HomeMy WebLinkAbout03163 (! I ((R
1� _
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit N2 3 1 5 3 •
•.r
n i 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. .
it Glenwood Springs, Colo((abo 81601 L
iA Phone (303) 9454$12 b,
.` y , This does not constitute p
"1 INDIVIDUAL SEWAQ DISPOSAL. PERMIT a budding or use permit. 3 4
I t PROPERTY � 6 �
:3 '
t
C�o wl��y T y�� �� �b �lt. g 6� %OGK u, . G.S,c a� f
Owner% Name Present Address Phone"
R I. S yste m L o ca tion 7j l . r'v .' � ! " "�'Qr O'�`Sre✓1`tl �/E�� on : s `
V' •
I 1
r , Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. l
n \
,„ SYSTEM DESIGN
< J
/-2sv
Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other ?'
---l- -"-=� Percolation Rate (minutes inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) �f .,
Required Absorption Area See Attached O ;/LOCK • • Sfp.�/^� 6'�°' 40 09 cG y'
' a .Q.<.eL.e..kGha- 64 = 7 as -- X- SL. . ti n rf F
! Special Setback Requirements: .� ✓ ✓ —Me n Its_ Tax x st C Pt. • !' !m 3uHri5 t f
k ‘ Date _ Inspector S
I
t FINAL SYSYEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
r Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
ds c -
System Installer rs t... 1.1 r w '
Septic Tank Capacity (Z- S 0 r.- ( ,k
r' +"
P , 0 i Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name is. E C A * - ; „ - R t.t e i c - , c pc ,. ""„
' S yCS
r x Se Tank Access within 8” of surface
�` 1
J , Absorption Area S 3 9 L f ( (/ A 6 C O
x
Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name �� t L " Q T O 'f
°� ): Adequate compliance with County and State reguletiona/requirementa '
iI AS
r t O ther / .
Date G ?� yam' q Inspector 4 g' 6- f 0 r r
.• -
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE ,
w•
*CONDITIONS: } }
1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter V
25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. (
i S' 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 y W
R ,, 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 Involvesa knowing and material ;,
p variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 8 , y
months in Jail or both). it
R �
r P White - APPLICANT Yelk>w - DEPARTMENT i
et t
/ 23
c p A- -N
1, r oCt% P C 0 _ /2. o,
21 L t AC i-I C AAJ-A 6 Cit- 15 ' R
') v c. , y(
/ T2C�c _ Si2 sz t 3Z. (fm f 7S
•
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER IYnPPI £ F117nk>etfl DNAllhn
ADDRESS j • i CP a 1.b . a ,' a • as. . • : .11 PHONE 945 -a1 l 00 44 7 - 54 J)
CONTRACTORflOPPI £ Fi I7(lbOile1 rnll)IIn
ADDRESS 'I: , Oa 0. _ . s ) . sea .s 1! PHONE (45 -n ll I (I+) Aq- 7- 5 4 76(W)
•
PERMIT REQUEST FOR (X) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR
Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable
building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4).
LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY:
Near what City of Town IP111 (9S Size of Lot 2,53 f�!'t'e.S
Legal Description or Address R1rr ‘ R. J Amended l PY I PY) l l I E omptl nrl
WASTES TYPE: o() DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: Sln(�I�Ylll�� nIAIQIIin
Number of Bedrooms 4 ll "Number of Persons 4
( ) Garbage Grinder ()Q Automatic Washer 00 Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: Q() WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: N/A
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: MnnnP A Whit
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? No
A site alan is required to be submitted that indicates the followine 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 It ll)''QtInd WA Pr ul4S PYICnLJnlpt'V» GptPrvrre nita `hM
Percent Ground Slope varies (a o P hoaSP 1r WvMlhPnrl a'7 °70) mI')()rip
• 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 TYI1iV1Yainn Plnv.Is
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? ND
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes 70 per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes CY) per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _
Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: awn L. Pnk1 Q Z R.C. 1 inrf'h-
Pnu11a1C C;a>FPrhricn. (., Tna. , Fly() M. ! 4- 1 (�I,IS, m R!!nl phone) t c14c
Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: pr report h Skew vP RI (Altaic P. C. 2
- 1Vik c ) caYpn. i5 suitable for n. rnnUPn-h infiltrntion `p(hr. rli�n .Ri.stera.
