HomeMy WebLinkAboutSummit Course at Cordillera Hole 5 - 210716114001 - 1980-00ISINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, CO 81631
Telephone: (970) 328-8755
COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1980-00 BP NO. 13134
OWNER: KENSINGTON PARTNERS PHONE: 970-390-5030
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 988 EDWARDS CO 81632
APPLICANT: CHRIS WILLIAMS PHONE: 970-328-6368
SYSTEM LOCATION: 1475 PINE MARTEN WAY CORDILLERA GOLF COURSE, COMFORT STATION #1 TAX PARCEL NO:
LICENSED INSTALLER: SPIEGEL CONSTRUCTION, CHRIS SPIEGEL LICENSE NO.20-00 PHONE: 970-524-7148
DESIGN ENGINEER: JOHNSON KUNKLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC., CHRIS WILLIAMS PHONE NO. 970-328-6368
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A COMMERCIAL RESTROOM FACILITY
1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK, 1674 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA, VIA 54 STANDARD INFILTRATOR UNITS AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: INSTALL AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN DATED 5/9/00. RAKE ALL TRENCH SURFACES TO PREVENT THE SMEARING OF THE
SOILS. BE SURE TO MAINTAIN 50 FEET SET BACK TO ALL ADJACENT WETLAND AREAS. ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL INSPECTION. DO
NOT BACK FILL ANY PART OF THE INSTALLATION UNTIL THE ENGINEER HAS INSPECTED AND APPROVED IT. BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SEPTIC SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL DATE: JUNE 6, 2000
CONDITIONS:
1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS,
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GRANTED IN 25-10-104, 1973, AS AMENDED.
2. THIS PERMIT IS VALID ONLY FOR CONNECTION TO STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE FULLY COMPLIED WITH COUNTY ZONING AND BUILDING
REQUIREMENTS. CONNECTION TO, OR USE WITH ANY DWELLING OR STRUCTURE NOT APPROVED BY THE ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS SHALL
AUTOMATICALLY BE A VIOLATION OF A REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT, AND WILL RESULT IN BOTH LEGAL ACTION AND REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT.
3. CHAPTER IV, SECTION 4.03.29 REQUIRES ANY PERSON WHO CONSTRUCTS, ALTERS OR INSTALLS AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO
BE LICENSED.
FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM (TO BE COMPLETED BY INSPECTOR):
NO SYSTEM SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS UNTIL THE SYSTEM
IS APPROVED PRIOR TO COVERING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSTEM.
INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: 1674 SQUAREFEET(VIA 54 HD-10 INFILTRATOR UNITS )
INSTALLED CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK: 1000 GALLONS IS LOCATED DEGREES AND @20 FEET INCHES
FROM THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING SEE AS —BUILT DRAWING FOR SYSTEM COMPONENT LOCATIONS
COMMENTS: ENGINEER FINAL CERTIFICATION AND AS —BUILT DRAWING RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 14, 2000.
ANY ITEM NOT MEETING REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CORRECTED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS
COMPLETED.
/�,(�y
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL/ Ill.%, GL�•l i. Jrr m= DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2000(`
Incomplete Applications Will NOT Be Accepted
t (Site Plan MUST be attached)
I SDS Permit # I l�y V
Building Permit # 13/?
APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY
P. 0. BOX 179
EAGLE, CO 81631
328-8755/927-3823 (E1 Jebel)
**************************************************************************
* FEE SCHEDULE
* PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00
* SIZING AND SITE VISIT.FEE $85.00 (WHEN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SIZES THE
* SYSTEM USING YOUR SOILS REPORT)
* MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER"
**************************************************************************
PROPERTY OWNER:2i�S�na,���"�`���
MAILING ADDRESS: O, P7aX �8� i E�w�� S3/G�z PHONE:
APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: C ��t.�S �� l�i cyw• S PHONE:
LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: ��; ey 5 �`F +cr., PHONE: 5 Z " -7l q )
COMPANY/DBA:T� Y>' ��^s'u�^ ADDRESS: ® Z�o� N���S�r�6b�e Rol
5ww- GJ f fo'3 "7
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: X NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR
LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
f
Legal Description: C°1�` � IF,`�^� q' r —F 5 S, K s3w
Tax Parcel Number: ` c.J--2
Physical Address: A4 1
BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category)
( ) Residential/Single Family
( ) Residential/Multi-Family*
(�) Commercial/Industrial*
*These systems require design by a Registered
Lot Size: N /A-
Ej cva,j S
y_'
Nu�✓�� er of Bedrooms
Number of Bedrooms
Type.{�-f
d,
Professional Engineer
TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category)
Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface
( Public Name of Supplier:
APPLICANT SIGNATURE: T/.�Z" Date:
***************************************************************************
AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT #: O DATE:
CHECK #: J CASHIER:
Community Development Department
(970) 328-8730
FAX (970) 328-7185
TDD (970) 328-8797
Email: eccmdeva@vail.net
http: //www.eagle-county.com
September 14, 2000
Kensington Partners
P.O. Box 988
Edwards, CO 81632
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179
RE: Final of ISDS Permit #1980-00. Property location: 1475 Pine Marten Way, Cordillera
Golf Course Comfort Station #1 at Hole #5.
