HomeMy WebLinkAbout02791 pn = r^4- �.���... n .. .. 1� . Y. i Nir'AT'?ITI:�� tA'i '. „V•� ..�-
\\\. , ,
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2791
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 Steven & Kathryn Quint Present Address 0020 Silverado Pr.. Aafsalt Phone_ 927 -4960
System Location 0134 Cedar Cove. Loa AmiROS Ranch. Lot 19. Fining 3 & 4, Glenwood Springs
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. 1
SYSTEM DESIGN
Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3
Required Absorption Area - See Attached
Special Setback Requirements:
Date { Inspector s' • FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION+AND APPROVAL (as installed) •
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Bbfore Covering Installation
System Installer 14) E /4(
Septic Tank Capacity /act,
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Pm pl 40,401
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface S
Absorption Area 9a7o
1 ll
X
Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name . R pony ev O.rnr to . �
Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements 1 -1 1 &' S LL •
Other 4 Roca or 7 T,n ,crt Op a `iII717ABAS
Date AO -lo Inspector gawV '''ter tit -
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS A CON&TRUCTION 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 — 8
months in )ail or both).
White - APPLICANT - Yellow - DEPARTMENT
/ I- ( �p
IN SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
•
OWNER .5-Mk _ BI £ )‘
ADDRESS a I '. - .c L d t,.,.. . d PHONE �98-07O5
CONTRACTOR nW MeR /ai
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).
LOCATION OF PROPOSF•D FACIT,ITY:
Near what City of Town - . -.! ' , • i - •f L. S ,�
n ? t
Legal Description or Address lye /7 (/.u� Al C�i��l 5//34 O� �S r++,5 %mo
WASTES TYPE: (DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: ?rN .4-lr ee5
J
Number of Bedrooms ^� Number of Persons V
( ) Garbage Grinder ( l4utomatic Washer (Dishwasher
SOTTRCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY; ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING 1 ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: fig /Rt(no. k.
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: oo? /o5
Was an effort made to connect to the System? 110
4 • IL I i r' ir•t i i• i •s h, 's(' • h•fil.,111 IM .i ,n •
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.
GROTIND CONDITIONS n // /
Depth to first Ground Water Table 4 cm47< 5� An An /PS / .3� Ad hoe �u/6
Percent Ground Slope .5% l cC/
2
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
(y) 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:
(4' 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? /ID
PERCOLATION TEST REST TT.TS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does
the Percolation Test) /�
Minutes 10 per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes /V per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes /2 per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO.
Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests:/ ubrflt -?&J k hie litoct n,« 1 i-c
mss /I _.• G..6I . . .r //
./ `J- i .. 11./ ,c l _ .id
Name, address and telephone of RP responsible for design of the system:77..4 .C-7.
>'/2 2.1K € '/ 1 -, / j lZ aicz ? /v9 913 -
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.
/07
�
Signed �� Date - �' �
PLEASE D' W • • CURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!!
3
.
TIMBERLINE ENGINEERING
STRUCI URAL CIWIL ENGINEERING • CONTRACTING *CERTIFIED ERTIffIED ENERGY DESIGN PROFESSIONAL
May 7, 1997
Garfield County Building Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: Leach Field Design
Quint Residence
Lot 19, Filing 3, Los Amigos Ranch
Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr Owens:
The location of the infiltrator system is shown the attached drawing. The Percolation testing
was done by HP Geotech, Job No. 194347. A copy of the test results is also attached. The
system must be located in the area which was tested. System specifications are listed below.
TANK SIZING
Bedrooms Persons/BR Gal /day /person Total CJPD Design Flow
3 2 75 450 675
A 1000 gallon septic tank is required.
FIELD SIZING Area = Q / 5 x Sqrt(T)
Q = 675
T =11
Area = 448 square feet.
A total of 28 infiltrator units will be required, installed in a trench configuration.
The bottom of the infiltrator must be located a minimum of four (4) feet above the existing rock
strata. Mounding may be required to get the minimum one (1) foot 'cover over the infiltrators.
If you have any questions regarding this report please call us at 970- 963 -9869.
Sin erely op �nARpG /SrF
. G, J \ °11, F h
�`" � --� P al t i
David A. Powell, PLI, o
25851 ; .;
s sr? 1 4 7Vie'
DAB POWE]LL, P.E. PHONE / FAX
P.O. BOX 631
CARBONIDALIE, CO. 81623 (970) 963 -9869
HRrwoRrlt- PAWLAC Gso76CHNICAt, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood 5pran6,. CO 81601
September 9, 1994 Pax 303 945-5454
Phone 303 945 -7985
David Bork
117 Aspen Alrpor Center
Aspen, Colorado X1611 Job No. 194 347
Subject Subsoil Study and Percolation Testing, Proposed Residence, Lot 19, Los
Amigos, Garfield County, Colorado.