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.
77 / Qhr ,,. 514199
Signed /%/��',,C • �(//6 d�' Date T /f/-
> 5
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
.,
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax 970 945 -8454
March 29, 1999 Phone 970 945 -7988
Tracy and Libby Cowling
•
988 Glen Oak Lane
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. 199 242
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Parcel B, Bershenyi Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Cowling:
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 March 15, 1999. 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 2 story wood frame
structure located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Ground floors are proposed to be
structural above crawlspace. Cut depths are expected to range between about 3 to 5
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 south 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 undeveloped at the time of our field work
except for an existing dirt access road which runs through the west portion of the lot.
The building area is located in a meadow which slopes slightly down to the northwest.
Vegetation consists of grass and weeds with scruboak on the east portion of the lot.
Four Mile Creek is located west of the property. Basalt boulders up to 3 feet in
diameter were observed on the ground surface in the eastern part of the lot.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating 2 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 foot of topsoil, consist of
4 to 6 feet of silty sandy clay overlying relatively dense silty sandy gravel with cobbles
and boulders. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a relatively
•
•
Tracy and Libby Cowling
March 29, 1999. •
Page 2
undisturbed sample of sandy clay, presented on Fig. 3, indicate low compressibility
under existing moisture content and light loading and moderate compressibility potential
under conditions of wetting and additional loading. Results of a gradation analysis
performed on a sample of sandy clayey 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 natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing
pressure of 2,000 psf for support of the proposed residence. The clay soils could
compress or expand after wetting and there could be some post - construction foundation
movement. The settlement/heave potential could be limited by extending the bearing
down to the relatively dense gravels (such as for a basement) and designing the footings
for an allowable soil bearing capacity of 3,000 psf. Footings should be a minimum
width of 16 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.
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 55 pcf for the
on -site clay soils as backfill.
Floor Slabs: We understand that a structural floor over crawlspace is proposed for the
residence. If a slab is proposed such as for a garage, the following recommendations
should be observed. The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to
support lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. The upper clay soils could have an
expansion potential and there could be some post - construction slab movement. 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
H -P GEOTECH
Tracy and Libby Cowling
March 29, 1999
Page 3
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, 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, crawlspace 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.
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. Free - draining wall backfill should be
capped with about 2 feet of the on -site clay 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
H -P GEOTECH
•
•
Tracy and Libby Cowling
March 29, 1999
Page 4
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 around the residence.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, should
be located at least 5 feet from the building.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on March 19, 1999 to evaluate
the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile pit and
three percolation boles 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 clayey sandy gravel with frequent cobbles and boulders. The percolation test
results, presented in Table II, ranged from 20 to 30 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. The disposal system
should be based in the underlying gravel soils.
Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the
locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in
the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface
conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions
may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be
notified at once so re- evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
H -P GEOTECH
•
•
Tracy and Libby Cowling
March 29, 1999
Page 5
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.
i1 ,td ,m om
Mark Mackie, E.I.
Reviewed By:. •
•}.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E , • 1 5 2 `
• %,33/3 °J4 el 1
T OF CC
attachments
H-P GEOTECH
1 PARCEL A
ti -,--,,
ACCESS ROAD
)
)
1 /
/ / 1
APPROXIMATE SCALE /
1" = 60' / /
/ /
/ PARCEL B
) )
1 1
1
1 I PIT 2 .
4 -MILE CREEK 1 1
a _ PROPOSED
/ RESIDENCE
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
1 / / • �
PIT 1 I
1 / /
/ / P1
/ � P a a p 2
/ P 3 PROPOSED
/ / AREAC DISPOSAL
/ /
/ /
• / /
/ /
/ /
PARCEL C
HEPWORTH - 199 242 I GEOTECHNICAL, N INC. I LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. 1
PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT
— 0 0 _.
A A _
idird —
0 Wfr7.6 0
. DO-109 d
u -- d
• y — u_
LA. » �y� 5 I
:91L 5 n
• C '� 5 -200 �� WCt11.0
- 200 23 -200- W WO 20067 1
10 10
LEGEND:
El TOPSOIL: clay, silty, sandy, organic, medium stiff, moist, dark brown.
CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, medium stiff to stiff, moist, dark brown, blocky, scottered basalt rock.
