400%
200%
100%
75%
50%
25%
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2750 Alhambra Pl - 210701301002 - 1504-95IS - OWTS-12-13-10112 - OWTS-6-14-10939
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 6 P / b Q $3 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. 1504 OWNER: Mathilde & Prieur Leary PHONE: (504) 895-2226 MAILINGADDRESS: 6334 Prytaria St Ciw: New Orleans Slade: LA Zip: 70118 APPLICANT: Spero L. Kontos PHONE: (970) 845-7363 SYSTEM LOCATION:90 Grand Traverse, Cordillera TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2107-013-01-002 LICENSED INSTALLER: Arena Excavating & Development, Stephen Jewet&NSENp: 56-95 DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: Huntin don Engineerin3z & Environmental Inc. Complete Engineering Services INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 1250 GALLON SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS: SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 570 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. via 32 infiltrator units SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Install as per engineer design. Drain away from leach field. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: August 22, 1995 CONDITIONS: 1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL tlFREA1ENT LE 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. 3� X INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: SQUARE FEET. /- j INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 'T .� �! GALLON DEGREES ES s' f /� !FEET FROM SEPTIC TANK ACCESS TO WITHIN 8" OF FINAL GRADE AND PROPER MATERIAL AND ASSEMBLY YES NO COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY / STATE REQUIREMENTS: 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: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: _01 ( SPE IF NECESSARY) RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS APPLICANT/ AGENT: PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE OWNER: RECEIPT # CHECK# Incomplete Applications Will NOT Be Accepted (Site.Plan MUST be attached) 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) * PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00 * * * MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE'.TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" PROPERTY OWNER: MAILING ADDRESS: to33 y �rti Tm..►.�� ST New a, l ev i LR %6l l rr PHONE: 50L1 - 91S APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: _Seero PHONE: `\' o LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: ,/cp, /� S° PHONE: P2'%- COMPANY / DBA : �',� X elf /1 4*1L**1*L, .+ ADDRESS: �G /* ********* PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (>O NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: e�y�f, Parcel Number: Lot Size: (p-all Physical Address: 90 BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) �4 Residential/Single Family. Number of Bedrooms ( ) Residential/Multi-Family* Number of Bedrooms ( ) Commercial/Industrial* Type TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category) ( ) Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface DQ Public Name of Supplier: *These systems require des n by a Registered Professional Engineer 1 ------ SIGNATURE: - ',�� - Jh�2© G_ /Caiv2J Date: 77//r AMOUNT PAID: MA RECEIPT # : DATE: CHECK #: �8� CASHIER: Community Development Department (970)328-8730 Fax: (970) 328-7185 TDD: (970) 328-8797 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO April 19, 1996 Mathilde and Prieur Leary 6334 Prytaria St. New Orleans, LA 70118 RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1504-95, Parcel #2107-013-01-002. Property location: 90 Grand Traverse, Cordillera Subdivision. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Leary, Eagle County Buildin;; P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle. Colorado 81631-017c 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, jdt�fw' Janet Kohl Environmental Health Department Eagle County Community Development ENCL:Information Brochure Final ISDS Permit cc: files EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO Dater August 22, 1995 TO: Arena Excavating & Development FROM: Environmental Health Division RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1504-95 Tax Parcel #2107-013-01-002 Property Location: 90 Grand Traverse, Cordillera Subdivision, Leary Residence. Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1504-95.It is valid for 120 days. The enclosed copy of the permit must be posted at the installation site. Any changes in plans or specifications invalidates the permit unless otherwise approved. Please 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 the Environmental Health Division at 328-8755. cc: files Community Development Department (970)328-8730 Fax:(970) 328-7185 TDD: (970) 328-8797 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO December 12, 1995 Dear Applicant, Eagle County Building P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179 The Environmental Health Division would like to notify you to make a formal request to extend your Individual Sewage Disposal System(ISDS) Permit #15711�-"Sinto the 1996 construction year. The Environmental Health Division discontinued percolation tests on November 15, 1995 and.final inspections on December 2, 1995 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 1996 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 #i:)T,14--r5File t- KUM s I r"}15 JFJ P. 01 P. 2 COMPLETE ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. PROJECT NO: 95-3530 Mr. Spero Kontos April 19, 1996 IKON Devel.OPMenL Inc. P 0 BOX 3010 Avon, Colorado 81420 SUBJECT: Septic Sy®tem rnst,allation Approval Lot 45, Cordillera SUbdivisian, Eagle County, Colorado REFERENCE: Personal Sewage Disppaal System Specifications, Complete Engineering Services, Inc., project number 95-35.0, dated 8-11-95 and.amended 4-9=96. Mr. Kontos: Installation of the personal sewage disposal system at the subject location was evaluated on April 19, 1996, to verify compliance with our specifications presented in the referenced system design. 'Information presented herein is based on visual inayectiQn of accessible components of the system. The system was partially installed at the time of evaluation and partially backfilled. Our evaluation indicates the system has been ,properly irstalled in subst.arztial coi;tp.liance with out' specificatiQns. Please Contact Our office if you have any questions concerning this information. Complete Engineering Services, Inc., Edward D. Ford, P.E. s' r. � • + • 4µ f 912 TWELFTH 5TAEET • GOLDEN. COLORA(1p 80401 • (303) 27a-6418 0 FAX: 279-6350 ---�_ IkON August 17, 1995 Ms. Janet Kohl EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH P.O. Box 179 Eagle, CO 81631 Dear Janet: In accordance with your request, enclosed please find the Septic layout for Lot #45, Cordillera (Leary Residence), as prepared by Complete Engineering Services. If you need any further information, please contact me at once. SLK:ma Encl. Sincerely, IKON DEVELOPMENT, INC. S ero IL/.lKontos IKON DEVELOPMENT, INC. International Village Homes 42 Avondale Lane, Unit C-1-C, Beaver Creek Resort, CO 81620 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3010, Avon, CO 81620 Office: 303-845-7363 FAX: 303-949-6102 t I Uz� r, . tlj--' It do Huntingtim 1;nqineerbg & Envlr* I affimtel, Inc, (ChawlSfor;harn, Ind.) 6080. Road 154 Glenwood Sp nJ. .ngs CO 81601 Telephone: (3' 31 i945-749a Fax: OP:94S-2363 'STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE !AC I 15, CORDILLERA SUBDIVISION !1AGLF- COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO, 4 12195 DECEMBER 15, 1994 IKON DEVELOPMENT ATTN: MR. SPERO KONTOGLANNIS P. 0, 13OX 1412 10DWARDS CO 81632-1412 A aember of the fl-11—HI gbWaF umvmw I V ~• t I � I I LLJL ) I -JI_I,)J4Jb 1 U,_ I- .k V Ikon Attn: P.O. Job P Dear As re Way i Subsea buildi sand. The f found bearix The r1 our re serv'ic recorE If you Sinter HUY Stan F Hunfingdon Engin 6fing & EnvIfOAri1811}dr Inc. (Chan -Northern, Inc,} ihber 15, 1994 s080 Road 154 Glenwood Spango-co a16o1 Telephone: 1 03)' 945-7458. Development Fax: { 03) 945-2353 O e� • Mc. Spero Kontogiannis ; ! �� - J / J box 1412 4ds CO 81632-1412 it. Subsoil• Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Testing Proposed . Residence, Lot 4.5, Cordillera Subdivision, Eagle County, Colorado to. 4 12195 .I Mr. Kontogiannis: t t quested, we have conducted a subsoil study at the subject site, located on lCordillera E the Cordillera Subdivision, Eagle County, Colorado_ � I ace conditions eneounlered in the exploratory borings P �' drilled in thel proposed i) g area consist of about one foot of topsoil overlying silty clay with some gravel and lGroundwater vwas not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. lioposed residence is considered fusible from a geotechnical standpoint and; can be ed on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable ig pressure of 3500 psf. ort which fellows descdjxs our investigation, summarizes our Endings, add presents commendations. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field Is during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the gsotechnical emendations. ave any questions rega;'ding this report, please contact us. ely, �GDON ENGINEERING t& ENVIRONMENTAI,y INC, 1 • scbmidt, P . E. Rev. Blv: FRC SRH t Ao~offt IiIE•I WM0fcOn f4=1 aeI.. .� )i..._wl..yJ-� A)LIUr I l.'14 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND STUDY ........................... ...... PR I OPOSED CC}NSTRVJc"014 .. , ....... . Srl�,E CONDITIoNs ._..�:................. ............... .. FIELD EXPLORATION AND PERCOLATION TESTING ....... . ........ . SLJ SURFAM CONDITIONS , ........ . i ' DE6GN RECoMMENDA TIO.NS ......... . ............. . . . . . • - , . S STEM ' .. . SEPTIC Y .......... ........ ......:............... FOUNDA-nONS .. i. , , . . FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WAL LS ........ . .. .......... . FLOORSws .. .............................. ............ UNDERDgAIN SYnEM ....... . ....... . ..................... . SITE GRADING 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 6 7 SURFACE DR ��� AINACiE........................................... 8 L14�1TATIONS . , - • - - � ........................ ... . ' II HJURE 1 - LOCATION CIF EXPLORATORY BORINGS i FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EX�LORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWEL ,CONSOLIDAT f ON TEST RESULTS FI i RE 5 - GRADATION, TEST RESULTS T LE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESU'LI^S TABLE II - SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS SIFIC.ATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERIl'dG PURPOSES I A+n~Mlhe i�IH 91�+P0tcaapim98 Huntlo.ldon .is The to the in were 14 to PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STIUDy This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed .ed on Lot 45 of the Cordillera Development, Eagle County, Colorado. own on Fig. 1; The purpose of the study was to evaluate geotecl lop recommendations for the foundation design, and to perform pei was conducted in .laccordance with our agreement for res�deoce to be project site feasibility, tton testing, engineering Ices to you, dated Octob 1 241 1994. A field exploration prggram consisting of exploratory borings was conducted±to obtain pmation on subsurface co�ditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were in the laboratory to ( determine compressibility or swell and other. oWneering acteristics of the on -site -sails. The results of the field exploration and labor'llatory testing janalyzed to develop rIqlcommendations for foundation types, depths aifd allowable (tares for the proposed building foundation. The results of percolation testing, field iration and laboratory te�sting are presented in the report. This report has been pirepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and ent our conclusions anl,d recommendations based on the proposed construction and IpUbsoil conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion ofeotechnical leering considerations rellated to construction of the proposed residence are ,included report. �, ROPOSED CONSTRUMON At the time of our stud+, design plans for the residence had not been developed. We Pate the structure will bye two-story wood frame with a possible basement.: Borings drilled within the anticioated building envelope as shown on Fig. 1. Grading for the ure is assumed tto be rel6ively minor with maximum cut depths between labqut 12 to A. For the purpose of our analysis, foundation loadings for the structure were assumed relatively light .and typical of the proposed type of construction. When building location., grading and loading information have been de"Woped, we 3 be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report. A -BMW ofthe MW oftorcagwnw •� ,. , i t . t I. t 1 ., 1-11AA I r aJ1 4 I i 1 dULUPi UltLrl—PJUK I HEW1 1 I U 1 EI i,'SJ 1.,',039496102 P. U6 Hunfi6gd1 n luck our the of with The test -2- SITE CONDITIONS Lot 45 is loL~ated at the end of Cordillera Way. Ile lot is constructed to the property lines. Vegetation consists of a )us brush anal weeds. The site slopes steeply down to the west e along the ivestern 4e. GEOLOGY acanit with, growth of becoming The site is underlain ;by the eagle