HomeMy WebLinkAbout03154 i 0 .. to
O /
e
l 1 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit N2 3 4 ;
4 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. ';
G lenwood Springs, Colorado 81807 i•.
i Phone (303) 945 -8212 7 i
f F This does not constitute 1 L
I t INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PER a building or use permit. e r
;4 y
P ROPERTY
4
II q p �� L /65 �'R 1 3 s
s Name
. t,sVb °I 9V7 -� $:
Owner � �J � l I�V� Present Address Phone ^ "
'/ � q / t
,• } System Location a(./✓�lr' Aoa d / 0 I Cirri tk.102, n 3pk. L (1 V6617 ' k Lo' /A toms ...S46d %vey.� lJ
j 7. Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. .
0 ROCK- L CA C (f C i ECl9 20 �6 6 SS R t
1, SYSTEM DESIGN t� C( AC h- o A FA al_ Y�C� 9 7 1 l P r CC C
( ' ,' d T A C'UCLIe 3 31,st (d (I S '
0 0 S eptic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other
imi
1 ■ - 7 Percolation Rate (minutes/Inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 8 '
Required Absorption Area - See Attached
ii i
f Special Setback Requirements: '
/ 1 (� p N
F i D S` l � l -9q 1 — Inspector A /L k D s"
V ∎
i F FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed)
is
Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation k
t t G 4-14 £' "—
System Installer •
' + Septic Tank Capacity ' 1 6 - 1
} ° 0 0 v Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name 0 `
• 'i
Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface v- 1
i1 1 it
i
I! Absorption Area ` , & )`, a t '
_ it'd,
Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name 3 / 0 Q/( /= U S g c,. ii
,j d Adequate compliance w County and State regulations /requirements t
}
f
•, ! Other
-
t 1 Date v — I nspector a r
6 4 }
7 RE TAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE S t
i r •CONDITIONS: i I'
i 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter t i !
25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. • t
!; 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- I'"
r i nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a c S.
t requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit.
ti, 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual seWage disposal system ine manner which Involves aknowing and material #';
t variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine -8 q f
i months In jail or both). .I
'� a White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION
OWNER Y317' L0O(4 rt •
ADDRESS /& 45 et ID 9 • PHONE 9W- ` 0 S
CONTRACTOR at Atectn/!er /owxer•
ADDRESS E G-$ ,4 -fjoW' PHONE 9`
PERMIT REQUEST FOR (h 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 67"/Y6 l/,ros Size of Lot c Of✓' ACE .
Legal Description or Address 4f ht 5 /l ihtfr-f1CO5
WASTES TYPE: (4—DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE
BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: -5271 41 ,?1 161 (,eusi
Number of Bedrooms _ J Number of Persons /!/4
(14 Garbage Grinder ('utomatic Washer ( tshwasher
SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( ) WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: te r 72iri li
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: *G 9a5s-
Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? /ff.
A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following 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. See f P.
GROUND CONDITIONS: �/
Depth to first Ground Water Table //ft
Percent Ground Slope /— 3
2
ir
•
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
( 2..)/IEPTIC 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:
( c'ICBSORPTION 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?
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the
Percolation Test) S L R 4 H ?
Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _
Name, address and telephone of RPE ho made soil absorption tests:
Ml'v?tt4t toa' <—
Name, address and telepho a of RPE responsible for design of the system:
Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and
additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant
or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is
subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made,
information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to
be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of
health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any
falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based
upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Signed S / Date ��q/ //1
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! `
3
P C a ( / V ?
I ; ?#ƒ L /
a= }
CL Cr n
CD f @ � \
/
° •-t r 0
/ (
/
IA
CD
E c
/ ��
"a
\ / �"
2 5 R, 66'
\ \
] } 0
k ° \ }5 R
r ��E ƒ \
R @gam
\ k 2}[
$ k 1 \
j\k \
/ ; { ® N
ilk 4& {( / l
F R Ft
R � � k Cg
% ) • ƒ it fr
w 4 B. .
