No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1701 Holy Cross Dr - 210530401001INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631 Telephone: 328-8755 YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1373 Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system. OWNER: Bud Knapp PHONE: 310-553-7800 MAILINGADDRESS: Talwood Corp. 10100 Santa Monica BLyq.. #2000 Los Angell,%% CA 90061P: APPLICANT: Alpine Engineering PHONE: 926-3373 SYSTEM LOCATION: SE 4, SE 4 , and E 12, SW 4 SE4 SeQQFIARCELNIiMBEFi 2W 2105-304-00-01 l LICENSED INSTALLER: left Hand Fx o nyAA t i on LICENSE NO: 45-94 DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: Alpine Fn inPPr' g (3 level Cabin & Cabin B) INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1500 GALLON SEPTIC TANK serving the three bedroom three level cabin and the one bedroom B cabin. ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS: SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 1 17 2 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS:_ install inspection portals at the end of each trench T stall as per Alpine Engineering specifications ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL:. DATE: 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 CAUSE FOR 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. p INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL ,A�R,EA: SQUARE FEET. INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: � �V GALLON DEGREES FEET FROM SEPTIC TANK ACCESS TO WITHIN 8" OF FINAL GRADE AND PROPER MATERIAL AND ASSEMBLY X YES NO COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY/ STATE REQUIREMENTS: X YES NO ANY ITEM CHECKED NO REQUIRES CORRECTION BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS CORRECTED. COMMENTS: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: /' DATE:�J L� �7 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPR DATE: (RE -INSPECTION IF NECESSARY) RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS APPLICANT / AGENT: OWNER: PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE RECEIPT # CHECK # COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (303) 328-8730 EAGLE COUNTY; COLORADO August 4, 1994 Bud Knapp Talwood Corp. 10100 Santa Monica Blvd. #2000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 500 BROADWAY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 FAX: (303) 328-7185 RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1373-94 Parcel #2105-304-00-011 Property located at: West Lake Creek Dear Mr. Knapp, 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 dwelling 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 328-8755. Sincerely, Jeff Fedrizzi Environmental Health Specialist ENCL: Information Brochure Final ISDS Permit COMMUNITY DEVLOPMENT DEPARTMENT (303) 328-8730 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO 500 BROADWAY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 FAX: (303) 328-7185 DATE: July 1, 1994;r TO: Left Hand Excavating FROM: Environmental Health Division RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1373-94 tax Parcel # ????-???-???-??? Property Located at: West Lake Creek Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1373 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 call our office well in advance for the final inspection. 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. Permit 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. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Shannon Garton or Laura Fawcett at 328-8755. cc: files June 21, 1995 Mr. Ray Merry Eagle County Department of Community Development P.Q. Box 179 Eagle, CO 81631 RE: Septic System at Knapp Property, Lake Creek Dear Mr. Merry: The septic systems at the main house site and the cabins have been constructed predominantly to plans as prepared by Alpine Engineering, Inc. At the main house the 1250 gallon tank was replaced with two 1000 gallon tanks in series and relocated to a more central position off the house, per attached: plan. The systems at the cabin site were revised and built per a revised application., submitted on August 3, 1994. Soils conditions at each site conformed throughout with what the soils profiles anticipated. As -built plans for each area. are included. These plans are to scale and locations are based upon measurements made in the field by us and by the contractor: Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Ken Neubecker, LS KN/mm enc Edwards Business Center - P.O. Box 97 • Edwards, Colorado 81632 - (970) 926-3373 - Fax (970) 926-3390 Received Apr-27-99 O9:02am FROM : RANCHO DEL RIO from 970 6534355 4 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH page 1 PHONE NO. : 970 6534355 Apr. 27 1999 10:221*1 P1 s Ds 1,3?�-qy --- 13 7 K - q-f too .� cn.•,Fe.C�t �+..���-ram- �+�,.e..,,,,"�" a,• � �,-� S °4- ca•+.ti+�.. S "'�-�"Sr�' — erg' �I"� � �'itir�� v�..Y?"� �►+`.c►-•t.�e.. L+.J-» � w''"� cn1 t� -*t co fin„ •c � � 01 ti4r'S t ti+y,J uw` `� Q �j �" tom• V'M.r"�-QK `V �+ 1�kQw W G+.ad-" C- t t,.i e^ t.�,.., S-c- •4 v c- � ~ • .fi r �I'�•�1AYOO� �j �� iJ. � Mom. � �'11'J K-.1.4.Fw�� .��"` +T1F w' M���/(� 1' � L'1 �j���R 4,.,j "'CC b +..,� �.�4-t.. c>�.-� �.4v-�...t�e.,�- R �` tom- � •�.••-F- � Rancho.. J#ff Gibson ��� �'� 70 �sS3-4431 x - 3-4355 "Not Your Usual Resort".. RAFftNC ► INUTtLiS - ASKING + HMING • CAMPING + CABIN11 • CAS • BROCO95 ARTAURANf • LAUNARY + PROPANE # LIQUOR 57M ALL ON THO 90410 AOO, RIVER E•Mail ranchat�ri+ail.n®t ' $tt►r Rauta 3 sond, Colorado 40423 Received May-25-99 03:12pm from 970 879 7479 4 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH page 1 TQE _04: 1°5 PM CDPHE,,1WQCD . —. 970 �ea`i9 7479 P. 01 Colorado Water Quality Control Division WATER QUALITY SITE APPUCATION Post -IV Fax Note 7871 Ta FYCtri Cfl p} co. Pho # .. Phone # Fax # Fax (t ,;QCD•Fia;d Support Section Steamboat Springs Policy No.:._W SA-6 Initiated By. Approved By: Effective gate: _ Revision Na: Policies & Procedures Revision gate: MULTIPLE INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS Purpose: To clarify the treatment of multiple Individual Sewage Disposal Systems with combined capacities exceeding 2,000 gallons per day serving as a community system or serving a single property or wastewater generator with respect to the site application process. Policy/ Procedures: Multiple Individual Sewage Disposal Systems shall be be treated as a single domestic wastewater treatment works and be subject to site application and plans and specifications reviews and approvals if: l.a. the systems serve a single habitable structure (i.e., school., church, apartment building); or b. the systems serve a number of'habitable structures on a single property (i.e., mobile home park, lodge or resort, shopping center) and the minimum horizontal separations to be maintained, from one system's components to springs or wells (based on design capacities of the individual systems) overlap the minimum horizontal separations of another system's components; or C. commonly owned systems serve a number of habitable structures on separate properties (i.e:, condomin- iums, townhouses, single family houses, etc.) and minimum horizontal separations of two or more of the systems overlap as.in I.b. above; or d. the systems are interconnected such that wastewater may flow from one system to another; and 2. the -combined design capacities of the systems exceeds 2,000 gpd, irrespective of whether the systems were constructed at the same time or at """' different times. Received Ma_y-25-99 03:12pm from 970 879 7479 4 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH page 2 MAY-2�-99 TUE 04 : 16 PM 1: DPHE,,1WQcD 970 1379 7479 P.02 Multiple Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Page 2 Background: The lack of guidance with regard to such circumstances has led to inconsistencies between counties as to the need for Division involvement in the review of these systems. Instances have also arisen in which clients have been advised that the Division's processes could be circumvented through the use of multiple systems. In at least one instance, a community water supply well has been impacted by an array of septic tanks/leachfield systems surrounding it. References: Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems, Revised 1984; regulations for Site Applications for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works; Colorado Water Quality Control Act', 25-8-742. Note: The conditions described in l.b. and 1.e. shall not aply to those situations which qualify for agricul- tural exemptions to local subdivision processes. �r Ojkv-p - So r L's HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 3020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE, GUEST FACILITIES AND STUDIO, KNAPP PROPERTY, WEST LAKE CREEK, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 194 217 MAY 31, 1994 PREPARED FOR: BUD AND BETSY KNAPP C/O PIERCE, SEGEBERG & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS ATTN: LARRY DECKARD 1000 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD VAIL, COLORADO 81657 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 May 31, 1994 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 Bud and Betsy Knapp c/o Pierce, Segeberg and Associates, Architects Attn: Larry Deckard 1000 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Job No. 194 217 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Guest Facilities and Studio, Knapp Property, West Lake Creek, Eagle County, Colorado. Gentlemen: As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study for the proposed buildings at the subject site. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled throughout the development area consist of silty clayey sands and gravels with cobbles and scattered boulders. Groundwater was encountered at variable depths in the borings and was generally shallow in the. guest facilities area. Groundwater was encountered at about 16 feet below the ground surface in the residence site and the studio site was dry. The proposed buildings can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils. The guest facility and studio buildings should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf and the residence building should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Precautions should be taken to control groundwater seepage impact on the below grade building construction. The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations. 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. Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Rev. By: DEH SLP/ro cc: Shaeffer Construction - Attn: Dennis Thompson Monroe -Newell - Attn: Hanes Spaeh Alpine Engineering - Attn: Ken Newbaker TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PREVIOUS POND CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FIELD EXPLORATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 FOUNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 FLOOR SLABS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SITE GRADING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 SURFACE DRAINAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 PERCOLATION TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 PLATE I - VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 2-3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 5 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURES 6-9 - GRADATION ANALYSES TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed residence, guest facilities and studio buildings to be located on the Knapp property, West Lake Creek, Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Plate I and Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation and septic disposal designs. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Bud and Betsy Knapp, dated March 30, 1994. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings and percolation testing was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine compressibility and other engineering characteristics of the on -site soils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation and for feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed development will consist of a fairly large residence, 4 guest cottages and a studio located approximately as shown on Fig. 1. The initial . construction will consist of the guest cottages. Typically, the guest cottages will be 2 to 3 stories of wood frame construction with a walkout lower level. The proposed residence will be 2 stories of wood frame construction with a walkout lower level. The existing lake will be extended along the east side of the garage. Grading for the structures is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 8 to 12 feet. We assume relatively light to moderate foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in -2- this report. We should review the grading and subsurface drainage plans for the residence and guest cottages. PREVIOUS POND CONSTRUCTION The existing pond next to the residence site was constructed in 1991. A soil-bentonite liner was installed in 1992 after excessive seepage was experienced through the winter. We have been provided observation testing reports by Chen -Northern for the embankment and pond liner construction. Two feet of on -site silt and clay with at least one foot of 5 % to 6 % bentonite treated soil liner was installed. SITE CONDITIONS The property consists of hilly and rolling terrain with a general slope down the south-southwest toward West Lake Creek. The topography of the property is indicated by the contour lines on Fig. 1. Vegetation consists of aspen and evergreen stands with grass, weeds and sage brush in open areas. Occasional boulders between about 6 to 10 feet in size were observed on the ground surface. Snow was patchy and up to about 2 1/2 feet deep at the time of our field exploration work. Numerous springs and seeps were observed in the guest cottages area. The pond embankment is about 10 feet high in the proposed residence area. The existing pond is located just north of the proposed residence. Willows are located in the natural draw below the pond. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on April 20 and 21, 1994. Fourteen exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate H-P GEOTECH -3- the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a track -mounted CME-45 drill rig.. A profile pit for septic disposal was dug on May 26, 1994 with a backhoe. The borings and pit were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Percolation testing was conducted at 4 locations for infiltration septic disposal systems at the different building sites. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1 3/8-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figs. 2 and 3. 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 Figs. 2 and 3. The subsoils consist of between 1 and 3 feet of topsoil overlying medium dense to dense, silty to clayey sands and gravels containing cobbles and scattered boulders. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and occasional drilling refusal was encountered in the deposits. The subsoils are mainly stratified, silty gravelly sands in the residence area. About 6 feet of compacted embankment fill was encountered at Boring 9. Stiff clay was encountered at 25 feet below the natural sands in Boring 7. The soils have typically low to non -plastic fines. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density, gradation analyses, and liquid and plastic limits. H-P GEOTECH SM Results of consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of silty sand, presented on Fig. 5, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus 1 1/2-inch fraction) of the natural granular subsoils are shown on Figs. 6-9. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. Free water was encountered in most of the borings drilled in the guest cottages area between about 3 to 5 feet and at 16 feet at the residence. No free water was encountered at the studio site. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The subsoils encountered at shallow depth consist mainly of granular soils suitable for lightly to moderately loaded spread footings. The soils encountered in the guest facility area and studio site contain considerable gravel to boulder size material and are medium dense to dense. The soils encountered in the residence are very sandy with scattered cobbles and are medium dense. Cuts made for below grade building construction in the guest cottages and residence could require excavation dewatering and installation of subsurface drainage to permanently lower the groundwater level. The pond should be lined both below the new water surface area and against the building foundation. The lining should not allow flow to beneath the residence which could result in foundation movement. A synthetic liner will probably be required. DESIGN RECOMN ENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the buildings be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils. H-P GEOTECH -5- The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for the guest facility and studio buildings and 2,000 psf for the residence building. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. Seepage from the pond could cause some additional differential settlement of the residence. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 48 inches below exterior grade is typically .used in this area. 4) 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 also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural granular soils. Voids created by boulder removal should be backfilled with on -site granular soil compacted to at least 100 % of standard Proctor density or with concrete. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement. In the guest area, some of the excavations may need to be dewatered by a trench drain located uphill and separate from the building cut. The existing embankment fill in the residence area should be evaluated for footing support at the time of excavation. H-P GEOTECH I. 6) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. . FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Self supported cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the building foundations and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Topsoil, clay soils and oversized rock should not be used as backfill material. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90 % of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement and walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. H-P GEOTECH -7- We recommend relatively free draining granular soils for backfilling founda4 walls and retaining structures because their use results in lower lateral earth pressure, and the backfill can be incorporated into the underdrain system. Subsurface drainage recommendations are discussed in more detail in the "Underdrain System" section of this report. Granular wall backfill should contain less than 25 % passing the No. 200 sieve and have a maximum size of 6 inches. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.5 in the guest facilities and studio areas and 0.4 in the residence area. Passive pressure against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf for a dry backfill condition and 200 pcf for a submerged condition. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a granular material compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. 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 minimum 4-inch layer of free -draining gravel H-P GEOTECH should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50 % retained on 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 sands and gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Free water was encountered at shallow depth in the guest facilities area and could be encountered in the residence area below the pond. It has been our experience in mountainous areas that the groundwater level can rise and 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, crawl space and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The system should be overbuilt in the existing shallow groundwater areas of the guest buildings to help reduce the risk of future groundwater impact on below grade areas. 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 l foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Deeper pipe invert and additional interior lateral drains could be needed in shallow water areas. 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 2 feet deep. The drain gravel should be extended up the excavation face to intercept any embankment seepage. H-P GEOTECH SITE GRAD `.NG Deep excavations made on steep slopes or to below the groundwater level will increase the risk of construction induced slope instability at the site. The risk appears low for dry cuts made for basement or below grade areas up to about one level, 10 to 12 feet deep. In shallow groundwater areas, pre -excavation dewatering could be needed. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep, especially on steep slopes downhill of the buildings. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95 % 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 and compacting to 95 % standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. 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. The risk of slope instability will be increased if seepage is encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be necessary. If seepage is encountered in permanent cuts, an investigation should be conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut stability. This office should review site grading and drainage plans for the project prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the buildings have 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. H-P GEOTECH -10- 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the buildings 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 paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on -site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. PERCOLATION TESTING Profile holes were drilled or dug at 5 locations and percolation testing conducted to evaluate the feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems. The profile hole logs are shown on Figs. 2 and 3 and the percolation testing results are presented in Table II. Four of the areas tested appear suitable for an infiltration septic disposal system. The variable test results are due to the variable subsoils encountered. An average percolation rate of 30 minutes per inch should be adequate for conventional leach field design. The area of Boring 4A had groundwater at about 3 feet deep and does not appear feasible for infiltration disposal. Other areas may have groundwater and the systems should be kept as shallow as possible. All of the systems should be designed by a civil engineer. 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 borings and pit located as indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our H-P GEOTECH -11- experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and pit 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 design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak, Reviewed By: b=-,j- <� Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/ro H-P GEOTECH 35 N :84 383 1 35' 4382 \'V\ im— < r (( 1, 1 --___ \ �/ �. I 4381 A 10 V LL 4380 2,000' Reference: Grouse Mountain USGS Quad Sheet, revised 1987. HLWMM-PAWLAK .194217 GIRMCHNICAL, Inc. Vicinity Map Plate 1 0, W \> C7 X • c , Mi W Os C O W m w Z•2 O« « to W O F ac w •w0- W o c C O O «'�a o c J W 0 91 N e v Ln V C': C j .- ^COON L D00 V LD \ II O II II \ CT V N J } O 01 CO It T .C+ ov L 3 ° cm w CL 0 W l0 0 O 4w, m A a o d. OJIMIM 1i1, � (AJ toN .-KVO+ON co \ n \ 11 11 O II it •-UDNJ�•-� ., OICO C II - 02 CO IL 4) a) ID \ Cl! C LO O N N C N 11 - V ^n5O \ It II O OCIS — + 1 co w 1 N 4 cD N c (n '- 11 d'c \ 11 11 C \ \ Cco V U p N v N T W 0 0 o\ et m a�i 4- N N m O N O t0 (h 1 \ 0,\ II C 'U. to CC U N th O OCO N C � y 0 3 M m 0.2! .0 CA C7 H U- 0 C C N N ^ OVi O111 r- 7 co N ¢ \ \ \ N mu IV O c u O L a) N T O3 W o:' L p C C. W 41 N O1 4 C " •n O CM��IIV Z N01 ONOI \IIO 1111 \ CLO 11 CJ:xc\j N= 1 JO_ cl• co w ' N �p 11 CII n \ g C "^ \UVN O+ �� + I V J 11 a Q L v Or 02 C) LU o Z rlll � 0 9 V O Ln O1 laaj - 43dap O n O In O O to .- .- N N M VI 0) C -O CD T 41 O In In 10 ow wm It > • a (.••1.:: t 0 m O W ° ' coll o_ 7 Q O C J N Y G1 Cl) Q to 00 \ I C 011 _ M N > I p V' "p "•v CcW ��Fae.:One�V: i O O o \ M N M N N cli clNO \ I II O \ co OD 0 oIt �n 3 A I _1 C It N •• O 0 ca W MUM C T O C O O fl N v r rn y � o 0 fl OM 01 cco M N T V > i Vl C L N o y 0 OCL m C C. N a C 4- C,! M Y O NIO ."' 11 N �M N W 0,co n ——�--0� \ II II C:,\ 11 11 \ m 0,00 it In U O N In U M N=: O M w Z L Ul m W � V V co C _ C. N N ^v'co M ' �i-�a+O In MO N [pn \ 11 II It O \ \ \ 11 11 O InU V N m I 01 CO \ O U O a N O In 3 M 4- N O. ct a + C II 02 c0 W Y N N � In II MO 4 It \ N �N- I- NO C. U dN ' + I •- \ 1 0>a0 N a ct N + In O1 J 0 v —10 Or • o C. In C) In O N M N �aa� - U1da0 LEGEND: VN POND EMBANKMENT FILL; sand and clay, gravelly, compacted, moist, dark brown. PTOPSOIL; organic sandy silt and clay, soft, moist, black. CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, fine gravel, very stiff, very moist, dark grey, low plasticity fines. SAND (SM); silty, gravelly with scattered cobbles, stratified, medium dense, moist to wet with depth, brown. 0o GRAVEL (GC -GM); sandy cobbles and scattered boulders, medium dense to dense, moist to wet, brown, subangular to rounded rock. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8-inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D-1586. 25/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 25 blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 011 inches. Depth at which free water was encountered and number of days after drilling measurement was taken. TPractical rig refusal. Where shown above log, indicates multiple attempts were made to advance the boring. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on April 20 and 21, 1994 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. Pit 1 was dug on May 26, 1994 with a backhoe. 2. Locations of the exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided and corner sakes of guest buildings. 3. Elevations of the exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in Water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Moisture Content f%) LL = Liquid Limit (%) DID = Dry Density (pcf) PI = Plasticity Index (%) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 177 " CHNICAL , Inc.nAcK�LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 4�2177 " CHNICALW, nAcK�LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 44 Boring 9Pof feet i III III Upon Compression ee III TI I �li O 2 N V. t d 2 W u x IL HYGROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS I IME HEADINGS I U.S. SI ANUAIIU SERIES GLEAM SOUAIIE UYENINus in R.MLInk ME �r ^�1� .i�irii��i mmmmmmmmmmwm .�.r■ter ����rr!•�m ��'��rrr�Irrl•r. ����� mm .. • � o���is��rru.�lrr�r���� -1111110�..l��rr. ��I�esM...� ME s �N �. ���.rrrr..���r��rr-i. .WI-7 iAM uum X•42 2A --- - -- - 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GIIAvEI COBBLES CLAY TO SILT FINE MEDIUM 1COAMSE I FINE COARSE GRAVEL 33 %. SAND 4.0 % SILT AND CLAY 27 % LIOUIO LIMIT to PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF silty clayey sand & gravel FROM Boring 1 @ 3 feet HYOIIOMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS '.' •. ' .,.. IIME HEADINGS U.S. SIANUAHO SOIJES CLEAN SOUAIIE OPENINGS --Y I DIAMETEn OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT GRAVEL 32 'x• SAND 4.7 x. SILT AND CLAY 21 N LIOUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX x SAMPLEOF silty sand & gravel FROM Boring 4A @ 8 feet 7 I 194 217 I HE?WORTH—PAWLAK I GRAOATIQN TEST RESULTS I Fig. 6 GECTECHN1CAL. Inc. HYOROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS I IME 11FAUINGS U.S. 51 ANUA14U SERIES CLEAR SUUAHE UMENIN(sS 4S MIN T 13MtN. Hn. ROMIN. 