HomeMy WebLinkAbout44 El Mirador - 210712110001INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, CO 81631 Telephone: (970) 328-8755 COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1995-00 BP NO. 13204 OWNER: CANWEST LLC PHONE: 970-926-8920 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 1329, AVON, CO 81620 APPLICANT: MARK SCHNUPP PHONE: 970-390-7098 SYSTEM LOCATION: 44 EL MIRADOR, CORDILLERA, EDWARDS, CO TAX PARCEL NO. 2107-121-10-001 LICENSED INSTALLER: ARENA EXCAVATING, STEPHEN JEWETT LICENSE NO. 27-00 PHONE: 970-827-4221 DESIGN ENGINEER: LKP ENGINEERING, LUIZA PETROVSKA PHONE NO. 970-926-9088 INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A 4 BEDROOM RESIDENCE 11140 �►(%rtrL+ 1500 GALLON SEPTIC TANK, `1-54 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA, VIA 36 INFILTRATOR UNITS AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: INSTALL AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN DATED 5/27/00. BE SURE TO MAINTAIN ALL APPLICABLE SET BACK REQUIRE- MENTS. DO NOT INSTALL IN WET WEATHER, AND RAKE ALL TRENCH SURFACES TO PREVENT THE SMEARING OF SOILS. ENGINEER IS RESPON- SIBLE FOR FINAL INSPECTION. DO NOT BACK FELL ANY PART OF THE INSTALLATION UNTIL THE ENGINEER HAS INSPECTED AND APPROVED IT. BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SEPTIC SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: ` DATE: JUNE 20, 2000 CONDITIONS: 1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GRANTED IN 25-10-104, 1973, AS AMENDED. 2. THIS PERMIT IS VALID ONLY FOR CONNECTION TO STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE FULLY COMPLIED WITH COUNTY ZONING AND BUILDING REQUIREMENTS. CONNECTION TO, OR USE WITH ANY DWELLING OR STRUCTURE NOT APPROVED BY THE ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS SHALL AUTOMATICALLY BE A VIOLATION OF A REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT, AND WILL RESULT IN BOTH LEGAL ACTION AND REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. 3. CHAPTER IV, SECTION 4.03.29 REQUIRES ANY PERSON WHO CONSTRUCTS, ALTERS OR INSTALLS AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO BE LICENSED. FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM (TO BE COMPLETED BY INSPECTOR): NO SYSTEM SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS UNTIL THE SYSTEM IS APPROVED PRIOR TO COVERING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSTEM. INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: 1116 SQUAREFEET(VIA 36 INFILTRATOR UNITS AS PER DESIGN, ) INSTALLED CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK: 1500 GALLONS IS LOCATED DEGREES AND '10 FEET INCHES WEST FROM THE WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING. COMMENTS: ENGINEER FINAL CERTIFICATION RECEIVED AUGUST 7, 2000. THE LEACH FIELD FOR THIS SYS— TEM IS LARGE ENOUGH TO SERVICE A FOUR BEDROOM RESIDENCE, BUT THE TANK IS OVER —SIZED AND CAN ACCOMMODATE FIVE BEDROOMS. ANY ITEM NOT MEETING REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CORRECTED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS COMPLETED. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVALDATE: AUGUST 10, 2000 ,x.,d, 131• v- a- U , i%-If luummunityuevedapment-4 J7U U2b dblJ:# 2I 2 Ir1G0MPl®ta Applications Will NOT Be Accepted ,(Sites Plan KUST be attached) ISDS Permit Building Permit ## � 1320t .APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DIS20SAL SYSTEM PERMIT F_V, VTR0h'MENTAL HEAL'Tkf OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY P. 0. BOX 179 EAGLS, CO 81631 128-8755/927-382:� (El Jebel) �*,�*****�tw**+kit****�t**�**,v�e�+�*sr�e�t*ie*vv�exww�r���w,r,�***�r****rt***t*mow*•*****,tw�rw *' FEE SCHEDULE * PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00 +� *' SIZING AND SITE VISIT FEE $85.00 (''[THEN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SIZES THE * SYSTEM USING YOUR SOILS REPORT) MANE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" W PROPERTY OWNER: _. ( Kg\,rAi<T— I_ L - MAILING ADDRESS: V--r,) �, ,�0,3 13?g I�vcr�.c C.