HomeMy WebLinkAbout02780 ..:.'" i'1'{�u'* i r , Mt 4uf .Y:4' F'F' W!v lM" R' tH- Y' ^.�.irYSl�uiM'CA'4: .•x':. .., ^ ,. I . ..-' +ht I 'ifI'i i':. 9' rM1'.;
i
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 27
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 Cindy & Robert Perry Present Address 54 lama, Carbondale Phone 963 -1005
System Location 4 y —7 0 County Road 108, Carbondale
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.
SYSTEM DESIGN
400 Septic Tank Capacity (gallo Other ,._. , !41
9y'� PF
S m+Nn o< . 41 t3 - fenr 4 -" --!'t r
� '�,,^ 9 z r
T�` � 2 Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of BRRdrooms (or other 3 / /
/ /?y * r ,4 h. e < +rCat-4 o nt j k' X 46 r - 3 /°Art
Required Absorption Area - See Attached IM Ft 0 ?in A 7a - y5 1- r° Iv d, ( th �err 33 km-A -
Special Setback Requirements: /54 - t 0.4.4,01n — r. 4 nM� 4 , /J
Date G - - / / Inspector � 44 01.t4 to "'" � "' =�t1��
1/11-c.,
FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer ett .)
Septic Tank Capacity /1200
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name e- I9P4 a
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface 9e S
.
Absorption Area 474
Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name 4 .s3 u lutmc Avr /4" etiTbt- •
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Ws
Other
Date 97 Inspector tI , ' i t_c/
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 )ail or both).
White - APPLICANT Yellow- DEPARTMENT
INDIVIDIJAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER RJ lid . nn . L_ u.2an&a- I'S. .
ADDRESS CA •• R & ( OE C-� � .5- PHONE 9 b3 - 1005
CONTRACTOR -^,,_ L , �^�t dro . C o- -es .
ADDRESS 1 PHONE 1 9 4 ` bOS
PERMIT REQUEST FOR t<) 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 C_SED t O . Size of Lot n o� e rc a r
Legal Description or Address 10 R CA ,ot
WASTES TYPE: (y) DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: n n n o JA , h n t t to
Number of Bedrooms Number of Persons
(x) Garbage Grinder X) Automatic Washer (24 Dishwasher
SOT IRCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( ) WELL N SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: n �a
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM:.
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? n a
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMIJM 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 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
2
•
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
( x) SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
FINAL DISPOSAL BY:
( ) 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? Yl7
pERCOI,ATION TEST REST TI TS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does
the Percolation Test)
Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _
Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests:
Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system:
Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and
additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the
applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the
permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations
made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be
represented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the
local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further
understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any
permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Signed �n&9 Pestitil Date t #1 1/(
(
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
k lib •
•
. N w i i ) 4 — r @
t
as
O
C T D, 0
_ . —
0 > f2 �Q > ° •
= L
OV et U v
• u 0 . �{/I1
ti =
0
0 _ R v
' C J
a y n td 'D v .G
Cn O = art) _ --
V7 � t 7
7
° ^ t O V
O Z V 'a T O
F..
7 t E ° E
° = H v ° z
r a >, o ct co
j t L " L
N N
rn . = v C
C ° • • 7
�• z
p O
h y O CZ
id ° a4
on O
3 cirr
s °J
V) N U O
U 4-.
Z
o
0 0 a
Q i v ,,
z v
a to Q P ct
Z itill
1 ) O a
N I O
Q C '' 0 z
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL INC. 5020 Road 159 , it % t
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 / (,h
• Fax 970 945 -8454
May 7, 1997 Phone 970 945 -7988
Ian Carney
1609 County Road 112
Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Job No. 197 256
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Road 108 (Thompson Creek Road), West of Carbondale,
Colorado
Dear Mr. Carney:
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 April 21, 1997. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single story wood frame
• structure located a half mile west of 4283 County Road 108. Ground floor is proposed
to be structural over crawlspace in the residence and slab -on -grade for the attached
garage. Cut depths are expected to be up to about 6 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 about 100 feet to
the east and 4 to 5 feet below the proposed building area.
If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those
described above, we should be notified to re- evaluate the recommendations presented in
this report.
Site Conditions: The site consists of vacant pasture land vegetated with grass and
weeds. There is oak brush to the north, south and northeast of the building site. The
ground surface in the building area is relatively flat with a slight slope down to the
southeast. There is about 5 feet of elevation difference across the building footprint. A
dry irrigation ditch is located to the south of the building site.