19MIN. 4MIN. 1MIN, '700 't1111 'S0'AA'" '18 'ifl>f '� R� 1'M' J" 3'R" 0 1t70 90 10 20 TO 30 L7 w Z 61).ro N ` a Vl < w ul 50 2 a. 50 1 r T, V w f0 R W w u/ a IL 30 JO 20 i 10 30 0 Wu 119 238 478 9S2 19.1 too 7&Z 127�2W .0 .47 22. DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GHAVEL COBBLES CLAY TO SOL. FINE MEDIUM JCOAnsii FINE I COARSE GRAVEL 22 % SAND 66 % SILT AND CLAY 12 % MUD LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDC,% SAMPLE OF silty gravelly. sand FROM Boring 7 @ 9 feet HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS t1ME HEADINGS U S. :IAnIUAnU S[9fuE5 CLEAR SOUAHE OPENINGS 7Hn. 4S.S MIN IN 13 MIN fill MIN, 19 MIN. 4 MIN. I MIN 21f0 '1tN1 •SO "n'30 •1R •1QR 'd 1- Y,� 1%L" 3' S-rR" 100 90 f 10 t 80 CI AO, a 501C Z Z US t[ 40 w 11 a 30 a to 20 —t— so 10 a— — —�90 o 02 .009 ,019 .ID7 LrTT .01. 1.38 4.76 9.52 lu 38.9 too 78.2 127' 200 .00t ,0 .OtD ,+2 2.0 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SAND FINE I MEDIUM 1COAnSE GnAVEL I COAnSE COBt3LE5 GRAVEL 3.5 %- SAND 48 % SILT AND CLAY _ 17 % UOUID LIMIT %. PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF silty sand & gravel FROM Boring 7 @ 14 & 19 feet combined HE.=WCRTH-PAWLAK 194 217 GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 7 GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. HYDSOMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS I IME READINGS U.S. SI ANUAI4U SERIES CLEAN SUUAN6 QPENINGS 21 FM. 4S MIN 7 HR. 15 MIN. RO MIN. 19 MINA MIN. i MIN, '7tX/ '70 'i00 'S11 '40 '10 '16 I'tt '4 5'1i 0' 0 100 90 10 GO 20 70 n w 0 z so us M 4o z a 1� N < us Solt d 50 /- ►� T. Uf0 t w 2 s w d us 7G 3 2030 A0 10 �- G at .UN .149 .291 1.19 4.1G 952 19.1 30.1. 7&2 _ 1271' 20D too 3102 Jm .009 .019 .U31 . 2P0.78 .,;590 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANU GRAVEL COSCLES CLAY TO SILT FINE ME171UM ICUAIISE I FINE I COAHSL GRAVEL 9 % SAND 63 % SILT AND CLAY 28 % $ %PLASTICITY LIQUID LIMIT INDEX SAMPLE OF $llty sand with gravel FROM Boring 8 @ 5 feet i HYDNOMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE_ ANALYSIS nME REAUINGS U.S. 31AN0AIIO SER1E5 CLEAR SOUAIIE OPENINGS I 2S HII. 45 MM. 7 MI IS MIN. 611 MIN. f9 MIN. 4 MIN. t MIN "2(N1 itl(1 SO A0']0 tR 70R •4 ?i Y.' 1'h' J' 5-r le 90 t0 - 80 1 70 u aW 1 So z i W600 es— W R40 W L w a a 70 10 90 0 - too 76.2 127' 200 .005 .0011 .014 .531 .014 .149 .297 5110 1.14 7-M 4.76 9S2 I4.1 3&1 .001 .00E ,42 2.0 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SANG GRAVEL COBBLES FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COAnSE GRAVEL 38 SAND 49 s SILT AND CLAY 13 LIQUID LIMIT %, PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF silty sand and gravel FROM Boring 8 @ 20 feet 194 217 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 8 CEOTEOHNICAL, Ins C HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIF-VE ANALYSIS I IME READINGS U.S. Si ANUAIiU SERIES CLEA14 SUUAIiE OPENINGS 1A un 7 Nn - — '10 _ — ..- — .mow+ .. DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS I SAND I GRAVEL coeoLEs CLAY TO SILT FINE I MEI7IUM JCOAnSEJ FINE CDAI-ISE GRAVEL 23 % SAND 43 % SILT AND CLAY 34 % 1 i are !{J LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF silty clayey, gravelly Sand FROM goring 11 @ 3 & 8 feet combined I i HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS LIME READINGS U.S.::IAN0ARO SF.IIICS I CLEAR SQUAIIE OPENINGS J Ht. lit SAW 15 MIN. fill MIN. 19 MIN MIN. 1MIN --,cm't00 'S0 •AO'30 •1a •��A '1 20 30 = JCL O i I 90 CLAY TO SILT GRAVEL "6 SAND % SILT AND CLAY :Ii LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF FROM ��100 200 uz . 194 217 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GRADATION, TEST RESULTS Fig. 9 GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. I t- N N LL O 0) LL .O Za m O Li cr Z �. J Q cr LL U cc Z � 2 cr L) LL W ~ 0 ¢ LJJ — C J Q Y m a~c � a Q IL LL i C Ix C Q a = U. a� a) m m co L L rn L rn rn W Qi Qi (: Q:. m co > co m c Lo > co > L6 > to m CO > CO O 0 O 1✓ 'o. U) L L C m L L m co N cc N C co � _ C co C N >. C i C m >. >. Lo >. > m U co — co > > co c C C c c c U U LC cn U N m m m cn L mco cn cn co U •fn •tA •fA •y .0 •N •fA N 0 U N U) O W W � _ us f LL W 2 LL v a a 0 N U I U X _ F •1.. r t= I J J • W t W Q I O Q j J N N _ N I W Lu y N> t\ N LO Nd, M O N n OD M N c H N CM N N N LO M .— N I IL a Z I ° 1" co 00 M ma co It co Td. O N f= • O Q > a cc M M N M N N LO m O) DD M 7 G 2 00 V/ O G Q ° W Z O CC W C) ^ O) Cfi N Co OD ^ Co rl LO a o o LO M N M t` M f\ Lf) 0 a M co OD Lf) CA e� W oZS LO ON o _m ° Q V t". N N M d LO to t� 00 Il- N N o O It N W • (7 Oa z� m O '7 U Z J J � Q � U_ LLI Z 2 cn U w W O cc LU - O �Ja �m� a °m a a O O a 3: 2 a 2 W Z) _ (n �II�IIIIIIINIIIIIIII HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 PAGE 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 (MIN./1NCH) P-2-1 40 15 refill refill refill 12 9 3 8 11 1 /8 9" 1 /8 2 11 1 /8 9 1 /8 2 12 1 /8 10 1 /8 2 10 1 /8 8 1 /8 2 P-2-2 44 15 refill refill refill 12 11 1 30 12 118 11 5/8 112 12 1 /8 11 5/8 1 /2 12 1 /8 11 5/8 112 11 5/8 11 118 1 /2 P-2-3 42 15 refill refill refill 12 11 1 /2 1 /2 12 3/8 12 3/8 14 13 1 /2 1 /2 14 13 1 /2 1 /2 Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch diamter auger and soaked on April 20 and the tests were conducted on April 21, 1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 PAGE 2 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-4-4 20 15 11 10 1 /8 7/8 60 10 1/8 9.5/8 1/2 9 5/8 9 1/4 3/8 9 1/4 8 7/8 3/8 8 7/8 8 1/2 3/8 8 1/2 8 114 1/4 8 1/4 8 1/4 8 7 3/4 1/4 P-4-5 25 15 refill refill 1 4 5/8 6 1/8 8 1/2 15 12 7/8 8 7/8 4 8 7/8 7 318 1 1/2 7 3/8 5 7/8 1 112 11 1 /8 9 1 /8 2 9 1/8 7 3/4 1 3/8 7 3/4 6 314 1 6 3/4 5 3/4 1 P-4-6 21 15 refill refill refill refill 10 4 6 9 5 5/8 3 3/8 5 518 4 1/8 1 1/2 12 318 6 3/8 6 6 3/8 4 5/8 1 3/4 10 7/8 7 3 7/8 7 5 2 8 WS 1 5314 2 5M7 Note: Holes were hand dug and soaked on May 26 and the tests were conducted on May 27, 1994. Holes P-4-1, P-4-2 and P-4-3 were not tested due to standing ground water in bottom of holes after drilling on April 21, 1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 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-10-1 39 15 26 1 /2 23 3 1 /2 12 23 20 1/8 2 718 20 1/8 17 3/4 2 3/8 17 3/4 15 7/8 1 7/8 15 7/8 14 3/8 1 1 /2 14 3/8 12 3/4 1 5/8 12 3/4 11 3/8 1 318 11 3/8 10 1 /4 1 1 /8 P-10-2 39 15 24 3/8 20 314 3 5/8 20 20 314 18 5/8 2 1 /8 18 5/8 17 1 /4 1 3/8 17 1/4 16 1/4 1 16 1 /4 15 3/8 7/8 15 3/8 14 1 /2 7/8 14112 13 5/8 7/8 13 5/8 12 7/8 7/8 P-10-3 36 15 18 3/4 12 7/8 5 7/8 10 12 7/8 10 1 /4 2 5/8 10 1/4 8 1/8 2 1/8 8 1/8 6 1/4 1 7/8 8 5/8 7 118 1 1/4 7 318 5 1 2 1 7/8 Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch diameter auger on April 21. Holes were soaked on May 24 and tests were conducted on May 25, 1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 PAGE 4OF4 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-11-1 35 15 refill 14 7/8 10 1 /8 4 3/4 11 10 1/8 7 718 2 1/4 7 7/8 6 1/2 1 3/8 6 112 5 3/8 1 1/8 5 3/8 4 1 3/8 8 5/8 7 1 /8 112 7 1/8 5 7/8 1 1/4 P-11-2 35 15 17 1 /4 14 3 1 /4 14 14 11 5/8 2 3/8 11 5/8 1 0 1/8 1 1/2 10 1/8 8 7/8 1 1/4 8 7/8 7 5/8 1 1/4 7 5/8 6 5/8 1 6 5/8 5 1/2 1 1/8 P-11-3 43 15 23 1 /2 21 7/8 1 5/8 27 21 7/8 20 5/8 1 1/4 20 5/8 19 1 /2 1 1 /8 19 1 /2 18 3/4 3/4 18 3/4 17 3/4 1 17 3/4 17 1/4 1/2 Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch-diameter auger on April 21. Holes were soaked on May 24 and tests were conducted on May 25, 1994. 13/3-y4 - Parcel 9f L1U7-.iV4-VV-U11 JOB NAME west Lake Creek KNAPP I . `S�//l I% 14� JOB NO. _ JOB FOLDER Product 278 i5gil, NEW ENGLAND 13USIN1_SS SERVICE-'INC., GROTON, MA 01471 JOB FOLDER Printed in U.S,A m Kqk,� e C.4.5Oc-0- � tc(__D 4 1 L oa rc0&- K~P -� �j is cxc; I swop UG Ft LxLD '4- 1 L'oov�i4(- %j ,4# G&,sr i `!� � � _ E '-� --- t f� INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631 Telephone: 328-8755 YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1374 Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system. OWNER:_ Bud Knapp PHONE: (310) 553-7800 MAILING ADDRESS: TalWood Corp., 101000 Santa Monica City: Los Angeles State: CA zip: 90067 BLVD., #200 APPLICANTAlpine Engineering, Inc. PHONE: 926-3373 SYSTEM LOCATION: West Lake Creek TAXPARCELNUMBER: 2105-304-00-011 LICENSED INSTALLER: Schaeffer Construction , Left Hand EXcayatingLICENSENO: 45-94 DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: Alpine Engineering INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK for the double cabin/750 gallon for the "little lodge" ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS: SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 750 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Place inspection portals at the end Of each trench, install s per Al pi np Engineering requirments. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: L CONDITIONS: i. 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 CAUSE FOR 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: 1296 SQUARE FEET. 36 infiltrators as per engineer's design INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 2000 GALLON DEGREES FEET FROM SEPTIC TANK ACCESS TO WITHIN 8" OF FINAL GRADE AND PROPER MATERIAL AND ASSEMBLY X YES _ NO COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY/ STATE REQUIREMENTS: X YES NO ANY ITEM CHECKED NO REQUIRES CORRECTION BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS CORRECTED. COMMENTS: Cabin B Little Lod a Kna re—%idence, Upper Lake Creek. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL:,,,,6' — DATE: 6 / 22 / 95 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: (RE-INSP CTION SSARY) RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS APPLICANT / AGENT: PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE OWNER: RECEIPT # CHECK # ISDS Permit # Building Permit # APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT ENVIRON14ENTAL HEALTH OFFICE- EAGLE COUNT' P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, CO 81631 328-8755/927-3823(Basalt) PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.0 PROPERTY OWNER: Bud Knapp MAILING ADDRESS •Talwood Corp, 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., PHONE: 310-553-7800 2000, Los Angeles, C 067 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: Alpine Engineering, Inc.. PHONE: 303-926-3373 LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR': Schaeffer Construct ADDRESS:- ='3- t�---ao -3�3 , PHONE • 3Z]2Et� PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (g) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAT LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: SE 1/4, SE 1/4, and E 1/2 SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 30 T5S,R82W Parcel Number: �i 6T - Lot size: Physical Address: BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) (x) Residential / Single Family Number of Bedrooms 4 ( ) Residential / Multi -Family* Number of Bedrooms ( ) Commercial / Industrial* Type TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: Well(K) Spring ( ) Surface ( ) Public ( ) Name of Supplier: *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer NOTE: SITE PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED TO APPLICATION MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER", SIGNATURE: pV DATE: `I i u Z GDATE: AMOUNT PAID: �� RECEIPT�r �Z � � ��-- CASHIER CHECK # ISDS Permit I Building Permit I APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EN17IR01` MENTAL HEALTH OFFICE- EAGLE COUNTY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, CO 81631 328-8755./927-3823(Basalt) PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.Ci Oeor" t1kz.K%1\6iPP PROPERTY OWNER: Bud Knapp MAILING ADDRESS: Talwood Corp, 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., PHONE 310-553-7800 2000, Los Angeles, C 90067 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: Alpine Engineering, Inc. PHONE: 303-926-3373 o i qs-gg LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: ADDRESS: PHONE: 309 PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: ( Y) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) ' REPAr LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: SE 1/4, SE 1/4, and E 1/2, SW 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 30 T5S,R82W Parcel Number: �00 rj- -2)oq - d 0 _ O I i Lot size: 0 dC re Physical Address: Lakt cr. BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) (�) Residential / Single Family Number of Bedrooms 4 ( ) Residential / Multi -Family* Number of Bedrooms ( ) Commercial / Industrial* Type TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: Well Spring ( ) Surface ( ) Public ( ) Name of Supplier: *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer NOTE: SITE PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED TO APPLICATION MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" SIGNATURE: DATE:A 3 A14OUNT PAID: 57 0 RECEIPT# 1122 DATE: /Z- ERCH# —.CASHI• COMMUNITY DEVLOPMENT DEPARTMENT (303) 328-8730 DATE: TO: FROM: RE: 500 BROADWAY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 FAX: (303) 328-7185 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO July 1, 1994 Left Hand Excavating Environmental Health Division Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1374-94 tax Parcel # ????-???-???-??? Property Located at: West Lake Creek Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1374 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 call our office well in advance for the final inspection. 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. Permit 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. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Shannon Garton or Laura Fawcett at 328-8755. cc: filos COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (303)328-8730 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO December 2, 1994 Bud Knapp/Talwood Corp 10100 Santa Monica Blvd #2000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Dear Applicant, 500 BROADWAY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 FAX: (303) 328-7185 The Environmental Health Division would like to notify you to make a formal request to extend your Individual Sewage Disposal System(ISDS) Permit #1374-94 into the 1995 construction year. The Environmental Health Division discontinued percolation tests on November 15, 1994 and final inspections on December 2, 1994 due to climatic conditions. ISDS permits are active for 120 days after the date of issue if no Building Permit has been issued for the same property. If a Building Permit has been issued for the same property the ISDS will expire at the same time as the building permit. If you still plan to apply for a Building Permit this year or in the early months of 1995 you will need to have a percolation test conducted before your Building Permit will be released. You will have to contact a Registered Professional Engineering(RPE) firm to conduct your percolation test. If you have had your permit issued and have not had your final inspection completed, but plan on constructing the system in the next few weeks, please give our office a call and we will evaluate your permit on a case by case situation. Please give the Environmental Health office a call at 328-8755, if you have any questions regarding your permit extension process. cc: ISDS Permit #1374-94 File ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. June 21, 1995 Edwards Business Center • P.O. Box 97 • Edwards; Colorad -0 81632 °(970) 926-3373 • Fax-(970) 926-3390 SEPTIC SYSTEM REVISION BUD KNAPP PROPERTY EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO JULY, 1994 Prepared For: Bud Knapp Talwood Corporation 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 2000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Prepared By: Alpine Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 97 Edwards, CO 81632 INTRODUCTION The Knapp Property is located at the upper reach of West Lake Creek, covering what was formerly the Tenderwild Subdivision. The terrain of the site varies from steep and gentle slopes to meadow. Revision: Upon excavation for the tank at the "Little Lodge", groundwater was encountered at an approximate depth of seven (7) feet. Therefore, proposed septic system #1 will be abandoned. The leach field of proposed septic system 2, which is already in place, will be expanded to include waste from the "Little Lodge". A 1000 gallon septic tank will be placed outside the "Little Lodge" and sewer pipe will connect it to the leach field. Septic system lA (see calculations) will serve the "Double Cabin" with a 1000 gallon septic tank and a leach field to the north of previously proposed septic system 1 (see revised site plan). PROPOSED USE Four (4) cabins for intermittent use. One cabin will have a kitchen and serve as the central gathering place. The other three (3) cabins are for bedroom use only. Two septic systems will be built for the cabins. See site plan. QUANTITY OF SEWAGE (Revised) System IA: 3 bedroom "double cabin" (2 people/br) (6 people)(75 gpd)(150%) = 675 gallons CD System 2 (Revised): 1 bedroom "Little Lodge" (3.5 people) 2 bedroom 'B cabin" (2 people/br) v 3 bedroom "triple cabin" (2 people/br) (13.5 people)(75 gpd)(150%) = 1519 gallons SEPTIC TANK SIZE (Revised) System IA: (675 gpd/24)30 hrs = 844 gallons - - one 1000 gallon tank for the "double cabin" System 2 (Revised): (1519 gpd/24)30 hrs = 1899 gallons -- two 1000 gallon tanks in series for 'B cabin" and triple cabin; one 1000 gallon tank for "Little Lodge" PERCOLATION TEST, SOIL PROFILE HOLE Percolation tests and the soil profile review were completed by Hepworth-Pawlack Geotechnical, Inc., per attached report. System 1: Perc Test Hole P-4-4 60 min/inch P-4-5 15 min/inch P-4-6 7 min/inch Average = 27.3 min/inch -- use 30 min/inch The percolation rate of 60 min/inch on P-4-4 causes some concern. Hepworth-Pawlack feel that this result is somewhat of an aberration. The average of the three P-4 test pits is 27.3. We are using 30 min/inch to be conservative. System 2: Perc Test Hole P-2-1 7.5 min/inch P-2-2 30 min/inch P-2-2 30 min/inch 401- Average = 22.5 min/inch -- use 30 min/inch ABSORPTION TRENCHES (Revised) System 1 A: A = Q/5 T°-5 = (675/5)300-5 = 739 SF 50% reduction for infiltrators = 370 SF Check with application rate A = 675 gpd/1.2 gpd per SF = 562.5 SF 50% reduction for infiltrators = 281 SF USE 370 SF 2 trenches @ 62.5' long, 10 units @ 6.25' long System 2 (Revised): A = Q/5 V-5 = (1519/5)300-5 = 1664 SF 50% reduction for infiltrators = 832 SF rV �1 Xe� 0j, Check with application rate A = 1125 gpd/1.2gpd per SF = 1266 SF 50% reduction for infiltrators = 633 SF USE 832 SF 4 trenches @ 75' long, 12 units @ 6.25' long HORIZONTAL DISTANCES (Revised) System IA: To proposed well, the distance required is 100', OK To Lake Creek, the distance required is 50', OK System 2 (Revised): To proposed well, the distance required is 100 + 42 = 142', OK To Lake Creek, the distance required is 50 + 42 = 92', OK h in 0 P M / lJ� d W � E4 � O U H Ea U U EH+ to P. w W U z 92 E+ z 0 H a 0 ca d O Py4 H z O H E-+ U W ca 6 U H Pa �p EWH ca rn0 U E4 N W P+ to W r r S ao 1 r� If l� 9 f I j� �r 1� I 'f � 1f 9 is — 1 r1 ' f u Q FROM SEFnC TAW 10 ti pR°M°o�a/ iRairWuaf no �avrosr.g� TO A850RP110N -TRENCHES SPUTTER PIPE DETAIL Ir STEEL FENCE POST — PAINT TOP V OF POST RED i' PVC COMPACTED 3/r SCREENED ROCK x ,: a • •`' : • •�.a- ~ OR 45' BtEN ELBOWS BELL TYPE PLUG. _•+� •: �: v "': r: ~+ WHERE REWIRED :.! � `'f •:A=' ;,• •'w: ••`: :•.'. � �y' s t.: t:•,tit •'K -• �' FLOW X., • •. try PLAN FOSEWER O�IZE WYE WITH 43' ELBOW (ALL BELL FITTINGS) SEWER CLEANOUT GENERAL NOTES 1. Contact Alpine Engineering, Inc. at least 48 hours prior to installing any septic system improvement. 2. Compact sewer trenches to 90% standard proctor density, or per soils engineer's recommendations. 3. Compact to 95% standard proctor density, below distribution boxes, etc., or per soils engineer's recommendations. 4. Provide risers on septic tanks to finish grade. 5. Comply with all Eagle County and Colorado Department of Health regulations regrading septic system installation. 6. Provide inspection portals per Eagle County regulations. 7. Provide minimum 5' horizontal distance between trees and sewer lines and septic tanks. 8. Field align sewer to avoid existing trees, buildings, and structures. 9. Provide 3' minimum cover and 2% minimum slope and 10% maximum slope from building to septic tank. 10. Provide cleanouts at bends. 11. Sewer line to be schedule 40 PVC. 12. Provide 6' minimum between trenchwalls. 13. Provide 5' minimum clear horizontal between trees and sewer pipes and septic tank. 14. Install infiltrator system per manufacturer's recommendations and Eagle County Health Department requirements. 15. Do not begin any sewer construction prior to notification of Alpine Engineering, Inc., Glenn Palmer 926- 3373. The septic system is also to be inspected by Alpine Engineering, Inc. prior to back fill: contact Alpine Engineering, Inc. for this purpose as well. 16. The splitter tee must have equal invert out elevation(s) on all pipes leaving the tee. 17. We recommend that the disposal field be seeded after installation of the subsurface disposal system. A good native grass cover will promote evapotranspiration from the field. We recommend using a see mix such as a Foothills, Pasture, or Prairie mix, available at local feed and seed stores. These mixes do not require irrigation and develop a growth 10 to 15 inches high. No automatic sprinkler system should be installed above the disposal field. 18. The owner must realize an onsite sewage disposal system is considerably different from public sewer services. The Owner must be aware of and assume the responsibility for continued maintenance of the system. We recommend the pumping of the septic tanks at the end of the first year of use to monitor sludge accumulation and at a minimum of every two years afterward. There are also daily considerations, such as not putting plastic or other nonbiodegradable material down the sewage disposal system. Also, water use must be carefully monitored so toilets are not allowed to run when seals malfunction. To illustrate the point, it should be noted a running toilet will consume in excess of 1000 gallons per day if allowed to run. Excessive loading (such as running toilets) will flood and irrevocably harm the system, and stress the onsite well. 19. Provide minimum 10' separation between water and sewer lines, or encase per Colorado Department of Health Regulations. 20. Provide two ties to sewer cleanouts, septic tank, and absorption trench corners, as required by Eagle County for as-builts. 21. Septic system approval is conditional upon receipt of as -built information. It HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5040 Road 154 Glenwoo.i Springs, CO 816o1 Fax 303 94541454 Phone 303 945 7988 SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE, GUEST FACILITIES AND STUDIO, KNAPP PROPERTY, WEST LAKE CREEK, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 194 217 MAY 31, 1994 PREPARED FOR: BUD AND BETSY KNAPP CIO PIERCE, SEGEBERG & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS A=: LARRY DECKIIRD 1000 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD VAIL, COLORADO 81657 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 May 31, 1994 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 Bud and Betsy Knapp c/o Pierce, Segeberg and Associates, Architects Attn: Larry Deckard 1000 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Job No. 194 217 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Guest Facilities and Studio, Knapp Property, West Lake Creek, Eagle County, Colorado. Gentlemen: As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study for the proposed buildings at the subject site. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled throughout the development area consist of silty clayey sands and gravels with cobbles and scattered boulders. Groundwater was encountered at variable depths in the borings and was generally shallow in the- guest facilities area. Groundwater was encountered at about 16 feet below the ground surface in the residence site and the studio site was dry. The proposed buildings can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils. The guest facility and studio buildings should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf and the residence building should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Precautions should be taken to control groundwater seepage impact on the below grade building construction. The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations. 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. Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Rev. By: DEH SLP/ro cc: Shaeffer Construction - Attn: Dennis Thompson Monroe -Newell - Attn: Hannes Spaeh Alpine Engineering - Attn: Ken Newbaker TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PREVIOUS POND CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FIELD EXPLORATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 FOUNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 FLOOR SLABS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SITE GRADING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 SURFACE DRAINAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 PERCOLATION TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 PLATE I - VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 2-3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 5 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURES 6-9 - GRADATION ANALYSES TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE H - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS e PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed residence, guest facilities and studio buildings to be located on the Knapp property, West Lake Creek, Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Plate I and Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation and septic disposal designs. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Bud and Betsy Knapp, dated March 30, 1994. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings and percolation testing was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine compressibility and other engineering characteristics of the on -site soils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation and for feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the - proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed development will consist of a fairly large residence, 4 guest cottages and a studio located approximately as shown on Fig. 1. The initial construction will consist of the guest cottages. Typically, the guest cottages will be 2 to 3 stories of wood frame construction with a walkout lower level. The proposed residence will be 2 stories of wood frame construction with a walkout lower level. The existing lake will be extended along the east side of the garage. Grading for the structures is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 8 to 12 feet. We assume relatively light to moderate foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in -2- this report. We should review the grading and subsurface drainage plans for the residence and guest cottages. PREVIOUS POND CONSTRUCTION The existing pond next to the residence site was constructed in 1991. A soil-bentonite liner was installed in 1992 after excessive seepage was experienced through the winter. We have been provided observation testing reports by Chen-Northem for the embankment and pond liner construction. Two feet of on -site silt and clay with at least one foot of 5 % to 6 % bentonite treated soil liner was installed. SITE CONDITIONS The property consists of hilly and rolling terrain with a general slope down the south-southwest toward West Lake Creek. The topography of the property is indicated by the contour lines on Fig. 1. Vegetation consists of aspen and evergreen stands with grass, weeds and sage brush in open areas. Occasional boulders between about 6 to 10 feet in size were observed on the ground surface. Snow was patchy and up to about 2 1/2 feet deep at the time of our field exploration work. Numerous springs and seeps were observed in the guest cottages area. The pond embankment is about 10 feet high in the proposed residence area. The existing pond is located just north of the proposed residence. Willows are located in the natural draw below the pond. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on April 20 and 21, 1994. Fourteen exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate H-P GEOTECH c -3- the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a track -mounted CME-45 drill rig.. A profile pit for septic disposal was dug on May 26, 1994 with a backhoe. The borings and pit were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Percolation testing was conducted at 4 locations for infiltration septic disposal systems at the different building sites. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1 3/8-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figs. 2 and 3. 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 Figs. 2 and 3. The subsoils consist of between 1 and 3 feet of topsoil overlying medium dense to dense, silty to clayey sands and gravels containing cobbles and scattered boulders. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and occasional drilling refusal was encountered in the deposits. The subsoils are mainly stratified, silty gravelly sands in the residence area. About 6 feet of compacted embankment fill was encountered at Boring 9. Stiff clay was encountered at 25 feet below the natural sands in Boring 7. The soils have typically low to non -plastic fines. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density., gradation analyses, and liquid and plastic limits. H-P GEOTECH Results of consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of silty sand, presented on Fig. 5, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus 1 1/2-inch fraction) of the natural granular subsoils are shown on Figs. 6-9. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. Free water was encountered in most of the borings drilled in the guest cottages area between about 3 to 5 feet and at 16 feet at the residence. No free water was encountered at the studio site. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The subsoils encountered at shallow depth consist mainly of granular soils suitable for lightly to moderately loaded spread footings. The soils encountered in the guest facility area and studio site contain considerable gravel to boulder size material and are medium dense to dense. The soils encountered in the residence are very sandy with scattered cobbles and are medium dense. Cuts made for below grade building construction in the guest cottages and residence could require excavation dewatering and installation of subsurface drainage to permanently lower the groundwater level.. The pond should be lined both below the new water surface area and against the building foundation. The lining should not allow flow to beneath the residence which could result in foundation movement. A synthetic liner will probably be required. DESIGN RECOXMIENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the buildings be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils. H-P GEOTECH -5- The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for the guest facility and studio buildings and 2,000 psf for the residence building. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. Seepage from the pond could cause some additional differential settlement of the residence. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 48 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) 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 also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural granular soils. Voids created by boulder removal should be backfilled with on -site granular soil_ compacted to at least 100 % of standard Proctor density or with concrete. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement. In the guest area, some of the excavations may need to be dewatered by a trench drain located uphill and separate from the building cut. The existing embankment fill in the residence area should be evaluated for footing support at the time of excavation. H-P GEOTECH c 6) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Self supported cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the building foundations and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Topsoil, clay soils and oversized rock should not be used as backfill material. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90 % of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement and walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall since this could cause excessive lateral pressure. on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. H-P GEOTECH r -7- We recommend relatively free draining granular soils for backfilling foundation walls and retaining structures because their use results in lower lateral earth pressures and the backfill can be incorporated into the underdrain system. Subsurface drainage recommendations are discussed in more detail in the "Underdrain System" section of this report. Granular wall backfill should contain less than 25 % passing the No. 200 sieve and have a maximum size of 6 inches. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.5 in the guest facilities and studio areas and 0.4 in the residence area. Passive pressure against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf for a dry backfll condition and 200 pcf for a submerged condition. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a granular material compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. 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 minimum 4-inch layer of free -draining gravel H-P GEOTECH should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50 % retained on 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 sands and gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Free water was encountered at shallow depth in the guest facilities area and could be encountered in the residence area below the pond. It has been our experience in mountainous areas that the groundwater level can rise and 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, crawl space and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The system should be overbuilt in the existing shallow groundwater areas of the guest buildings to help reduce the risk of future groundwater impact on below grade areas. 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. Deeper pipe invert and additional interior lateral drains could be needed in shallow water areas. 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 2 feet deep. The drain gravel should be extended up the excavation face to intercept any embankment seepage. H-I' UEOTECH M SITE GRADING Deep excavations made on steep slopes or to below the groundwater level will increase the risk of construction induced slope instability at the.site. The risk appears low for dry cuts made for basement or below grade areas up to about one level, 10 to 12 feet deep. In shallow groundwater areas, pre -excavation dewatering could be needed. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep, especially on steep slopes downhill of the buildings. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95 % 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 and compacting to 95 % standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20 % grade. 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. The risk of slope instability will be increased if seepage is encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be necessary. If seepage is encountered in permanent cuts, an investigation should be conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut stability. This office should review site grading and drainage plans for the project prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the buildings have been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior baclfill 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. H-P GEOTECH -10- 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the buildings 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 paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on -site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. PERCOLATION TESTING Profile holes were drilled or dug at 5 locations and percolation testing conducted to evaluate the feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems. The profile hole logs are shown on Figs. 2 and 3 and the percolation testing results are presented in Table II. Four of the areas tested appear suitable for an infiltration septic disposal system. The variable test results are due to the variable subsoils encountered. An average percolation rate of 30 minutes per inch should be adequate for conventional leach field design. The area of Boring 4A had groundwater at about 3 feet deep and does not appear feasible for infiltration disposal. Other areas may have groundwater and the systems should be kept as shallow as possible. All of the systems should be designed by a civil engineer. 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 borings and pit located as indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our H-P GEOTECH -11- experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and pit 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 design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. b Steven L. Pawlak, Reviewed By: tP 9 Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/ro H-P GEOTECH L-M6- M I "LM � 35 X 383 / i / \ \�\` \ ` `� L' N �000 4 k 7 4382 Qz Y "i -100 4381 4380 2,000' Reference: Grouse Mountain USGS. Quad Sheet, revised 1987. 194217 HEP""-PAWLAK Vicinity Map Plate I (11110TECHNICAL, Inc. I o� U- • N Of C_ N O m m N N 0 > N W (� \ a ~ C C A W N w N N i7 O O U w c c '° a a y cf0i -o Cf \ w - m • c N w I m o mJ : ; °° fA fq pp co co c �4N c 4 1 N �• •y N 4 6rC, CL 1 LL CL �m a cc 9 N CLn N n.C7Ci ° to N LL p � gC c C4 a o O U d co ° O0 O d c r� O X oo 44a m m° `T + `T�W a w N a44 d T N • 4 4 _ -a d - _ I� o 0 c? �n v O CD N C7 M CO OON U 'm 'CO _ II L Ul co W O/ N 9 M 4 In 111- ci � —CJmOm \ —11 11 N II 110 II II \ Cr (T CO C 11 —30N Jt > i N O M W 0 \ N IT O N N- N N 11 .1 Lo <<-MO p II II O \ •1 U d'N p)m I� N=. + I C 11 0� o m W v O V S 11 N -N N N O Ql \ it II C \ \ d U O N N N UC^ _: M I lfJ N C I I i OJ , ?o.a �.. M 4J �Im i O N \ � � CP In In N N Nn II o O 1c _Mrn � \ CCUo N M C II i O .o 0.m w mw o �I' .. e...•�ii n N N d IT N C N CCi U N pmZ M M � I V ti 11 m w - Y N 41 1F t+)(V NO IIII V N CNJ N CT \ IIO 11 II \ 19 Lng-' I•+ M C 11 or IC CRfYoiab:�obo: "ems° — m w N V n 1- toIM M N N M O N 1p II 11 O \ M n Omm \ U V N C)1 ct -K + I o �n �IIII�IIII�IIII� laaj - Ujdaa 1* 9 lL C O C 3 O L O M E fq O C O A C m a x W m M Z n N It a) i ■ O o O _ o O N to O N — Y v al ro 1i a > I m o_ w id O r 4� d d tF Q Lc) N d _ co o'm O M N > O O 41 M N N y- N O M II N O 0 p \it C. \ C. N CO � o �A a 11 ..- > 1 co W SW d m ~ N N V O O ,JD r- \ \ I c p M M N C 11t I L N T m W O IV au lu C\I h p C, cli r- n \ It 11 O \ II III \ C: 11 C I I CD In CJ O N to j m N 3 0 „ O M M O -+ m W m V O N OJ co M C .0 N ^ CO II V M 'I Ojj 00 c\jto M O �^ It �1 \ \ 11 II c)m to U d'N cm oo \ OUCaN c)\ If)r- 3 0+ I N Ol V 3 F I C II > O -+ m Y LU 0 1� N N M Lo 11 4- I� .-- �11 M c)N \ In 11 I�NO 1111 O 3 N \ n 1, 11 \ \ 11 O \ I co clj It > m W Ai•. O 1 * O to O to O O N !- �IIII�IIII�IIII�illl�llll�llll� •-- N N M laaj - U�daa I E M o 'a a w °to a O m O 7 t+ y c m O C m m cc a a O I Y 9 LEGEND: POND EMBANKMENT FILL; sand and clay, gravelly, compacted, moist, dark brown. NTOPSOIL; organic sandy silt and clay, soft, moist, black. CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, fine gravel, very stiff, very moist, dark grey, low plasticity fines. SAND (SM); silty, gravelly with scattered cobbles, stratified, medium dense, moist to wet with depth, brown. GRAVEL (GC -GM); sandy cobbles and scattered boulders, medium dense to dense, moist to wet, brown, subangular to rounded rock. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8-inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D-1586. 25/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 25 blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 0,1 inches. Depth at which free water was encountered and number of days after drilling measurement was taken. TPractical rig refusal. Where shown above log, indicates multiple attempts were made to advance the boring. NOTES: 1 . Exploratory borings were drilled on April 20 and 21, 1994 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. Pit 1 was dug on May 26, 1994 with a backhoe. 2. Locations of the exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided and corner sakes of guest buildings. 