HomeMy WebLinkAbout02642 •
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2642
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 Chris Aronson S Terry �Wn� cgddress 1220 Coborado Ave., G. S Phone 945 -8926
System Location 0271 Los Amigos Drive, Los Amigos Ranch, Lot 24, Glenwood Springs
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.
SYSTEM DESIGN
JZ V 0 Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
( it
1.l MI/. /. Percolation Rate (minutes /inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 4
Required Absorption Area - See Attached f-1 o 3
Special Setback Requirements:
Date _4_1— _4,_6 7 Zj Inspector
FINAL j SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
System Installer_ K ) 'I )7 IA le k (,N
Septic Tank Capacity 1 ) S O
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name ?Cr" t hl_D
%J E: S
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface
Absorption Area L4 ( Li c
Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name / Al (f t 7 11 A 7 ^r O )1 S
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations /requirements
Other Q / /�//�
Date I) — 2 C -9 v Inspector / /
•
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE
•CONDITIONS: - .-
1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter
25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984.
2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con-
nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a
requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit.
3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which Involves a knowing and material
variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine —6
months in jail or both).
White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT
•
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER
41/4121 Ac
ADDRESS 22 COL -40! At ' 0 1 QvV PHONE ` (o
i
CONTRACTOR ?t• -rA7a 3 TtC)I "
ADDRESS Cdr 'A-1Q•i&V 'b PHONE °) 1C -77S
PERMIT REQUEST FOR ptc 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 COUNTY
Near what City or Town Y , Y"- -2 ' )N�-- Size of Lot 2- ( 17 /- c. )WM.0
Legal Description or Address 1....61 — J1' Loc_ ,A1 P11!--.0e ` fin >L-A � V\3>1 , 1015. \0
f%7-- ¶ \ ts& ' %'
WASTES TYPE: (c) DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
�( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERV ' - • PE: ' tJ _ 6te51 t. ' A ►_ 4,
Number of Bedrooms 9' Number of Persons Gt'
( Garbage Grinder ( Automatic Washer p4 Dishwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
Give depth of all wells within 180 feet of system:
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier
GROUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to bedrock:
Depth to first Ground Water Table
Percent Ground Slope
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM:
Was an effort made to connect to community system? ( ) YES ( ) NO
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
(yet 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 , 1
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? C>
2
•
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer)
Minutes per inch in hole No. I Minutes per inch in hole No. 3
Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole No.
Nance, a dress and tele Atone of RPE . to made soil absorption tests F:�� �1 L ' 1 L A\?
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 purposes 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
adopted under Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. 1973, as amended. The undersigned hereby certifies that all statements
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 hest 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. 1 further
understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any
permit grant- . ul on said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Signed 44.41.10/4 � Date 6•IC- 1 w
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
't
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNLCAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
September 6, 1994 Fax 303945 -8454
Phone 303 945 -7988
Terry Ewbank and Chris Aronson
1328 Grand Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job. No. 194 322
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 24, Los Amigos, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Terry and Chris:
As requested, Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechr
�'.- / � / t. /74,
design of foundations and septic disposal
conducted in accordance with our agreeml
you dated June 27, 1994. The data obtair
proposed construction and subsurface con
report. Chen - Northern previously conduc
geology report and reported their results i
Proposed Construction: The proposed r
construction located as shown on Fig. 1. 1
space in the residence and slab -on -grade i
range between about 3 to 5 feet. Foundal •e
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 property was undeveloped and covered with a moderately thick
pinon and juniper forest with an understory of sparse grass and weeds. The ground
surface in the building area is strong to moderately sloping down to the southwest with
up to about 8 feet of elevation difference across the building site. Basalt rocks are
scattered across the ground surface. A basalt rock ridge is located just above the
building site. The cul -de -sac road at the east side of the lot and a driveway access along
the south property line were gravel surfaced.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the building site were evaluated
by excavating two exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The
logs of the pits are presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1/2
foot of topsoil, consist of calcareous silty clay with occasional gravel and cobble size
basalt rock. At Pit 1, basalt gravels, cobbles and boulders were encountered at 6 feet in
a calcareous silty clay matrix. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a
relatively undisturbed sample of the silty clay, presented on Fig. 3, indicate low
compressibility under existing low moisture conditions, and low collapse potential
(settlement under constant load) and moderate compressibility when wetted and loaded.
Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of clay matrix and gravel (minus
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
September 6, 1994 Fax 303 945 -8454
Phone 303 945 -7988
Terry Ewbank and Chris Aronson
1328 Grand Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job. No. 194 322
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 24, Los Amigos, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Terry and Chris:
As requested, Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for
design of foundations and septic disposal system at the subject site. The study was
conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to
you dated June 27, 1994. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report. Chen - Northern previously conducted percolation testing and a summary
geology report and reported their results in a letter dated July 2, 1992.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be single story wood frame
construction located as shown on Fig. 1. Ground floor will be structural above crawl
space in the residence and slab -on -grade in the garage. 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.
