HomeMy WebLinkAbout1100 Forest Rd - 218923301003 - 1844-99INDIVIDUAL 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. 1844-99 BP NO. 12432
OWNER: JAVIER AND CYNTHIA GONZALEZ-BRINGAS PHONE: 970-927-0287
MAILING ADDRESS: 405 PARK AVE #F3, BASALT, CO 81621
APPLICANT SAME PHONE:
SYSTEM LOCATION: 0900 FOREST DRIVE EL JEBEL CO TAX PARCEL NO. 2189-233-01-003
LICENSED INSTALLER: PIFCO. DUANE PIFFER LICENSE NO. 66-99 PHONE: 970-963-8176
DESIGN ENGINEER: PHONE NO,
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: MINIMUM FOR A THREE BEDROOM RESIDENCE
1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK 1350 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA VIA 44 CHAMBERED UNITS AS REQUESTED BY OWNER,
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: INSTALL IN SERIAL DISTRIBUTION IN TRENCHES WITH A CLEANOUT BETWEEN THE TANK AND THE HOUSE,
AND INSPECTION PORTALS IN EACH TRENCH. RAKE ALL TRENCH SURFACES TO PREVENT SMEARING OF SOILS, AND DO NOT INSTALL IN
WET WEATHER. FENCE OFF LEACH FIELD AREA TO PREVENT ANIMALS FROM GRAZING OVER IT. CALL EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENT-
AL HEALTH FOR FINAL INSPECTION PRIOR TO BACK FILLING ANY PART OF THE INSTALLATION, OR WITH ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING
INSTALLATION. BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SEPTIC SYSTEM HAS RECEIVED FINAL APPRO-
VAL.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: SEPTEMBER 9.1999
CONDITIONS:
1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS,
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GRANTED 1N 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 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: 1350 —_ SQUARE FEET (VIA 44 TNFTT.TR ATo R TTNTTS }
INSTALLED CONCRETE TANK: 1000 GALLONS IS LOCATED 2b3_ DEGREES AND 23_ FEET FROM THE CLFANOUT
COMMENTS:
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 APPROVAL _ . _ _ _ �1 r(� `/� f./�1/ DATE: OCTOBER 5. 1999
(Site Plan MUST be attached)
ISDS Permit # 1 0 qq _ � q
APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
` ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY
P. 0. BOX 179
EAGLE, CO 81531
328-8755/927-3823 (E1 Jebel)
**************************************************************************
* PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00
*
* MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER"
PROPERTY OWNER: AAJ(tv1- tw& C N 4 PHONE: _(970) `l11 of i7
MAILING ADDRESS: Lt v S V AA X� A-1 r E_iul'Ml 7 CO (6 �
APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: PHONE: 0?7�- ) Wo Z IL
MAILING ADDRESS: _
LICENSED ISDS CONTRACTOR: `T� �_ PHONE:
COMPANY/DBA: ADDRESS:
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: +64 New Installation ( ) Alteration ( ) Repaii
LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
Building Permit # ,8 �3c2_ ( if known)
Aoxtf
Legal Description: Subdivision: Cu t rC►L Caeol/Aling: _Block: Lot No.
O 0 3 �.
Tax Parcel Numbe - - Lot Size:
Street Address: 0goo
BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category)
(�) Residential/Single Family
( ) Residential/Multi--Family*
( ) Commercial/Industrial*
TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category)
(l ) well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface
( ) Public Name of Supper:
Number of Bedrooms
Number of Bedrooms
Type
*These systems requiredAsig^p\,by h Rtglstered Professional Engineer
SIGNATURE: / Date •
TO BE COMPLETED 31BY COUNTY
AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT #: 1 �FS3_ DATE: 3 aA Cl
CHECK #: l f4c2_1k, CASHIER:
ISDS Permit # jLgq - q 1 Date
ISDS Final Inspection_
Comleteness Form
Tank is I000 gal. Tank Material /a(1Y
Tank is located 7t _ft. and Q7� degrees from fit w�
(permanent landmark)
Tank is located ft. and degrees fro
(petmenant landmark)
JL/_ Tank set level. Tank lids within 8" of finished grade.