Valley Evaporate Formation. The formation is ied by silts, cla' s s y , l uin. and siltstone. Dissolution voids are known to ioccur in the ation causing oinkholes.: Although sinkholes have been noted in other areas of the illera Subdivision, no evidence of sinkhole activity was noted at Lot 4i Sinkhole ltial cannot be !precluded in 'the Eagle Valley Evaporate Formation. However, due to A evidence of surficial expressions of sinkhole activity and the conditions iobserved in orings, it is our opinion that the potential for sinkhole development at this site is low. No evidence ?of landsliding or slope movement was observed at the site during our Ligation. The potential fear landslide development at the site is considered 1dw provided ,commendation's presented herein are incorporated into the design and lonstru.ction : project. FIELD EXPOirATION AND PERCOLATItON TESTING • I The field exploration for the project was conducted on October 28, 1994. Two -story borings 4nd one profile boring (for percolation evaluation) were dialled at the :Ins shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings wereadvanced -inch diameter -continuous flight angers powered by a track -mounted CME 4SdrW rig. ori.ngs were logged by a representative of Huntingdon. In addition, three percolation ales were drilled at the locations inidica,ted on Fig. 1. I AtrsROerofe. PURI go#-f--wiea Hunt4igdon -3- Samples of the subsoils were taken with 13/8-inch and 2-inch I.D_ spoo4 samplers. samplers were; driven into the subsoils at ,various depths with blows front at 140-pound ' mer falling 30 inches. his test is similar to the standard penetration testIII described by M Method ]34; 8& no penetration resistance values are an indication cif the relative ity or cons' stemcy of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the Aration resistance values are shown on the Togs of Exploratory Borings! Fig. 2. The >les were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer 4nd.testing. Percolation test hobs were presoaked overnight by filling them! completely. olation tests ftre performed the following day until stable percolation rates were aved. The results of pei;colation tests are indicated on Table Ii. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Tha subsoil cionditio encountered at the site are shown graphically on Fig. 2. The 41s generally c,gnast of about I foot of topsail overlying silty clay with some gravel and Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural ure content, density, gmdation analyses and a swell -consolidation test. Re utts of swejl- lidation testingi performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of saindy clay soil Boring 2, presented do Fig. 4, indicate low to moderate compress $iliiy under lions of loading and welting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in our borings; at the time of drilling. 1 i DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS SYSTEM The installatig' a of a cc nveintional leach field disposal system is consideled feasible from a-geotechnical i;tandpoirlt. For design purposes, a percolation rate of 40 iniriutes per inch may be utilized; . I _ Ri11Bd1Cb'oFtllg }ii.�'t pa�uo►w�lpanies rc_r•E:J_r r 11.1AA IV.AgI114(:jD1Jhl I.HEfI-Idl_ik'IH17-k'td 10 :1EJ3 3130 94963102 P.OB H • i oil SE FOUNDAMNS ,' I i Cotxsidering the subsail conditions encountered in the exploratoryomngs and the nature of the proposed oans}tructior , we recommend the building be founde I with spread foo 'ngs bearing o� the natural silty clay soils. The design a6d constrpctian criteria presented below should be observed for a spread foo foundation system. The construction critez is should be - considered wheIt preparing prej.-ct documents. i 1 } i Footings pigeed on tie undisturbed natural soils exclusive of topsoil should be designed fori an allowable. soil bearin + g Pressure of 3540 psf. Based on� experience, we -expect settlement df footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about i inch o less. j 1 2) I The footings:; should Have a minimum width of 16 Inches for continuo walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. i 3) i Exterior footings and; footings beneath unheated areas should be prl viried with adequate soil cover abiove their bearing elevation for frost protection. )�Ilacernent of foundations at least 41 inches below exterior grade is t ypically used in this area. 4) i Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span an unsupported length csf at least 10 feet. Foundation walls acting �s retaining structures shQuid also die designed to resist lateral earth pressures as dis Tlss6d in the r "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) Any existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be remorred and -the Ifooting bearing level Extended down to relatively dense natural granular soils. if water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered bef6re concrete placement. 