� PHONE: APPLICkNT/CONTACT PERSON: 4_ �G�►'yy �p PHONE. LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: PHONE: COMPAivY/DBA: TxCAD:17RESS : PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR : (V NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE ]DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: "r i in Z l vi� A Tax Parcel Number: Z t V 3 12t 10 (90 (_ Lot Size; 7.0CH Acwt s. Physical Address: -44 �A Vyllti 4c\. Uyu BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) (Y- Residential/Single Family Number of Bedrooms ( ) Residential/Multi-Family* Number of Bedrooms ( ) Commercial/Industrial* Type *These systems require design by a Registered Profeasi.onal Engineer TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Cl' k pplicable category) Well ( ) Spring ( ) :3a. face 1 ( ) Pub is Name of pp:, r : vL i(.C, APPLICAN {. Dv '� SIGNATURE: Date: �****+*****+�9W��r**,r***�********war*wsr*�r�•*x*****war********•x�**�v,�*********w�rvr�t* AMOUNT PAID; �' � � RECE I P11' j[: I 1 ZI A DATE: 6/ 12 CHECK #: 1— 7 CASHIER: ­ v It cvWw A d. v1 r W JGv—.jvv= "Mr 111t, rmut, u7 e rr: MCI' Enpnee August 7, 2000 Mr. Glens Wood CanWest Ventures, LLC 9 Vail Road Vail, CO 81657 ' 1E: ':q4^•' 0044' 32 Installation rojWallit No. 1995-00 Dear Glen. At the request of T{, an Au gust „. M,sx , 2 . wi d t construction site +era .loot f: > 1, Cordillera Filing No, 32, > 4 ott> olorado. The p ie Of'• `.site visits was to observe the installation of the septic systenj:. 'They installed the s stet. `� compliance w' Y b p t Hyst= dosign, Drawing No. I9266SD.D WG, dated May 27; li<Nb11,stem was iris :. �;: OB tl* above -named drawing. They installed a 1500- all,ott tW16i otn ent ' g f # precast, c� s�' ` ; with two risers on the aCccss openings of the tank. 7'he.� Wa, "10cated 30 feet we> i ftha t � of tt,c building. Thirty in size Standard lral i ` Y bers were instal foi'chps, Each row of trenches contained nine infiltrators. The' a om connected °a riat. t'butioh. In the last infiltrator of each trench, inspection Ports ..'r te' d. Horizontal d"° fi'?utter tta center of the tt`enches, was c feet or more. All piping 'w -inch PVC. Tliie pxh titMc.6s vas no more than 36 inches. 1f you have any questio isas4 not hesitate to r Sincerely, LKP Engineering, ROM etliza Petrovs -; President � +�►� : ' Sri .rF ��• .� .' •�•• At cc: Ms. Heather ' 1ti t it r-Environmenta,l h DiWpn, fall: 328-0349 ',IccanipWp�li;1Mv(ileslcWxldpclwpDOCSW9265qu,wpd , „ : {�.� Z1I IP-7-aPOM mnw 1 P- M7PM Tn- 1=10 I P f ni If fTV PMrl WI=U TI-I p0r=- a LKP ENGINEERING, INC. P.O. Boa 2837 Edwards, CO 81632-2837 Fax (970) 926-9089 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Location: Lot 1, El Mirador Cordillera #32 Eagle County, Colorado Project No.: 99266 Client: Glen Wood Canwest Ventures, LLC 9 Vail Road Vail, CO 81657 P-1 P-2 P-3 TIIvIE/DEPTH 20" 21-8/16" 22-8/16" 3:15 3" 2-4/16" 2-4/16" 3:25 14" 11" 4-4/16" 2" 10" 7-12/16" 3:35 17" 3" 5-4/16" 1" 12-4/16" 2-4/16" 3:45 18-8/16" 1-8/16" 6" 12/16" 13" 12/16" 3:55 Dry 6-12/16" 12/16" 13-12/16" 12/16" 4:05 7-8/16" 12/16" 14-8/16" 12/16" PERC RATE 0 MINANCH 13.3 MINANCH 13.3 MINANCH AVG PERC: 9 MINUTES PER INCH Average Percolation Hole Diameter: 8" Holes Dug and Presoaked: 5-24-00 Test Run: 5-25-00 PROFILE HOLE 1: 0 to 3 feet Topoil 3 to 8 feet Light brown, silty sand No Ground Water PROFILE HOLE 2: 0 to 8 feet Topsoil 8 to 9 feet Brown, silty sand No Ground Water rEB-23-2000 11:J6 H—P VEOIECH P.02118 GO..tech Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Jac S020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-9454 h pgeo C&hpgeotech.cont CG. V\lyi� let C:�'- 1 .c., dR- tires SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 1, FILING 32, EL MIRADOR CORDILLERA, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 100138 FEBRUARY 22, 2000 PREPARED FOR: CANWEST VENTURES, INC. ATTN: GLEN WOOD P.O. BOX 1329 AVON, COLORADO 81620 FEB-23-2000 11:36 H-P GEOTECH P.03i16 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. February 22, 2000 Canwest Ventures, Inc. Attn. Glen Wood P.O. Box 1329 Avon, Colorado 81620 Job No. 100 138 Subject: Report Transmittal, Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Lot 1, Filing 32, El Mirador, Cordillera, Eagle County, Colorado Dear Mr. Wood: As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study for the proposed residence at the subject site. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed building area consist of about 3 to 16 feet of stiff to very stiff sandy silt and clay fill overlying very stiff to hard sandy silty clay. Siltstone/claystone of the Eagle Valley Evaporite was encountered below the natural clays at depths ranging from. about 7 to 20 feet. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. The proposed residence can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils, bedrock or existing fill and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. The report which follows describes our exploration, 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. Thomas J. Westhoff Rev. By: SLP TJW/rso rEB-,e3-ZOOO 11:36 H-r UEOTECH r.d4%1b TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .............. . .................... I SITE CONDITIONS ............................ 2 SUBSIDENCE POTENTIAL ..................................... 2 FIELD EXPLORATION :.......... 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..... . ............................. 3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 4 FOUNDATIONS ........................................ 4 FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ..................... 5 FLOOR SLABS ........................................ 6 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM .................................. 7 SITE GRADING ........................................ 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................... 8 LIMITATIONS . . ........... 8 FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS H-P GEOTECH FEB-23-2000 11:36 H-P GEOTECH P.GS;iti PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located on Lot 1, Filing 32, El Mirador, Cordillera, Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to CANWEST Ventures, Inc. dated January 21, 2000. We previously conducted a preliminary geotechnical study for Filing 32 and presented our findings in a report dated June 22, 1998, Job No. 197 637. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposedconstruction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Plans for the proposed residence had not been developed at the time of this study. We expect the residence will be a one to two story wood frame structure possibly with a full or partial basement. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 10 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the assumed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. H-P GEOTECH FEB-23-2000 11:36 H-P GEOTECH P.06i16 -2- SITE CONDITIONS At the time of our field work, the site was vacant and covered with about 1 to 2 feet of snow. Structural fill has been placed to raise and flatten the building envelope area. The fill was placed between June 1 and June 16, 1998 and was observed and tested on a part-time basis by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. under our Job No. 198 369. The site is gently rolling to hilly with grades ranging from about 10 to 30 percent and generally slopes down to the southwest. There is about 78 feet of elevation difference across the property and about 24 feet across the building envelope. El Mirador Road borders the site on the north. Vegetation in the building envelope consists mostly of grass, with evergreen and aspen trees to the north and scrub oak below the building envelope to the south. SUBSIDENCE POTENTIAL Bedrock of the Pennsylvanian age Eagle Valley Evaporite underlies the site. These rocks are a sequence of gypsiferous shale, fine-grained sandstone and siltstone with some massive beds of gypsum and limestone. There is a possibility that massive gypsum deposits associated with the Eagle Valley Evaporite underlie portions of the lot. Dissolution of the gypsum under certain conditions can cause sinkholes to develop and can produce areas of localized subsidence. Sinkholes were not observed in the immediate area of the subject lot. No evidence of cavities was encountered in the subsurface materials; however, the exploratory borings were relatively shallow, for foundation design only. Based on our present knowledge of the subsurface conditions at the site, it cannot be said for certain that sinkholes will not develop. The risk of future ground subsidence on Lot I throughout the service life of the proposed residence, in our opinion, is low, however, the owner should be made aware of the potential for sinkhole development. If further investigation of possible cavities in the bedrock below the site is desired, we should be contacted. H-P GEOTECH rEB-�3-c�i00 11:37 H-H OEOTECH ,07,18 -3- FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on January 25, 2000. Three exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51HD drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak GeotechnicaI, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 13/a 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 and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered in the building envelope consist of about 3 to 16 feet of stiff to very stiff sandy silt and clay fill overlying very stiff to hard sandy silty clay. Siltstone/claystone of the Eagle Valley Evaporite was encountered below the natural clays at depths ranging from about 7 to 20 feet. The fill encountered in the borings is consistent with that observed and tested during its placement in 1998. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content and density, and percent silt and clay gradation analyses. Results of consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of the sandy silty clay fill from Boring 3 at 10 feet, presented on Fig. 4, indicate low compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The natural clay soils could be H-P GEOTECH FEB-23-2000 11:37 H-P GEOTELH r-,Ub, I -4- susceptible to compression when wetted under load. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS The existing fill is similar in type to the native soils and has been adequately compacted for footing support. Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils, bedrock, or existing fill. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils, bedrock or compacted structural fill should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. The settlements could be differential due to the variable bearing conditions. There could be some additional differential settlement if the subsoils become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 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 42 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 H-P GEOTECH rtB--LrJ�1F� 11 ; ` T n-r' UCU f tl.r1 r-. LJ7, lb -5- 12 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) Any topsoil or loose and disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense soils. If structural fill is required to re-establish the bearing elevation, it should be a non -expansive material, placed near optimum moisture content and compacted to 100 % of standard Proctor density. 6) A representative of the geotechnical 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 60 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence 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 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site soils. 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. BackfilI 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 H-P GEOTECH rto-e �ee1eJ10 11 �o n-r ueu i tl n ,- . le.v ,o -6- standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near walls, 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. 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 0.40. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 300 pcf. 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 compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. FLOOR SLABS The 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 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. H-P GEOTECH rEB-e3-eOOO 11;36 H-P UEOTECH P.11/18 -7- All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on -site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas and where bedrock is shallow that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2 % passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 11/2 feet deep. SITE GRADING The risk of construction -induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the building is located as planned and cut and fill depths are limited. We assume the cut depths for the basement level will not exceed one level, about 10 to 12 feet. Additional fill should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep, especially at the downhill side of the building envelope where the slope steepens. 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. H-P GEOTECH FEB-23-2000 11:38 H-P GEOTECH P.12i18 -g- 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. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on -site soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from foundation walls_ LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no H-P GEOTECH FEB-23-2000 11:38 H-P GEOTECH P.13%18 -9- warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings 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 geotechnical engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Thomas J. Westhoff Reviewed By: �ilev �; 1P222 .� Steven L. wV0 E. TJW/rso qTf OF CD��; cc: Don Eggars H-P GEOTECH r tB-G.)