. Appropriate chamber end plates shall be installed on the inlet ends to prevent scouring of the trench
bottom surface. An inspection port should be installed on the top mid -point cut out at the end chamber in
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
C/O Pete Waller
SE Job No. 24060.01
September 7, 2004
Page 4
each corner trench. This will mark the field and allow for checking the performance of the system over
time.
OWS Operation and Maintenance
The engineered system shall be inspected on a regular basis and be properly maintained. The
responsibility for repair and maintenance of the system will remain with the Lot Owner. The owner shall
inspect the OWS and perform maintenance and repairs necessary to ensure that the system is operating
properly. The effluent filter shall be maintained when the tank is pumped or as needed. Suitable
component handles and extensions on the filter assembly will be installed to provide easy maintenance.
We recommend a periodic inspection be performed every 6 months.
The OWS system should require minimal maintenance. Several factors influencing the need for
maintenance include: actual wastewater flows versus design flows, the volume of kitchen/domestic waste
(excluding human waste and toilet paper), excessive household chemicals and other toxic liquids. The
tank, dispersal field and other applicable treatment system components should be visually inspected bi-
annually for debris, wear, damage, leaks, or other potential problems. In general, for a properly utilized
system, septic tanks should be pumped and inspected every 2 - 4 years. The effluent filters should be
cleaned every six months and at the time of pumping. Absorption fields should be maintained with
suitable cover and kept free of root invasive plants. Positive surface drainage away from the absorption
field should be maintained.
Construction and Inspections
Prior to construction of the permitted system the engineer should be contacted by the contractor and owner
well in advance to provide adequate time to discuss the system components with the contractor, answer
questions, resolve any conflict issues and schedule inspection site visits based on construction progress.
County Regulations require that the Design Engineers of record perform site inspections of the permitted
system during construction and provide "As -Built" documentation of the installed system to the County
after construction is complete.
General Notes
1) All materials and installation practices shall conform to the Garfield County Individual Sewage
Disposal Regulation.
2) All sewer lines and distribution lines in the system shall be 4" Schedule 40 or SDR -35 PVC unless
specified otherwise on the plans.
3) Add a two-way clean out on the service lines from the house and detached barn.
4) The system shall be plumbed to distribution effluent into the trenches with equal distribution.
5) The contractor shall ensure that the concrete septic tank and sewer lines are watertight.
6) The trench area must be protected to prevent damage from vehicular or livestock traffic and must be
crowned to divert drainage runoff away from the trenches to minimize surface infiltration.
7) The leaching chambers shall be installed level in each trench. A splash plate shall be installed on the
trench bottom surface below the inlet in each trench to prevent scouring from the effluent. The top of
Karl and Cindy Hanlon
C/O Pete Waller
SE Job No. 24060.01
September 7, 2004
Page 5
the backfill over the chambers shall be covered with filter fabric or other suitable pervious material to
prevent the migration of fines from the overlying topsoil layer.
8) The trenches must have a minimum cover of 12 inches. A final cover of topsoil suitable for vegetation,
a minimum 4" deep, shall be placed from the top of the pervious cover layer to the finished surface
grade.
9) The absorption trenches must be sodded or covered with vegetative ground cover.
Our design and recommendations are based upon data supplied to us by others. If subsurface or site
conditions are found to be different from those presented in this report, we should be notified to evaluate
the effect it may have on the proposed OWS.
If you have any question or need any additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
03/17/2085 09:58 970-704-0313
SOPRIS ENGINEERING
PAGE 01
•
March 17, 2005
Kart And Cindy Hanlon
00 Pete Wailer
Klomhaus ani Waller
P.O. Box 1027
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
RE: As -Built OWS System, Hanlon Residence 0037 Spur Drive, Lot 16, Teller Springs, Garfield County CO
SE Job No. 24060.01
Dear Pete:
Fursuant to County Regulations, this letter provides documentation that the new OWS system recently installed is in general
compliance with rhe permitted design. Sopris Engineering has performed site visits to measure, inspect, and document the as
built conditions of the constructed system. We have coordinated ow efforts with the contractor that constn cted the system.
The system was inspected prior to backfilling and after all installations were completed. The as -built conditions and installation
of the new ISDS components is in compliance with the permitted design specifications for the system.
The septic tank. distribution pipes, and absorption field installations are in accordance with Garfield County Regulations, the
design presented in the Sopris Engineering design drawing, dated September: 7 2004. A 1250 gallon dual compartment septic
tank was installed with 4" tee baffles and an effluent filter. The absorption field was constructed with a total of 42 standard
leaching chambers in a trench configuration with (3) 88' long trenches containing 14 chambere each. The chambers were
backfilled with screened native material Each trench was installed level. inspection ports were installed on each corner end
chamber. The chambers were installed in suitable sons consistent across the Field. The field has individual distribution lines
from a concrete distribution box, connected to each trench. The distribution box was installed level on compacted ground and is
marked with a aection of sewer pipe. The minimum setback distances have been maintained. The 3 trench have a separation
distance of 6-8 feet and are installed approximately 3' deep relative to the existing site grades. Additional observations of the
soils within the field were performed during construction indicating that the soils arc consistent with the description in the
geotechnical report. No ground water was encountered to a depth of tO feet.
OWS Operation and Maintenance
The owner shall periodically inspect the OWS, perform any maintenance required and periodically pump the septic tank aS
necessary to ensure that the system is in good operating condition and performing as designed.
The OWS should require minimal maintenance. Several factors Influencing the need for maintenance include: actual wastewater
flows versus design [tows. the volume of kitchen,/domestic waste (excluding human waste and toilet paper), exceseise household
chemicals and other toxic liquids. The tank, sanitary tees and effluent filter should be visually inspected bi-annually for
clogging debris, damage or teaks. In general, for a properly utilized system, septic tanks should he pumped and inspected every
2 - 4 years. The effluent filter should be cleaned every six months and at the time of pumping. Absorption fields should be
maintained with suitable vegetative cover and kept free of root invasive plants. Positive surface drainage away from the
absorption field should he maintained.
If you have any question or need any additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
Pr�t ge','y�.
Nichol, PA:"
:02 '�ttit 8tP'et • Sake A3 0 Carbondale, CO 81623 0 (910) 704-0311 : Fax (910) 704-0313
REerryED
MAR 1 7 2005
B oG&�NNG
SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC
civil consultants
;5-
a a
a
W OWza2X'
O]
2
0
0
0
$ tstW \
1aag e61;00
a36fl$iyas< FS
- 110:14:
o !
dig;#3\
to
co Iggit60108
J;ps
L
a
a
ki
ghl
Astir
0:40,
L41 P
3 1-4gRE