6) A roprosentalve of thr soil engineer should observe all footing excavatibns rior to concrete placement to levaluate bearing conditions. p I i POON MD RETAINING 'IWAII S I Foundation malls and retaining structures which are laterally supported aitrl: can be Amrrftf01Me 1Rf{ gmL9rAmp *, ... ,, , , n. n 1i , i i it v,_n + i ,nr i v rar..rr r rr� r<r v r t_r L 1.5k9 i i4 ib l l•7r' F-' . U r r�t0 igdon -5- expected to undergo only a slu�gbt amount of deflection should• be designed for t* lafral earth �i preskure computed on the 1 asis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 60 p4 for backfill co isting of the on -site soils. Alternatively, imported granular soil may be utilized for baci fill. If imported granul*r soils are utilized as backfill, walls may be designed for an equ ent fluid weight of MINE Imported soils should be approved by the i e6technir,al oons�lta.nt prior to placemelit. Cantilevered retaining structures which are s pirate from the I esidence and can be erected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full I active earth pressure condition should b0 designed for a lateral earth pressure computed ;on:the basis Of a# equivalent fluid unit weight of 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-si a soils. All foundatio'b and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate surcharge pressures such as adjacent fbotings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. 'The , pre�IIures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the wads and'a horizontal back6 surface. The buildup: of water behind a wall or an -upward sloping ba&fill surface will ncrease the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure, An and drain should bi provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maxi: um standard : Proctor idensity at a moisture content near optimum. ; Backfill in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95%a of the maximum standard Proctor density. Case should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the 1 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 soul result in distress to fac4ities constructed on the back611. The lateral resistance taf foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of tht 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 I a calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.30. Passive pressureiagainst the sides of the footing s fan be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 300 pd. The coefficient of friction, andassive pressure p p values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of ssfety should be included in the design to limit the strain which A mm of the(H!M SMP of ft-p Us all Iri Slab of �t 11-I 111 II•II 11 Al/11I. 11, 1,1It- 1`1 1'�I_ JI,_ I1-11- I,J1 I I_i 7 !J. �._�, ; i .'��J �yttyl, i. L•1F' i-' _ "I LI Hu nti j*don I occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistant Fill placed nst the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a grantitar material patted to at Iedst 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a mo>sture content optimum. Due to the hi h um 'content of the site soil i g s, potential for sulfate attack on rete is considered high. Ne tecommend the use of Type 5 sulfate resistant cement for 3ncrete in direct contact: with the site sails. OR SLABS The natural, on -site Boils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to :rarely loaded slab -on -grade construction. Some differential slab movemen�- could occur underslab soils beco n6 wet. To reduce the effects of some differentials movement, slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints i allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to :e damage due' to shrine age cracking. The requirements for joint spaGiitg and slab rrcement should be established by the designer based on experience and To intended ise. A minimum 4-in6 layer of free -draining gravel should be plated beneath