Dear Mr. Bork:
As requested, Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and
percolation testing for design of foundations and septic disposal system at the subject
site. The study was conducted as verbally requested by Marty Pickett on August 9,
1994. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction
and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report.
Proposed Construction: A single family residence is proposed on the lot. The
building location and plans were not available at the time of this study and purchase of
the lot is not final. Shallow basalt rock conditions have been identified on the lot as
described in our previous letter to you dated July 12, 1994, Job No. 194 347. It is
desired to identify a septic disposal area on the lot suitable for an infiltration (leach
field) system.
When building conditions and location have been determined. we should be notified to
reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
Site Conditions: The lot is covered by a relatively thick juniper and pinon forest with
sparse sage brush, grass and weeds understory. The eastern part of the lot is less treed
and opens to a grass covered meadow further east. Most of the lot has basalt cobbles
and boulders exposed at the ground surface. The possible building and leach field area
in the eastern part of the lot has a better established topsoil layer. The ground surface
is rolling and strongly to moderately sloping down to the south - southwest with about 10
feet of elevation difference in the current study area.
Subsurface Conditions: We met with Marty Pickett at the subject site on August 9,
1994 to review the she conditions. A possible building site was identified in the middle
eastern part of the lot where less rock was exposed on the surface. The subsurface
conditions at the designated possible building site were evaluated by excavating three
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 foot of topsoil, consist of
gravel, cobble and boulder size basalt rock in a calcareous silty sand matrix. A clay
layer about 1 foot thick was encountered below the topsoil at Pit 2. 13elow the gravel
soils, the basalt rock was more solid and backhoe excavation refusal was encountered at
3 1/2 to 3 1/2 feet in the pits. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a
• reladvely undisturbed sample of the clay layer encountered at Pit 2, presented on
•
David Bork
September 9, 1994
• Page 2
Fig. 3, indicate high compressibility when wetted and loaded. t .kesults of a gradation
analysis performed on a sample of the upper gravel and cobble soil (minus 6 -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 relatively dry.
Percolation Test Results: The profile pit was excavated and 3 percolation tests were
conducted at the designated disposal area to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration
septic disposal system. The percolation teat results are presented in Table I. Based on
our findings. The tested area should be suitable for an infiltration septic disposal
system with some mounding due to the limited soil depth encountered of about 5 feet .
A civil engineer should design the disposal system.
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the general type of the proposed construction, we recommend
spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural basalt rock soil designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 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 and compressible clays encountered at the
foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the undisturbed basalt rock 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 reinfotced top and
bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10
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 40 pcf for the
on -site soil as backfill excluding rock larger than about 6 inches.
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 joint
spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on
experience and the intended slab use. A thin gravel layer may be placed as a leveling
course beneath the slabs. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with
leas than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and Tess than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve.
H.P ticnrcrH
•
David Bork
September 9, 1994
Page 3
All fill materials for support of floor slabs*hould 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) but it
may be more practical to import road base gravel.
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 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 fret in pavement and walkway areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
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 assumed 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
eenetrucden to review and menkor the implementation of our recommendations. and to
H•P GEOTECM
David Bork
September 9, 1994
. Page 4
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 - PAWt
c ?T �,,'l . INC.
1 'fir 9t------e. 0 Srld x222 -
S' :i / ri4rite/ ;
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. � ^ fkrj a + �� i
,t r6 I Oh ' AL , : q
ti, O . COL
Reviewed By:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
SLP /rr
Attachments
cc: Marty Pickett. Attorney
14-P GEn7gew
Approximate Scale
1" -60'
trNN
Cr/
srik
Ro y i
Possible
Wilding Site
Dimmed in
Report 7/12/94
11.PG.1 x194 347
Pit 1
Lot19 !
Possible
Pit 2 Building
! Site P -
P-2 Ili_
Profile � I Leach
Pit P -3 ! Field
Lot Open
Boundaries Space
1
•
Pit 1 Pit 2 Profile Pit
0 0
.10..4... rk WC =8.9 L�
..: =53 pito DD -92
a
.pr.... 5 a 5
1 L
y C
•
io
e.
LEGEND:
. - TOPSOIL; organic sandy clay, dark brown.
— 7 CLAY (CL): sandy, stiff slightly moist, brown.
: 21 BASALT GRAVEL, COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GM); silty sand matrix,
calcareous, medium dense, dry, white.
Relatively undisturbed 2 inch diameter hand driven liner sample.
r i Disturbed bulk sample.
--r- Refusal to backhoe digging.
NOTES;
1. &ploraton pits were dug on August 14,199a with a baekhas.
