HomeMy WebLinkAbout02615 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 615
109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No.
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone (303) 945 -0212
This does not constitute
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit.
PROPERTY
Owner's Name Donald Roberts e ntAddress 11466 Hwy 325, Rifle Phone 625 -2107
`-'/TD
System Location 4/14894" Road 320, Rifle
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.
SYSTEM DESIGN
4,2 SL Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
/ , 3`/' Percolation Rate (minutes /inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3
Required Absorption Area - See Attached
Special Setback Requirements: ` � (� /
Date B "11-9q Inspector A ' //'r (]jt
FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer /int flfr1- AJE '
Septic Tank Capacity / 2.5v
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name erot c�N�
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Ye- S
0
Absorption Area li9 /
qq r
Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name4 �x f• C /14 Wit;eS
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations /requirements Ye—S.
Other
Date ' c7C. `-//�
9 Inspector / P-o'L2
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE
'CONDITIONS:
1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Heart
earth 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 — 8
months in jail or both).
White- APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 615
109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No.
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone (303) 945 -8212
This does not constitute
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit.
PROPERTY
Owner's Name Donald Roberts /deent ddress 11466 Hwy 325, Rifle Phone 625 -2107
System Location 44/e9tr County Road 320, Rifle
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.
SYSTEM DESIGN
Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
Percolation Rate (minutes /inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3
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
Date 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 I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine —6
months in jail or both).
White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT
_ i►
• INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL. SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER f7 o n Q• ae in * s
ADDRESS /hy4 c "- / 3� S o , x v
Lrr to y/4 so PI -ZONE 9 70 - /.
CONTRACTOR .S / a ry />, -/ S-f F . , G'/, a.. et AM a +
ADDRESS /0 "/ /.1 rccs? 174 f :47c co sic roPHONE 62 r- y /CC
PERMIT REQUEST FOR 00 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; COUNTY CA t• ..i'c I tt
Near what City or Town (t; ;l r ego, Size of Lot // /{ c t - c $
Legal Description or Address Jo ? 95/ (1 /lo d 3 a. o
WASTES TYPE: OC) DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: /its c. 5 C
Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 2
( )6 Garbage Grinder (4 Automatic Washer ()() Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
Give depth of all wells within 180 feet of system: / t /r� c
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier t? ; 'f / n ' lai fie-
GROUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to bedrock: s P % #s / e „ d 3
Depth to first Ground Water Table $c c Na +, H y d . s L- nj • .. - <« sly a Ine
Percent Ground Slope L
DISTANCE TO NEAREST' COMMUNI'T'Y SEWER SYSTEM: !2 /i: /e.
Was an effort made to connect to community system? (x) YES ( ) NO
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
no 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:
OO 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? A✓O
2
PERCOI TEST RESULTS• (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer)
Minutes per inch in hole No. I Minutes per inch in hole No. 3
Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole No.
Nance, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Al." yr tin 8 d o K E in ee■ 1•1 y
4* en ✓;ron'n ell/ r( Y Mr .'fo 'n 13,4 /C /°len o d sPys Co Y / /.v
PA, 97 0 - 9 set - 9 lSb'
Nance, 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 repots as may be required by the local health department to be made and famished by the
applicant or by the local health department for proposes of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the
permit is subject to such terns and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations
adopted under Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. 1973, as amended. The undersigned hereby certifies that all statements
made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be
represented to he 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. 1 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 729 2y / ?9(
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD
SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE SITES •
•am"rs POW MR
• 01010
.. . 1 /
L" 1 PERCOLATION 1
L °, " ` " T P A PITS
,� ... f
. $ g ter.
PERCOLATION 2 , :.:::." Jar
.... PROPOSED L OT --
ST PIT t 1 1.0 ACRES±
° o �
w ��
S� N
°r
`man
• 100 Par
ss �
PROPOSE LO 2 Alt ► t\N,
7.0 A •E ± A' `�
Ss I �
h
-N il ik S89'28'0 "
0 ' � � N89'2:'� "E �w.