Size of field t2 units lineal ft.
Technology , /1 f S
Cleanout is installed in between tank and house(+ 1/100€t).
There is a 'IT" that goes down 14 inches in the inlet and
outlet of the tank.
Inlet and outlet is sealed with tar tape, rubber gasket etc.
a/ Tank has two compartments with the larger compartment closest to the
house.
JL Measure distance and relative direction to field. 30
Depth of field ft.
Soil interface raked.
Inspection portals at the end of each trench.
y% Proper distance to setbacks.
Chambers properly installed as per manufacturers specifications.
(Chambers latched, end plates properly installed, rocks removed from
trenches, etc.) 35
Type of pipe used for building sewer lined leach field Q
Other
Inspection meets requirements.
Copy form to installer's file if recommendations for improvement were
suggested.
ACTION TAKEN:
Setbacks
Well Potable House Property Lake Dry Tank Drain
Water Lines line Stream Gulch
Fe100 25 20 10 50 25 10 10
Tang 50 10 5 10 50 10 * 10
EAGLE COUNTY ENV. HEALTH
P.O. BOX 179
EAGLE, CO 81631
JOB
SHEET NO. OF
CALCULATED BY DATE
CHECKED BY DATE
I :
i -
i
..-�. _._.._. _.... :::._.::::... :...... _-- ......... :..... ...
:::...__.-t..�__Y"....��...::c......::��..l
:_ :.. ._. _._..._. .__... ... .. _._. _.....—._.._. _..._._.... ...... :. ..... . ............ _.. __.._ ... __ _... _ ._............ . ..:.
L J.
..-...__._.__�_._
aapoucT Tp41 (svo suers) 2wl (pwm) ®®hc eMK 01111 t0 OM MM70LL rag I-e0Pt25 6Ilo
MAR 12 '99 07:22PM MM TEAGUE
14LEPWORTH-PAWLAX GIRCrMCHNICAL, INC.
16
1"00 4CIA
SMR"dt%
Glenwood spdNp. co m6ft
Fast fm 945-6m
Phone 9w %3dnn
APR
utyl-ry
I
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED GONZAIM-BRINGAS RESIDENCE
LOT 8, COULTER CREEK RANCH
COTTONWOOD PAM
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 197 704
JANUARY 239 1M
PREPARED VOR.-
JAVIER GONZALYS-BRINGAS -
C/O JOHN BACEMAN
P.10. BOX 1842
ASPEN, COLORADO $1611
P.1
MAR 12 '99 07:22PM HARRY TEAGIE P.2
TABLE OF CONTEN`i'S
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ................................. 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ..... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CONDITIONS ......................... 2
FIELD EXPLORATION ................. r :................. ..... 2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... 2
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ........................... 3
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
FOUNDATIONS ........................................ 3
FLOOR SLABS ........................................ 4
SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................... 3
PERCOLATION TESTING ................................ 6
LL IITATIONS................................................ 6
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 TESL' RESULTS
TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
MAR t2 '99 97.23PM MARRY TEAGLE P.3
HE P NORTS - PAWLAS GRaMCHMCAL, INC.
January 23, 1998
Javier Gonzales-Bringas
c/o Iohn Backman
P.O. Box 1842
Aspen, Colorado 81611 Job No. 197 704
Subject: Report Transmittal, Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed
Gonzales-Bringas Residence, Lot 8, Coulter Creek Ranch, Cottonwood
Pass, Eagle County, Colorado
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study for the proposed residence at the
subject site.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the Wloratory borings drilled in: the proposed
building area consist of about 2% to 3 feet of topsoil and very stiff silty clay overlying
relatively dome basalt fragmmim in a sandy clay matrix. Groundwater was not
encountered in the borings at the dme of drilling.
The proposed residence can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural basalt
gravel subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. The upper
clay soils are expansive and should be removed below the building area.
The report which follows describes our exploration, summarizes a= findings, an&
presents our recommendations, It is important that we provide consultation during
design, and geld services during construction to review and monitor the impleatenmion
of the geotechnical recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAS GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Jordy Z. Adamson, It. P.E.
