The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4581 P 1 \ it 1 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING, SANITATION and PLANNING DEPARTMENT 109 8th Street Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 01601 (303) 945-6212 (22 9/ County Road 7.19, Glenwood Springs Job Address -- Nature o1 Work Building PermitI Use of B)Biding Single Family Dwelling Unit Bill l)ayes — � — Owner for —_ Contractor klaye COPE tructtoa _ — — it 1,101.38 September 16, 1992 _ Amount o7 Perm $ 0ale: Permit: 66).50 � Plan 437.8II S. Archuleta Clerk While -Trees Canary- 011lce Pink - Applicant Gold - Duplicate r ► _. L1 r • ICI CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY - - - N 21 3 Q BUILDING DEPARTMENT Ij GARFIELD COUNTY COLORADO I I; No change in the uhar'ncler ofoccuponcy ore i i, building shall be made without a CmrBncme Issued Without Fee or aoupnncv - Onto Sec Saul September 27 19 93 • Permission is hereby granted to • Bill Hayes 1 Building Permit No. 4481 ______Zone D istrict_ __ „I I fl_RoafLll a a runnc Rpxings..__— Lot ____._.- 91k..__.. Addition silua[dd at 07QLCOUn for the following purpose Ging1P Fami1y17Qe111nv lime (State Nature of Use) Contractor Hayes Construction (\ Its once of a C of Occupancy .,hen not I ed approval .� nf the prov, e1r 11. a des of other ordinances ee _ f th jurisdiction. / Certificates presuming l give authority .ions GARFIEL TY 41 / 1 DI G DEPARTM Ni of this code f other ordinances of jurisdiction ro hdl IM valid. /� \ (UBC Sec 1) 107( , By F r j, � -� -- 1 d white: Owner Groom Lendna Agency Yellow. Bmme,g Boomt Pint Assessor Gald, Contractor • • r GARFIELD COUNTY )))) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT ' Y�8 / 77/ i. /qw PERMIT NUMBER q 6 please print or type DATE % -z, - 7a_ 9-4) -902,, AS. SSnrF.QarPv /* TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT PLOT PLAN ADDRESS 4 ttt b , NOTE: Show easements, property line dimensions, .a SUBDIVISION C IC/5 C' / all other structures, specify north, and street d 'FILING # LOT # / ik BLOCK # ! name. For odd shaped lots, or if space is W ' TAX SCHEDULE # too small, provide separate plot plan. !LEGAL ( EC /TWV /RNG) - r ., • _ • . - ;, pt- 1 # OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL Mi h c ME ie Pf1 6,}R ' USE OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL F! !NAME B,L /_ /-IA'V ES 1 ' MAILING ADDRESS 2 cob' a SUs ce— o !CITY C yp d hn (o _ HONE _& NAME _ /f /,4'L Co A (aLii'nbetsn, /h) _ CH) ADDRESS , jQZ � liyyf/,tl CITY t eal CJSTLL 6' 7 n a. ? PL NAME / CON • o ADDRESS ,f p1J Z C 4' / c / 5 f /e /h 'CITY /f, (7) /b o I' o ONE 4Z5 A LICENSE # CLASS OF WORK NEW x ALTERATION _ ADDITION DEMOLISH REPAIR MOVE - - MOBILE HOME (make /model) S.F. OF BUILDING a tee S.F OF LOT /8,/96 # OF FLOORS 2. . HEIGHT 26 '3" # OF FAMILY UNITS # OF BEDROOMS .3 INTENDED USE OF BUILDING RESlDF.V'T _ GARAGE: SINGLE DBL X CARPORT: SINGLE DBL FRONT PROPERTY LINE FIREPLACE up _ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED _ STREET NAME/ROAD NUMBER ijf4h, Q 1.i4-Na WATER SUPPLY \4/ { CHECK IF CORNER LOT _ DRIVEWAY PERMIT X\ CAM It P d DESCRIPTION OF WORK PLANNED SITE PLAN X r./LST/ / /'P s etd2 n Lam. BUILDING PLANS x SANITARY SEWER CLEARANCE . 4 e -°t, /C, S $ t rr?N I hereby acknowledge that I have read this ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT _ „ffialer application and the above is correct and I OTHER DOCUMENTS (specify) agree to comply with all county ordinances and st e laws reg tin building construction 2 SZ g " !'� ._ l0 3 6¢ 5 i SIGNATURE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY VALUATION /0 7 0 FLOOD HAZARD PERMIT FEE $ I47. So PLAN CHECK FEE $ -33,3, 8 g CERTIFIED BLDG ELEVATION TOTAL FEE $ /p /.3 s SCHOOL IMPACT PEN S /vst- � SPECIAL CONDITIONS DATE PERMIT ISSUED < J ZONING DISTRICT PROBLEMS WITH PERMIT TYPE OF OCCUPANCY 47 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION V. I,/ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NEEDED S.F. OF BUILDING X92_8 S.F OF LOT -- /'AO etc. MAX. HEIGHT it- - 4.., ROAD CLASS. CERTIFIED CERTIFIED BY COLORADO REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR SETBACKS FROM PROPERTY LINE: FRONT OR ENGINEER REAR RIGHT LEFT OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED a Q7 f it. d APPROVE .