ieut level slabs to facilitate :drainage. This material- should consist of mm' u, s 2-inch ;ate with less than 50% (passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 204 All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at. lelasr 95% of am standard Proctor density at a moisture content near- optimum. Regtdred-fill can of the on=sit6 soils dey' oid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. �ERDBAW SYSTEM Although free water wIAs not encountered during our exploration, it bak been our ence in mountainous arias that local perched i . p hcd groundwater may develop during times vy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can also . r a perched condition. We recommend belovu i grade construction, such as retaining Ado me Hr W00010ftwim .,.-. . ... I1 1111.1111111111111'1 I.I II- 1.1._ 1, qI III; I rIr KIA 11.1 1. PJ_..'.... i 1.'H"'94191)l l 11) P..t 1. Htntm 'don -7- i wail, crawl space and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydros' tcttic pressure buil up by an undeidrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill I surrounded above the invert !level with free -draining granular material. Thy ijra' should be placed at each leirel of exciavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacentiiin"tsh grade and sloped at a minimum 1!a to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining material ranular g rial used in the underdrain systerh should contain less than 2% passing the No. 2(0 sieve, less than I50%a passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The! drain gravel bacidiillshould be ai least 2 feeet deep. I I I SU GRADIN I i i The risk of cohstructio# induced slope instability at the site appears low �rovided cut I and !fill depths are limited. We assume the cut depth for the lowest level wiq not exceed one level, about 1 to 14 feet. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 11 feet deep. Embj nkment fills shbuid be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum star d Proctor density near optimu moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be care hally prepared by removing all vegetation, topsoil and existing fill and ooilnpacting to 95% standard Procter density. 'The fill should be benched into the portions; o£! the site exceeding 20% grade. ! i Permanent u retained �ut slopes should be graded at 1.5 to l horizontal to vertical (or flatter) for slopes up to 121 feet in height and 2 to 1 horizontal to vertical ,foir cut slopes higher than 12 feet. ibe risk of slope instability will be increased if seepage is e1ccituitered i in cuffs and flatter stapes may I be necessary. If seepage is encountered in pernianent cuts, an investigation should be conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cuts ility. Fill slopes shouldd be graded at 2 to 1 borizontal to vertical or,flatter. ' his office should review site grading plans for the project prior. to construction. i An�n6er the HI gMWofmom. 1) 2) 3) 4) are indic fifth the t until diffe. of th VSre a 1 u__iv 14UP, Irlr_rav li_.1 1t71���1. ._�7.-i�4`�b1L•7c' t-'. 1.� i HunWgdon s . f A(M 13 V \ A,CL The following drainage precautions should be observed during co[ruction and wined at all tunes afters the residence has been completed: 1_accessive wetting or dying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided duuring construction. frying can increase the expansion potLntial of the on -site clay sails. Exterior bacl`cfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and cord pacted to at Ieast 95% of the maximum standard proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 9WO of the' maximum standard proctor density in landscape areas. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should ?ale sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a mintll'mum slope of 12 incites in the fiat 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope! of3 inches in the first 1a feet in paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be upped with about 2 feet of the on site soils to reduce surface water infiltration, i Roof downspi)uts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits Of atli backfill. LIMITATIONS This report his beets prepared in accordance with generally accepted gieotechnical ,ering principli6s and practices iri this area at this time. We make no other warranty expressed or hinplied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted iA this report tsed upon