Rev. By: DER
MAR 12 199 07:23PM HARRY TEAGLE P.4
PURPOSE AND SCOPE Of STUDY
This report presents the mutts of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be
located on Lot 8, Coulter Creek Ranch, Cottonwood Past, 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 m accordance
with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to John Backman dated
December 15, 1997.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to
obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained daring
the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification,
compressibility or swell and other engineering characneristim. 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 rile data obtained during this study and presents our
conclusions, design recommendations and other geotecbnicat engineering considerations
based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed residence will be a two story wood frame structure Iocated as
shown on Fig. 1. Ground floor will be slab -on -grade. Grading for the strtuctUM is
assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths up to about 5 feet. We assume relatively
light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction.
If building loadings, location or grading playas change significantly from those
described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations conu dmd in
this report.
H-P GWTECH
MPR 12 '99 07:23PM HARRY TEAGUE P.5
ME COMMONS
The site was vacant and covered with about 2 feet of snow at the time of our
held work. The area of the proposed residence had been cleared of vegetation. The
ground surface in the building area is relatively flat with a alight slope down to ttne
west. There is about 3 fact of elevation difference across the building area. A small
trailer is located in the area of the proposed residence. Vegetation consists of sagebrush
and scattered suds of aspen trees.
FM -D FJMORATION
The field exploration for the project was couducted on December 29, 1997.
Three exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. I to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter condwous
flight augers powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK 51Hb drill rig. The borings
were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Ceotcchnicai, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with lib inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows
from a 140 poured hammer falling 30 inches. This test is sim0ar to the standard
penetration test dawn -bed 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, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review
by the project engineer and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDI'X'IONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Fig. 2. The subsoils in the building area (Borings 1 and 2) consist of about 1=h Beet of
H-P GEOTECH
MAR 12 199 07:24PM HARRY TEAGUE P.6 ,;-
-3-
topsoil and I to i SA feet of very stiff sandy clay overlying relatively dense basalt
fragments in a sandy clay matrix. The subsoils in the leach field area (Profile Bori*
consist of 2 feet of topsoil and S 'A feet of very stiff sandy clay overlying dense basalt
fragments in a sandy clay matrix.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included
natural moisture content and density, Atterberg limits and finer than sand size gradation
analyses. Results of swell -consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed
drive samples of the upper clay soils in the proposed building area, presented on Fig. 4,
indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading and a
high expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The clays were
moderately compressible upon increased loading after wetting. Atterberg limits testing
indicates the clay soils have high plasticity. The laboratory testing is summarized in
'Fable I.
No free water was encountered m the borings at dw time of drilling and the
subsoils were slightly moist to moist_
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The shaLlow clays encountered on the site are highly expansive and should be
removed from the building area. The basalt fragments in a sandy, clay matrix should
provide adequm support for a spread footing foundation. Based on the borings there is
21h to 3 feet of topsoil and clay overlying the basalt gravels in the proposed building
area.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
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 basalt gravels below the topsoil and clay.
M-P GaorECH
MAR 12 '99 07:24PM HARRY TEAGUE P.7
-4-
The
design, and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a
spread footing foundation system.
1)
Footings placed on the undisturbed natural basalt gravels should be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 paf. The upper
clay soils are highly expansive and should be removed from the building
area. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and
constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less.
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 area 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 wails should be reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assumJAg an unsupported length of at least
10 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be
designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent
fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for on -site basalt gravel or imported granular
soils as backdU.
5)
The topsoil, clay and amy loose or disturbed soils should be removed and
the footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural gravel
soils. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be
dewatered before concrete placement.
6)
A representative of the geotecbnkal engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing cou&tioas.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil and sandy clay, are suitable to
support ligbdiy loaded slab -on -grade construction. The shallow clay soils have a high
expansion potential which could result in slab d auras if the subsoil become wetted.
H-P GEo'ICK
MAR 12 '99 07:24PM HARRY TEAGUE
P.8
-3-
The clays should be removed below the building areas. To reduce the effects of some
differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing wails and
column 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 slabs -on -grade to act as a leveling course.