� \
/ c
�
9 )(
� �/
4::', ± ®. s-
5020 Road 154
11- PAWLAd< �iliUll'CIINICA4, INC. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
lax 970 945 -8454
Phone 970 945 -7988
August 14, 1998
Brent and Roxanne Lough
1655 County Road 109 Job No. 198 538
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot A -2, Lough Subdivision, A subdivision of Parcel A of
Colohan Exemption, County Road 109, Garfield County, Colorado.
Dear Mr. And Mrs. Lough:
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 proposal for geotechnical engineering services to
you dated July 15, 1998. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed development will be a single family residence
located in the building envelope as shown on Fig. 1. There were no building plans at
the time of our study. Foundation loadings for a wood frame residence typical of the
area are assumed to be relatively light. Cut depths for the residence are assumed to be
up to one level, about 10 feet. The septic disposal system is proposed to be located
downhill from the residence.
When building conditions and foundation loadings have been developed, we should be
notified to re- evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
Site Conditions: Lot A -2 is located along the west side of County Road 109 about 1' /2
miles south of its Junction with Road 154. The ground surface in the building area
slopes strongly down to the east at grades of 10 to 15 %. Further to the west is a steep
shale bluff of Eagle Valley Evaporite. Several small dry drainages that originate from
the steep slope cross the area. The lot is vegetated with grass and sage with juniper and
pinion trees in the higher elevation above the lot.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
observing two exploratory pits in the general 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 ' foot of topsoil,
consist of mixed silt and sand with variable gravel content. Results of consolidation
testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the silt soils, presented on
Figs. 3 & 4, indicate relatively low compressibility under existing low moisture
constant load) light
hen wetted. a Results (settlement
sof a gradation analysis performed on samples of
•
Brent and Roxanne Lough
August 14, 1998
Page 2
the more gravelly soils (minus 3 inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on
Fig. 5. No free water was observed in the pits and the soils were relatively dry.
Geologic Conditions: The site is underlain by Pennsylvanian Age Eagle Valley
Evaporite bedrock. The Evaporite contains gypsum deposits and dissolution of the
gypsum under certain conditions can cause sinkholes and localized areas of subsidence.
Sinkholes were not observed in the immediate area of the subject lot nor were
indications of voids encountered in the exploration pits. Based on our present
knowledge of the site, it cannot be said for certain that sinkholes will not develop.
However, in our opinion, the risk of ground subsidence throughout the service life of
the project is low.
The site is located on a strongly sloping bench formed by coalescing debris fan deposits
from relatively small ephemeral drainages. Due to their small size, the potential for
debris flow from the steep slope located to the west of Lot A -2 is considered low but the
owner should be made aware of the potential. Surface drainage and grading design
typically used for this type of terrain should be provided to direct potential runoff
around the development.
Foundation Recommendations: The subsoils encountered at the site are highly
compressible when wetted and could result in building settlement and distress.
Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of
the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil and
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 800 psf can be used for support of the
proposed residence. The magnitude of post- construction differential settlement will
depend on the depth and extent of wetting but could easily be 3 inches or more.
Precautions should be taken to prevent wetting below the structure. The foundation
should consist of continuous heavily reinforced and interconnected foundation walls ,
rather than isolated column pads to help limit the effects of some differential settlement.
Footings should be a minimum width of 20 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for
columns. Loose disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the
excavation should be removed to expose the undisturbed natural soils. The exposed
subgrade should then be moistened and compacted. Two to 3 feet of on -site soil
compacted to at least 95% standard Proctor density could be provided below the footing
bearing level to further help reduce the settlement risk. 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 heavily reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 15 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
H -P GEOTECH
•
/ Brent and Roxanne Lough
August 14, 1998
Page 3
soil as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. The soils could settle when wetted, similar
to that described above. To reduce the effects of some differential settlement, 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 Tess 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.