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 property was undeveloped and covered with a moderately thick
pinon and juniper forest with an understory of sparse grass and weeds. The ground
surface in the building area is strong to moderately sloping down to the southwest with
up to about 8 feet of elevation difference across the building site. Basalt rocks are
scattered across the ground surface. A basalt rock ridge is located just above the
building site. The cul -de -sac road at the east side of the lot and a driveway access along
the south property line were gravel surfaced.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the building site were evaluated
by excavating two exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The
logs of' the pits are presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1/2
foot of topsoil, consist of calcareous silty clay with occasional gravel and cobble size
basalt rock. At Pit 1, basalt gravels, cobbles and boulders were encountered at 6 feet in
a calcareous silty clay matrix. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a
relatively undisturbed sample of the silty clay, presented on Fig. 3, indicate low
compressibility under existing low moisture conditions, and low collapse potential
(settlement under constant load) and moderate compressibility when wetted and loaded.
Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of clay matrix and gravel (minus
Terry Ewbank and Chris Aronson
September 6, 1994
Page 2
3 -inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Fig. 4. No free water was
observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist. A
previous pit excavated on the site by Chen - Northern (refer to Fig. 1) encountered basalt
rock and clay soils to a depth of 8 feet.
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 1500 psf for support of the proposed residence. The clay soils tend to
compress when wetted and there could be some post construction settlement depending
on any wetting of the bearing soils. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches
for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose and disturbed soils at the
foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. It may be more practical
to moisten and compact the subgrade and fill voids from rock removal with compacted
base course. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their
bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below
the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be
reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported
length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should be
designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at
least 50 pcf for the on -site soil as backfill, excluding oversized rock.
Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. There may be some potential for settlement
due to wetting of the subsoils. 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 sand and gravel should be placed
beneath interior slabs for support. This material should consist of minus 2 -inch
aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% 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.
H -P GEOTECH
Terry Ewbank and Chris Aronson
September 6, 1994
Page 3
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. Foundation wall backfill should consists 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.
Percolation Testing: A profile pit and three percolation holes were dug and
percolation tests were performed to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic
disposal system. The subsoil profile encountered in the designated area is shown on
Fig. 2 and the test results are presented in Table II. Based on our findings, the tested
area is suitable for an infiltration septic disposal system.
Limitations: This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
other 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
H -P GEOTECH
Terry Ewbank and Chris Aronson
September 6, 1994
Page 4
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 soil engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK _!. CHNICAL, INC.
- \STE •.
f� F O • •
y w 1 5222 1%1;
Steven L. Pawlak, • F .tic, 7 y. t ;
Reviewed By: gip, •..•••• �P
• S OF Get-
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
SLP /rr
Attachments
cc: Invision Company - Attn: Les Cavada
H -P GEOTECH
– – — \ Lot 25
Lot 24
\III■
i
Building j Cui de sac
Lot 23 Site
Lot 22
I
Property Line
i
I
Approximate Scale
1" = 50'
G&G
------------
C•84-9.______ Basalt Rock Ridge 0
1 _\
640
(b ° �
Proposed
Residence
i Pit 2
. 9 "' • Pit 1 — 6.3.3o
Garage
0 P2 Chen - Northern ;
July 2, 1992
I P-3 a P -2 — b800
i$ /o P -1 9
Profile
I -- -,Pit
1 � Survey Pin
•8/o
194 322 0RT14 I Location of Exploratory Pits Fig. 1
0E01EOINICAL, Inc. and Percolation Test Holes
Pit 1 Pit 2 Profile Pit
31= 6828' 31 =6820' 31 =6816'
0 P 0
WC -12.5
- _ OD =76 w
LU al
�
— 5 1 41C =8.4 / 5�
_ 'O -- i +4 =22 / i —
,Lu _ A 200 =34 ` : "11 — W
10 10
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; organic silty clay with basalt gravel and cobble size rock.
✓ I
/l CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, slightly gravelly, occasional basalt cobbles, stiff, .
•
, slightly moist, light brown /white, low plasticity, calcareous.
:e. BASALT GRAVELS, COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GC); sandy clay matrix,
0k,. medium dense, slightly moist, light brown, calcareous.
Relatively undisturbed 2" diameter hand driven liner sample. •
•
I Disturbed bulk sample.
'
m Practical refusal to digging with Cat 426 backhoe.
i
NOTES:
1. The exploratory pits were dug on July 18, 1994 with a Cat 426 rubber tired backhoe.
2. Locations of the exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from the features
shown on the site plan provided by Les Cavada.
3. Elevations of the exploratory pits were obtained by interpolation between contours on the
site plan provided and checked by hand level.
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by the method used.
( 5. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation. Fluctuation in water level
may occur with time.
6. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Moisture Content ( %)
DD = Dry Density
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
194 322 H ORTH PAWLAK Logs of Exploratory Pits Fig. 2
SAL, Inc.