1 r
Mr V4 overt
EMC. 20, DRA00 CAP
NOT TO SCALE
4 387 94 Huntingdon TEST PITS AND PERCOLATION TESTS LOCATION Fig 1
• \ \ , _ _ _ _ _ _ \ \
)- 'so \
• �\ a& \
I ZI ( \ \
f T �; \ s
1 I \ ' \
\ F
3
+ * r OP '^ \ V \
" 6 O S
1 I , IN o • t \ \
1 a
v
" S
1
f F \
�` 4 ` .1 t f
1 " • + \
\ a
' j
\ # ..
/ '
1111 1: 4
C.
10
A m 1
a a
I x
\
i v I 1
S
X a 1 1
s 1
c w
1
X 1
7 \
r o
i n I 1
•
1. 1
‘slr i J
•
Huntingdon
Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
(Chen- Northern, Inc.)
6080 Road 154
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Telephone: (303) 945 -7458
Fax: (303) 945 -2363
PRELIMINARY
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED ROLLING ACRES SUBDIVISION
RIFLE, COLORADO
JOB NO. 4 387 94
OCTOBER 12, 1994
," o t(3
f .6t- 3
f s fir
Pr f
PREPARED FOR:
MR. ROLAND FOSTER
10894 COUNTY ROAD 320
RIFLE CO 81650
(} A mantel of Oa ® vow of companies
• Huntingdon
• Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
(Chen - Northern, Inc.)
5080 Road 164
October 12, 1994 Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Telephone: (303) 945 -7458
Fax: (303) 945 -2363
Mr. Roland Foster
10894 County Road 320
Rifle CO 81650
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Rolling Acres Subdivi-
sion, Rifle, Colorado.
Job No. 4 387 94
Dear Mr. Foster:
As requested, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical engineering study at the subject
site, located along the south side of County Road 320 in Rifle, Colorado
Subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory test pits excavated in and near building areas
are variable and consist of a combination of sandy clay and sandy gravel containing cobbles and
boulders on Lot 2 and sand clay overlying sandstone bedrock on Lot 3. Groundwater was not
encountered in the test pits at the time of our investigation.
The proposed residences can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural gravel subsoils
and bedrock and designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 1500 to 2000 psf, depending on
the local soil conditions. A site specific subsoil study should be performed for individual
structures. Moderate grading will be required to construct the driveways to access the proposed
Tots.
The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our
recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is important that we conduct
additional subsurface investigation when building plans have been developed. We should also
provide field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the
geotechnical recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HUNTINGDON ENGINEERING
& ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
i,„„
Fred R. Cameron
Reviewed by: SRH
(! A member& the (HIH) group of companies
Huntingdon
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY I
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 1
SITE CONDITIONS 2
FIELD EXPLORATION 2
GEOLOGY 2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 4
FOUNDATIONS 4
FLOOR SLABS 5
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 5
DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION 5
PERCOLATION TESTING 6
SITE GRADING 6
ADDITIONAL STUDIES 8
FIGURE 1 - TEST PITS AND PERCOLATION TEST LOCATIONS
FIGURE 2 - TEST PIT LOGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 AND 5 - SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 6 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 7 - PROJECT LOCATION
FIGURE 8 - TYPICAL SMALL CHANNEL SECTION
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
0 A member of the I H 1 H) woo of canpanies
•
Huntingdon
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the
proposed Rolling Acres Subdivision to be located in Rifle, Colorado. The project site is shown
on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to provide recommendations for preliminary design
of foundations and driveway subgrade. The study was conducted in accordance with our
proposal for geotechnical engineering services to you, dated September 21, 1994.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits was conducted to obtain
information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested
in the laboratory to determine compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics of
the on -site soils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to
develop preliminary recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for
the proposed residential building foundations, roadway subgrade parameters and topsoil depths.
The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in the report. Evaluation
of the geologic conditions which may impact construction on the site was performed based on
review of existing literature and a partial site reconnaissance.
This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to
present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil
conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engineering
considerations related to the proposed construction are included in the report.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed development will consist of a semi- private access drive to Lots 2 and 3 and
two proposed single family residential lots. The proposed building area for Lots 2 and 3 are
located on the extreme north edge of each lot. The driveway from County Road 320 ascends
to the south across a relatively flat area. Near the break in slope, there will be an intersection
with a driveway to each building area. Cuts in the drive alignment will vary from 0 to
approximately 8 feet and maximum fill depth will be on the order of 7 -8 feet. A layout of the
proposed development is shown on Fig. 1.
