HomeMy WebLinkAbout220 Sunset Ln - 239128401001 - 1346-94ISINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone: 328-8755
YELLOW COPY OF PEPMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1346
Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system.
OWNER: Anthony & Carolyn Scheer PHONE: 920-2006
MAILINGADDRESS: P.O. BOX 2299 city: Aspen state: CO zip:.. 81611
APPLICANT: Belk/Overholt Construction PHONE: 963-2006
SYSTEM LOCATION: Sunset Ln. , El Jebel TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2391-284-01-001
LICENSED INSTALLER: Ed Dreager/Dreager Excavating LICENSE NO:-2 9 - 9 4
DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM:
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK
ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS:
SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 740 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Install 20 infiltrator units in trenches, or 260 lineal ft. SB2 in tree
Install inspection portals at the ends of each trench. ONLY install a trench system
No beds are to be installed on this site. Call for inspection prior to backfi]ling
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: LA �- DATE: L
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: 740 SQUARE FEET.
INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 1250 GALLON 80' DEGREES 15 FEET FROM east facing side of house
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: Be sure that a clean out was installed between the building sewer and the septic
tank. IV
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE:
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE:
(RE -INSPECTION IF NECESSARY)
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS
APPLICANT / AGENT:
7'.7J�:11
PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE 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: Anthony and Carolyn Scheer
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2299, Aspen, CO 81611 PHONE: 920-200R
APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: f% '�%��D� �f G��✓7��il� PHONE: o UD
LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR:
/} PHONE:
COMPANY/DBA: ADDRESS:
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (K) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR
LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
Legal Description: Lot 1, Filing 3, SoderhPrg Snhd i vi c; nn
Tax Parcel Number: f 9�- p �� M - Q0% Lot Size: 5 27 @Grp-q
Physical Address: ] Sunset Lance, arbond l( CO.. IS1R22
BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category)
(� Residential/Single Family
( ) Residential/Multi-Family*
( ) Commercial/Industrial*
TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY:
(� Well ( )
( ) Public Name
(Check applicable category)
Spring ( ) Surface
of Supplier:
Number
Number
Type _
of Bedrooms S
of Bedrooms
*These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer
SIGNATURE: Date:
***********************************************q***************t1*************
AMOUNT PAID: C 1JT:j RECEIPT #: ! DATE:
CHECK #: '7 0 CASHIER:
COMMUNITY DEVLOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
(303) 328-8730
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
June 20, 1994
500 BROADWAY
P.O. BOX 179
EAGLE, COLORADO 81631
FAX: (303) 328-7185
Anthony & Carolyn Sheer
P.O. Box 2299
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1346-94 Parcel #2391-284-01-001
Property located at: Sunset Lane, El Jebel
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sheer,
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,
Shannon Garton
Environmental Health Specialist
ENCL: Information Brochure
Final ISDS Permit
cc: files
COMMUNITY DEVLOPMEM
DEPARTMENT
(303)328-8730
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
DATE: May 5, 1994
TO: Dreager Excavation
500 BROADWAY
P.O. BOX 179
EAGLE. COLORADO 81631
FAX: (303) 328-7185
FROM: Environmental Health Division
RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System
Permit No.1346, Tax Parcel # 2391-284-01-001
Property Located at: Sunset Lane, El Jebel
Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1346 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 Tania M.
Busch -Weak at 328-8755.
t
cc: files
I IEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81o01
March 31, 1994 Fax 303 945-8454
Phone 303 945-7988
Tony Scheer
P.O. Box 2299
Aspen, Colorado 81612 Job No. 194 143
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 1, Soderberg Subdivision, Filing 3, Eagle County,
Colorado.
Dear Mr. Scheer:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for
design of foundations and percolation testing at the subject site. The study was
conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to
you dated March 4, 1994. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single story wood frame
structure above a crawl space and located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. The floor of
the garage will be slab -on -grade. Cut depths are expected to range between about 2 to
4 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively
light.
If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those
described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in
this report.
Site Conditions: The site is vacant and covered with scattered brush, grass and weeds
in the building area. A pinon and juniper forest borders the south side of the building
site. The ground surface slopes strongly down to the southwest with about 5 feet of
elevation difference in the building site. Below the site the slope steepens down to the
south and west.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating two exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs
of the pits are presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 10 to 12
inches of topsoil, consist of very stiff plastic clay overlying gravel, cobble and boulder
basalt rock in a highly calcareous clay matrix below 2 1/2 to 3 feet. Results of swell -
consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the upper clay,
presented on Fig. 3, generally indicate low compressibility under existing moisture
conditions and light loading and a low expansion potential when wetted. The
underlying calcareous clay and rock subsoils are not expected to significantly settle or
heave when wetted under light loading. No free water was observed in the pits at the
time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist.
Tony Scheer
March 31, 1994
Page 2
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread
footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil designed for an allowable soil bearing
pressure of 2,000 psf for support of the proposed residence. Settlement/heave is
expected to range up to about 1 inch and occur mainly from wetting of the bearing
soils. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet
for columns. Loose or disturbed soils and existing topsoil encountered at the
foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to the undisturbed, firm, natural soils. Voids created by
boulder removal should be backfilled with concrete or compacted road base. Exterior
footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost
protection. Placement of footings at least 42 inches below the exterior grade is
typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and
bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12
feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should be designed to resist a
lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for the
on -site soil (excluding oversized rock) as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. The upper clays have expansion potential and
there is a risk of some slab movement if the subgrade were to become wet. 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 the garage slab for support
and drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than
50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% 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 imported granular soils such as road base devoid of vegetation, topsoil
and oversized rock. The on -site clay will be expansive when compacted and should not
be used as subfloor fill.
Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration,
it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater may develop
during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. The stiff clay soil and frozen
ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below
H-P GEOTECH
Tony Scheer
March 31, 1994
Page 3
grade construction, such as retaining walls and crawl space 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 1 1/2 feet deep.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided
during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab
areas and to at least 90 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape
areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to
drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum
slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of
3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
Percolation Testing: A profile pit (Pit 2) was excavated and three percolation tests
were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the
site. The log of the pit is presented in Fig. 2 and the percolation test results are
presented in Table II. Based on our findings, the tested area is suitable for an
infiltration septic disposal system. The percolation level should extend below the upper
stiff clay soil and into the underlying calcareous rocky soil encountered at about 3 feet.
Due to the clay content and variable percolation rate, the leaching area should be
oversized.
H-P GEOTECH
Tony Scheer
March 31, 1994
Page 4
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 pits
excavated at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our
experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the
subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions
encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we
should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations
presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
l
Steven L. Pawlak,
Reviewed By:
t
l � J_
Daniel E. Hardin,
SLP/ro
Attachments
cc: Varouj Hairabedian Architect
H-P GEOTECH
- - ..... 100\
Approximate Scale
1" = 60'
Sunset Drive
Edge of Pavement
Building
\ Setback Lines' ----,
I
I
I
P-1
Pit 1 P-2 P-3 I I
� 0 I
Proposed Pit 2 I
Residence
qO
oo
I HEPWORTH-PAWLAK I Location of Exploratory Pits I
194 143 GEOTECHNICAL, inc. and Percolation Test Holes Fig. 1
Pit " Pit 2
a1
elev=93' elev=94'
g;
4, '
WC=1 1 .6
4- , DD=98
�lC=11 .0 LL=32
90 DD=102 8e Pl=10 °0
-200=G3
rD
W o
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; organic silty sandy clay, dark brown.
ti
F1 CLAY (CL); SANDY, scattered basalt rock fragments, very stiff, slightly
moist, brown, slightly calcareous, medium plastic, blocky.
GRAVEL, COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GC); sandy clay matrix, basalt rock
to 3' + size, medium dense, slightly moist, light brown, highly calcareous.
}� Hand driven 2" diameter liner sample.
.-' Disturbed bulk sample.
NOTES:
1. The exploratory pits were dug on March 10, 1994 with a 426 Cat backhoe.
2. Locations of the exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing
from features shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of the exploratory pits were obtained by interpolation between
contours on the site plan provided and checked by hand level.
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate
only to the degree implied by the method used.
5. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Moisture Content (%) LL= Liquid Limit (%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf) PI = Plasticity Index (%)
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
194 143 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK Logs of Exploratory Pits Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. 9 p 9'
W
0
0 1
U)
V)
tv
2
E
0
0 0
t=
0
N
2
E
0
" 3
Moisture Content = 11.0 percent
Dry Unit Weignt = 102 pcf
Sample of: Sandy clay
I I From: Pit 1 @ 2 feet
! I
i
I
Expansion
Upon Wetting I
j
I i .
I I
► I
i I I (II � I Ili
o. 6 ,cc
►
j
I
I
I
l i
Moisture Content = 11.6 percent
pry Unit Weic,t - 08 pcf
Sample of: Sand clay
Y d Y
From: Pit 2 @ 2.5 f eet
I
'�
`
l i !
I
� � I►! ��� i ! I
� I lip
I
I
I
V
I
No Movement
i Wetting
Up
on p g
"I
i
i
I
i.
Ii
► �
I (ii
I �
I
I
I
I I
I
10-M
194 143
1.0
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK IGEOTECHNICAL, Inc. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 3
d-
d
rn
r
O
Z
m
O
U
Z
U_
z
U
w
H
0
0
Q
Q
a
F-
CC
0
a
w
U)
J
D
U)
W
U)
W
a
O ~
J V
N Q
m
U
M
U
A
>
c
(n
c
N
co
N
W
7 =
W
F
W Z
z I
IL ¢
U i F
Z O N
� U
F}
" x
W
O
J
J
d
w
cc
W
Q
a
o
a
cN
N N
(Y)
x N o w
(0a
h
a
Z
0
Zo
Q
Z
N
0
0
a
cc
(�
J
W
a
cc
J
~
N
jN
CO
TT
Z O
W
5 ?
r^
W
F
H N Z�—
O
Z U
N
~
N
c-
Q
�
W w
�
N
a
U
O
J
J
6.
y
a
r
N
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE 11
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 114
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
50
15
water added
water added
water added
water added
10
9 1 /4
3/4
30
11
10
1
10
9 1/2
1/2
10 7/8
10 3/8
1/2
11
10 1 /2
112
11 1 /4
10 3/4
1/2
P-2
38
15
water added
water added
water added
water added
8
7
1
20
8 1/2
7 3/4
3/4
8 1/2
7 3/4
3/4
8 3/4
8
3/4
8
7 1/4
3/4
8
7 1 /4
314
P-3
42
15
water added
water added
water added
water added
water added 1
10
7 7/8
2 1 /8
10
10 1 /8
8 5/8
1 1/2
10 1 /8
8 5/8
1 1/2
10 1 /8
8 7/8
1 1 /4
10 1 /4
8 3/4
1 1/2
10 1 /4
8 3/4
1 1/2
Note: Holes were dug and soaked on March 10 and the tests were conducted on March 11, 1994.
All holes were in calcareous clay matrix soil with rock fragments.
nZ
� � j
� � � {
E,i'�
\ �' , � f
`,� � f � ��
� I
.
.:. � ..
_.
1 f,
;. ; ;r � ., � arc ;�;�s�:. �_ � :,; _ ,
t _
. ...... ..... :.. t.. .-..- e.... .. ... .. -- -... .r �.. -