. ,
Moisture content • 12.5 Prow
Dry Unit %tight • 76 pcf
samos°t Sandy Silty Clay
From: Pit 1 at 3 feet
0
s
2
--------- Compression
ac Upon Wetting
3
n
N
4
0_
0
LL
5 i
;1 II 1
I 1 1
.,
I
';I ' I1 I • 1 it
1II I I i i t I
1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 t 11 1 1 l ,
0.7 1.0 10 ice
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
194 322 HEPWORTH- PAWLAK SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Fp 3
GEOTECHNICAL, int
•
I NVOROMETEn ANALYSIS 1 SIEVE ANALYSIS
1IME READINGS U.S. 51 ANUAIIU SEIIIFS I CLEAN $UUAIIE UVENINUS NA 7 1411. , •1
15 MIN. 90 MIN. 19 M 70
INA MIN. 1 MIN. '0 '11M! •50 ' ,0'30 •19
S N 'a '4 K' n V4 S TT T
500 —_= ==== =•■•■•∎• = �� 0
∎ ∎ ∎∎rte ∎•∎� ∎�
---� _Es. nIENNr�rr.r
90 simnrass _ r�isOv= 20
70.E =�. � ACC- �C' "sC �� ∎∎ =�0
2 0 0 — — — — -� r at
_ 4
N _
.t __ 9 ! Ii = =a= W 50 1 ∎�I.7 - , =MeM eMI• 59
W W oo �� AD
_ = e l
6. �� s e __ N
C = . =� _ .. �� X 11 _ 7° � �I—
� \ /— � 1
4■1 •∎•101 r� -- ^ i�7�r� 10
0Mr ..w •.� Mali�ri. . aiNDW.i7�r.. s 100
.001 .002 .005 .009 an .03/ .014 .149 29/ .] 500 1.19 2 030 4.70 9.52 19.1 30.1. 762 127. 700
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
SANG I GRAM COOOLES
CLAY TO SILT FINE j MEDIUM ICOARSE I FINE j COARSE
GRAVEL 22 % SAND 44 % SILT AND CLAY 34%
LIOUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDX %
-
SAMPLE OF Sandy Clay and Gravel FROM Pit 1 @ 7- 8 Feet
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
1 SIEVE ANALYSIS
LIME READINGS I U.S. 3IANIIAIIU SEIIIE$ I CLEAR SOUNIE OPENINGS
24 1415. 7 HR. • 10
15 MIN 15 MIN 00 MIN. 19 MIN M MIN I MIN. •2fl 900 '511 411'30 • 1 'A •4 %_ t' 1%' S • TTY'
100 — _ —1 ♦ .- ��—" ^f
90 i.:,..r F�rn�R C� 1 10
t�
� �__ I 1 1 1
—} 120
]II r -1 —4.- [--4--' 1
0 r I 1 t � . l.0'S
in 1 1— _ �- ! — 1 4
N --��� I1
a. 50aa�� —.- _!5116
W i'M.... rMIR W
30 _
l9 � 90
aim 0 ����.T.. 1 r �� '• . ma 100
=I .007 .005 .000 9 .019 6 RT7 . .074 .149 .297 .2 590 1.19 2.0 • 426 9.52 19.1 J61 703 12'5
1 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS (`
CLAY TO SILT I FINE I SAND
MEOIUM ICOnGSEf PINE OR j ECOARSE COBBLES
GRAVEL % SAND % SILT AND CLAY %
LIOUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX %
SAMPLE OF FROM
194 322 HE ?WORTH- PAWLAK GRADATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 4
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
CV _
CO co
\ 0§ ._
7
( �is / \ /
/ / /
CO CO CO
CA CO cn
at
k $|§�
/ §
2 1- §§§«
2 2
U.1
4
R
ij
k §
$ƒ
.i< \ ..) §k /
O. ±
\ < CC 0
; �� .
CL
_ \ | q
P g§ I (0
z0 § LO
it
■|! Cr) / in
9
2 k — 04
.,
•
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II •
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 322
•
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHESI• INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION
(MIN) INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE
(INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MIN /INCH)
P -1 61 15 8 61/2 1 1/2
6 1/2 5 3/4 3/4
5 3/4 4 3/4 1
refill 7 3/4 6 3/4 1
6 3/4 5 3/4 1
20
5 3/4 5 3/4
P -2 45 15 81/4 63/4 1 1/2
6 3/4 5 3/4 1
refill 7 3/4 6 3/4 1
6 3/4 6 3/4 1
refill 71/2 61/2 1
20
6 1/2 5 3/4 3/4
P -3 50 15 91/4 61/2 23/4
6 1/2 5 1 1/2
refill 9 61/2 21/2
6 1/2 4 3/4 1 3/4
refill 8 1/2 6 1/2 2
F 1/2 4 3/4 1 3/4
- 9 I
Note: Holes were dug and soaked on July 18 and tests were performed on July 19, 1994.
d
0 f lb. 33
3 ,