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 Togs of the pits are
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 5 to 5 feet of slightly
organic silty clay (topsoil), consist of sandy silty clay to the maximum depth explored,
•
8 feet. Results of consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of
the lower clay soils, presented on Figs. 3 and 4, indicate low compressibility under
existing moisture conditions and light loading and moderate compressibility upon
• Ian Carney
May 7, 1997
Page 2
addition loading after wetting. A sample of the upper clay soil (topsoil) showed
moderate compressibility under light loading. No free water was observed in the pits at
the time of excavation and the soils were moist.
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread
footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil beneath the topsoil and designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for support of the proposed residence. The
soils tend to compress after wetting and there could be some post - construction
foundation settlement. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for
continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Topsoil and loose disturbed soils encountered
at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the firm natural soils. As an alternative to extending
the footings down, the design footing grade could be reestablished with structural fill
compacted to at least 98% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture
content near optimum. The structural fill should extend out from the edge of the
footing a distance equal to the depth of fill. Structural fill should consist of an
• imported granular material. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover
above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36
inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation
walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming
an unsupported length of at least 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 soil as backfill. A perimeter under -
drain may be needed if the crawlspace is deeper than about 3 feet.
Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential
movement, 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 free - draining gravel
should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material
should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve
and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of
•
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill
can consist of the on -site lower clay soils or imported granular material devoid of
H -P GEOTECH
• Ian Carney
May 7, 1997
Page 3
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.
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 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement
and walkway areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
• Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on April 22, 1997 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 holes were
covered overnight to protect against freezing. The soils exposed in the percolation holes
are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and consist of about 5
feet of slightly organic silty clay overlying sandy silty clay. The percolation test results
are presented in Table I. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the
percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a conven 'opal infiltration
septic disposal system +"C l'!t':° , c ,1:a eb i i 1i•x . 31 h I =e t ;
'ifl
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.
H -P GEOTECH
Ian Carney
New May 7, 1997
Page 4
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant
design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the
recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations
and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the
geotechnical engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
r
Q�q Apq � � ORE0474 ,
• , i Gtr? ,� ,y •s2 /���,1,1
Jordy . A ai on, Jr., P.E. f° 2 9707 p
Revie ed /
7:G
E CG
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
JZA /kw
attachments
cc: Dave Powell
•
H -P GEOTECH
L P -2
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1' = 20'
PROFILE PIT
• O P -1
p P -3
•
■ PIT 1
PROPOSED
RESIDENCE
1 1
■ PIT 2
•
•
197 256 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK I LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 1
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT
0 0
1
t 5 WC�22B 5 _
_ DD�OB w
— W0 -15.0 Wc=ia.e
_ DD-93 DD -94
- 200=51 - 200=80 —
_ 10 1O--
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; silty clay. slightly organic, medium stiff, moist. dark brown.
CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, medium stiff to stiff, moist, yellowish brown.
2" Diameter hand driven liner sample.
• NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on April 21, 1997 with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features
on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory pit locations 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 was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( X )
DD = Dry Density ( pcf )
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
•
197 256 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
• Moisture Content = 22.8 percent
Dry Density = 98 pcf
0 Sample of: Slightly Organic Silty Clay
From: Pit 1 at 4.5 Feet
1
K 2
No movement
upon
• wetting
E 3
a
E
ci 4
•
5
6 •
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
• Moisture Content = 15.0 percent —200=51%
Dry Density = 93 pcf
0 Sample of: Sandy Clay
From: Pit 1 at 7.5 Feet
1
K \\
2 Compression
`o upon
n wetting
0 3
a
E
0
0 4
5 \.1
6
• 0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
197 256 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK SWELL— CONSOLIDAl1ON TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. •
•
- 200 =80%
• Moisture Content = 18.6 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 94 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay
From: Pit 2 at 7 Feet
0
1 •
No movement
c upon
— wetting
' 2
d
•
E 3
U
4
•
5
•
• 0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
197 256 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK I SWELL — CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
• TABLE
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 197 256
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHES) INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION
(MIN) INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE
(INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MIN. /INCH)
P -1 56 15 12 9 3
water added - 13 101 2%
water added 13'1 11'% 1%
11'1 10'% 1
water added 11% 10'% 1
10'% 9' 3 /4 16
P -2 48 15 8 6% 11/4
water added 8'h 7% 3 /4
water added 91/4 8'h %
8'h 8'/4 %
water added 9 81/2 1
• 81/2 8 h 36
P -3 42 15 10 7' 21/4
water added 9 71/4 1'
water added 91/2 8'h 1
8'h 7'
water added 9 81/4 %
23
8'1 % h
NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug In the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on April 21, 1997. The test holes were
covered overnight to protect against freezing. Percolation test were conducted on April 22, 1997.
•