To Whom it May Concern:
This letter is to inform you that the above referenced ISDS Permit has been inspected and
finalized. Enclosed is a copy to retain for your records. This permit does not indicate
compliance with any other Eagle County requirements. Also enclosed is a brochure regarding
the care of your septic system.
Be aware that later changes to your building may require appropriate alterations of your septic
system.
If you have any questions regarding this permit, please contact the Eagle County Environmental
Health Division at (970) 328-8755.
Sincerely,
jfl�
Janet Kohl
Environmental Health Department
Eagle County Community Development
ENCL: Informational Brochure
Final ISDS Permit
cc: files
Community Development Department
(970)328-8730
FAX (970) 328-7185
TDD (970) 328-8797
Email: eccmdeva@vail.net
http: //www.eagle-county.com
Date: June 6, 2000
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
TO: Spiegel Construction
FROM: Environmental Health Division
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179
RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No.1980-00. Property
Location: 1475 Pine Martin Way, Comfort Station #1, Cordillera Golf Club.
Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1980-00. It is valid for 120 days. The enclosed copy of the
permit must be posted at the installation site. Any changes in plans or specifications
invalidates the permit unless otherwise approved. Please note any special requirements
that may have been added to the design by this department.
Systems designed by a Registered Professional Engineer must be certified by the Engineer
indicating that the system was installed as specified. Eagle County does not perform final
inspections on engineer designed systems. Your TCO will not be issued until our office
receives this certification.
Pemiit specifications are minimum requirements only, and should be brought to the property
owner's attention.
This permit does not indicate conformance with other Eagle County requirements. Please
notify this office if you have not been contracted to perform this installation.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Environmental Health Division at 328-
8755.
cc: files
Johnson, Kunkle & Associates, Inc., Chris Williams
Johnson, Kunkel, and Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 409
Eagle, CO 81631
Phone: 328-6368
TO: Eagle County
Laura Fawcett
Environmental Health
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Date:
19-Jul-00
lJob No.: EA00125
Project:
Summit GC Comfort Station, Hole 5
Location:
1475 Pine Martin Way, Edwards, CO
Contractor:
Spiegel
Owner: Cordillera
Weather:
Cloudv
Temp: 85 F
Present at Site: Chris Spiegel (contractor), and Kathy
Scott (J&K)
1) This inspection took place before backfilling operations.
2) The sides of the trenches were raked to ensure absorption.
3) Backfill under pipes was smooth and clear of rocks.
4) Bends and joints were secure.
5) Clean out was placed within three feet of the building foundation.
COPIES TO: Denny Stoner, Cordillera DUDDD DDDDD4
SIGNED: L`-`-'&
REA0012600CUMENTS\FIELD REPORT.As 9/13/00
Johnson, Kunkel & Associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • MAPPING
September 13, 2000
Eagle County Environmental Health
500 Broadway
Eagle, CO 81631
Attn: Laura Fawcett
Subject: Septic System As -Built, ISDS Permit No. 1980-00
Cordillera Summit Golf Course, Comfort Station at Hole 5
Property Location: 1475 Pine Martin Way, Edwards, Eagle County, Colorado
Dear Ms. Fawcett:
Please find enclosed the septic system as -built drawing and field report for the Summit Golf
Course, Comfort Station at Hole 5, located in Edwards, Colorado. The field report states the
visible findings of the site inspection before backfill operations. The as -built drawing shows the
surveyed information; or actual location of the building, septic tank, and infiltrator rows before
backfill operations.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 328-6368, ext. 234.