If driveway grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should
Ci
A member of the HUH) proop of companies
Huntingdon
-2-
be notified to re- evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
Lots 2 and 3 are composed of varied terrain. The northern ends of both lots consist of
gently rolling to hilly areas. To the south, the lots climb relatively steeply up to a Grass Mesa.
Several minor surface drainages cross the lots from south to north and there is a larger
intermittent drainage across Lot 2 along the west side of the building envelope.
The sites are vegetated with pinions, junipers, sagebrush and grasses. Bedrock outcrops
in several areas along the hillside. Total elevation change across the two sites is approximately
280 feet.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on September 23 and 26, 1994. Two
exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface
conditions. The pits were advanced with a backhoe. The pit on Lot 3 was excavated below the
actual building area because the terrain is too steep for equipment access. The pits were logged
by a representative of Huntingdon. One additional pit was excavated on each lot for the purpose
of percolation testing.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 -inch I.D. hand drive. Bulk samples of the
soils were also collected. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project
engineer and testing.
GEOLOGY
Site geology can be divided into two main areas. The northern end of Lot 2 consists of
alluvial and colluvial deposits described under the "Subsurface Conditions" section of this report.
�'s A member of the (HI111 group of companies
•
Huntingdon
-3-
All of the proposed development for Lot 2 and most of the driveway for Lot 3 is within these
materials.
The building area for Lot 2 will be underlain by colluvium /alluvium and the building area
for Lot 3 will be underlain by the Wasatch Foundation.
Based on a partial site reconnaissance, the only significant potential geologic hazard
identified is that of rockfall. We believe the severity of the hazard is low, in part because of
the tendency for the site bedrock to form slabs. Slab shaped pieces would tend to have short
travel distances even on the relatively steep slopes. A positive measure for mitigation of this
hazard would be to locate the residences away from the hillslope on the proposed building pads.
Soil cover on the steep slopes behind the building envelope appears to be shallow, so any
surficial slumping should be minor.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsoil conditions encountered at the site (shown graphically on Fig. 2) are variable
with respect to their types, depths and engineering characteristics. The subsoils encountered in
Pits 1 and 3, located below and in the building areas of Lot 3, generally consist of 1 foot of
topsoil overlying medium dense, sandy clay. Based on the location and attitude of the
outcropping bedrock it appears that excavation in the building area of Lot 3, above Test Pit 1,
will encounter shallow sandstone bedrock. In Test Pit 2, located near the center of the building
area of Lot 2, we encountered 0.5 feet of topsoil overlying relatively dense sandy gravel.
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of excavation.
The United States Soil Conservation Service classifies the site soils as the Arvada Loam.
This unit is generally described as a deep, well drained silty clay loam. The Arvada Loam is
shown as Map Unit 4 on the partial reproduction of Sheet 9 of 20, of the U.S. Dept. of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Rifle area map, dated 1977. This partial reproduction
is included in the report as Figure 7. This figure indicates that the southern most ends of the
lots grade into Unit 67. This unit is classified as Torriorthants -Rock Outcrop Complex, and is
described generally as exposed sandstone and shale bedrock and stony soils.
A member of the )H 1H) group of companies
Huntingdon
-4
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural moisture
content, Atterberg limits testing, gradation analyses and consolidation testing. Results of
consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the clay, presented
on Figs. 4 and 5, indicate moderate to high compressibility under conditions of loading and
wetting and high compression when wetted under constant light surcharge. Results of gradation
analyses performed on a bulk sample (minus 3 -inch fraction) of the natural coarse granular soils
from Lot 2, are shown on Fig. 6. Atterberg limits testing typically indicates the clay soils have
moderate plasticity. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the general
proposed construction, it appears that development of the site should be feasible based on
geotechnical engineering considerations. Subsurface conditions vary considerably across the site
and should be carefully evaluated for the individual lot construction when building plans are
available.
The following recommendations are made for planning and preliminary design purposes.
When final building plans have been developed, we should be contacted for review and
additional analysis as needed.
FOUNDATIONS
The subsoils encountered at expected foundation bearing depths on Lot 2 are mainly
sandy gravels beneath a thin veneer of sandy clay. Although Test Pit 3 did not penetrate the
sandy clay, we anticipate that the strata at foundation bearing levels will consist of the sandstone
bedrock exposed lower in the slope on Lot 3. The natural granular soils on Lot 2 and bedrock
on Lot 3 should be suitable for support of lightly loaded spread footings.