2. Lbcatlona of exploratory pita were measured aooroxxnstelp by pacing from ms sacs property line coma's.
3. Elevations of ■xplaratory pits were net measured end logs of the pits are drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory pit locations should be ponsidared accurate only to tM degree imoliea by tns method used.
5. No free Water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation. fluctuations in water level may oodur wish
time.
6. Laboratory Twtlp Results:
WC . Water Content 1 %1
00 . Ory Dandily loci
+4 . Pweent retained en No. it pew
-200 . Pweent passing Na. 200 sieve
1 dawned... d• Wi A K 1 ._ Dt.w 1 Flo. 2
I I Will ( _ :e-fariGW sa dy clay
1 1 111111 I mranr , Foot
I I III I 11111 H HHL
1 • • I I II IIIiI I I 1111
HHHI I I I 1 I I 1!lit
Z , I IIA II Ngd Il111111
3
a 1 Flo Movement 11 Jpon Wetting c,S i 1 11 !ill I \1 1 11111 , 1 1 i I HMI
I I 1111 I I I I � 6 1 1 1 1 lII WWI
111111111 t 1111H I! !W
I 111H 11 \ 1''''I
1 I HIM 1 I I I MI 1 WV
H HUU HHHW I I N I 111
1 11111111 HUH 111 illll
H IlIRI III HUIIH
H HIflH 1 IHU I I l 11IIi
II 1 I IIIf,I I I l IIIII
a> >
APPUED PRESSURE — ktt
u -- Yft?u.DAWI OK .....r . nn.eeni ,na"If M TFSTRFSULTS I R/. 3
i •
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE 1
.1 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 347
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 46 10 6 6 2 .
refill 7 314 6 1/2 1 114
refill 61/4 ' ' 6314 11/2
refill a 6 3/4 1 1/4
e
MN a 7 1
7 5 3/4 1 1/4
refill 6 6 3/4 1 1/4
refill 7 3/4 6 3/4 1
10
P-2 46 10 a 6 114 1 3/4
refill 9 3/4 7 3/4 1
7 3/4 6 3/4 1
MRS 8 3/4 a 3/4
8 7 114 3/4
7 1/4 6 1 1/4
refill 114 7 3/4 - 1/2
7 314 6 3/4 1 13
. w
P•9 43 10 7 5 2
refill 7 U 6 1 1/4
refill 7 6 314 1 1/4
refill 71/4 61/4 1
7 1/2 8 114 1 1/4
reRD
6 114 S 1 114
refill 7 5 9/4 1 1/4 _
1
../I 7 4 .
Note: Holes were hand dug In bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on August 15 and testa were
N - nomann ANALTIIIS . ^.^ r . 1 Sal ANALYSIS �� NIU ,. ��
IPSt1 us. 1
J 'T! r w• ..• r Trr r
>_ IV111 MO WIN AN1M.e 1/Il IYP. 'RIP spa - ]11 •A1 '>• • N 1 e •� ∎ e
.-
A pi
ITI A
Qr 1 -
r mg
A
re --» "
IS � r
_. — _.. — ... NO
0 •�..� Pr _ �• 1.1e e A7 i •.1S ICI 31.1 I.I • *2 1t1 1 V
Ai A„ A1. 1
1 WRITER OP PARTICLE 114 M MtT
lLLIERS OMVpI SAWS i
tAAYTO SILY 1 PAW ! fat IOU** Ir„VMSEI :w! 1 OOAr1M1C l
OPAVEL 53 % SANO 39 % 01LT ANO CLAY 8 'a
a
LOUD LIMIT 14 PLASTICITY tNO:X
•
SAMPLE OPSi lty sandy gravel with PROM ?it 1 2i 2 -3 Feet
cobbles
` SIEVE ANALYSIS I
NYMI IINCW ANALYSIS all a rasa OPtNINOL l
11111 ME/Ww6t 1 VI G I avow EE1NCi
wow/ 1611e1 MINN Is 44144 1 IIe1 IN 111 NW •Ile. •.n ••.1 a •N 'w a .1
4 .1
Ig
iA
III
IIY.—.--- _�
CI •r
• ..� -- . —. —• ... --�• ' .p -
•
at ser
a
r ea
A• . -
1 r
N n ...
A Ar a a AN 031 .V. .141 On See la = ale in rti at nit .rpm
I .V ONMETICfI OF PARTICLE IN MItU 4u' CRS I
11040 f O1IAYEL 40011812.1 OAT YO ELT NNE 1 uEDlw ?WSJ Plat 1 tOAA4t
OMVQ % NANO • SILT ARO CLAY I A
ULKJID LIMIT • PLASTICITY IMDa
aAMPLt OP PROM
EA. an 1' HEPW0R'11- PAWLAK I . GRAPATION TEST RESULTS , Pia. 4
