Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02859 y r GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 285 9 . 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 Phone (303) 945 -8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Mary & Andrew OtBrocht esem Address 2834 S. Glen, Glenwood phone 945 -5496 Owner's Name 0273 Dolores Circle, Westbank Mesa, Lot 12, Glenwood Springs System Location Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN k.. . ( i __ _ ' Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other '4 M 1 Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 13 ( 90 arnfiftthe RS el X eta 4 r Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: _ . — Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL. (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) B Covering Installation + � System Installer 1 3 (� (� L U I tal 0 1 N L l Septic Tank Capacity 1 2 - J ` ' /+ A Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name ` O P C ` A ~I (' Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Y C Absorption Area 2 to EN en u S S CA • Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name 1/.1 F II L 1 A A r o 6 5 ` 2 t/) Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements V 9 Other ' /( Date 11- ' -9-7 Inspector n ct h Pr-- 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 line — 8 months in Jail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT _ , S • INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER Dltit t Mn 'i cp. CW1 ADDRESS U3- 6 (a +fig. (aL NINICOI , q 3 k - +Nhs PHONE eNS 096 c!oWP -k�o SU»c)l ' CONTRACTOR AP> a Cfb CoNs.tOtn owl eo, /Nov ADDRESS IL ?2 W • LA' , LPL fl1►upof SPR -tN&i S / C-6 PHONE ate' c l 2g S g SS2 PERMIT REQUEST FOR (`) 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 Size of Lot / a/ aar`) N it" Wts78,41J Legal Description or Address NJ 4 u �INI'IF2 - D2.., t-Ntru Of) 5P2t C , LCT Imo, MESS WASTES TYPE: ()4_ DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE Supbtq kSion1 ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: ONesrvN ICA7V11 L'4 kItM(- DUCE, WaYl r Ct11 Number of Bedrooms Number of Persons 3 (20 Garbage Grinder 09, Automatic Washer () Dishwasher SOi JRCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? 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 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 f- -- r '•, TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: (7<) 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? PERCOLATION TEST REST IT,TS (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) n Q P3 I Minutes 7 per inch in hole No. 1 f Minutes 2 4 per inch in hole NO. 3 P 2 Minutes /3 per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _ Name, address and telephone ofRPE who made soil absorption tests: /J.ep WD rj74 - f W 44 /o( /a( ('47 e 1 4)i /G AIikkre_ 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 0 441 C Date Mp P/ � PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! 3 HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 970 945 -8454 July 2, 1997 Phone 970945 -7988 Andy and Mary Obrochta c/o Ed Troyer 1102 Walz Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. 197 372 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed Residence, Lot 12, Westbank Mesa, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. & Mrs Obrochta: 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 proposal for geotechnical engineering services to you dated May 19, 1997 and revised May 30, 1997. 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 one story frame structure over a basement level located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Basement and garage floors will be slab -on- grade. Cut depths are expected to be up to about 10 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 25 feet downhill to the northeast of the proposed 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: The site was vacant at the time of field work. The ground surface in the building area is strongly sloping down to the northeast at grades of about 10% to 15 %. There is an elevation difference of about 8 to 10 feet across in the building area. The hillside to the southwest of the building site is very steep and forms the west side of the Roaring Fork Valley. Vegetation consists of sagebrush, grass and weeds. 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 Andy & Mary Obrochta July 2, 1997 Page 2 presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 'h foot of topsoil, consist of medium stiff slightly sandy silty clay. The clays below about 4 to 10 feet are highly calcareous. Results of swell- consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the subsoils, presented on Figs. 3 and 4, indicate moderate compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading and a low to moderate collapse potential, (settlement under constant load) when wetted. The samples exhibited high compressibility upon additional loading after wetting. The low density and high moisture shown for the smaple from Pit 2 at 10 feet is the result of the chemical composition of the soil. The sample from Pit 1 at 6 feet is more representative. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil can be used for support of the proposed residence with a risk of settlement. A lower risk alternative would be to place the structure on a drilled pier foundation. Spread footings can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 800 psf. The soils tend to compress after wetting and there could be some post - construction foundation settlement. Settlements could range between 1 to 3 inches or more, depending on the depth and extent of wetting and could be differential. Precautions should be taken to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. Footings should be a minimum width of 20 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. 