This material should consist of tutus 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 moist= content wear optirmim. Required
fill should consist of the on -site basalt gravel or suitable imported granular materials
devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. The on -site expansive clays should
not be used as M within the building area.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
3} Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be .
avoided during construction. Dryitlg could increase the expansion
potential of the clay soils.
2) Exterior backfdl should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab area and to at least 90 % of the maximmu 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 Wm in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas.
H-P GE0TICH
MAR 12 '99 07:25PM HARRY TEAGUE•
P.9
-6-
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation, bests were conducted, on January 6. 1998 to evaluate the feasibility of
an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile boring and three
percolation holes were drilled at locations as shown on Fig. 1. The test holes were
drilled with 6 inch diameter auger and were spewed with water one day prior to testing.
The soils encountered in the percolation holes arc similar to those encountered in the
Profile Boring shown on Fig. 2 and consist of sandy clay. The percolation but results
are presented in Table U.
The measured percolation rates were quite variable, from 40 to 240 minutes per
inch. Relatively slow percolation rates are typical of expansive clays such as those
found at this site. It had been our experience that percolation tests performed in auger
borings can result in slow rates due to restricted permeability by smearing of the sides
of the holes with the auger. We recommend that additional percolation tests be
performed in hand dug holes prior to construction. We expect that the site will require
a civil engineer to design the iuffitration septic disposal system.
LnWrATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principle3 and practices m this area at this time. We make no
warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the 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 inwrpolation 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
H-P GadTscm
MAR 12 '99 07:25PM HARRY TEAGLE
-7-
encountered during construction appear di %rent from those described in this report, we
should be notified so that t-evaluation of the recomnmendations may be made.
This report teas 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 itnplementatioa of our
reco=mndadons, and to verify that the rm tandations have been, appropriately
interpreted. Significant dmiga changes may require additional analysis or modifications
to the recommeadadons 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.
HEpwoitm - PAWLAK GEOTECEWCAL, INC.
Iordy Z. Adamson. Jr. P.E.
Reviewed By:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
JZAllcsm
cc: K= & Associates - Ate: Brian Kurtz
H-P GEmcH
MAR 12 199 07:2G" HARRY TEAGLE
P.11
NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN
WAS PREPARED FROM i
A FIELD SKETCH BY I
H-P GEOTECH. I
� ----- -----------------
EXI"NG DRIVEWAY
� / I
I
I
I
• i
BORING 1 I
I
I
1
PROPOSED
RESIDENCE 1
i
BORING 2
I
i
I
I
I
I
Fi
I
BENCH (NARK: GROUND AT �
EkISTING WELL;
ELEV. - 100d. ASSUMED. I
NOT TO SCALE
i
P1 I
. I
PROFILE BORING I
a '
P 2 LEGEND:
• SOIL. BORING
a P 3 a PERCOLATION TEST
4
D
(n
N
I197 704 HE WORT I PAWC. LOCATION OF EXPLORAMRY WRINGS Fig. 1
MAR 12 '99 07:26PM HARRY TEAGLE
t. P.12
BORING 1
BORING 2
PROFILE BORING
ELEV. - 103.3'
ELEV. — 1Old
ELEV. - 97.5'
105
-
i05
15/12
WC-248
00a9B
100
—was
100
• • 47/12
1�r:
w=13a
wCft25.7
—ZQ0.�35
Go-"
my
e
35/12
95
•i
1M�1�.3
1glr2
25
I
do
m
?3r2
W
•
MOW
Doming
90
•� 20/3
LL�ss
s0
xD%12
tl
ra
` w
,.• ra/4
ag
8S
Nate: Explanation of syrnbvls is shown
on Fig. 3.
197
704
HEPWORTH — PAWLAK
LOGS OF
EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL. INC.
MAR 12 199 07: 26PM HARRY TEAGLfE
P.13
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL.; sandy silty clay, organic, stiff, moist. dark brown, upper 4 inches frozen.
CLAY (CL); silty, slightly sandy. very stiff, slightly moist to moist, reddish brown, high plasticity.