`a ✓ /L/f/J_____ - _ A " APPROVED: OSP k 4 1 L_ �� N DEPARTb1EN' DA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE . e/L L - - ' 77 1/ /f// 4. . ‘t C 3 _. 1 „cc- 46 . LI' ./ 76 , c .2v • / ,) 4; DC)o, - --...... . tg? / ,(‘:-p0 dc v t. K • - - , 292 /, c ,_ . . (") • •. • • 1 •‘; .-•,) Al It 2 7 .. „,,-•,._ 3 ill, ( • • • ,• S/z L /-/,4e \//EL 94 21Si) C /11). /coo c - t 7 -'1 , c - (5 1 L.-4_ ,. e cel tfc • 0 c, 72- c vr 1 / 7.7 F /C 4LIL T±IL ' or_ e x 9' 7 / 2( 3_Jc (2,_s Loy /c3 5( US X i --- Co Ari t 0 tiZ 0 4 z_ 7 6e , , 4 A. E7 piece .c ,• , , , 4 6 cti - ( c/A kr L E- , kz=t3riet.. e b I I -9 \ , n \ i t: ....\:,.\ \:-Ti• (-) : oi, Q..5/ ■ \Ii J ,, * \ i r n 5±55 -# t4 14- 1 N \ ‘. ■ \ \., 1 \ . , eCo k j\ . : II r; 4 1 ..._ ... i . ( n II 0 1 0 6 / i / ii ( 0 P ' TL ,..,, , , c PiLl—f September 10, 1992 Ci`e°‘ <`, Hayes Construction `\ yr Attn: Ron Hayes >y 432 East 1st Street S` Rifle CO 81650 -2404 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Parcel A, Christeleit Subdivision, County Road 119, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 4 462 92 Dear Ron: As requested, Chen - Northern, Inc., performed a subsoil study for design of foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you, dated August 3, 1992. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this 'report. We understand the geologic conditions and hazards at the site were evaluated by Nicholas Lampiris. Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a two -story wood frame structure over a crawl space with an attached garage. Ground floor in the garage will be slab -on- grade. Cut depths of about 2 to 6 feet are assumed. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report. )') /,1 i C i" `t' P R�l1M 1 N AW Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our site visit. The building area slopes moderately down to the north and west with about 5 to 6 feet of elevation change across the proposed building footprint as pointed out to us in the field by the client. Basalt cobbles and boulders were observed on the ground surface at the site. Large basalt boulders were observed on a small knoll above the building area. The site is vegetated with sagebrush and scrub oak. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating four exploratory pits around the building area. The Togs of the pits are presented on Figs. 1 and 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1/2 to 1 1/2 feet of topsoil, consist of silty sand with basalt fragments on the south side of the residence and basalt cobbles and boulders in a silty sand and gravel matrix on the north side of the residence. Results of swell - consolidation tests performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the silty sand indicate low to moderate compressibility under Light to moderate surcharge and a low collapse potential when wetted under constant light surcharge. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation. Three pits were also excavated in the proposed leach field area for percolation testing. The percolation test results are described below. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoils 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 pressureof 1500 psf for support of the proposed residence. 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 footings extended down to adequate natural bearing 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 45 pcf. Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to moderately 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 gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil Fb`Oersized rock. pRE Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may 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, crawl space 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, Ids than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 2 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, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. ��.AN PR 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 firsUALfeet 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 of the house to direct surface runoff around the residence. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Percolation Tests: Three percolation tests were performed west of the proposed building area on August 26, 1992 in holes excavated and soaked the previous day by the client. The test results are shown on Table II. The percolation rates ranged from 30 to 48 minutes per inch. We believe an average percolation rate of 40 minutes per inch should be suitable for septic system design. A deep pit excavated in the proposed leach field area indicated that the calcareous silty sand with basalt fragments encountered below the thin topsoil layer e extends down to a depth of at least 8 feet. No free water was observed in the deep leach field pit. Limitations: This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and ,a foundation engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the and the proposed type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not become evident until further excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. Sincerely, CHEN - NORTHERN, INC. Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. Reviewed By Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. DEH /ec Attachments lob Mo: 4 462 92 M0N PY LOG OF EXPLORATORY HOLES p Daum Prepared By DEH /C -N. , Inc. • Date 8 -25 -92 • Excavation Equipment: Koehring 266 Reviewed By 5L -N., Inc. Date 9 -10 -9z trackhoe Hole No.• 1 Elevation Hole No. 2 Elevation Location North side of building area Location South side of house Depth. Ft. Classy. Description of Materials Depth. Ft. Class. Description of Material, r■mmmmmmm 0 -1.5 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly 0 -1.5 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly sand and silt, with roots, sand and silt, with roots, medium dense, moist, dark medium dense, moist, dark brown. brown. 1.5 -5 GM -GP Cobbles and Boulders (basalt .5 - 9 SM Silty Sand with basalt fragments); in silty sand fragments; slightly clayey, and gravel matrix. calcareous, medium dense, slightly moist, white to whitish brown. Bottom of Pit at 5 feet. Bottom of Pit at 9 feet. Sample Samples 3 -5 GM Small disturbed - matrix 3.5 SM Hand Drive - silty sand with material, silty sand with basalt fragments basalt fragmetns, calcareous, medium dense, dry, whitish . 6 SM Hand Drive - silty sand with brown. basalt fragments 6 SM Small disturbed - silty sand with basalt fragments Fig. 1 • • 10b No. 4 462 92 LOG or EXPLORATORY HOLES P Datum Prepared By DEH /C -N.., Inc. • Date 8 -25 -92 Excavation Equipment: Koehring 266 Reviewed By SLP /C -N., Inc. Date 9 -10 -92 trackhoe — Hole No. 3 Elevation Hole No. 4 Elevation Location West of building in proposed Location West of building area south of Pit 3 driveway area Depth. Ft. Cla,,. Description al Material, Depth: Ft. Clot Oe,criptian al Materials 0 - 1 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly 0 -1.5 TS Topsoil; oragnic gravelly sand and silt, with roots, sand and silt, with roots, Medium dense, moist, dark medium dense, moist, dark brown. brown. • 1 - 3 GP Basalt Cobbles and Boulders .5 - 3 SM Silty Sand with basalt in silty sand and gravel fragments; slightly clayey, matrix. calcareous, medium dense, slightly moist, white to whitish brown. Bottom of Pit at 3 feet. Bottom of Pit at 3 feet. • • • • • • • • • • • Moisture Content = 13 percent Dry Unit Weight = 79 pcf • Sampleor. silty sand with basalt fragments From: Pit 2 at 3.5 feet • ag 0 • 1 • O 1 • • No movement s_ • upon wetting E 2 0 U 3 -- 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksl Moisture Content = 14 percent Dry Unit Weight = pcf Sampleof: silty sand with basalt fragments • From: Pit 2 at 6 feet • 0 0 1 • 1- 0 2 • Additional 3 compression under constant pressure due 4 to wetting 0.1 • 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 4 462 92 f Chem Northern, Inc. SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS F19. 3 - c Cv (/) Cr Ir N L4 -C-P >.E + �_ ti 3E3E O ..-.L Q O _JO vtti 'O 0 CLCL- N_ W MN- ex� w N l0 ls 3 vIL InL ci d- Q I— _1 w Z Nr Z Wl oty° CC =U I- 1- VJ 7} d 2 u2 Z W n c . 