Footings can probably be sized to impose a maximum bearing pressure of 1500 psf to
2000 psf, depending on the local soil conditions. The upper clay soils are compressible and
could result in some post- construction foundation settlement if the structures bear on them.
�'3 A member of the [H I HJ group of companies
Huntingdon
-5-
Settlement potential of foundations should be evaluated as part of the site specific foundation
study for the individual structures.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site granular soils and bedrock should support lightly loaded slab -on -grade
construction, typical of residential construction. The on -site clay soils are compressible in their
native state but should be suitable for use as underslab fill, if properly compacted. To reduce
the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be constructed independent from
the building foundation.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Individual buildings should have foundation drains to prevent wetting of the below grade
areas and prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind foundation walls and retaining structures.
The foundation drains should consist of drainpipe surrounded by free - draining granular material
placed at least 1 foot below the bottom of the proposed excavation. The free - draining gravel
backfill should be surrounded by a suitable filter fabric to reduce infiltration of the on -site fine -
grained soil into the gravel. The drain line should be sloped at a minimum 1% grade and
connected to a gravity outlet pipe. Free - draining granular material used in the drain systems
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.
DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION
The subsoils encountered within the proposed roadway alignment were evaluated using
standard property tests to estimate an 'R' value. The test results are summarized in Table I.
Clayey fine - grained soils, such as those encountered at the site, typically have poor load support
properties. The soils in this area are also known to be frost susceptible. Based on the other
tests results and our experience in the area, we recommend an 'R' value of 15 be used for design
of pavement sections on the sandy clay subgrade.
a A member or the ® group of companies
• Huntingdon
-6-
Subgrade soils should be scarified, adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
95 % of the standard Proctor density prior to placement of base course or surfacing materials.
A preliminary roadway section consisting of a layer of "pit -run" material over properly prepared
subgrade and surfaced with a 4 -inch aggregate base layer should be suitable for typical
residential traffic. Heavy construction traffic could damage the roadways and placement of
additional base and regrading may be necessary in a post- construction phase. In some areas
overexcavation and placement of compacted granular borrow or additional aggregate base course
may be necessary to stabilize the driveway section.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Preliminary percolation testing was performed in the proposed leach field areas of the
building sites. The subsoil profiles were logged in the adjacent exploratory test pits. No free
water was observed in the exploratory or percolation pits. The testing was performed in hand
dug holes in the bottom of the backhoe excavated pits. The results of the percolation testing are
presented in Table II. The results indicate the subsoils have a variable percolation rate but
should be acceptable for conventional infiltration septic disposal systems.
SITE GRADING
Drainage ditches should be provided along the uphill side of the driveways to divert
surface water away from the road section. The proposed site grading will consist of minor cut
and fill to allow construction of' the semi - private driveways and building sites. We assume
proposed cut depths will not exceed about 10 feet and maximum fill depths will be about 5 to
7 feet. The following criteria can be used in developing preliminary grading plans.
Grading of the property should limit cut and fill depths as much as possible. Permanent
unretained cut and fill slopes which do not encounter seepage should be graded at 2 horizontal
to 1 vertical or flatter. If groundwater seepage is encountered or where deeper cuts are
proposed, we recommend that they be evaluated for stability on an individual basis. Interceptor
drains will be needed above the building pads to divert surface flow around the building areas.
We do not anticipate unusual problems with the proposed fill slopes provided the fills are
A member of the (HI I{J oipip of tornpanies
Huntingdon
•
-7
properly compacted and the slopes do not exceed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. We understand that
the larger intermittent drainage crossing Lot 2 will be re- channeled, to the west away from the
proposed building area. We recommend that the east side of the new channel be protected from
erosion from the mouth of the drainage along the length of the building area for Lot 2. This
could be done by the placement of rip -rap or channel lining. On -site sandstone cobbles and
boulders should be suitable for rip -rap. A typical channel section is shown on Fig. 8.