Sincerely,
Kathy Scott
P:\EA00125\DOCUMENTS\EC-Site Inspection.doc
P.O. Box 409 • 1286 Chambers Ave. • Suite 200 Eagle, Colorado 81631 • Phone (970) 328-6368 • Fax: (970) 328-1035
P.O. Box 771 196 • 1 120 So. Lincoln Ave. • Suite 202 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 • Phone: (970) 879-4676 • Fax: (970) 879-4870
i> %
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
H2O Counts Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone:970-945-7988
Fax: 970-945-845 4
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
lips, a4- 1990-C)d
C (nil S+J�vv�- -4-3
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY
AND
PERCOLATION TESTING
PROPOSED COMFORT STATIONS
GOLF COURSE
THE SUMMIT AT CORDILLERA
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 199 834
JANUARY 17, 2000
PREPARED FOR:
KENSINGTON PARTNERS
ATTN: DEI NY STONER
P.O. BOX 988
EDW ARDS, COLORADO 81632
'JAN 2 5 4UO
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
January 17, 2000
Kensington Partners
Attn: Denny Stoner
P.O. Box 988
Edwards, Colorado 81632 Job No. 199 834
Subject: Report Transmittal, Preliminary Geotechnical Study and Percolation
Testing, Proposed Comfort Stations, Golf Course, The Summit at
Cordillera, Eagle County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Stoner:
As requested, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed
comfort stations.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits excavated in the proposed
building areas generally consist of between 2 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying sandy clay
and clayey sand with varying amounts of basalt fragments from gravel to cobble size. A
low to moderate expansion potential was indicated for the clay soils. Groundwater was
not encountered in the pits and the soils were slightly to moist to moist.
Spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing
pressure of 2,000 psf to 3,000 psf appear suitable for building support. The footings
should also impose a minimum dead load due to the expansive clays. The expansion
potential of the subgrade should be evaluated at the time of construction.
The report which follows describes our exploration, summarizes our findings, and
presents our recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is
important that we provide consultation during design, and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical
recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
i
jj
Jor�, Z.1Ad�mson, Jr. P.
Rein, Bvi SLP
JZA/ksm
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................... I
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................... 1
SITE CONDITIONS .......................................... 2
FIELD EXPLORATION.......................................2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... 2
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......................
FOUNDATIONS ........ ..... .
FLOOR SLABS ....................................... 4
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM .................................. 4
SITE GRADING ........................................ 4
SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................... 5
PERCOLATION TESTING ................................. 5
LIMITATIONS .............................................. 6
FIGURE I - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 through 7 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TALE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the
proposed comfort stations to be located on the golf course at The Summit at Cordillera,
Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the
study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and their impact on the project. The
study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering
services to Cordillera Construction Corporation, dated October 15, 1999.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits and percolation tests
was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsurface conditions. Samples of
the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to
determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering
characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed
to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report
summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions and
recommendations based on the proposed development and subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed comfort stations will consist of single story wood frame structures
with slab -on -grade floors at the locations shown on Fig. 1 Comfort- Stations 1 and
M11.7.Yiave a footprmt`ofabout 15- by 20 feet-,, Comfort Station 2 will be a halfway house
and have a footprint of about 40 by 50 feet. Comfort Station 4 will be for the driving
range and have a footprint of about 24 by 40 feet. The development will be serviced
with municipal water and individual septic disposal systems.
If development plans change significantly from those described, we should be
notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
H-P GEOTEC:=
-2-
SITE CONDITIONS
The comfort station sites were vacant at the time of our field work. The ground
surface in the areas of the proposed construction varies from slightly sloping at Station
4 and -strongly to moderatelysteep sloping_<at-Stat ons-1 2 and 31� Up to 10 feet of fill is
located in the area of Station 4. Vegetation consists of brush, grass and weeds.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on October 19 and 20, 1999
An exploratory pit and profile pit were excavated at the comfort station locations shown
on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The its were dug with a trackhoe.
The pits were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with relatively undisturbed and disturbed
sampling methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by
the project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Fig. 2. The subsoils generally consist of between about 2 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying
sandy clay to clayey sand with varying amount of basalt fragments from gravel to
cobble size.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural
moisture content, density, Atterberg limits and gradation analyses. Results of swell -
consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on
Figs. 4 through 7, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and
light loading. Most of the samples showed a low to moderate expansion potential when
wetted under a constant light surcharge. The:�sample from; Pit; 6,-at a_.depth of 3 feet,�at
H-P GEDTECH
-3-
Comfort Station 3%showed a minor collapse potential settlement under constant load)
when wetted and high compressibility upon increased loading after wetting. Results of
a gradation analysis performed on a disturbed bulk sample of the gravelly sand soils
(minus 5 inch fraction) from Pit 1 are shown on Fig. S. The laboratory testing is
summarized in Table I.
