Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02930 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 29 a 0 109 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 Gan at Minna nI WZI Present Address 5387 CR 154 #87, G.S. phone 945 -4946 System Location 0*27 Old Native Lane, Westbank Mesa, Iat 54, Glenwood Springs Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other 4 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 !3i« Of t-L f,Q s Septic Tank Capacity /C7S a �] Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name PDPL ")u4.. Septic Tank Accese within 8" of surface VF�S A r Absorption Area a L 3 hit 9 Q N 1917I.4 EI Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name _ jr F IL Tp,f?tt.C. Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements y'rc.5 Other o Date / 2 - %r %I Inspector .0 494'd 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 off ice 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 specif ications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6 months in )ail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT • ,&t w nrr NGI'VCt etVG 1 APR 2 4 1998 April 23, 1998 GAHFIE:t.D COUNTY Gary and Diane Olson 5387 County Road 154, #57 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Olson Residence ISDS HCE File number 98004.03 Dear Gary and Diane: This letter is in response to your question regarding the design of an individual sewage disposal system for you new house. The design and drawing we previously prepared was for a house with six bedrooms. After further discussion and refinement of your plans for the unfinished portion of the house, you have requested that the design be revised to be based on five bedrooms. — Leaving all the other parameters of the house and site the same, we have calculated three options for the absorption area. They are as follows: 1. Standard Infiltrator units in a bed configuration would require the use of 48 Infiltrator units. 2. Standard Infiltrator units in parallel trenches would require the use of 40 Infiltrator units. 3. "Equalizer 36" Infiltrator units in parallel trenches would require the use of 40 units. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 1%------ Ti othy P. Beck, P. E. P ncipal Engineer TPB /soe cc: Ed Walters, Walters Construction N. Don Owen, Garfield County Building Dept. 923 Cooper Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Telephone: (970) 945 -8676 • FAX: (970) 945 -2555 . INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER G"f\1.4 4 Ltio,mz... 0k n n ADDRESS 132 C �d ICI •� %1 GIenw tcdi i PHONE qqS • b t o €44001 Gvork 9 S 990 CONTRACTOR -.$ »n1 t. ADDRESS PHONE 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). , •e, • •t••• 1 1 Near what City of Town GltAll.675ba Size of Lot t !n'1 ac rc Legal Description or Address &«a(/ CV\ 00 we }.6. r`Q WASTES TYPE: (4 DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE /tt Il td - / .vwa -tit 2_ 0 7lbtne BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: Elbflle, Number of Bedrooms Number of Persons (4` Garbage Grinder (1Kutomatic Washer ( (Dishwasher 5OIJRCE AND TYPE OF WATER STJPPLY: (WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: (L)0 S tY>rktOK Me s P` 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 MINIMITMiiktances: 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 DISPOOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT A SITE PLAN. GROI JND CONDITIONS: Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope 2 , TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: (I-1 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? K) O pERCO1,ATION TEST REST ij 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. l Signed Date 3 _ q ._ 7 lS PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! 3 HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 970 945 -8454 January 21, 1998 Phone 970 945 -7988 Gary and Diane Olson 5387 County Road 154, Space 87 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Job No. 198 111 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed Olson Residence, Lot 54, Westbank Mesa, 0927 Old Native Lane, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. & Mrs. Olson: 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 January 12, 1998. 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 one story wood frame structure over a walkout basement level located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Basement floor will be slab -on- grade. Cut depths are expected to range between about 4 to 8 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 20 feet downhill to the north 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 and covered with about 6 inches of snow at the time of our field work. The ground surface in the building area is a relatively flat topographic bench with a slight slope down to the north. A steep fill slope up to Huebinger Drive is located to the south of the proposed building area. There is a steep cut slope to the north of the building area down to a lower topographic bench. Shallow fills up to about 3' feet deep were encountered in the pits on the upper bench. Deeper fills may be present in the area. The lot is vegetated with sagebrush, grass and weeds. Gary and Diane Olson January 21, 1998 Page 2 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 presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1 to 3 feet of granular fill materials, consist of gravel and cobbles in a silty sand matrix. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of the gravel (minus 5 inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Fig. 3. 