GRAVEL (GM); with cobbles and basalt boulders, silty to clayey, sandy, medium dense to dense,
slightly moist to moist, brown.
I SI 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample.
i Disturbed bulk sample.
"f- Practical refusal to digging with backhoe.
T
NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on March 18, 1999 with a Cot 4168 Turbo bockhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from the building and septic disposal
stokes by others.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits are drown 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 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 ( 7. )
DD = Dry Density ( pct )
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
199 242 I HEP EOTECH WORTH CAL, I LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. 2
•
•
• +
Moisture Content = 7.6 percent
Dry Density Weight = 109 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Clay
From: Pit 2 at 2 Feet
0
1
No movement
c upon
q
N 2 wetting
u
a
E
0
ci 3
4
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
199 242 I H — PAWLA SWELL — CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
•
•
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 1 SEW NiALYS6 I
1 lYE READINGS U.S. ITAMARD SFA6 1 GEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
• 24 HR. 7 HR
45 MN. 15 MIN. 50 MIN.19 MIN. 4 MN. 1 WA /200 /100 550- 150 /16 /6 N 0/6'I/2 1 1/Y T re r
100 - -�
C _
—, •
an - -��-G Mann
p _____ —_ a 10
--w ma a
= - - - ∎— M M SSW ME ■imi
= ____- I
nan -- —•••■••••• • — MMMIN
50 sin 20
-- sm....m ImINEM
mamma am au■
--- �—
� �
= notes
70 — _ —_ —__� _ - _ JO
amaa n_ - -- MD —
m -inn — —
NM =CM I — 0
0 �� -- — w
Z p ___���_ 40 Z ■
an amm.4 am ems. a
Q ammaa ala n. a W
mmmampomi. won o _ � o
Ce
momma we r C —C�— ■ r
Z 50 °— C 2° z
an �� — w
IX p — C te
w C �G —�— ■ w
1:1- MnINIMM•i■
40 p
ana —a - - MSS
nesa - any- - - -MPOS�—
=so as x — 70
— ����C� C_ —�C C
C —� — ..01■1
MilMNSin SSE
- - -�C
MO — ••flC MIMS
p _a so
—an a
amass —��— a
ana _ _
a a
ana 10 •■••Ma• - -S
amma amain. a
amass a al
S
--��—
0 100
.001 .px .015 .00• .010 .037 .074 .150 .300 .600 1.16 2.36 4.75 0.5 19.0 37.5 76.2 12152 203
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS
CLAY TO ST ; —F QaeE ES
GRAVEL 61 % SAND 16 % SILT AND CLAY 23 %
LIQUID LIMIT 7 PLASTICITY INDEX X
SAMPLE OF: Sandy Clayey Gravel with Cobbles FROM:Pit 1 at 4.5 thru 5.5 Feet
199 242 I HEPWORTH — PAWLAK I GRADATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 4
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
\ 12
,[ §
| /k CO (
eg 0 e >,-
/ >• >. 37 j J
ti ® t 8
2 )
o / ■|
7 ® |�`
/ 1 - | . .
S |-
o ±e
Mc� _ .
k� 5 CO § | Q N
a §
, §- »
\ \ .
I .
|
w | ' .
t ■ | ! CI) }
)i|® /
§
>C.
~ L
L - .
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 242
• 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 64 15 91/2 81/4 11/4
8 1/4 7 1/4 1
7 1/4 6 1/2 3/4
6 1/2 5 3/4 3/4
5 3/4 5 3/4
5 4 1/4 3/4
4 1/4 3 3/4 1/2
3 3/4 3 1/4 1/2 30
P -2 60 15 6 3/4 6 3/4
6 5 1/4 3/4
5 1/4 4 3/4 1/2
4 3/4 3 3/4 1
3 3/4 3 3/4
a 2 1
water added 5 4 1/2 1/2
41/2 31/2 1 20
P -3 48 15 6 1/2 5 3/4 3/4
5 3/4 5 3/4
5 4 1/4 3/4
4 1/4 3 1/2 3/4
3 1/2 2 3/4 3/4
water added 5 3/4 5 3/4
5 4 1/4 3/4
4 1/4 3 1/2 3/4 20
NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug In the bottom of shallow backhoe pits on March 18, 1999, soaked with water,
and protected overnight from freezing. Percolation testing was conducted on March 19, 1999.