Areas to receive fill should be carefully prepared prior to fill placement by removing all
vegetation, topsoil and other deleterious materials. The exposed subgrade should be scarified
and compacted to provide a uniform base for fill placement. Fills placed on hillsides exceeding
2 horizontal to 1 vertical should be benched into the hillsides. Fill material should be compacted
to at least 95% of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum in areas to be
developed and 90% in landscape areas. Fill sections deeper than 10 feet should be studied on
an individual basis for slope stability and settlement potential.
c7 A member or ft (HIM group of companies
Huntingdon
-8
ADDITIONAL STUDIES
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices in the area and is suitable for planning and preliminary design purposes.
Additional studies should be performed to finalize foundation design parameters once building
plans have been developed.
If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further service,
please contact our office.
Sincerely,
HUNTINGDON ENGINEERING
& ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
e d R. Cameron
Project Geologist o�0O REQ�s� %‘
Reviewed By i � x' $ s ` A
(,P . °
1 . o 66 �,/ S
q c
Stan Helenschmidt, P. ( : Fr NG\C„
FRC /Ir
c7 A membef of me (H I IiJ /loop of companies
•
PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD
SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE SITES •
0 110..• ,� --er22'0
i PERCOLATION 1
\--- j4 TEST PIT 1 TEST : PIT 3
0. .
• y;
$g
PERCOLATION 2 o
•.... ^ � <' PROPOSED L OT 3 it
.•• P � �, 0 ACRES± :
w
o
• o
f a.
s airs— a
ti
�., ' a0' pett'ft
ss •� Nt-
PROPOSE ,L OT 2 ►A
7.0 A •E ± „`►4
_ % 0 4. .0
li S89 N89'28 "E
1
MAW V4 C01
200 20, DRA00 CAP
NOT TO SCALE
4 387 94 Huntingdon TEST PITS AND PERCOLATION TESTS LOCATION F 1
TEST PIT 1 TEST PIT 2 TEST PIT 3
— 0 .. 0
• I WC = 4 —
WC= 4 ! DD =101 —
DD = 105 , —
5 tE4 5
—
IWC =9 r IWC= 5 —
i -200 = 80 _£ i +4 = 54 -
r - 10 LL = 34 —200 = 19 10 —
5 —
— 1
w — w
1 ° — 15 15 —1
— 20 20 —
— 25 25 —
NOTE: Exportation of symbols presented on Flg. 3.
4 387 94 Huntingdon TEST PIT LOGS Fig. 2
LEGEND
® TOPSOIL; Silt and Clay, sandy, flrm, slightly moist, brown
7 CLAY; Very sandy, firm, moist, brown, occasional gravel
1
® GRAVEL; Sandy, dense, moist, brown, with cobbles and boulders
up to 1.5 in diameter, very sandy below 7.5.
0 Hond drive sample.
1 Disturbed Bulk Sample
NOTFS
1. Test pits were excavated on September 23, 1994, with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory test pits were determined approximately
by features shown on the site pion provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory test pits were not measured and logs of
exploratory test pits are drown to depth.
4. The exploratory test 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 test pit logs represent
the approximate boundaries between material types and the transitions may
be gradual.
6. Ground water was not encountered in the test pits at the time of excavation.
I ARORATORY TFSTING RFSIII TS
WC =Water Content ( %)
DD =Dry Density (pcf)
— 200 = Percentage passing No. 200 sieve
LL= Liquid Limit (%)
PI= Plasticity Index (7)
+4= Percentage retained on #4 sieve
4 387 94 Huntingdon LEGEND AND NOTES IF`g_ 3
•
Moisture Content = 4 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 105 pct
2 sempteot: sandy clay
From: Test Pit 1 at 3 feet
.1
n 0
1
N
L
0 2 Additional compression —
under constant pressure
due to wetting
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
\\\\
10
11
12
13
14
o.t t.o so soo
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
4 387 94 I Huntingdon 1 SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS {nQ. 4
•
•
Moisture Content = 4 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 101 pct
1 sample of: sandy,clay
From: Test Pit 3 at 1 foot
tre ,0
0
o
N 1
VI
d
L
Q .
O 2
U
3
Additional compression
4 under constant pressure -
due to wetting
5
6
7
8
9
10 (..\\\\\
11
12
13
14
15 \!)