0 U F- w w .. w } 'A C — Cr S � Y 0 4 J F- �Vn N r--. O CO Q w0ZN — N • L. 2 F O _ C CO lb i ^ Q �; 1 v' V J o `a . 0 a L1.. o o 'w O < 0 } - . Q _ 02 2c o L ¢ J w ..-. 1" M GI CO rmi' r r 100 F L0 Z 12 i- co l0 u O o 1 .i el w E.' a N a — N • • Job No. 4 462 92 TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS pP �L1 Ml WATER WATER LENGTH DEPTH AT DEPTH AT DROP IN AVERAGE HOLE OF START OF END OF WATER PERCOLATION HOLE DEPTH INTERVAL INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE NO. (In.) (Min.) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Min. /Inch) P -1 48 10 10 9 1/2 1/2 9 1/2 9 1/2 9 8 1/2 1/2 81/2 81/4 1/4 8 1/4 8 1/4 8 7 1/2 1/2 7 1/2 7 1/4 1/4 7 1/4 7 1/4 7 6 3/4 1/4 35 P -2 44 10 8 7 1/2 1/2 7 1/2 7 1/4 1/4 7 1/4 7 1/4 i 7 6 3/4 1/4 6 3/4 6 1/2 1/4 61/2 61/4 1/4 6 1/4 6 1/4 6 6 - -- 6 5 3/4 1/4 48 P -3 48 10 6 1/4 5 1/2 3/4 5 1/2 5 1/2 5 41/2 1/2 4 1/2 4 1/4 1/4 4 1/4 4 1/4 Water Added 6 5 3/4 1/4 5 3/4 5 1/4 1/2 5 1/4 5 1/4 5 41/2 1/2 30 Notes: Percolation tests were performed on August 26, 1992. A deep pit excavated in the leach field area indicated silty sand with shale fragments up to boulder size down to a depth of 8 feet. • G`le'n@ `01 kern, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Scionlists 5080 Road 154 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 303945 -7458 303 945 -2363 Facsimile September 10, 1992 Hayes Construction Attn: Ron Hayes 432 East 1st Street Rifle CO 81650 -2404 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Parcel A, Christeleit Subdivision, County Road 119, Garfield County, Colorado. Job No. 4 462 92 Dear Ron: As requested, Chen - Northern, Inc., performed a subsoil study for design of foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you, dated August 3, 1992. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. We understand the geologic conditions and potential hazard impacts at the site were evaluated by Nicholas Lampiris. Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a two-story wood frame structure over a crawl space with an attached garage. Ground floor in the garage will be slab -on- grade. Cut depths of about 2 to 6 feet are assumed. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our site visit. The building area slopes moderately down to the north and west with about 5 to 6 feet of elevation change across the proposed building footprint as located in the field by the client. Basalt cobbles and boulders were observed on the ground surface at the site. Large basalt boulders were observed on a small knoll above the building area. The site is vegetated with sagebrush and scrub oak. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating four exploratory pits around the building area. The logs of the pits are presented on Figs. 1 and 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1/2 to 1 1/2 feet of topsoil, consist of silty sand with basalt fragments on the south side of the residence and basalt cobbles and boulders in a silty sand and gravel matrix on the north side of the residence. Results of swell - consolidation tests performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the silty sand indicate low to moderate compressibility under light to moderate surcharge loading and a A member of Ihelrjj$ l grrn ip nl companies ,1, Hayes Construction September.10, 1992 Page 2 low collapse potential when wetted under constant light surcharge. The laboratory testing is summarized on Table I. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation. Three shallow pits were excavated in the proposed leach field area for percolation testing. The percolation test results are described below. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoils 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 1500 psf for support of the proposed residence. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. There could be differential settlement between footings bearing on the silty sand and footings bearing on the basalt cobbles and boulders, mainly due to post - construction wetting of the subsoils. Loose and disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footings extended down to adequate natural bearing 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 45 pcf. Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to moderately 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. 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 mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may 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 crawl space areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. In shallow cut areas where there is good surface drainage, a foundation drain may not be needed. If drains are installed, they should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain Ch en @Northern, Inc. C„ so,,,ng Fn9;nnors and Cr 'enUcts Hayes Construction September '10, 1992 Page 3 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 2 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, 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 may be needed uphill of the house to direct surface runoff around the residence. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Percolation Tests: Three percolation tests were performed west of the proposed building area on August 26, 1992 in holes excavated and soaked the previous day by the client. The test results are shown on Table II. The percolation rates ranged from 30 to 48 minutes per inch. We believe an average percolation rate of 40 minutes per inch should be suitable for septic system design. A profile pit excavated in the proposed leach field area indicated that the calcareous silty sand with basalt fragments encountered below the thin topsoil layer extends to a depth of at least 8 feet. No free water was observed in the profile pit. Limitations: This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the site and the proposed type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not become evident until further excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on -site observation Ch en!Northern, Inc. Cnnsnlbnq E ngineers and Sr.onllsls IF . Hayes Construction September 10, 1992 Page 4 of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, CHEN - NORTHERN, INC. Daniel E Hardin, .E. r�o •c,∎. E. 11. % c • . ° 24443 y s . • Reviewed By s . , . • •; 4Q �,+ (9 .•2 tfr wtmmintittoo Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. DEH /ec Attachments cc: Westar, Inc. - Attn: Steve Keslar Chen Northern, Inc. Consulting Engineers and 3i.7aniisIs . )ob,NO. 4 462 92 LOG OF EXPLORATORY HOLES Datum Prepared By DEH /C -N. , Inc. Date 8 -25 -92 Excavation Equipment: Koehring 266 Reviewed By SLP /C -N., Inc. Date 9 -10 -92 trackhoe Hole No.- 1 Elevation Hole No. 2 Elevation Location North side of building area Location South side of building area Depth, Fl. Clan. Description of Materials Depth. Ft. Class. Descriptionol Materials 0 -1.5 T5 Topsoil; organic gravelly 0 -1.5 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly sand and silt, with roots, sand and silt, with roots, medium dense, moist, dark medium dense, moist, dark brown. brown. 1.5 -5 GM -GP Cobbles and Boulders (basalt .5 - 9 SM Silty Sand with basalt fragments); in silty sand fragments; slightly clayey, and gravel matrix, dense, calcareous, medium dense, slightly moist, whitish brown. slightly moist, white to whitish brown. Bottom of Pit at 5 feet. Bottom of Pit at 9 feet. No free water in pit. No free water in pit. • Sample Samples 3 -5 GM Small disturbed - matrix 3.5 SM Hand Drive - silty sand with material, silty sand with basalt fragments basalt fragme , calcareous, medium dense, dry, whitish " 6 SM Hand Drive - silty sand with brown. basalt fragments 6 SM Small disturbed - silty sand with basalt fragments - - -- — Fig. 1 r, JobNo. 