3. Elevations of the exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only .to the. degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the .approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Moisture Content (%) DID = Dry Density (pcf) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve LL = Liquid Limit (%) PI = Plasticity Index (%) 194 217 f QEMOINT ICAL,I Inc. K LEGEND AND NOTES I Fig. 4 I 0 I 1 0 2 0 5 1 Moisture Content = 1 1 .3 percent Ory Unit Weight = 93 Pcf Sample of: silty sand F:ram: Boring 9 @ 9 feet I iH� Compression Upon Wetting Ili I � I II 1 I • I I I � I � I � i( I �! I I ! I � I I i � ! � I I I I, � I 1 1 � � I i• 1 IE I i I I I I I !I�►►. f ili I! !� �, i II I �I.l. i i.0 iU 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 194 217 HE?WaRTH-PAWLAK SWELL-CONSOLIOATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5 GE-0-TECHNICAL, inc. i HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I IME HEAUINGS SIEVE ANALYSIS ilES CLEAH SQUANG UVENINGS I '10 z z us N Q 1 z z u a n r.....��� o r�■��re�e��.��r�� ���� re��rl�� e��rr���e l� t ENNEN= .001 .tut .en/a .IK.I .�.� .. -- •--- 47 2.0 I DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS ' ZOU 152 _ CLAY TO SILT FINE MEMUM JCOARSE I FINE COAM'M I GRAVEL 23 % SAND 43 % SILT AND CLAY 34 % LIQUID LIMIT %PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF silty clayey, gravelly sand FROM Boring 11 @ 3 & 8 feet combined HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS (IME HEADINGS U.S. S IANOAIIU SE*MES CLEAR SOUAIiE OPENINGS 24 ma 7 Hfl.Inn 7 '4 !Y ? 1•h S Sir" S d5 too. 90 w 7 t7 N a z w 2 a MM r>.�r�����r� N�tr�r•�r�rrlrr�r� �r ^.rrir r�e�rr�.��r���e1 rrCr�l�rr-rr��rer� rrr�� 1-���M��■ ��1Mrll��������rr.r��' M��• �r� M�e.��M�' .00I .Wt .uln .wv ....� ...... _ .___ .42--- - 2.0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANG GRAVEL COBS CLAY TO SILT FINE ME01UM COARSE FINE COARSE GRAVEL % SAND % SILT AND CLAY 4 LIOUID LIMIT X PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF FROM 194. 217 HE?WQRTH-PAWLkK--j GRADATION TEST RESULTS GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. 71 0 Fig. 9 L 1 _ l IN LL (r O) LL OG za ❑o O U U z E. U N CD L L L a N "Ci N N � j N mo H m f0 tl7 f6 m m f6 "U ft7 m f>6 ]C _ U -D C "'D C L .a C N L Di L a! iO L O! L CSi y N N N m C U C co C > C C >.. >. co >. > cc co 3 co rn cc c>o coo m co co co c c co U U N U > fd N U) > > A A >• > C >- >, A A > (p t +1 a J ++ ++ ++ N N N N U N N N N NN N O > _ W F Zz W LL a V n¢ F Z o N � U U X H — Hm O 3� Q Z OO J 1 W W J J — N N N C W Z N> Il N LO T t rM O N 1- OD l'M y Z y N M N N N 10 CY) �— N r- a a i -_ z Wt (0 RcoRt a Z O N F= > a cM N (N LO O) 00 M CV) N CY) ('0 J 2 C W T V, Z cc cc W d Ci ^ O) d N co 00 n CO r- LO 7 U)~ o a o o— LO r N 00 ^ LO Z U O) o a m CM LO 00 Cf 00 LO 0) � N czS LO ON O �� U � U O J J a y O o N N CY) ItLI) CDt` 00 m H J w m m w F- W Q D U) IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �■ iiminiiiiiiiniiii HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 PAGE 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 (MIN.ANCH) P-2-1 40 15 refill refill refill 12 9 3 8 11 1 /8 9 1 /8 2 11 1 /8 9 1 /8 2 12 1 /8 10 1 /8 2 10 1 /8 8 1 /8 2 P-2-2 44 15 refill refill refill 12 11 1 30 12 1 /8 11 5/8 1 /2 12 1 /8 11 5/8 112 12 1 /8 11 5/8 1 /2 11 5/8 11 1 /8 1 /2 P-2-3 42 15 refill refill refill 12 11 112 1 /2 12 3/8 12 3/8 14 13 1 /2 1 /2 14 13 1 /2 1 /2 Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch diamter auger and soaked on April 20 and the tests were conducted on April 21, .1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194217 PAGE 2 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-4-4 20 15 11 10 1 /8 7/8 60 10 1/8 9 5/8 1/2 9 5/8 9 1/4 3/8 9 1/4 8 718 3/8 8 7/8 8 1/2 3/8 8 1/2 8 1/4 1/4 8114 8 1/4 8 7 3/4 1/4 P-4-5 25 15 refill refill 14 5/8 6 1 /8 8 1 /2 15 12 7/8 8 7/8 4 8 7/8 7 3/8 1 1/2 7 3/8 5 7/8 1 112 11 1 /8 9 1 /8 2 9 1/8 7 3/4 1 3/8 7 3/4 6 3/4 1 6 3/4 5 3/4 1 P-4-6 21 15 refill refill refill refill 10 4 6 7 9 5 5/8 3 3/8 5 5/8 4 1/8 1 1/2 12 3/8 6 3/8 6 6 3/8 4 5/8 1 3/4 10 7/8 7 3 7/8 7 5 2 Note: Holes were hand dug and soaked on May 26 and the tests were conducted on May 27, 1994. Holes P-4-1, P-4-2 and P-4-3 were not tested due to standing ground water in bottom of holes after drilling on April 21, 1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 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-10-1 39 15 26 1 /2 23 3 1 /2 12 23 20 1/8 2 7/8 20 1 /8 17 3/4 2 318 17 3/4 15 7/8 1 718 15 7/8 14 318 1 1 /2 14 3/8 12 3/4 1 5/8 12 3/4 11 3/8 1 3/8 11 3/8 10 1 /4 1 1 /8 P-10-2 39 15 24 3/8 20 3/4 3 5/8 20 20 3/4 18 5/8 2118 18 5/8 17 1 /4 1 3/8 17 1/4 16 114 1 16 1 /4 15318 7/8 15 3/8 14 112 7/8 14 1/2 13 5/8 7/8 13 5/8 12 7/8 7/8 P-10-3 36 15 18 3/4 12 7/8 5 7/8 10 12 7/8 10 1 /4 2 5/8 101/4 81/8 21/8 8 1/8 6 1/4 1 7/8 8 518 7 118 1 1/4 Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch diameter auger on April 21. Holes were soaked on May 24 and tests were conducted on May 25, 1994. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 217 PAGE 4OF4 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 (MINANCH) P-11-1 35 15 refill 14 7/8 10 1 /8 4 3/4 11 10 1/8 7 7/8 2 1/4 7 7/8 6 112 1 3/8 6 1/2 5 3/8 1 1/8 5 3/8 4 1 3/8 8 5/8 7 1/8 112 7 1/8 5 7/8 1 1/4 P-11-2 35 15 17114 14 31/4 14 14 11 5/8 2 318 11 5/8 - 10 1 /8 1 1 /2 10 1/8 8 7/8 1 1/4 8 7/8 7 5/8 1 1/4 7 5/8 6 5/8 1 6 5/8 5 1/2 1 1/8 P-11-3 43 15 23 1 /2 21 7/8 1 5/8 27 21 7/8 20 5/8 1 1/4 20 5/8 19 1/2 1 1/8 19 1 /2 18 3/4 3/4 18 3/4 17 3/4 1 3/4 171/4 1/2 Lt17jA- Note: Holes were drilled with 4-inch-diameter auger on April 21. Holes were soaked on May 24 and tests were conducted on May 25, 1994. PFF' JOB NAME 3�yl JOB NO. .13V JOB LOCATION BILL TO DATE STARTED DATE COMPLETED DATE BILLED I� 100�-,0 C a/�( ��f � � C�/i4� / GU S 'l j JOOO ,rK Vt b .� 64 < � . o " 0 i t lao r ��, o `��` 'r /,WX JOB COST SUMMARY TOTAL SELLING PRICE X0 TOTAL MATERIAL TOTAL LABOR INSURANCE SALES TAX 1 MISC. COSTS S d U f 2—\ TOTAL JOB COST GROSS PROFIT LESS OVERHEAD COSTS 10 OF SELLING PRICE NET PROFIT JOB FOLDER Product 278 Qe NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE, INC., CROTON, MA 01471 JOB FOLDER Printed in U.S.A. 7 Y •� . V K 4i �!I � ✓, f bt a ' z F_ P Z Q Q o „2Nil r Z \�J O J � t a V� \lei y J ^ b V O � N J r � �0 4. (J CST . U 4 Ir `� U R--rt'� G 6 bF .$ 04443 k 0 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631 Telephone: 328-8755 YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system, PERMIT NO. 1422 OWNER: Bud Knapp PHONE: 310-553-7800 MAILING ADDRESS: Talwood Corp, 10100 Santa Monica B&Vd #2000 L.A. Stage: CA ZI: 90067 P APPLICANT: Glen Palmer ALpine Engineering PHONE: 926-3373 SYSTEM LOCATION: Holy Cross Drive Edwards TAX PARCEL NUMBLU05-304-00-011 LICENSED INSTALLER: Left Hand Excavating LICENSE NO: 45-94 DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM:_ Alpine Engineering INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1250 GALLON SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS: Install as per engineer's design MAIN LODGE SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 1152 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS:32 infiltrators as_j2er engineer's design ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DATE: 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 CAUSE FOR 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): PRIOR TO COVERING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSTEM. NO SYSTEM SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS UNTIL THE SYSTEM IS APPROVED INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: 1152 SQUARE FEET. 32 infiltrators INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 1250 GALLON DEGREES FEET FROM SEPTIC TANK ACCESS TO WITHIN 8" OF FINAL GRADE AND PROPER MATERIAL AND ASSEMBLY _ x YES —NO COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY/ STATE REQUIREMENTS: X YES NO ANY ITEM CHECKED NO REQUIRES CORRECTION BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS CORRECTED. COMMENTS: Main Lodge Knapp residence,UPDer Lake Creek. -------------- ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APP ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPLICANT / AGENT: PERMIT PERCOLATION TEST FEE (HE-INSPECTIO F NECESSARY) RETAIN WIT RECEIPT RECORDS OWNER: RECEIPT # CHECK# DATE: 6/22/95 DATE: ISDS Permit�� Building Permit APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT ENVIROrR4ENTAL HEALTH OFFICE- EAGLE COUNTY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, CO 81631 328-8755/927-3823(Basalt) PERMIT APPLICATION FEE 150.00_ PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.0 PROPERTY. OWNER: Bud Knapp MAILING ADDRESS: Talwood Corp, 10100 Santa Monica Blvd-, PHONE: 310-553-7800 2000, Los Angeles, CA 90067 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON:, Alpine Engineering, Inc. PHONE:, 303-926-3373 LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: Schaeffer Construction ADDRESS: P.O. Box 373, Vail, CO 81658 'PHONE: 303-845-5656 PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (X) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAT LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: SE 1/4, SE 1/4, and E 1/2, SW 1/4, SE, 1/4 Section 30 T5S,R82W Parcel Number: V, r1 Lot size: ��!� acrts Physical Address: 0170 tk} U OJ�S ✓ r- ► V-L �(03 BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) (X) Residential / Single Family Number of Bedrooms 4 ( j Residential / Multi -Family* Number of Bedrooms ( ) Commercial / Industrial* Type TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: Well(x) Spring ( ) Surface ( ) Public ( ) Name of Supplier: *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer NOTE: SITE PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED TO APPLICATION MAKE ALL RE:IITT CE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" SIGNATURE: `L/� DATE: (li AY.OUNT PAID: RECEIPT/ CHECK 1# DATE:_ CASHIER: ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. June 2.1, 1995 Mr. Ray Merry Eagle County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 179 Eagle, CO 8-1631 REc Septic System at Knapp Property, Lake Creek:, Dear Mr. Meng: The septic systems at the main house site. and the cabins have, been constructed predominantly to plans as prepared by Alpine Engineering, Inc. At the main house the 1250 gallon tank was replaced with two 1000 gallon tanks in series and relocated to a more central position off the house; per attached: plan. The systems at the cabin site were revised and built per a revised application submitted on August 3, 1994. Soils conditions at each site conformed throughout with what the soils profiles anticipated. As -built plans for each area are included. These plans are to scale and locations are based upon measurements made in the field by us and by the contractor. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, / v Ken Neubecker, LS KN/mm enc Edwards Business Center • P.O. Box 97 • Edwards, Colorado 81632 • (970) 926-3373 • Fax (970) 926-3390 SEPTIC SYSTEM APPLICATION BUD KNAPP PROPERTY EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO June 1994 (Revised September 21, 1994) Prepared for: Bud Knapp Talwood Corporation 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 2000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Prepared by: Alpine Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 97 Edwards, CO 81632 INTRODUCTION The Knapp Property is located at the upper reach of West Lake Creek, covering what was once the Tenderwild Subdivision. The terrain of the site varies from steep and gentle slopes to meadow. A four bedroom house is too be built on the property along with a septic system and absorption field to service the residence. Horizontal setbacks to previously proposed septic systems as well as wetlands and water bodies on the property will need to be considered. FLOW QUANTITY 4 bedroom house x 2 persons/bedroom = 8 persons Peak Flow = 8 persons x 75 gpd/person = 600 gpd Peak Flow x 150% = 900 gpd Provide one seperate, specific septic system for the 4 bedroom house. SEPTIC TANK SIZE 900 gpd x 30/24 = 1125 gallons Use one 1250 gallon septic tank. SOIL PROFILE HOLE A soil profile hole has been dug at the side of the proposed absorption field. Soils reports are attached, which provide soil profile information, as well as percolation test results. The absorption trenches are proposed to be moved approximately 70 feet from the previous (June 1994) plans. PERCOLATION TEST, SOIL PROFILE HOLE Percolation tests and the soil profile review were completed by Hepworth-Pawlack Geotechnical, Inc. See Soil Profile of Boring 10. Percolation Test Hole P-1 Average = 30 minutes per inch Percolation Test Hole P-2 Average = 30 minutes per inch Percolation Test Hole P-3 Average = 30 minutes per inch Use 30 minutes per inch ABSORPTION AREA The average percolation rate was determined to be 30 min/in in the proposed area of the absorption trenches. Absorption area = (Q/5) -VT = (900/5) V30 = 986 square feet 50% reduction for infiltrator units = .5(986) = 493 square feet Check application rate. The proposed application rate is 900 gpd/493sf = 1.8 gpd/sf which does not include the reduction for using infiltrators. Use 493 square feet 493 sf/(3 feet wide) = 164 if 2 = 82 if per trench, two trenches. Use two trenches 100 feet lon at 16 units -De r trench. Check application rate. A = 200 if x 3 = 600 feet Application rate = 900 gpd/600 feee = 1.5 gpd/sf Setbacks Peak flow = 900 gpd, which is less than 1000 gpd so that the standard setbacks are appropriate. The septic system, (including the septic tank and absorption trenches) are located far enough away from the other septic systems at the site so that horizontal setbacks from one system do not overlap other septic system horizontal setbacks. Setbacks to springs, wells, creeks, and dry gulches, are MP-4, Iz H r M c-� H H O z H x O C x a cn O ro H H O H z 0 x CA cn M b cn H M H 0 0 H H M O P-C z cn H c z N d z U 2 d HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS I IME HEAUMUS U.S. SIANUA14U SEIIIES CLEAN SUUMiL• UNENINIiS 7 Mi. .10 .. k- .