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 footing subgrade should then be moistened and compacted. 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 heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 14 feet. The foundation should be constructed in a "box- like" configuration rather than isolated ponds to further help limit the effects of differential settlement. 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. H -P GEOTECH Andy & Mary Obrochta July 2, 1997 Page 3 Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. The subsoils are compressible when wetted. 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 soils devoid of vegetation and topsoil. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during tunes of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1' feet deep. An impervious membrane such as 20 mil PVC should be placed beneath the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: H -P GEOTECH Andy & Mary Obrochta July 2, 1997 Page 4 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. Free - draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on -site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 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. A swale will be needed uphill to direct surface runoff around the residence. 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 10 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 June 18, 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 soils exposed in the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and consist of about 1 /2 foot of topsoil overlying medium stiff slightly sandy silty clay. The percolation test results are presented in Table II. The percolation test results indicat- an infiltration rate between 7 and 26 minutes per inch. The average percolation w. minutes per inch. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered 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 H -P GEOTECH Andy & Mary Obrochta July 2, 1997 Page 5 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 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, • ORTH - PAWLAK G , �: 1ic ii , .2 � : ,. ; AD '� i' 1�1 . c) ` -` DS F� � / . •v •7�7 i r i Jordy '. '' Jr. P.E. 1 rt- y °T c<",9'," •'/ , '17, : 6 ': rl., 1 � 1 `/OVAL ' r R4' i&vved By: / \ � „�% %.0- -e Daniel E. Hardin P.E. JZA /kw attachments H -P GEOTECH LOT 13 PROPERTY LOT 12 BOUNDARY • PIT 2 P 3 PROPOSED 0 RESIDENCE P 2 A • PROFILE PIT P 1 A ■ U PIT 1 cc U N W OR / "0 Wq y S L•OT 11 APPROXIMATE SCALE 1' a 20' 197 372 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig, 1 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 4 PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT _ 0 0 — — — W002.9 / / — 00 —ee / — — —2 WC ■18.5 / — 00-90 . _ 5 u. 3e / / _ 5 0 1. — PI -14 WC =6.7 / lu I — DD =74 / — I r — L — r g - — a _ 10 1 _ o WC-24.4 00■55 — 15 15 — LEGEND: n./ TOPSOIL; silty clay, slightly sandy, organics, roots, medium stiff, slightly moist, dark brown. N k I C silty, slightly sandy, medlumd stiff to stiff, slightly moist to moist, light brown to white, I / slightly t highl c alc areo us w ith de I SI 2' Diameter hand driven liner sample. NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on June 17, 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 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 tronsitlons 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 LIquid Lim t passing No. 200 sieve LL = PI = Plasticity Index ( X ) 197 372 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. 2 i GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Moisture Content • 12.9 percent Dry Density Weight = 86 pcf 0 Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: pit 1 at 2 Feet 1 2 3 Compression upon 4 wetting O 5 tt 6 To 7 T o. E 3 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPUED PRESSURE — kef 197 372 I H ICAP I SWELL — CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 • Moisture Content = 24.4 percent Dry Density Weight = 55 pcf Sample of: Highly Calcareous Cloy From: Pit 2 at 10 Feet 0 1 ro Compression upon 2 wetting K 3 0 4 0 O 5 6 0 7 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 197 372 I HEPWORTH — PAWLAK I SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 4 GEOTECH N I CAL, INC. p 2 . . . . . . . \ / / . k - » § � > § / \ 6 a o 0 ] / ] f Li ii ii p | k j cc / E § � � I ® �_§ | |! r CD LLIe § ) k� §) ° 4 | N } • o 2 \ 2 » R 1 . | LU 1 | ! (E |I2/ 2 2 §|t - ° k \ . |! ® © - 2 1 §| _ N HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE I PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 197 372 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 -1 571/2 15 9 5 4 water added 1014 7'1 3 water added 91 6 2 water added 10% 7 3% water added 91/2 61/2 2 water added 91/2 7 21 7 5 2 water added 9% 7%s 2 7 P -2 53% 15 8 6 2 water added 9% 8' 1%: water added 9'h 8% 11/2 water added 9% 8% 1 '4 water added 9% 81/2 1% water added 9 8% 1 8% 7% 1% 7% 6% 1 13 P4 46% 15 8 7 1 water added 9% 8% 1 water added 9% 9'h % 9' 8% 34 8% 7% 3 7% 7% 1 7' 6'/ % 6'/ 5' 3A, 26 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug In the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked June 17, 1997. Percolation tests were conducted on June 18, 1997. i ' 1