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
4 387 94 I Huntingdon 1 SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 5
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
' TIME READINGS U S STANDARD SERIES I 1 CLEAR SOUARE OPENINGS
24 HR 7 HR
4 MIN 15 MIN 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN '200 '100 '50 '40 '30 '16 1'8 4 \ 1 I. ♦
el i 1 0
90 1 10
la
I •
80 1 20
70 30
1 1' 0
i 1
L 11 t
60 •0 z
a
< 1 a4 1
0 50 .1 {{ 1 , 5 o
I. 2 �� w
R 40 1 ._ I 60 u
6
1 / 1 n
30 1 111 1 70 1
/ I - 1 1
20 i - - 4 80
; - 1
10 90
1 1
0 ens •IM1w11=1. wow sM•10 n wl.ssww - .INAD•• ■•=111••••1.4m
001 002 005 009 019 037 071 149 297 590 119 238 4 76 952 191 381 762 127 20
42 2 0 152
I DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
CLAY TO S6T f fwE 1 SAN
MEDIUM /COARSE, FINE GRAVEL I COARSE 'COBBLES
GRAVEL 54 % SAND 27 % SILT AND CLAY 19 0
% %
LIQUID L IMI 1 PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF sandy gravel FROM Test Pit 2 at 5 feet
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
1 S ANALVSIS
I TIME READINGS
I U$ STANDARD SERIES I
HI CL E AR SQUARE OPENINGS
24 H 7 HR '10
45 MIN 15 MIN 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN '200 '100 '50 '40 '30 '16 1'8 '4 1
103 4 1 0
I L
90 1 I 10
60 1 1 20
- 4 1
1 1
70 1 30
0 - 1 0
• 60 4 40 L' 1 1
o 1 1 a
1 1 7
o- ; 1 .504r
w . . . 4 . z
a s 1 1 '600
30 I 1 0
20 1 j 8D
1
_4 1
10 1 90
1 1
0 wealoiall■wMuwu■w1=11r1•4•w• wIDISo•r11■11•••∎f11n•ou8118 100
001 002 005 009 0 037 074 149 297 590 119 38 A76 952 19' 381 762 127 200
42 20 152
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
SAND GRAVEL ICOBOLE$
CLAY 1051LI FINE 1 MEDIUM ICOARSE FINE I COARSE
GRAVEL % SAND % SILT AND CLAY %
LIQUID L IMI 1 % PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF FROM
1 397 94 1 Huntingdon [ GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6
Y y3 :y
SOIL SURVEY OF RIFLE AREA, COLORADO J. ;; + ss
Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties ,i,: y
United State Deportment of Agriculture
Soil Conservotion Service, 1977 ' ` %�� as 5 t.. •
3a r '..g. 4,,,, Rererwia
, ' A ll d 't l
� �i:SF. Y. r°
• Mf" pa �' r5 i : ' , •e 55
' r d 7 i � r j
t ' . jI y ` �
r
i .A'+ .MESA ° a 73a y + / � \/
3
,i3.& t�4 . �i r+t �; S' r .Y �s 56 51 30 a0 ■
/ �
t °35 �6 - 0
i t 4 56
3S ' t
i r 55 t 1 1 Q .. ` po 3a .: .� 1 22 t
J
3 _ 1 65
Y bS'•
.r . 065 . 8 .. '7%.
- ' .l �6 7
+�,, 1fy $ % 1- C, 1 .t. 27 .• "t,• �. _'
e , (i t- r + e r ..
1� � �'ii 6 T : , 3 10 .i`. ` "! ` J , t '.fix
I..I t
I re n ti.. 7
t K r 1 e F74.
3 rs + i , ' � ' J � " . 1 V xt > `1 O . - b 1 '•) ff.' 6t ;
�w PROJECT SITE l' ,#'"' t%':
yejl
20
6 2 r 21 i6 22
, 61 44 3
a 7 68 F
"J. •••",;.'
jt'6 4; :•'� = 68 dd, r 68
H .
•62 GRASS MESA m a5 62
56
66
1 i 66
4 68
?94 r »:` 28 . 65 27
I
4 387 94 Huntingdon PROJECT LOCATION I 'ti 7
f
BOULDER
EAST RIP-RAP
'�� WEST .ti.
S
FILTER i
FABRIC
ask
+ 3C7 94 1 Huntingdon TYPICAL SMALL CI14NNEL SECTION Fig 8
J
•
:
� R
O i s
t g 4 1 4
W
U
1 1 1'
a E--. .