Underdrairt System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration,
it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop
during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring
runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade construction, such
as retaining walls and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic
pressure buildup by an underdrain system. Shallow crawlspace area should not need an
underdrain provided there is proper backfill placement and surface slope away from the
building.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining
granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the
No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of
2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1' feet deep. An impervious
membrane such as 20 or 30 PVC should be placed beneath the drain gravel in a trough
shape and attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing
soils.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
H -P GEOTECH
•
Brent and Roxanne Lough
August 14, 1998
Page 4
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 and berm should be provided uphill to
direct storm water and site 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. Preferably, xeriscape should be used to
limit potential wetting due to irrigation.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on August 7, 1998 to evaluate
the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile pit and
three percolation holes were dug at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The test holes
(nominal 12 inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow
backhoe pits and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in
the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and
consist of gravelly silt and sand. The percolation test results are presented in Table I1.
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the
tested area should be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system.
Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the
locations indicated on Fig. 1, the 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.
H -P GEOTECH
'
Brent and Roxanne Lough
August 14, 1998
Page 5
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations
presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
s ,
tn. , v):
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. 1 ti 2 2 2 S* j
1 � OF CO
OQ �
attachments
cc: Land Design Partnership - Attn: Ron Liston
I-I-P GEOTECH
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1 " =50'
7
LOT A -1 LOT
BOUNDARIES
------ -. -6105
ACCESS
EASEMENT /
I \ 6100
I \ -6100
I I N
� 1
J �� r '� ■ BUILDING 1
I / ( PIT 2 ENVELOPE --...14
7� 6095
6100 / I \ �i�
/.r 1
/ I 1 1 6090
�� ' // �\ LOT A -2 1
6095 I ���
/ _
_���/ 1 P IT 1 1
6090 I
I / P 3 1
PROFILE
� I \\ PROFILE
_ i 6085
6085 I 1 P 2 1
6080 I --- 1 - 6080
- L- -- _ =� - = / i I.'" ...
6075_ ..... 1.................. 1.......J - - 6075
COUNTY ROAD 109
198 538
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 1
GEOTECH NICAL1
HE - - AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
TECH INC. NC.
PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT
ELEV. = 6088' ELEV. = 6098' ELEV. = 6086'
0
0 gim.05 riOn ��
M
�� WC =2.8 m pD -82 000 V
u - 200 =82 /
we =z.o we =z.3 0
5
p u +4-aa pp.os
y _ - 200=27 04.1 - 200 =78 Q
O +4 54 / - i
_ _ 200=27
10
10
LEGEND:
IMP TOPSOIL; sandy silt, organic, medium stiff to stiff, slightly moist, dark brown.
1/
i
SILT (ML): sandy, gravelly, medium stiff, slightly moist. light brown.
SAND AND SILT (SM —ML); gravelly, medium stiff, slightly moist, light brown, angular rock fragments.
GRAVEL AND SAND (GM —SM); silty, medium dense, slightly moist, light brown.
•
,
ISI 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample.
, Disturbed bulk sample.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were observed on August 6 and 7, 1998 with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features on the site
plan provided. Ian rovided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were obtained by interplolation between contours on the site p P
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevotions should be considered accurate only to the degree
implied by the method used. pit logs represent the approximate
5 bounldaries between material types and t transitions t
may be gradual.
6. No free water was observed in the pits.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( 7. )
DD = Dry Density ( pcf )
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
NU
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
� 4 1111117111111111)P1 resision 11111111
0 IP IS 1111111
mull1111 11111 1111111
F 68 1111111111111111 NMI 1111111
1011111111111111111 1111111111 IWO
12 1111111111111111 11111111111 1111111
14 111111111111111111111
16 111111111111111111111111
18 111111111111111110111
100
198 536 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
k'
111[Sr:"ere:s:?12lee?ct PP ecrfc e n t
0 ee mum
2 umasum, 1111111
inmon immintession 111111
nummi min g num
i .
lowomosinomm omm
12immommul 1111111 11111111
N111111111111 111111111111N111111111
1111111111111111 1111111111111111111
1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
I I SIEVE ANALYSIS ' I
XYpROMETai ANALYSIS (],EAR = ARE OPENINGS
•
T9E READINGS U.S STANDARD SERIES
44 NR 7 HR 4 34'3 4' 11 2' J • S'9 S'
451191. 15 MM. 6o MIN.19 MW. 4 YIN. 1 MIN, 200 00 • 0 D 6 6 100
1 10
so 90 �� 20
�� - --- ■• — 30 ' LIJ
C.7 70 .� P - �� 111∎ � - — •
Z �� ___� —��- 40 1—
h < ommimm• 'mammas mom.