the:, data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at 'the locations . ted on Fig. 1 the sed . g P ra t p , type of construction and our experience in the area. Our gs include intepolation! and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at ploratory borirngs and variations in the subsurface conditions may not becaoane evident xcavation is p rfarmed.; if conditions encountered during construction appear to be .nt from those described' in this report, we should be notified at once so reI evaluation recommendations may be made. I This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our exploratory information Atesib rafft ao Sl pda ws- �. :.• n : : r_.n , r o : ,:_� �.q.y ,.: �i...J '1 , v:_h I f IL- I'd V 1 U Hunt#igdon -9- h has not been described or documented in this report. As the project evolves, we ld provide continued consultation and field services during construction tb review and itor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify :that the nmendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design Ganges may ire additional Analysis of modifications of the recommendations presented herein. We mend on -site! observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata *d testing of tural fill by a r:,epresentative of the soil engineer. :rely, MNGDON I✓NGI �•• $ VIRONMFNTAL, INC. Helenschmidt,; IP 9666 yf 5'•4l2 :wed By: •--.........• ��, R. Cameron , I i A member of M g HIH 9wPot Eomp9nors .I i tl ... t. I ...� - . .. . i ... ii i i .ii v �� i �1_.�1'1 t_.i II_ 1 •� 1 4�Ji'.. 11 lC=1C1'I I lJ L kJ.. i..iJ 1. Jt-J I L'.I.-, !"• . J. _i l k I I I ' ' I I BORING li BORING 2 I PROFILE 1 a i 0 i 0 i 32/1 a i I 5 37/1'2 5 WC - 7 DO = 128 62%12 • � i i ! 10 VIrQ = 53/12 10 WC _ 5 I I i DO = 124 I +4 = 59 S@/5 —200 - 7 15 ' { ; 100/12 1 i I i I 20 I 2Q 109/12 I I { 2G/0 I i 25 I I i 25 1 I 30 s i 8J/18 . 30 I l � II ' I , ' NOTE: ;` Explano4on of Symbols presented on F1g. 3. , I-- ui LLI CL w c 4 ! 21 195'I�tlll EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS - !I 2 I j t I j 114 1 ( I - I v r%"ri r-11 h I I I I qLjLJL-11 'I t-M-14 --1AJf-, I f1r-1K1 I Ill I _IUYJ4Ab 1 1-1. 1b tEGEND TOPSOIL_: Silt, Jlayey, soft to firm, slightly moist to malst, i!S)hf brown SILT (OL); cla)ft'y, gravelly, hard, slightly moist; yellowish brown SILT and CLAY kML—CL); soft to firm, moist, light brown GRAVEL (GP): �andy, coarse gravel, very dense, moist, brown. MM to reddish browin Drive Somple, 2—':,inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive Sample, Standard Penetration Test. I 3/8—inch split spop:ni sample,' Drive sample blow count. Indicates that 32 blows of a 140- 132/12 pound Hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampldr 12 inches. 1. Exploratofy boringd were drilled on October 28, 1994 with c 4—inc6 diameter continuous flight power auger, while 0 7—inch auger was used for ;thd percolatiolp and pr011e holes. 2. Locations; of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from feat; res shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations; of exploratory borings were not measured and logs of exploratory boring' are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considore'd accurate on ly to the degree implied by the method used. S. The lines between ;materials shown on th I - I e exploratory boring logy represent the apprdximate bloundarlies between material types and the trarishloiis may be gradudl. 6. ound water was ;not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. LkE3ORATQE?X TMTING RF&JI TS WG=Water! Content! (%) DD=Dry D{ nsity (pp'f) +4--Per-centage reialned on #4 sieve —200—Pei'centage :Pas5ing No. 200 sieve 41121 9.5 I Huhtingdon I LEGEND AND NOTES F%- 3 .. . -..... . .. I...---.--.. ... — I I. —.I...—.-... .._. 1u-_. �.��I�ieJ��_r.-tJu1r�G I- . 1 f 1 -1 1 1 .. 1� I I . -1 L-1 *� I 1 113 1 tJ,:,-"--) I LIJ,,Y:J-4Jb -1 t' le 1- . I J z"S 4:6 IN. W, I ism Yt Mir wi Ck cli ,,._.. r ,..: r . . :: �:.r_.• t ,..t ti.. i t r .r .)I .. 11 li_t�.t 't Ill 1 t.1._i.._r�l L._i,J.J Jy JlJ1L1_ I' ��I I t HVNT*GDON ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, WC. TABLE n SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TESTREStiLTS 1 'JOB NO.4 12195 s .': uiir,s+� 7 `;la�7i ..J.M S t r- .. i .t.n ~� 2, <h�S/�,, h .O' ,a ......... y. ... tt.�r, ,tN) 1 •. ) ) I.'N)YC , � t +' '� p\ ; .{�'.. :9 W ...: T ... v�N tW;)M � AS' — 'V' il: 11 1,�t; � t � '^. .. � ... .. ' .. .; Y .: �': � "+2+