Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03185 r x M s LLL GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit N° 1,µ i .A I ' 1 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. S t Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 p ' 41 , Phone (303) 945-8212 Present Addres Phone C 0 A ; root This does not constitute 1 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT y a building or use permit. % i PROPERTY tovZ 94,6_ 01970 r ' ) Owner's Nam 11), [ 41 V ,S ) TW 2Y14 (- a A���l (� (� `' f/ ! . i S A / ( Q EZ4 ) ( n 7 1V3 � ,; System Locat � t: .„ r Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. \ ,' 10%1) 'WC K— to t IL — PI — s 866 R 4 SYSTEM DESIGN "LI (, C A C y_ f C ft 4, en- oe p — '7 S 2 O lc qe Limits t', 3 � JJ Tn EvCpeS> 499 R 2 3 i , Septic Tank c apacity (oal Ion) Other % , Percolation Rate (minutes /inch) ..; Number o Bedroom (or other) •'s P r !` ` f Required Absorption Area - See Attached t : �.e ,4 4 Special Setback Requirements: . it i I, Date _ Inspector .1 I ' '' FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) ., Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation //� , ': �J� D frA 0 0 �r S System Installer , 1 Septic Tank Capacity 1 ` J 0 G L A C r ? Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name 00 v ^' �'" ` "� ,q K 0 .,' Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface i I i i tZ ,' Absorption Area 'S T n CI C /-/ C S O r g ) 9' c 0 / f ' S Cr i Y �J nn Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name " L I f vS Cn .r a t Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements 1 1 1 ± c ' S Other r . O �} Y Y e " Date 1 .-- 1 / Inspector — , $ f / r , RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE a r% 4 r *CONDITIONS: 1 p 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter A e 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. , . F' 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- . k r nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a 4 A requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. a u ` 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an Individual sewage disposal system in a manner which Involves a knowing and material k 4 �i variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 6 , t months in jail or both). ' I W hite - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT • INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER Ss0,14 Qa€V IO ?k L3 ADDRESS -O) 2I72 G 3. PHONE qj YS -2,11 CONTRACTOR S i n Fro/ PHONE u S I ADDRESS qS - fav�n c9�r C�l 5. 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 PROPOSE FACILITY: Near what City of Town (euwCod Sp t t v■-• Size of Lot 4.c ac rt_s L e g a l Description or Address S Y S Aw 6 e 24 WASTES TYPE: X' DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: s h -Pave i I Y res id 2t1+ Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons () Garbage Grinder (t4 Automatic Washer (N4 Dishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: () WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEI If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: )• 4144 Wad DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: 2 n^' ( e Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? 4lp 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 SYSTENIPEKNOINILL NOT BE ISSUED WI THOU A SITE PLAN. GROUND CONDITIONS: Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope_ 2 TYPE OHNDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: (X) SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PTT 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? PERSOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does thi Percolation Test) 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 who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant aclmowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory an additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applies' or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with Hiles and regulations mad. information and repots submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented 1 be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department 4 health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that at fslson or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application.or revocation of any permit granted bas upon said application and in legal ction for perjury as provided by law. Signed C.- NA - ` Date PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! 3 • HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 970 945 -8454 • .March 17, 1999 Phone 970 945 -7988 , Phil Long c/o Lafarge Corporation P. 0. Drawer 368 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Job No. 199 208 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed Residence, No Name, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Long: As requested, Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and percolation test for foundation and septic disposal designs at the subject site. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you dated February 26, 1999. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single story wood frame structure over a walkout basement level. Ground floors are proposed to be slab -on- grade. Cut depths are expected to range between about 4 to 8 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. The septic disposal system is proposed to be Located about 40 feet downhill to the southeast of the proposed residence. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re- evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our field work. The ground surface in the building area slopes strongly down to the south. The terrain becomes very steep in the northern portion of the lot. There is about 10 to 12 feet of elevation difference in the building area. The lot is vegetated with scattered juniper trees, scruboak, grass and weeds. Some boulders are scattered on the ground surface. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating two exploratory pits in the building area and one profile pit in the septic disposal area at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs of the pits are presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 2 to 41/2 feet of topsoil, generally consist of relatively dense slightly silty to silty sand and gravel with cobbles and small boulders. Fractured siltstone bedrock was encountered beneath the sand and gravel in Pit 1 at a depth of 10 feet. Results of gradation analyses performed on samples of the sand and gravel (minus 5 inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Fig. 3. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation • • • Phil Long March 17, 1999 Page 2 and the soils were slightly moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular 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 caused by excavating should be moistened and compacted or removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Voids created by the removal of large rocks should be backfilled with compacted sand and gravel or concrete. 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 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 sand and gravel, excluding oversized rock, as backfill. Floor Slabs: The natural on -site granular 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 slabs -on -grade to act as leveling course. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on -site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area that Local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. • Phil Long March 17, 999 Page 3 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'h 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 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. Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on March 10, 1999 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 about 2 feet of topsoil overlying relatively dense silty sand and gravel with cobbles and small boulders. The percolation test results are presented in Table I. The percolation test results indicate an infiltration rate between 12 and 20 minutes per inch with an average of 16 minutes per inch. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. Phil Long March 17, 1999 Page 4 • Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re- evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to 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. to0 GO" Jordy Z. Adamson, r. P -9 29 ' 07 x`o j • Reviewed By: 1 0 'off\ 44 ). / 1 ... • dap 1s % j� NAB Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. JZA/ksm attachments cc: Kurtz & Associates - Attn: Brian Kurtz I LOT 3 1 LOT 2 1 I PIT 1 • PIT 2 • P 1 P 2k. PROFILE 1 OVERHEAD PIT 1 U11UTY LINES PROPERTY BOUNDARIE I (TYP) 1 -, .... - - OVERHEAD -- - - - UTILITY LINES LOT 1 I 1 ' EXI 906\6 URES STRUCT ST O APPROXIMATE SCALE 1 " =80' FRONTAGE ROAD 199 208 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK I LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. 1 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE 0 .�� ^ 0 • —" asiA0 or _ . rug 5 s 1 +4-63 55 �� I 0 .t.. • = -20W t O - „ 0,, ti Xet — 1 — 1 +4-45 1 - 200-35 10 x.t -! 10 — — . _! — tfa — 15 15 LEGEND: El TOPSOIL; silty sand and gravel, slightly organic, loose, slightly moist, dark brown to black. SAND AND GRAVEL (SM —GM); slightly silty to silty. with cobbles and small boulders, medium dense to dense, slightly moist, brown, angular to subongulor rock. , SILTSTONE BEDROCK; fractured, calcium carbonate In fractures, medium hard, brown. 4 i Disturbed bulk sample. NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on March 9, 1999 with a John Deere 690D —LC trockhoe. 2. Locations of exploratory pits were based on the building footprint as stoked by the client. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits are drown to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree Implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve —200 = Percent possing No. 200 sieve 199 208 I H E WO CHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS I Fig. 2 • I MY00.N1ETE1 MAL= 1 VrW 11NN YSIS 1 TIME KA M U.S. STANDARD SERIES I GEM b011ARE ammo 24 1*. 7 NR , . 3 - /!' 4' 11 • r'6' S' MN. 15 MN. SO a* MN. 4 YIN. 1 10N. e ao 00 - • X1 /6 0 ,M 10 PO U' 70 Z Z 40 55 ts � . � z W 3 0 0. a I eo 20 1 1 6o 10 a t da r n ' r.. .'.. .16 -]6 .76.1151 0 3 a 1n�� .001 .003 .005 .006 .0,6 .0 7 .074 .130 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS MAY TO MLT 1 POW 1 g 4 $111 mmairy 1 no ' own 1 axes GRAVEL 45 % SAND 20 % SILT AND CLAY 35 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Silty Gravel with Sand FROM:Pit 1 of 8 thru 10 Feet I NYMOMflR ANALYNr._ 1 rN YYS 1 711E REAM* U.S. STANDM O WC Cl/d1 SOUANE OPE7111165 641St 7 i61 .. 6 �/t 1' i/ A' 6' • 0' 46 MN. 1¢ MN. 60 N.1 MK 4" 1 MN. , • • 00 .: • 100 ao - .. . MaRIwrnalnoM nlm••aS 1p 30 III 1111111111111111111111111111111/4 1111111111111111111111111111111/41 4 W so 1— a. so r F 2 Z 00 U U 40 O! f 70 a EL a0 io _ iimissim iii at . ..... so 0 .0 a6 .75 115 0.0 -5 15 127 .am am .005 .000 .019 .037 .074 . 150 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS Ott, CLAY 10 SILT 1 r" r r�41 ?MAIM 1 766' M $ T.OMF 1 55551 GRAVEL 63 % SAND 28 % SILT AND CLAY 9 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Slightly Silty Sondy Gravel with FROM: Pit 2 at 4 thru 6 Feet Cobbles 199 208 I H EOT O ECHNICAL. INC. I GRADATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 3 HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. • TABLE I • PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 208 199HOLE • HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE N0. (INCHES) INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION (MIN) INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MIN./INCH) P -1 48 15 7 3/4 6 1/2 1 1/4 61/2 51/4 11/4 51/4 41/4 1 4 1/4 3 1/2 3/4 water added 7 6 1 8 5 114 3/4 5 1/4 4 1/2 3/4 4 1/2 3 3/4 3/4 20 P -2 39 15 81/4 7 11/4 7 5 1/2 1 1/2 6 1/2 4 1/4 1 1/4 4 1/4 3 1/4 1 water added 6 3/4 5 1/2 1 1/4 5 1/2 4 1/2 1 4 112 3 1/2 1 31/2 21/2 1 15 P -3 48 15 7 114 6 1 1/4 6 4-3/4 1 1/4 4 3/4 3 1/2 1 1/4 31/2 2 11/2 water added 6 1/2 5 1/2 1 5 1/2 4 1/4 1 1/4 41/4 3 11/4 3 1 3/4 1 1/4 12 1 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on March 9, 1999. Percolation tests were conducted on March 10, 1999. The average percolation rate was based on the last three readings of each test. 97 ✓ 3