No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation and the
subsoils were slightly moist to moist.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the
proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits, and
our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for planning and
preliminary design but site specific studies should be conducted for individual building
development.
FOUNDATIONS
Bearing conditions will vary depending on the specific location of the building
on the property. Based on the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings
placed on the natural subsoils should be suitable for building support. We expect the
footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of 2,000 psf to
3,000 psf. Expansive clays encountered in building areas may need to be removed or
the footings designed to impose a minimum dead load pressure to limit potential heave.
The expansion potential of the subgrade should be evaluated at the time of construction.
Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth
loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls
should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading by use of an underdrain
system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 48 inches for frost protection.
H-P GE0TECH
ME
FLOOR SLABS
Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils.
There could be some post construction slab movement at sites with collapsible matrix or
expansive clays. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs
should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor
slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. A
minimum 4 inch thick laver of free -draining gravel should underlie slabs to facilitate
drainage.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered in the exploratory pits, it has been our
experience in the area and where clayey soils are present that local perched groundwater
can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. An underdrain
system should be provided to protect below -grade construction, such as retaining walls,
crawlspace and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The
drains should consist of drainpipe 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
cyravity outlet.
SITE GRADING
The risk of construction -induced slope instability at the sites appears low
provided cut and fill depths are limited. Cut depths for the building pads should not
exceed about 10 to 12 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep, especially
where they encroach steep downhill sloping areas. Structural fills should be compacted
to at least 95 `,"o of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture
content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing
all vegetation and topsoil. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside
exceeding 20 % grade. The on -site soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be
suitable for use in embankment fills.
H-P Gco_:c;
-5-
Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to
1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, or other means. This
office should review site grading plans for each building prior to construction.
SURF -ACE DRAINAGE
The grading plan for the building sites should consider runoff from steep uphill
slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond
which could impact foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing soils next to the
buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive slope away
from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should
discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be
restricted.
PEERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation tests were conducted on October 20 and 21, 1999 to evaluate the
feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at each site. One profile pit and three
percolation holes were dug at each of the comfort station locations shown on Fia. 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 pits shown
on Fig. 2 and typically consist of about 2 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying sandy clay to
clayey sand with varying amounts of basalt fragments from gravel to cobbles size. The
percolation test results are presented in Table II. Based on the subsurface conditions
encountered and the percolation test results, the tested areas at Comfort Stations 1, 3
and: 4 should be suitable for conventional infiltration septic disposal systems. Testing at
the Comfort Station 2 location showed very low to no percolation. Based on these
results, we recommend the septic system for this area be designed by a civil engineer.
r-P GE:o`EC
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted according to 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 exploratory pits and percolation tests located as shown 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 so that re-evaluation
of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning
and preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations
by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued
consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation
of our recommendations. 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.
Respectfully Submitted,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK G, HNIC..Aj;L ,_fivC.
Jordy Z. Adamson, Jr. P.
Reviewed By:
i
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
JZ A%ksm
H-P C3EDT
APPROXIMATE SCALE LEGEND:
1"=600'
® PROPOSED COMFORT STATION
0 BORING DRILLED FOR JOB NO. 199 473
O BORING DRILLED FOR JOB NO. 197 407
BORING 16 O
9
8
10
7
11 BO ING
6
12
®
$.
13
ORIN 8
A,�101� 3'
(PPrsS�s) '
BLOCK 1
5
16
�I 5
BORING ®
14 4
TO
17 18
15
GORE
2
TRAIL
19
3
J�
1
/
20
BORING 21
O
BORING
5 ®
22
21
23
24
STATION 4
(PIT 7)
25
4
,
3
5
2
6 B ING 3
B
RING 9
�
BORING 17
7 ®
1
O
8
1,
9
(PITS 1 & 2)
18 10
BORIN
® BORING 4
®
12_'
Jr
11
13 BLOCK 2
V
1415
ON
BORING 1
- STATI2 '
(PITS 3 do 4)
199 834 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fia. 1
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
PIT 1- PIT 2 ipV� PIT 4
WC=21.7 WC=22.6 ''a• WC=19.4
DD=100 DD=100 DD=100
a�
U-
5
5
WC=12.1
WC=23.4
DD=101
DD=101
I
a
—200=33
t
.-
LL=35
•f •
PI=15
10
1 +4=14
10
_ —200=7
1 NPR
l )
l )
STATION 1
15 STATION 2 15
PIT 5 PIT 6 PIT 7
o-, 0
WC-16.4
'.°•
WC=26.4
°
DD=95
•
DD=94
—37
41
WC=11.4
°t
.