---d0o 11. u9 ri-r uEu l ELH r. l,ii lb / 8120 BENCH MARK: BASE OF PROPERTY CORNER ) / STAKE; ELEV. = 8130', ASSUMED. / /' / � / �oRING 2de Ole � t BUILDING \ BORING• BORING t 8120, / ENVELOPE8110 1 8120 8100 — 8110 .00 8090 / LOT 1 x 8100 BOBO 1 / 8090 LOT 2 8070 \ 8070 / 8080/ APPROXIMATE SCALE / 1" = 75' 1 / 8060 / NOTE: CONTOURS SHOWN ARE ADAPTED FROM / AERIAL SURVEY PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT 1 I HEPWORTH — PAWLAK i nrnTtnl\► nF CXPI_ORATORY BORINGS � Fio. 1 E 1 1vv i.Jo ! GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 11:39 m-H uEOTECH N. 15/ 1b BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3 ELEV. = 8125.4' ELEV. = 8114.2' ELEV. = 8112.7' 8125 8120 8115 8110 8100 8095 8090 QP2 WC-19.3 DD=122 32/12 WC-11.0 00-122 30/0 50/3 12/12 21/12 WC=10.6 OD-101 50/1 23/12 WC-14.9 21/12 WC=19.5 OD- 105 14/12 70/1 8125 8120 8115 8110 8105 8100 8095 8090 8085 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. 3. 8085 .�J .-- HFPWORTH — PAWLAK l !1l_4 OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig_ 2 IVV IJL7 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. rEii-ei-c-L)wd 11- �9 h-r, uEO fELH r. lb/ lb LEGEND: MANPLACED FILL; sandy silt and clay with scottered gravel, stiff to very stiff, moist, brown, traces of organics and root hairs. ©CLAY (CL); sandy, silty with occasional gravel. very stiff to hard, slightly moist to moist, gypsiferous, gray. SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE; very hard. slightly moist to moist. gypsiferous, gray. Eagle Volley Evaporite. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive sample; standard penetration test ( SPT ), 1 3/6-inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D - 1586. 39/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 39 blows of a 140-pound hammer foiling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. NOTES- 1 . Exploratory borings were drilled an January 25, 2000 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power ouger 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of 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. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. later. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( X ) DO = Dry Density ( pcf ) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve. i -- . I HFPWORTH — PAWLAK i PnPNn ANTI NOTES Fia_ 3 I i"" �"' ( GEOTECHNICAL, INC. ' FEB-23-2000 11:39 H-P GEOTECH P.17i16 bt 0 Moisture Content = 19.5 percent Dry Density = 105 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay (Fill) From: Boring 3 of 10 Feet No Movement upon wetting 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf . HFPWORTH — PAWLAK cu1171 i _rnN¢nl If1ATION TEST RESULTS Fiq. 4 lw i.Ou I GEOTECHNICAL, INC. ` ""-�- rtt3-G.�-GeJ�1�J 11 � �IrJ rt-t' latU I tl.l1 r, ltt� lb U Z J a U_ Z U `IJ i W C7 J Q a cc Q a W N H J W F- w U- 0 a D 0 m N a 1 f� R m W 1 = 2 N _ m N v u 'A S v x � z W C u 2 7R W W YD O N a n = W W Lo �k 0 0 J W a � y ` — � c z W N r N O e- Lo O z c _ a O O p co O rn qt r- to O = g u $ a �` o - O M to O u 0 "I Icq TOTAL P.18 uaaM rKUM UaNWEST VENTURES INC 970 479 1735 /�ry21-2000 10:12am FrwCordiIlorrlla►rtall Mouse .-III P-001/003wh sm Cm f-565 4Raw m G&ec Nevaattb-Par•bdc i�aor- 970A1S-79ip� oiarado sisal htnuary 20, 2M Fas: 9m9gs.645.j bP"gQhPP Rdtem Cordullem Consmuction Corporation Attu: Alma Crabbe P.O. Box si88 E4wag*• ('olorado 81632 Job No. 196 369 Subject: Summary of Obsenvion and T Fitt, Las 1, El Mirador, F' • of Building Envelope Smtetura! �8 , CotidUlm, Fa& Comity, Colorado Dear: Mr. Crabbe: As request-d, A rive of Hepwortb-pawlak Ccomchnical, Im. time obsw a wn and petfotmW part- testipg of 6iae p a aaod dal fitl Placcm= within &c butldusg eo�ekgw at the subj= sire betwcm Jura 1, and luxe 16. 1999. The results of sus obaervutioas and testing were . ed o0 daily Seld . eposts and are t�narined is this C�11era Canstrttctioa Co�Cratioa is fit- We pmvioaslY condmW a Pn } geotechuical spy for FiliAg 32 and presemW our dated June 22. 