Q '
w
yL a
w — W' °>
aj w O cn .
.a . a
T : p � " W Q3
w a O S a i
Z 7 O w
.. - .
A
L :
j V P v d
s 8
b Fs O O O O
te .7 Y ,
im
+ , .
A
�
\
ky
\ m; 0 n § q« r 9 n m
\ }
� � /
/
F.
K / § ; A ; n
■ . , A, , , 4 ; §
2 >
\ ° 0 \
«
§ . .
Lo E. \
k 44 \ K( 2 - 2 ] ; ; § ; 2 P. ; §
o
1.( : • K
§ 2
+d
O \
§ � � \
f e . 0000 . . .
. .
_ y .
0\ q
} t
% ,-
\ ( . ,
k :
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT , ,
109 8th Street Suite 303 As 2 615
Asses
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 sor's Parcel No.
Phone (303) 945 -8212
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT This does not constitute
PROPERTY a building or use permit.
Owner's Name Donald Roberts
ant Address 11466 H 325 Rifle
System Location
7U Phone 625625_
- Count Road 20 Rifle
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.
SYSTEM M�N
f
Septic Tank Capacity (gallon)
Z-2 S
Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other)
3
Required Absorption Area - See Attached
Special Setback Requirements: v `-
-
Date
Inspector � &( D
FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer
Septic Tank Capacity
I
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
Date 8'20/ 4
Inspector / r R r /' iaika■
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONS R UCTION 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 I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6
months in jail or both).
While- APPLICANT Yellow- DEPARTMENT
! . b ( 4( . W
l /Jtn� Dom of Q .�
4ATf 1 0 95F ors Sao r - a wcso
Sg a - )
2 ) 1_ C A ca -- CPA /46 EFL , 6E0 -- GGi 2R. _ 33 P /tra
31 7 1. er 3---S-I9 Z 9 v
c�ES
o�2
(1) 7: ft k 982-
9 (3, e 0 _ SY, _ 3 joi 2' CI)
'?'me- (vet -/ -- (19/ alb !L
3 � v
4 X, i �' c -- t 0 -k
1\-) c , d ,� 1p � , ��,
T—'" No. 5927..,, ,
GARFIELD COUNTY G DBPARTMCNT
B UILDING, SANITATTON PLANNING 109 8tb Street Suite 303
Dien od Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 945 -8212
10894 County Road 320, Rifle
lob Address
Nature of Work
Building Permit
We ofyrdldin: Sin:le Famil Dwelling w Double Cara: -
Owner Donald Robert
•
Contractor Owner Amount of Permit S
1 686.71 Date June 1"
Permit: 1022.25
Plan : 664.46
Paid $635.2 S. Archuleta
Clerk
-.. r OCC. GR /(3 P U ( 1 CONST. TYPUZ
NUIICE / ' WATER SUPPLY DATE PERMIT ISSUED da - 5 - 96
) ._
SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL PLUMBING. HEATING.
VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. SPECLLL APPROVALS REWIRED Rearveo Nor RECURS()
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS ZONING be
NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK 15 SUSPENDED
OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS
COMMENCED. HEALTH DEPT.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW
THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ANO ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT.
GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED
HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE 501L REPORT
AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR / {.�
LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION O• TH PERFORMANCE OF ✓ . "t' t oet( TRUCTION. SETBACKS - �.l L
f
4 .i. ••••40 310. O.P+0t (. .s 4...-- 94 FLOOD HAZARD
�Igneture of Own r, Contractor or avthodzed agent , : rstood n• lee _
So a,'rfr MANUF.
•
m
Building pe nnt ApproVeldat S o Planning Department A p p rel. OTHER/.SiS ISO, DO
Pr AGREEMENT
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR OR OWNER TO
CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE SIGNER HEREBY AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AND LAND USE
REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNER FURTHER
AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF
THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THAT THEN AND THERE IT
SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID.
THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FROM
THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PREVENTING BUILDING
OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGULATION OF THIS
JURISDICTION.
THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN
ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR LIABILITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES. THE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ARCHITECT, DESIGNER,
BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN SUPPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. �/' /� r///( 777
Garform.003 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE (INITIAL!`/, a ' ' 1