DD=105
o
�o
tip
.:� 10 0
Y . ) STATION 4
15 15
NOTE: Exolanation of symbols shown on Fig. 3.
199 834 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fia. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay, scattered gravel, organic, firm, slightly moist, dark brown.
CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, stiff to very stiff, slightly moist
to moist, reddish brown, high plasticity.
SAND AND CLAY (SC); silty, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, dense to very stiff, slightly moist
to moist, light brown to white, calcareous.
SAND (SC); clayey, silty, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, medium dense to dense, slightly
moist to moist, light brown, calcareous.
oo• .
SAND AND GRAVEL (SC —GC); clayey, scattered cobbles, dense, slightly moist, light brown.
�j 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample.
Disturbed bulk sample.
_J
NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on October 19, 1999 with a backhoe.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features
on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits are drawn 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:
WC = Water Content ( % )
DID = Dry Density ( pcf )
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL = Liquid Limit ( % )
PI = Plasticity Index ( % )
NP = Nonpiastic
199 834 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 3
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
2
c
0
c 1
0
0-x
w
0
c
o_
W
N
N 1
D_
O
U
2
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
2
c
_o
01
c
0
a
x
w
I 0
C
O
W 1
a
E
0
CD0.1
1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
199 834
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK
SWELL —CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 4
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Moisture Content = 21.7 percent
Dry Density = 100 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Gay
From: Pit 1 at 3 Feet (station 1)
Expansion
upon
wetting
Moisture Content = 22.6 percent
o
c
0
a
x
w 0
i
c
0
m 1
a�
a
E
U 2
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
6\
c
0
c
0
n
x
w
I 0
c
0
� 1
a
E
0
U
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
199 834
HEPWCRTH — PAWLAK
SWELL —CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 5
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Moisture Content = 19.4 percent
Dry Density = 100 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Clay
Moisture Content = 23.4 percent
Dry Density = 101 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Clay
From: Pit 4 at 6 Feet (station 2)
I
Expansion
upon
wetting
I
b` 0
c
0
U)
0 1
n.
x
W
I 2
c
0
N
U
F
n 3
1=
0
U
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
0
1
2
3
c
0
In
4
a
E
0
U
5
6
7
8
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
199 834
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 6
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Moisture Content = 26.4 percent
Dry Density = 94 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Clay
From:t,�5��'',at 4 Feet (station 3)
Expansion
upon
wetting
•
Moisture Content = 16.4 percent
Dry Density = 95 pcf
Sample of: Clayey Sand
From:'�'�' 6�t' 3 Feet (station 3)
'
Compression
upon
wetting
0
1
c
0
En N
a�
a 2
E
0
U
3
4
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
199 834
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 7
Moisture Content = 11.4 percent
Dry Density = 105 pcf
Sample of: Clayey Sand
From: Pit 6 at 6 Feet (station 3)
.
No movement
upon
wetting
co
00
a)
rn
0
z
U
z
a
U_
T�
i
U
LIJ
F—
O
LU
a.
LU
2
J
w
cc
F.
w
W
a
v
C
}
O y
m
(%)
U
y a
>T
mcc
U
U
_
U
_
U
_
UCl)
c
U
a
-p
Cua
c
O
c
C
�.
N
>`
>
N
>.
C
cm co
c�ca
c
12
12
cn
cn (D
w
U
to
0
to
U
U
o W
W � r
F
a a
U � t
z O N
D. U
ry
U_
~
a z
z
LO
r
�
a
O
0
W
Ln
g J -
LO
M
m O
M
M
I�
co
w
a a z
Z
< tR
d�
O
E-
C
Q
CL
C7
J
WQ o�
~
e z_
s- a z n
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
M
uI
0')
O
z
z v
N
N
e-
c—
N
N
.-
u
W-
Cl)
O
M
CD
m
CD
M
CD
z
o
4-�
o
M
a
U
L
+ N
L
M
G
LO
a
_O C
.o.o
O C
M
L
O C
LO
CD
O cu
U(
O (a
U U
O
U U
i
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE If
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834
Comfort Station 1 Paae 1 of 4
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINJINCH)
P-1
31
15
10 1 /4
8 1 /2
1 3/4
24
8 112
7 1/4
1 1/4
7 1/4
6 1/4
1
6 1/4
5 1/2
3/4
5 1/2
4 3/4
3/4
4 3/4
4 1/4
1/2
4 1/4
3 1/2
3/4
3 1/2
3
1/2
P-2
43
30
11 3/4
11 114
1/2
80
11 1/4
10112
3/4
10 1 /2
10 1 /8 (
3/8
10 1 /8
9 3/4
3/8
P-3
42
15
10 1 /2
9 112
1
30
9 1/2
9
1/2
9
8 1/4
3/4
8 1/4
7 1/2
3/4
7 1/2.