1998, lob No. 197 637. in a report The truildir g envelope area was dripped of Prey Pad uaconnrolled All and topsoil To aWe the naaual subgrade. The up¢olatrolled fill Wroady is place outside Me buildigl: envelope was = removed. No seepage was obsarved at the exposed s>l dace. A 3ubdrain MQ= �g'S� of perforated pipe bedded in scaecaad gravel was msudled at the mrurai subgrade surface to provide drainage for pot,amaal seasonal gr )urtdwater below the strucmral fill. The stratum, fill is estimated to be uP m about 20 feet deep. Stl==al f ill was placed in about 6 latch thick Ioom lifts, moisuue cocditioned with a waxer truck. and caxapacmd with a large vibratory simpsfam raft. Our test tnsetirs iadicaae'tar the str `i fill was cOmpacud to a mWmm of 100 Proctor dcr.:;iry (AS'!'M D 698) a tlnoistttre �� of sraadaid content S0nerally ranging from 3 percent below to of dmmin moisture. Laboratory classification tears on repmemative samples of the fill umenal inakm that the Material ranges from sandy lean clay to clayey sand with gravel Based on mr observations. teat results and uLfarlmomn provided by the contractor, the structural f! 11 placed within the building envelope should be suitable fot support of ca/Z0'cl rA31(]�] a-i9 ZO : t. T OOEZ-W-+*W inoD—UU Tax vz iu/-izi—lU—UUl JOB NAM., Lot 1, Filing 32 The Divide El Mirador, Cordillera Edwards CANWEST LLC JOB NO. one � nf�AT1A1J BILL TO DATE STARTED _ C, DATE COMPLETED DATE BILLED liq �ya b '001101n ISoo 36 = II l(o JOB COST SUMMARY b TOTAL SELLING PRICE TOTAL MATERIAL TOTAL LABOR INSURANCE SALES TAX MISC. COSTS TOTAL JOB COST GROSS PROFIT LESS OVERHEAD COSTS % OF SELLING PRICE NET PROFIT JOB FOLDER Product 278 JOB FOLDER ti PrlMed in US.A, 8122 8124 / 8126 / 812 8130 +' �Nt tK PARKING / TRAILER TRA5M DUMP5TER TOILET MATERIAL 5TORAGE GEOFAB 51LT FENCE TO BE ERECTED PRIOR TO CON5TRUCTION 4 LEFT IN PLACE UNTIL C.O. ZN,� 1��. v `%�—TY TYPICAL EXISTING TREES STANDARD INFILTRATOR N. T.S. I NI PERCOLA T70M TEST RESULTS Perc No. 1 Perc No, 2 Perc No. 3 <5 minutes per inch 13 minutes per inch 13 minutes per inch Average percolation rate recommended for design T = 9 minutes per inch. 0 a SOIL PROFILE W 0 PROFILE HOLE xfl PROFILE HOLE 12 0 to 3 feet Topsoil 0 to 8 feet Topsoil 13 to 8 feet Light brown, 8 to 9 feet Brown, silty sand silty sand No ground water No ground water - Q 0 DESIGN CALCULATIONS d z Design percolation rate T = 9 minutes per inch Number of bedrooms = 4 Maximum daily Flow = Omox 0mox = Vpersonslbdrm x 75 gallons/person/day x 15OX 0max 900 gpd SEPTIC TA V = 0:mox/24hrs x 30 hrs , cV V = U e 15I gallon, two compartment precast concrete tank by Copland Concrete or equivalent ro O ABSORPTLOf'AREA Z (3 A = Omax 5 x ✓T vow A = 900155 x ✓9 = 540 S. f. A ti Q W -- rr BasedC125s. ficotio Rate: _ - - = - - -- _ 0 J �O- A 0. 9P /s. f. Q A = Standard Infiltrator Chamber System in a trench configuration with on allowed 50 percent v1 Z Q reduction in the obsorpti n area is recommended. W Acorrected = 56.3 s. f. ( V cr- e� a-sf� e Infiltrator Chamber = 15.5 s. f. _j O Use 36 In frl tra for hambers in four trenches with 9 In frl trators in each. C� z--i Q "1 QC W V NOTES• OJ 1. The building sewer line from the house to the septic tank shall have a maximum slope of 114 inch per foot. Bends in the building sewer shall be limited to 45 degrees. 2. The septic tank shall be installed level The tank shall have removable covers or manholes to within:8 inches of the finished grade, for inspection and cleaning. 3. Excavate three (3) feet wide trenches.; The horizontal distance from sidewall to sidewall between the trenches shall be a minimum of six (6) feet. 4. The bottom and the sidewalls of the Trenches shall be raked to eliminate smearing. 5. Assemble and install the Infiltrator Chambers in the trenches according to the manufacturers recommendations. 6. Backfill the sidewall area with native on -site soil for proper support. V 7. Backfill the trenches with a minimum of 12 inches of tamped soil cover. 8. Avoid vehicle traffic over the system. _ W 9. All installations shall meet the rules and regulations of the Eagle County Environmental Health Division, W Chapter 4, Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. 10. The Septic System Installation shall be` inspected by the Design Engineer prior to backfilling 1500 GALLON TWO COMPARTMENT CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK ' PLAN VIER' .. ✓ ° .. r • 5'-8" R I' 12 -2 20" SIDE VIEW I -1LTRATOR CHAMBER DETAIL A - A N. T. S. rr`• V rn 00 o N � M (0 c0 N co rn O0 -- bw 0) 'o vi 0) 0 x ^I v w 00 r- 00 n ` W K) o 00 N c0 xN O m b�n 0 WSJ Or- a ... w - M ok �Nltt tl ftfillltiTlrq�i 49 REGfs�,,,��f ET O R -0 ; 29526 ; cc ,r DRAWN BY L.P. • CHECKED BY L.P. PROJECT NO.: _ 99266 N. T. S.DA M 05-27-2000 BY COPLAND CONCRETE OR EQUIVALENT NOTE. SITE PLAN BY SCOTT SONES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT INC DRAWING NO.: 99266SD.DWG SHEET 1 OF 1