4 462 92 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BOLES • • Datum Prepared By DEH /C -N.., Inc. Date 8 -25 -92 • Excavation Equipment: Koehring 266 Reviewed By SLP /C -N., Inc. Date 9 -10 -92 trackhoe Hole No. 3 Elevation Hole No. 4 Elevation Location West of building in proposed Location West of building .area south of Pit 3 driveway area • Depth, Fi. Class. Description of Materials Depth. Ft. Class. Oescription of Materials 0 - 1 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly 0 - 1.5 TS Topsoil; organic gravelly sand and silt, with roots, sand and silt, with roots, Medium dense, moist, dark medium dense, moist, dark brown. brown: 1 - 3 GM -GP Basalt Cobbles and Boulders .5 - 3 SM. Silty Sand with basalt in silty sand and gravel fragments; slightly clayey, matrix, dense, slightly calcareous, medium dense, moist, whitish brown. slightly moist, white to whitish brown. • • Bottom of Pit at 3 feet. Bottom of Pit at 3 feet. - No free water in pit. No free water in pit. • • • • • ---------- _ - — — Fig. 2 • • Moisture Content = 13 percent Dry Unit Weight = 79 pct Sample of: si lty sand with basalt fragments From: Pit 2 at 3.5 feet 0 1 0 0 1 0 No movement E 2 upon wetting 0 U 3 — 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 14 percent Dry Unit Weight = pcf Sample of: silty sand with basalt fragments From: Pit 2 at 6 feet 0 0 1 0 n • a. ai 0 2 Additional 3 compression under constant pressure due 4 to wetting 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 4 462 92 Chen °Northern, Inc. SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 C v) C V v a -C 4 d t +4C.1C ¢ K ZE3E o -.-eL - Ct op UU Cal- Q (Co Co CLC s- o o W (04 -aW- w VI V N m -C >ra CI alt -P '10 -. --1 vr--i N N -4-a. Ic .--110 vt3 v& c VtC a CO I— —J D� O W y♦ 2N LL W W O d W _G M a 8 N LL U F 0) jX W 1 - Z 0 a V r m Z w cr 1 o >- a 3_s CC L O `jam - w? N 04 n L CO a wg a s 2 Q CC I I— p op 1 a V 2 J o FL 0 lL g c., w O Li' 0 } cc J ) Q _ t26 c7, Z O c 2 G W acc? Er 0 a00 21U 'ID 2,,,, lP 4 o m 4- 01 W U M o W 6 i a 1- Z r N r � • - Job No. 4 462 92 TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS WATER WATER LENGTH DEPTH AT DEPTH AT DROP IN AVERAGE HOLE OF START OF END OF WATER PERCOLATION HOLE DEPTH INTERVAL INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE NO. (In.) (Min.) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Min. /Inch) P -1 48 10 10 9 1/2 1/2 9 1/2 9 1/2 9 8 1/2 1/2 8 1/2 8 1/4 1/4 8 1/4 8 1/4 8 7 1/2 1/2 7 1/2 7 1/4 1/4 7 1/4 7 1/4 7 6 3/4 1/4 35 P -2 44 10 8 7 1/2 1/2 7 1/2 7 1/4 1/4 7 1/4 7 1/4 7 6 3/4 1/4 6 3/4 6 1/2 1/4 6 1/2 6 1/4 1/4 6 1/4 6 1/4 6 6 6 5 3/4 1/4 48 P -3 48 10 61/4 51/2 3/4 5 1/2 5 1/2 5 4 1/2 1/2 4 1/2 4 1/4 1/4 4 1/4 4 1/4 Water Added 6 5 3/4 1/4 5 3/4 5 1/4 1/2 5 1/4 5 1/4 5 4 1/2 1/2 30 Notes: Percolation tests were performed on August 26, 1992. A deep pit excavated in the leach field area indicated silty sand with basalt fragments up to boulder size down to a depth of 8 feet. Chen Northern, Inc. Cur Ind 5denlisls i ! r 'INSPECTION WILL NOT MADE UNLESS THIS CARD IS POSITED ON THE JOB ' '° 24IIOIJR9 NOTICE REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS ' • - ` , � AR IELD COUNTY, TY, COLORAD Date Issue ..1. onerl Area Permit No..._ ng AGREEMENT .- l In consideration of a issuance of this permit, the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws an.l regulations related to the zoning, location; roost ,clion ....d erection of the I proposed structure for which this permit is granted, and farther agrees that if the above said regulations are not fully complied with in the Toning, location, erection and construction of the above described structure, the permit may then be revoked by notice from tb o c C and INIME.I IATELY BECOME MILL ANI) VOID, t ur g lnspe 1-_-___I _a4 _. ___Li 'Ai ®7'ee' Use - Address Legal Deseriglion py � ' � Conti »cloy 0 Owner R - i. I* Setbacks __Front Side. ' Side Rear; This Card Must Be Fasted So It Is Plainly Visible From the Street Until Final Insption. • INSPECTION ,RECORD Zoning d '/ .. ,. R Covering Electric -Final (by STATE inspector Footing (214/ i90 �r Numbing- nder,round �[ ` — 1 - Gas Piping Heati 14 ng Ventilation ` - C Frame 1) i -S- g3 ' ' 1. Insulation Plumbing-Rough / .. , z 4 , , ,, ?' '/ ,� Drywall �� Electric -Rough (hy STATE inspector) . o , ALL 1 ISTED ITEMS MUST BE INS .ECTED r MPROVE BEF®RE CO'VERINC. WHET R yk&ND'OR VEvGROUND i• -�G '> "ftiM1 W "S+G i t AB A !r y ,1;', rr ! 1'C r� -'f $ R ,, J, , r v TIi E � �5 O ! 2'r Phnne 945 8212: 109 St treet, r7C n 4 Slurtliousd; fi R nWood Springs, Colo. i APP.* 0 E L ' 'NOTfDES 1 OY SCAR 1 al , ® e 1 ✓ , 'i ;' 1 1 IF PISACFD OUTSIDE - COVE' WITIICLEAI{ PLASTIC - � il - - tr P ' 4 d - F H . �L� xl _ • r M r^ L' slt: • .1 t �Sq= �X`•d > ✓F d n It i 't ar � t f wf d .. p t