7
1/2
7
6 1/2
1/2
6
5 1/2
1/2
NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 19, 1999. The holes were
covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on October
20, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE If
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834
Cnr►' fhi .Shinn 7.,., o--- 1) „.9 A
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN./INCH)
P-1
33
15
11 1 /4
9 1 /2
1 3/4
60
9 112
8 3/4
3/4
8 3/4
8 5/16
7/16
8 5/16
7 15/16
3/8
7 15/16
7 5/8
5116
7 5/8
7 7/16
3/16
P-2
35
15
30
8 3/8
8 5 /16
1 /16
960
85116
8 5/16
0
8 5/16
8 1 /4
1116
8 1 /4
8 1 /4
0
P-3
44
15
30
813/16
813/16
0
did not perc
813/16
813/16
0
813/16
813116
0
8 13/16
8 13/16
0
NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 20, 1999. The holes were
covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on
October 21, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test.
t
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE 11
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834
or�ttat=to;nb:i°,
Page 3 of 4
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN./INCH)
P-1
39
15
30
10 1 /8
9 1116
1 1/16
19
9 1/16
8 1/8
1 5/16
8 1/8
6 9/16
1 9/16
6 9/16
5
1 9/16
P-2
51
15
30
11 9/16
10 3/4
13/16
31
10 3/4
10 118
5/8
101/8
91/16
1 1/16
9 1/16
8 3/16
7/8
P-3
33
15
30
81/4
711/16
9/16
28
7 11/16
7
11/16
7
5 7/8
1 1 /8
5 7/8
4 7/8
1
NOTE
(
Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 20, 1999. The holes were
covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on
October 21, 1999. The average percolation rafes were based on the last two readings of each test.
-7500
----
a(4 {1s'S 30 %rs
ay
X q 0(� J-a� .n a 0 hC
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE If
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
Cnmfnrt gtntinn A
JOB NO. 199 834
T
HOLE NO.
P-1
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
36
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
15
water added
-- _
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
7 1 /2
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
6 1 /2
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
1
rage 4 of 4
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINANCH)
20
6 1/2
5 1/2
1
5 1/2
4 314
3/4
4 3/4
4
3/4
4
3 1/4
3/4
7
6
1
6
5 1 /4
3/4
5 1/4
4 1/2
3/4
P-2
39
15
water added
8 1 /4
6 3/4
1 1/2
20
6 3/4
5 1/4
1 1/2
5 1/4
4 1/2
3/4
4 1/2
3 3/4
3/4
3 314
3
3/4
9
8
1
8
7 1/4
3/4
7 1/4
6 1/2
3/4
P-3
34
15
water added
10 1 /2
5 1 /2
5
15
5 1/2
3 1/4
2 1/4
10
71/2
21/2
7 1/2
5 3/4
2214
5 3/4
4 1/4
1 1/2
4 1 /4
3
1 1 /4
3
2
1
2
1
1
NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 19, 1999. The holes were
covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on
October 20, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test.
1980-00 Tax #
1475 Pine Marten Way COMFORT
JOB NAME Cordillera Summit STATION JOB NO.
Gam ---I Golf Course Edwards
B LOCATION
BILL TO
DATE STARTED
DATE COMPLETED
DATE BILLED
VU 50 /
-
r f J rU C
I
ovt LL
too Z
N -10
Uj
4` vim �e�� Q � o
jj(;CL6- T Lba,
() t�- j1
- C- 0-,0
r
oy. aJ3-
are - J dI 1
JOB COST SUMMARY
TOTAL SELLING PRICE
TOTAL MATERIAL
TOTAL LABOR
INSURANCE
SALES TAX
MISC. COSTS
TOTAL JOB COST
GROSS PROFIT
LESS OVERHEAD COSTS
% OF SELLING PRICE
NET PROFIT
JOB FOLDER Product 277
JOB FOLDER
Printed In USA
- r
-- - - - -
s '
a
` -
--