� --- = W ix
go
41 mos NINON I■INIM CL
0- So - - CC��� ao INIMM• ��� Sim ESN OINNS
MS C sus 20 1 r= -- -= — 0 90 IMMO o -C C
0D
��� .300 .600 1.16 x .36 4.ffi 0.5 19.0 37.5 ]62 127
0
.001 .002 .005 .009 .m9 .037 . DI .150
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS ��
CLAY TO SILT FINE .
a
a� '
GRAVEL 44 %
SAND 29 7. SILT AND CLAY 27 7.
LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX %
FROM: Pit 1 at 4 to 6 Feet
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sondy Gravel —
H ' OM +' ANAL CLEAR SQUARE OPINING!
U.5. STANDARD SERIES
19E READINGS U.5. 9'
6 6 5 3 1 x C 11 2' Y .� 0
24 HR. 7 HR -' �'����'��
45 1141.16 MN. 60 1111.19 104. 4 MIN. 1 MN. 200 00 ma . mms... •i�� ••.m.
INS44mmomms smog 100 ��..�� sm. — .��_� ° — 10
00 =. •S•.I WMo � ........ 20 0
90 o •■ s OIMISi - ■ IMMIM .� 30 W
IS MIS SIIMNE IV/ISM ISNMINI ••■• 11•1111•
INSOMISMOSII MONO •�� - IIMIIIII
Z °� -C 's ss - W SMO MIME IMIIIMM 7 60 ' = == • .s...... 0••••• 60 Z
_ _ _ _
W __ ..s�..��� = awase.� .
OSSImumus �omm. a 00
�_� - -- E Ism
t0 SIs_ •s��� �.���� -- - 100 UM.
-� , 300 .600 1 .19 136 4.76 9. 19.0 37.5 76.2 127ss 203
0
.001 .002 .006 .009 .019 .037 .074 .150
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES
CLAY TO SILT ... —'
.i i.Iffxcr11.1.1•In -eIll
GRAVEL 54 %
SAND 19 % SILT AND CLAY 27 %
LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX %
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Gravel
FROM: Pit 2 of 7 to 8 Feet
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5
198 538
GEOTECHNIC AL. INC.
M
Ln
03
0)
r
N
O g > m
2 � ;12
O >
T N T
V to
C H C
CO
N u, 0 0
F_ N fih
1 H
J 4
Q
N OP:
Z �
F-
w F
W _ ° iii
C7 JO
Y Q ¢ Q
J m g co N o. N
4 3 t 7 $
Q LL
a O
cn
2 g
CL CP 1 J
LU xi- to
$ (-4 0)
yy W
1 of O M
� N N N
co co
N n
g
N
/ HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 198 538
- AVERAGE
HOLE NO. HOLE DE S) INTERVAL AT START OF WATER
AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION
(INCHES) INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL
(MIN)
(INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MIN.IIN
P-1 51
15 131/4 71/4 6
10 7 1/4 5 1/2 1 3/4
5 refill 12 1/4 10 1/4 2
10 1/4 8 3/4 1 1/2
MIMI 7 1/2 1 1/4
,
7 1/2 6 112 1
refill 101/2 91/4 1 1/4
® g 1 114 5
111.111111.111 1
15
10 3/4 6 3/4 4
10 INIMIll 4 1l4 2 112
10 1
5 refill
10 11111M 1 114
ia
SWIM 3/4
SISIMI
®®�
15 �S®
10
10 314
5 refill Mill MI1M
10 314 11111M 1 112
Sa
' tte e
inlaria
Note: Percolation holes were dug and soaked on August 6, 1998. The percolation tests were conducted on
August 7, 1998.