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, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed gravels beneath the existing fill designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf for support of the proposed residence. It has been our experience that the natural soils in this area tend to settle after wetting and there could be some post - construction foundation settlement. Precautions should be taken to avoid wetting of the bearing soils. Footings should be a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose and disturbed soils and existing fill encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the natural gravels. 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 45 pcf for the on -site gravels as backfill, excluding vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. 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 john 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 H -P GEOTECH • Gary and Diane Olson January 21, 1998 Page 3 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 gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. 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 times 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: 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 H -P GEOTECH Gary and Diane Olson January 21, 1998 Page 4 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 may be needed uphill to direct surface runoff from the southern slope 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 of soils below the foundation caused by irrigation. Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on January 16, 1998 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 test holes were covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. The soils exposed in the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and consist of about 11/2 feet of fill materials overlying gravel and cobbles in a silty sand matrix. The percolation test results are presented in Table II. The percolation rates varied from 13 to 24 minutes per inch with an average of 20 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 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. The site may H -P GEOTECH Gary and Diane Olson January 21, 1998 Page 5 be underlain by Eagle Valley Evaporite Formation bedrock. This bedrock contains minerals which are water soluble and can cause surface sinkhole development. Evaluation of subsidence risk due to dissolution of the bedrock is beyond the scope of this study. 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, / d-JE WORTH - � WLAK, G OTECHNICAL, INC. l% ' , '� J dy ZI . damson, Jr. P. . Reviewed By: O:p0 Ec R 4' `, Y �. . • • • t ` tea ••••H•�i7. I r. ki - 7.-.,0 c ` 1 P ;° 24443 .. Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. z 4 : ltrt(4r Ak : A te••• ° <, JZA /ksm . p �E*\�� `'� attachments H -P GEOTECH APPROXIMATE SCALE 1' =60' POK'ER 1 1, ...... . _ _ EASEMENT I 1 _ ... .. , n 1 PROFILE 1 1 1 P 2� PIT P 3 1 w 1 11� POSED 1 s DENCE 1 I • PIT 2 1 I- 1 F 1 I LOT 53 1 LOT 54 / 1 / 1 / 1 BUILDING / / 1 ENVELOPE / L -- -- _ / o L ��'� Iv 198 111 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 1 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT 0 0 rt . ' ' Y II a, itO • 4 — , ca t.- . • rr LI- 5 5 0 _ J .... EL o — ' ' — 200 =19 = o J ■ 10 10 LEGEND: FILL; silty sandy gravel with cobbles, clayey, medium dense. moist, dark brown. organics in upper 4 to 6 inches, subangular to subrounded rock, rubber belt at 3 feet in Pit 2. f GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GM); in a silty sand matrix, scattered boulders up to 3 feet in size, g r medium dense, slightly moist, brown, subongular to subrounded. 4 Disturbed bulk sample. NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on January 15, 1998 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 drown 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 moy occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve —200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 198 111 I HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. • T • HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS RME READINGS U.& STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CFA SQUARE OPENINGS 24 HR. 7 HR 45 MIN. 15 MIN. SO MINIS MIN. 4 MN. 1 IAN. /200 /100 150 130 /16 /6 H 3/3 1 1/2' Y 6'C SC 100 1 1 W I 10 . 1 . so . 1 20 . I 70 I • 30 1 o 0 Z 50 40 Z LW a 1 w a ce Z SO SO F- w w CY 1 0 a i a 40 1 60 / 1 . 30 i ]0 m 1 . eo 1 1 10 1 SO I , 1 0 I 100 .001 .002 .005 .000 .010 .037 .074 .150 .300 .600 1.16 2.36 4.75 0512.5 15.0 37.5 76.2 1 152 203 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SAL —yra-a■■ef E , r rime we61E5 GRAVEL 54 % SAND 27 % SILT AND CLAY 19 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Gravel with Cobbles FROM: Pit 1 at 5.5 thru 6.5 Feet 198 111 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 GEOTECHNICAL, .INC. • 4 HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE I PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 198 111 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 37 15 14% 14 '% 14 13'% Y. 133/4 13'% '% 13'% 13 '% 13 12% IA 12'% 11% % 11% 11 % 11 10% y 24 P -2 42'% 15 7% 6 1'% water added 11'% 10% 1 10% 93/4 13/4 9'% 8'% 1 8/ 7 1'% 7 5% 1% 5'% 4'% 1/ 43/4 3'% 1 13 P -3 41 15 83/4 7'% '4 7% 7 / 7 6% % 6% 6'/. % 6 6 /. water added 9 8% '4 8% 7% % 7'/ 7 % 24 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of shallow backhoe pits on January 15. 1998. The holes were soaked with water and covered with rigid foam insulation to protect from freezing overnight. The percolation tests were conducted on January 16, 1998. The average percolation rates were based on the final two readings.