- '•'' T S'e' I. V tn W a z Z U R W a .001 .00Z .005 .009. .019 A31 MIA - .149 .291 1 .SOU 1.19 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 38.1 . 76.2 IZ1152 . 47 2.0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL CLAY TO SILTOOOLES FINE MEDIUM ICUAF1SEj FINE coCOANit 1 GRAVEL 36 % SAND 55 % SILT AND CLAY 9 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDZX SAMPLE OF slightly silty sand with FROM Footing Grade, south side gravel HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME READINGS U.S. it AN0AIIU SERIES CLEAN SGUAIIE OPENINGS DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS O W uu R U 2 U. a D SAND GIIAVEL CLAY TO SILT FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE COBBLES GRAVEL % SAND % SILT AND CLAY % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF FROM HEPWORTH-PAWL.AK GRADATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 1 194 217 l GEOTECHNiCAL, Inc. I HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS KNAPP RESIDENCE JOB NO. 194 217 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 80' S of Residence 50 15 water added 12 10 1 /2 1 1/2 30 10 1 /2 9 3/4 3/4 9 3/4 9 114 1/2 11 10 1 /2 1/2 10 1/2 10 1/2 10 9 1/2 1/2 9.1/2 9 1/2 9 8 1/2 1/2 P-2 35' S of P-1 51 15 water added 12 10 1 /4 1 3/4 30 11 10 1 /4 8 1 /2 1 3/4 8 1/2 7 1/4 1 1/4 10 9 1/4 3/4 9 1/4 8 1/2 3/4 8 1/2 7 3/4 3/4 7 3/4 7 1/4 112 7 1/4 6 214 1/2 P-3 25' S of P-2 48 15 water. added 12 11 1/4 3/4 30 11 1/4 10 3/4 1/2 10 3/4 10 1 /4 1/2 12 11 1/4 3/4 11 114 10 3/4 1/2 10 3/4 10 1 /4 1/2 10 1 /4 9 3/4 112 Note: Holes were dug and soaked by Shaeffer Cosntruction prior to our testing on August 31, 1994. U U) Z ` J a m U_ LLI Z � 2 (A U uj W ~ O CC _ W p LLI J Q Y m J ~ m a a LL = o O � a 2 W :D U) a x O U cc � J O O 5 �. (A W Y m (� as 4- (D CM cu L N � 0) � W � � W W W Z - N Oi aWC a U ^� F- 2 O N 7 U U X F Fy- Q O J a W W a o � J J U ti a LA O) w H o (A(� 0- a z o - Ln LO z a a O s a c (Y) z � •- J 2 H 00 N ZV O z U r O 0 C a 0 O- LI. Q . 3 a) ) N a ae c [A W Oda G cn m X cc0 Co i 6' STEEL FENCE POST - PAINT TCP I' OF POST RED 4' PVC COMPACTED 3/4' SCREENED ROCK (2) 22-1/Y ELBOWS 45' BEND BELL TYPE PLUG, - ' + 1AHERE REQUIRED FLOW SEWER LINE. SEE PLAN FOR SIZE WYE WITH 45' ELBOW (ALL BELL FITTINGS) SEWER CLEANOUT FRCW SEPTIC TAW RM L • • r. .. a• • a ` TO ABSCf2P'iION TRENCHES SPLITTER PIPE DETAIL GENERAL MOTES 1. Contact Alpine Engineering, Inc. at least 48 hours prior to installing any septic system improvement. 2. Compact sewer trenches to 90% standard proctor density, or per soils engineer's recommendations. 3. Compact to 95% standard proctor density, below distribution boxes, etc., or per soils engineer's recommendations. 4. Provide risers on septic tanks to finish grade. 5. Comply with all Eagle County and Colorado Department of Health regulations regrading septic system installation. 6. Provide inspection portals per Eagle County regulations. 7. Provide minimum 5' horizontal distance between trees and sewer lines and septic tanks. 8. Feld align sewer to avoid existing trees, buildings, and structures. 9. Provide 3' minimum cover and 2% minimum slope and 10% maximum slope from building to septic Link. 10. Provide cleanouts at bends. 11. Sewer line to be schedule 40 PVC. 12. Provide 6' minimum between trenchwalls. 13. Provide 5' minimum clear horizontal between trees and sewer pipes and septic tank. 14. Install infiltrator system per manufacturer's recommendations and Eagle County Health Department requirements. 15. Do not begin any sewer construction prior to notification of Alpine Engineering, Inc., Glenn Palmer 926- 3373. The septic system is also to be inspected by Alpine Engineering, Inc. prior to back fill: contact Alpine Engineering, Inc. for this purpose as well. 16. The splitter tee must have equal invert out elevations) on all pipes leaving the tee. 17. We recommend that the disposal field be seeded after installation of the subsurface disposal system. A good native grass cover will promote evapotranspiration from the field. We recommend using a see mix such as a Foothills, Pasture, or Prairie mix, available at local feed and seed stores. These mixes do not require irrigation and develop a growth 10 to 15 inches high. No automatic sprinkler system should be installed above the disposal field. 18. The owner must realize an onsite sewage disposal system is considerably different from public sewer services. The Owner must be aware of and assume the responsibility for continued maintenance of the system. We recommend the pumping of the septic tanks at the end of the first year of use to monitor sludge accumulation and at a minimum of every two years afterward. There are also daily considerations, such as not putting plastic or other nonbiodegradable material down the sewage disposal system. Also, water use must be carefully monitored so toilets are not allowed to run when seals malfunction. To illustrate the point, it should be noted a running toilet will consume in excess of 1000 gallons per day if allowed to run. Excessive loading (such as running toilets) will flood and irrevocably harm the system, and stress the onsite well. 19. Provide minimum 10' separation between water and sewer lines, or encase per Colorado Department of Health Regulations. 20. Provide two ties to sewer cleanouts, septic tank, and absorption trench comers, as required by Eag!e County for as-builts. 21. Septic system approval is conditional upon receipt of as -built information. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. September 12, 1994 Bud and Betsy Knapp c/o Pierce Segerberg and Associates Attn: Larry Deckard 1000 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 Job No. 194 217 Subject: Observation of Excavation and Percolation Test, Proposed Knapp Residence, Lake Creek, Eagle County, Colorado. Gentlemen: As requested, a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the excavations for the residence on August 10 and 31 and performed percolation testing on August 31, 1994 for foundation support and leach field design at the subject site. The findings of our work and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated May 31, 1994, Job No. 194 217. The proposed residence will consist of a two story log home over a full basement area and an attached slab -on -grade garage. A conventional spread footing imposing a maximum bearing pressure of 2,000 psf has been used for design. At the time of our initial visit to the site, three backhoe pits had been dug to approximate design footing bearing level. When observed on August 31, the building excavation had been cut in three levels from 3 to 15 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of slightly silty to silty sand with gravel. The results of a gradation analyses performed on samples of sand (minus 1 1/2-inch fraction) obtained from the excavation are presented on Fig. 1 and Table I. No free water was encountered in the excavations and the soils were moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are consistent with those previously encountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allowable bearing pressure of 2000 psf. Loose and disturbed soils should be removed in the footing areas to expose the undisturbed natural soils. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. A profile pit and three percolation test holes were excavated, and the percolation holes soaked by Shaeffer Construction prior to our site visit. The percolation test holes were located approximately 100 feet south of the residence site. The subsoils encountered in the profile pit, below 3 feet of topsoil, consisted of two feet of sandy clay over silty sand to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. The percolation tests were conducted in Bud and Betsy Knapp September 12, 1994 Page 2 the silty sand soils and the test results are summarized on Table II. No free water was observed in the profile pit. Based on findings the tested area is suitable for an infiltration septic disposal system. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. If there are any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. P,G 15222 Steven L. Pawlak, E. LElrr �� T 'V /O Attachment cc: Shaeffer Construction - Attn: Dennis Thompson Monroe -Newell - Attn: Hannes Spaeh Alpine Engineering - Attn: Ken Newbaker H-P GEOTECH 1422=94 KNAPF nua /'� / uctY—� JOB NAME Holy Cross Rd, Upper Lake Creek `^'l,� (� 2105-36,4-00-011 J B NO. /to it (Z nR I nL`ArInN � o BILL TO DATE STARTED DATE COMPLETED DATE. BILLED 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 PtodUot 278 Q® NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE, INC., GROTON, MA 01471 JOB FOLDER Printed in U.S.A. INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway Eagle, Colorado 81631 Telephone: 328-8755 '✓ YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1497 Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system. OWNER:. Bud Knapp PHONE: (310)553-7800 MAILINGADDRESS: TalWood Corp., 10100 Santa Monica Bl-Td:. #2000 L.A. slaze: CA ZIp:90067 APPLICANT: Alpine En ineerin , Inc. PHONE; (970)926-3373 R W,6th PM, Eag e County SYSTEM LOCATION:W 1/2 SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sect.29 T5S, TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2105-304-00-011 LICENSED INSTALLER: Left Hand Excavating LICENSENO: 11-95 DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: Alpine Engineering INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS: SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE13ED 405 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. via 11 infiltrators SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Install as per engineer design except add one more infiltrator. As built must be submitted for permit to be finalized and C.O. issued ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: July 14, 1995 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 CAUSE FOR 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: 432 SQUARE FEET. via 12 infiltrator units INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 1000 GALLON DEGREES FEET FROM SEPTIC TANK ACCESS TO WITHIN B",OF FINAL GRADE AND PROPER MATERIAL AND ASSEMBLY X YES —NO COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY/ STATE REQUIREMENTS: X YES _ NO ANY ITEM CHECKED NO REQUIRES CORRECTION BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS CORRECTED. COMMENTS: Final inspection done b Al ine En3zineeri n Au ust 29, 1995. Certification received August 31 1995. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: September 6. 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: (RE- PE NECESSARY) RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS APPLICANT / AGENT: OWNER: PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE RECEIPT # CHECK # ISDS Permit #_ Building Permit # APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, CO 81631 328-8755/927-3823 (Basalt) PERNUT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00 PROPERTY OWNER: Mr. Bud Knapp MAILING ADDRESS: Talwood Coro., 10100 Santa Monica Blvd 42000 Los Angeles CA 90067 PHONE: (310) 553-7800 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: Alpine Engineering, Inc. PH NE- 9 0 926-3373 LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: Seams .__ .,,,mot. skim„ ADDRESS:P.O. Box 373 Vail CO 81658 PH E: 970 845-5656 PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (X) NEW CONSTRUCTION () ALTERATION () REPAIR LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description:W 1/2 SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sect. 29 T5S R82W 6th PM Eagle County Colorado Parcel Number: 21 b5 --,361 00— Oil Lot size: 265.36 acres Physical Address: BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) (X) Residential/Single Family Number of Bedrooms 3 () Residential/Multi-Family* Number of Bedrooms () Commercial/Industrial* Type TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: Well (x) Spring ( ) Surface ( ) Public ( ) Name of Supplier: *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer NOTE: SITE PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED TO APPLICATION MAKE ALL REI�T,ANCE PAYOLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" AMOUNT PAID: / J ( RECEIPT # CHECK _q Y CASHIER: Community Development Department (970)328-8730 Fax:(970) 328-7185 TDD: (970) 328-8797 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO September 6, 1995 Bud Knapp Talwood Corp. 10100 Santa Monica Blvd. #2000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Eagle County Building P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179 RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1497-95 Parcel #2105-304-00-011. Property located at: 0170 Holy Cross Rd.,West Lake Creek, EDwards, CO, Knapp Caretaker's Unit. Dear Mr. Knapp, 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 328-8755. Sincerely, L Janet Kohl Environmental Health Department ENCL: Information Brochure .Final ISDS Permit enclosures COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (303) 328.8730 DATE: _ TO: FROM: EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO July 14, 1995 Left Hand Excavating Environmental Health Division 725 CHAMBERS AVE. P.O. BOX 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 FAX (303) 328.7207 RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1497 Tax Parcel #2105-304-00-011 Property Location:0170 Holy Cross Rd., Upper Lake Creek, Edwards, CO 81632 Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 14975-95 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 call our office well in advance for the final inspection. 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. Engineer as builts must be submitted for permit to be finalized and C.O. issued. Permit 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. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Environmental Health Division at 328-8755. cc: files Mom ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. May 26, 1995 Mr. Ray Merry Eagle County. Department of Health P.O. Box 179 Edwards, 'CO 81631 RE s . Knapp Residence Caretakers Residence Dear Mr. Merry: . We have received plans from- Schaeffer Construction, and have been authorized to begin the design of the septic system for the proposed caretaker unit: The caretaker building is to be a 3 bedroom house with water saving fixtum. . We would like to wait until sufficient snowmelts at the site to obiain percolation tests. We have done othersystems nearby and feel that percolation rates, soil profile conditions, etc. will be suitable for a septic system. The. design will be completed as soon as we can get pemlation tests. Sincerely; ' V Glenn Palmer, PE GP/mm cc Bob Brownlee, Schaeffer Construction Post-W Fax Note 7671 OM 7o Q F� ColDW. Co. Prone M Phono M ax 0 Fax N Edwards Business Center • P.O. Box 97 • Edwards, Colorado 81632 • (970) 926-3373 • Fax (970) 926-3390 TOTAL P.01 ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. July 5, 1995 Mr. Ray Merry Eagle County Department of Health P.0. Box 179 Eagle, CO 81631 RE: 'Knapp Caretaker's Residence, Individual Sewage Disposal Permit Application Dear Ray: Enclosed you will find the above -referenced application for a permit to`install' a septic system If you have any questions concerning this document, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, ALPINE ENGINEERING;_ INC. Edwards Business Center • P.O. Box 97 • Edwards, Colorado 81632 • (970) 926-3373 Fax (970) 926-3390 SEPTIC SYSTEM APPLICATION KNAPP CARETAKER RESIDENCE Prepared for: Schaeffer Construction P.O. Box 373 Vail, CO 81658 Prepared by: Alpine Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 97 Edwards, CO 81632 (970) 926-3373 SEPTIC SYSTEM APPLICATION INTRODUCTION The Knapp Caretaker Residence is a single family homesite located in the W1/2 SWl/4 SW 1/4, Section 29, T5S, R82W, 6th P.M., in the Lake Creek drainage near Edwards, Eagle County, Colorado. The property is not served by Upper Eagle ' Valley Consolidated Sanitation District; an individual sewage disposal system is proposed. PROPOSED USE A three (3) bedroom residential single family dwelling is proposed to be constructed on the property. QUANTITY OF SEWAGE (3 Bedrooms)(2 persons/bedroom)(75 gpd)(1.5 peaking factor) = 675 gpd SEPTIC TANK SIZE 675 gpd x 30 hrs/day = 845 gallons 24 hrs/day Round to 1,000 gallon capacity septic tank. SOILS INVESTIGATION A soil profile pit and percolation tests were conducted in the proposed leach field area on June 29, 1995. The profile pit was dug by backhoe to a depth of 8.0 feet and encountered one foot of top soil followed by a sandy silt with some cobbles. Neither groundwater nor evidence of a seasonal high water table was encountered in the profile pit. Three percolation holes were dug to a depth of two to two -and -a -half feet, encountering approximately one foot of top soil followed by a sandy silt with some cobbles. The results of the tests are presented in the attached table. The average percolation rate of the three holes is 9 minutes per inch. All three tests indicated sufficient percolation rates. Application for ISDS Permit Knapp Caretakers Unit TRENCH DESIGN A = Q/5 (T)os A = (675 gpd/5) (9 mpi)o.s A = 405 SF with a 50% reduction for infiltrators = 203 SF Length of trench: L = 203 SF/3 ft. wide trench = 67.5 ft. APPLICABLE SETBACKS The proposed location of the septic tank and absorption trenches is outside of all applicable setbacks distances. Application for ISDS Permit 2 Knapp Caretakers Unit ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. Knapp Caretaker Residence Percolation Test Results - 6/29/95 TIME HOLE #1 HOLE #2 HOLE #3 DEPTH MPI DEPTH MPI DEPTH MPI 10:45 0.58 0.77 0.57 10:50 0.61 13.89 0.89 3.47 0.68 3.79 10:55 0.66 8.33 0.96 5.95 0.70 20.83 11:00 0.70 10.42 1.05 4.63 0.78 5.21 11:05 0.75 8.33 1.14 4.63 0.83 8.33 11:10 0.78 13.89 1.19 8.33 0.88 8.33 11:15 0.801 20.83 1.25 6.94 0.94 6.94 11:20 0.83 13.89 1.32 5.95 0.98 10.42 11:25 0.86 13.89 1.39 5.95 1.01 13.89 11:30 0.89 13.89 1.46 5.95 1.04 13.89 AVERAGE 13.041 5.101 8.64 INFILTRATOR SIZING CALCULATION WORKS HEST Step 1 - Deternine: Bed Configuration Trench Conf iguratior. x Step #2 - Deter;aine; Gravity Feed Pressure Dosing , Mound (usually dosed) Step 13 - Deter:aine SF of Absorbtion Area for gravel system unless already determined for Infiltratoro Sr Grave Step 14 - Calculate Infiltratorm SF SF of Gavel System for Trench X�.6<= 203 SF of Infilt SF of Gravel Systen for Bed .5 = Sr of Infilt Step #5 - SF of infiltratorO System ; 18.75 SF/Chanber = nuzber of InfiltratorO.Chambers Step 16 - NTu1:iber of InfiltratorD Chambers x 6.25 LF/Cha:aber= ._..��Z•S____.. Total LF of Innfiltratorm Chambers GRAVITY FEED SYSTLMS = Chambers + 1 open end + 1 closed end + 1 splash plate per row PRESSURE DOSING & DOSED MOUNDS = Chambers + 2 closed ends + 2 splash plates + 1 pipe hanger at each chamber to chamber connection per row 13 44 GQI�.VEL AND PIPE 4 * 4" P64-1113!Qd PIP0. OYM dMilbuk-11. -,I. W4, Mp ,..%. .... ., Z.- WAS, 15l d rc-jtg,i!c-d A rf e :k4; MOB EMS WITH GRAVEL, !nf,.Il roll nr 11350%1060-1, .9 5:orncl UNFAl"RATOrz-, I. v WKMI ED TO SO' IE FR0.,,LEtA3 for .4F S�xl! a K"o Nij-4ve, SDI: "N ri:& ZINO -0d V* 21' 7 1!.$r i,<p• Y C`a o r) c a 01C.1 Pi Y. rti;\�1Mi? f�•1�' i•,.Y,:. •4•�••.J:t•r " _, fvr �,.• lot S :rove Ihs Sind pic1,65 "i plor"t-I iti' i�i'`fij' ., ter.. , :(i . .l ..�•. i :j. !• .:• t•_ %. .'.'.';1`';°h it {�J~.•i i ?S-�'w i �' i�:it;,'•'` tip �'r•' :� !V Yj•..�'v i1 r%:I •Cr. 1 •1 �+�3 'i�:.�t:ii�:,r%r 1f?:•lid?�.r�-i� �i�) CGh ±r`i�1}4 Make the I'll'd It' r. I ARE i • �`� •�'79•/ •-.+�»' fir!' •. .• y1: L• A\\•\1.�':L i.:'=''•, s' .'•t'i j.•'• '•� � v:::• '•' i :4'.�..'�l;`'•,�,�•(•'J 'jet" •a�=,••%•�i :♦ •`. �• Wit. . •_ : y/i•�: ..� •:` .• ^rram•. •: `•-� .�ti! Stir..• r i � •..I: • , :.'• 'v;.�..--1 'ti if:. = i sr� l�•�=. i•7'•'� •.�+ '•�� •`'- ~ -'♦• � . �••r ►• w 5/i•:✓ti•tJi �::.•�i t, ti\" \, � //' � j: i�:i.�y ti�, w' rY w i; cj U. '=1�=;.+� t �; .j 7 '.�.' ✓ �•'� \�� •�: ..': ti'i .- .`.�S•,.. - ..i >.� { •.1:,.. ar _ ..: e�' o ).� j . I L ... . •'� 1 •r l' `• • r (�:� V r'�'.Y i7 •1. 4, •vim {tiL. Cr G=AT :' . i., �.�: 7� l.) 7.�..+Kii.i11Ii ,�• f- ^�i,'/ `r^ar•�} •` 1 /...11�t :• '�i! t t• +:I• vtJr...' `1 i'-.� i.l���::%l� JiJ}�:�:.�:1 rri. ♦rr i pl v.�.•';e,-) j xos-t re i./1 !r; 44 . •�i�Ji �.� 'The tii 1iiJ a�riy, ::7 7 =s�� t _l `�i l +';: •t1^:••+ r� i3�%t•'Y'�1.�1 21f�1 ii 1.�(,,'�Iv?���1 �ri$i�'•1.i�:!lv:�' � i'i y� i .:.,•, r,!� _ „! ! r. _.. � 's: _ .. 6 �1 f.:7 %1��'.��• •;1•' �i•i• - N'G�aA. `plori, ,.y.ET r,, � , n-,L. .+� �JF *1 ,Lj��;'�.Z a,r• ; el �;. ii •tti;�t✓:Q `_fr•1 ft^ci'nt`•;�• aY1-. �• •�•. f•.{-;1..' ,.': ti •�..:} _ 't.>';�i �i�.1:i�Sot%+'t�l:Jr:ii:'�i`'��1.iJ;.::-..^-�t�1t;s�►'� t �j: �i.Jtit .:••� _•1 {r _� , Gt•i,-� {- .� r,..ii�� � L .. ..:ram S.!r'u t i-•-..•.F•- i'r•t �'!' ,•� e{ .Li.•.. � ^ i L•v!1 �11;. J^ :t. i• 1 LL%��E'T--•�, 1Jti�1, .t' t•� � •�,M f j^ ;r•' � �•.�•.•� 7, J r:•J! : � Fi } !�'�:v+ ': try :%L�i.i? (V♦r �ir�S~)f 7 s ai.. .'+': '.t.-i7:i1 ri'.. : tit E•., }ra '1 }•7 "S Af it •pV `:�.•1 : ;_,.`. !. •IFK^ •r �"S - _ a.r ....i ^, .f. � _x., ti. .,. ;L . :I:l:`'1r•,�. �.1 �•q.�:� 7 Do„.uman'ad Ie.rc;h hos c�ecrty darn isfict;d that ih9 ;NRL Tr iOi2'r charzL,e, provides are optimums infiltrative suKdc'a for 'eoc-hing s-Wlems. Severel states have dwcy recogn'z&-j th's cnd g nntad s .,,sm siza reductions c000rdingtr The graph shows that . 2 3 'Itr!FiLTRATORP have 2/3 ri Ct�::`zr:.rl [i �?` �� }�T Yam' �. ..� _ ... r Vie. efieatr la l�i?1';TCt}�a F i! _ - i ,n ., �;� l r'rTCt '3�ar1Q: 9 CtfB jJi7i !in ar f+: ^t.. "' v ; �WJ on ,�5{"y icy a :r ITen ^.r',th v" of gravel i�:a;lr the pipe, ams ing 150% g;auai mmkIrg `a s des cnd ;,i% Gr.'i C?f`.':ir..✓u:::,� fJ ond^�:d c�nd t�lgh GC�ppc�y';'v i? R.�:7C�R�'• :°r:�h fir;r �r;c>'-;r-,g Yvr TESTED FOR iNC"41IEDI BLC STR cNGINI,, Eaoa7!ed vnB ctsr Iond lost ftrovAn- i�Yi iLtIS� .,'�i�•;ii � tril �:�:t,.�''r a�� ✓rvl'.'i �� s:.r,a..L;.?•.:J 4w I e 1; 14 f1l;l T04* r 1� a c a e 'n c- fhe,A N.,-;-7- j�Alr* )r ..♦.. slnrii,:-,-fd and copo- i a . f% C, -4 I rn. Cj K. rt V4, -.r- -.tfV..'t r Yr. %",V.AYf x -,4:- -Tu I.Cv V, ri; r. 't f-' ;.I?j -.:K C'-In%i I 4't.'f i''. i � r .,. �1;�, ' •. ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. Edwards Business Center - PO. Box:97 • Edwards; Colorado 81632 • (970) 926-3373 Fax (970) .926-3390 1497-95 Tax#2105-304-00-011 JOB NAME Upper Lake Creek KNAPP JOB NO. Edwards, CO CARETAKER W 1/2 SW 1 4 SW1/4 Sect.29 r777ION BILL TO DATE STARTED DATE COMPLETED DATE BILLED l JOB COST SUMMARY - TOTAL SELLING PRICE 'TOTAL MATERIAL TOTAL LABOR INSURANCE SALES TAX MISC. COSTS oo TOTAL JOB COST GROSS PROFIT LESS OVERHEAD COSTS % OF SELLING PRICE NET PROFIT JOB FOLDER Product 278 ®® NEWigNGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE, INC., GROTON, MA 01471 J0.13 FOLDER Printed in U.S.A. ►- f o Z 0cc j KNAPP CARETAKER J UNIT I I FF = 89010L= I- �r { Z oI 1 Q i EXIT B LDING o' CLEAN 4"j PVC SDR 35 / SEWER LINE YLA = W111 W1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4, SECT. 29, T5S, R82W LAKE CREEK DRAMAGE, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO I!] I PRATE DRINKING WATER W GARAGE a'1� CO PAC ED 3/4' SMWO ROD( PANT TOP V OF POST NO PLUG AND CAP\ 4 BACKF L COMPACT a' TO SPEWICAMONS r PVC BELL TTPE PLUG. MOM REOLWED SE LBENi PLAN PCR Snf WE " W M" (ALL Ku Emir) SEWER CLEAN -OUT DETAIL GROED TO/ -PR IDE " TO /(8" OV f p OVER INFJtTR ORS, / / o � � / , .: j" � ELEVATIONS // — ' ATI N PORTS GRD: 8879.0 INV. 8877.7— OOSERI i GRD: 8876.5 INV: 8875.2 — - ° \ ABSORPTION T, EN HE5,- j WITH INfiLTRATO 6 UN17S PEP T NC: � r / / \\ ,RE 0 GAL. PTIC TANK \ PRE- AST C CRETE s GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 20 ft. ) GENERAL NOTES 1. CONTOUR INTERVAL = 1. TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 2. CONTACT ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC. AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO INSTALLING ANY SEPTIC SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT. THE SEPTIC SYSTEM IS ALSO TO BE INSPECTED BY ALPINE ENGINEERING PRIOR TO BACKFILL. CONTACT LINN SCHORR, 926-3373. 3. COMPACT SEWER TRENCHES TO 90% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY, OR PER SOILS ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 4. COMPACT TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY, BELOW DISTRIBUTION BOXES ETC., OR PER SOILS ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 5. PROVIDE RISERS ON SEPTIC TANKS TO FINISH GRADE.-," 6. COMPLY WITH ALL EAGLE COUNTY AND COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REGULATIONS REGARDING SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLATION. ✓ 7. PROVIDE INSPECTION PORTALS PER EAGLE COUNTY REGULATIONS.,/ 8. PROVIDE MINIMUM 5' HORIZONTAL DISTANCE BETWEEN TREES AND SEWER LINES AND SEPTIC TANKS. 9. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 2% GRADE ON SERVICE LINES CARRYING SOLIDS AND 3 FEET.I COVER EXCEPT AS REQUIRED NEAR INFILTRATORS. 10. SEWER LINE TO BE 4' PVC SDR 35. PROVIDE PRE -CAST CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK. 11. PROVIDE 6' MINIMUM BETWEEN TRENCHWALLS.-"" 12. INSTALL INFILTRATOR SYSTEM PER MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND EAGLE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS. 13. WE RECOMMEND THAT THE DISPOSAL FIELD BE SEEDED AFTER INSTALLATION OF THE SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO PROMOTE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. RECOMMENDED .SEED MIXES INCLUDE 'FOOTHILLS PASTURE' OR 'PRAIRIE', WHICH ARE AVAILABLE LOCALLY AND GROW TO 10' TO 15' HIGH. NO AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM SHOULD BE INSTALLED ABOVE THE DISPOSAL FIELD. ✓ 14. DIRECT DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ABSORPTION TRENCHES: 15. ALIGN TRENCHES WITH CONTOURS TO MAINTAIN COVER. a CONSULT CIVIL ENGINEER DURING INSTALLATION IF NECESSARY. 16. CONNECT TRENCHES FOR SERIAL DISTRIBUTION OF EFFLUENT. 17. THE OWNER MUST REALIZE THAT AN ONSITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IS CONSIDERABLY DIFFERENT FROM PUBLIC SEWER SERVICES. THE OWNER MUST BE AWARE OF AND ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTINUED MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM. WE RECOMMEND PUMPING OF THE SEPTIC TANK AT THE END OF THE FIRST YEAR OF, --- USE TO MONITOR SLUDGE ACCUMULATION AND AT A MINIMUM OF EVERY THREE YEARS AFTERWARD. THERE ARE ALSO DAILY CONSIDERATIONS, SUCH AS NOT PUTTING PLASTIC OR OTHER NONBIODEGRADABLE MATERIAL DOWN THE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. ALSO, WATER USE MUST BE CAREFULLY MONITORED SO TOILETS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RUN- WHEN SEALS MALFUNCTION. TO ILLUSTRATE THE= POINT, lT _ SF OIJLD BE NOTED THAT A RUNNING TOILET WILL CONSUME IN EXCESS OF 1,000 GALLONS PER DAY IF ALLOWED TO RUN. EXCESSIVE LOADING (SUCH AS FROM RUNNING TOILETS) WILL FLOOD AND IRREVOCABLY HARM THE SYSTEM, AND STRESS THE ONSITE WELL. 18. PROVIDE MINIMUM 10' SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER LINES, OR ENCASE PER COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REGULATIONS. 19. PROVIDE TWO TIES TO SEWER CLEANOUTS, SEPTIC TANK, AND ABSORPTION TRENCH CORNERS, AS REQUIRED BY EAGLE COUNTY FOR AS-BUILTS. 20. EAGLE COUNTY WILL NOT APPROVE THE SEPTIC SYSTEM UNTIL AS-BUILTS ARE SUBMITTED. 21. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AS -BUILT DRAWINGS TO ENGINEER FOR FINAL INSPECTION. GROUND SURFACE ABSORPTION TRENCH INFILTRATOR 3.0' WIDE X 1.25' HIGH OVERFLOW PIPES 1' MIN. Z' MAX. 6' MIN. ABSORPTION TRENCH DETAIL SECTION A ALPINE SHEET 1 OF 1 ENGINEERING INC. EDWARDS BUSINESS CENTER • P.O. BOX 97 EDWARDS, COLORADO 81632 • 970 926-3373 • FAX 926-3390 9 JOB# KNAPP