BASALT FRAGMENTS (GC); gravel to bouldir'size, in a sandy day matrix, medium dense to dense.
slightly moist. reddish to whitish brown. coicareous.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2—inch I.D. California liner samples
Drive sample; standard penetration test ( SPT ). 1 3/8—inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D — 1556.
I
18/1Z Drive sample blow count; indicates that 18 blows of a 140—pound hammer failing 30 inches were
required to drive the California or 5PT sampler 12 inches.
TPractical refusal to auger drilling.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on December 29. 1997 with a 4—inch diameter continuous flight power
auger.
2. Locations of exploratory bariings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown
on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark
shown on Fiq. 1.
4. The exploratory baring 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.
G. No Free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling.
Fluctuation in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results;
WC - Water Content ( X )
DD - Dry Density ( pef )
--200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
LL — Liquid Limit ( X )
PI - Plasticity Index ( X )
1 197704 1 GEOTECNICAL, INC. LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 3 1
MAR 12 '99 07:26PM HARRY TEAGUE
P.14
k�
5
4
3
2
3
ae
2
Moisture Content = 2k6 percent
Dry Density = $B pof
Sample of. Slightly Sandy Clay
From: Boring 1 at 1.5 Feet
Expansion
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
Expansion
upon
+Matting
`z
Moisture Content - 25.7 percent
Dry Density ^ 94 pef
Sample of: Sandy day
From: Boring 2 at 1.5 Feat
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
197 704 LHEPWORTH — PAIN�AK SWELL —CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
OTECHNICAL.. INC.
100
Fig. 4
MAR 12
'99 07:27PMi HARRY TEpQ
P.
0
•.
z
�
� E
'3 m
E
a
M $
V
IC2
caw
v
c
a
C
c
u� U
H
a
rn m
W � _
U
z
N
a
I
11!
V W
w
3 x
ul
0
uj
w m
{:J
sr
V uj Q
1 It
cr
m
i G
LL
Q
a 4
LLW
Q
� W
0.
W
� m
n
cm
4 o
cr1
LA
4
r-
a
8
u
a
uo
m
r
N
C
a`
MAR 12 '99 07.- 7PM HARRY TEAGLIE
P.16
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
r-CriL�V6AI ION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 197 704
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
WATER DEPTH
WATER DEPTH
DROP IN
AVERAO1s
(MIN)
AT START OF
INTERVAL
AT ENO OF
WATER
COLATION
INCHESI
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
LEVEL
(INC I+ I
RATE
1MIN-IINCH)
IIN
P-1
54
is
39A
39
A
_
75
39
38%
y�
30
38%
38'A
va
30
394
38%
'k
P-2
43
16
24%
24
'A
120
f 5
24
23%
y4
30
23%
23
30
23
22%
%
p"3
34
18
15 A
15 %
36
40
is
15%
15
,p
30
- 75
15
NOTE: PercoWon tests were performed on January 8&. 1998. The bast holes warp soaked with water the previous day and
Protected from freezing avemlght with rigid foam inwWtlon. The sa temparaturss at the time of the per�calation test
Was Gbout 340 F.
ISDS PERMIT # I(5yy- '?i
Kljw- -cQU 0 DFA
I' l oo uq a RIM
.OWNER: _ &7fil Z--� Z 9I'ih 4 a
-PHSYSICAL ADDRESS 0 9Qo es F
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:d o� rood 4yP
MAILING ADDRESS: /airk ap, G F5 Go �Fl&z U
TYPE OF DWELLING: S• NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: z
TEST HOLES PRE-SOAKED: YES NO
SOIL C6-"'"&pj h
PROFILE `1?319
tj
TIME WATER DEPTH O)D4 HkS OF FALL RATE
nt
m-
mmomm
mmmoommmmmm
mm,..mmmmmmmmv
mmmmmmmml
m
mmmmm
TIME TO DROP LAST INCH: q(6 PERC RATE: 10 Ari . 4
MINIMUM LEACH FIELD SIZE&d
I �MINIMUM SEPTIC TANK SIZE�;" J-
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SPECIALIST DATE
6. 6 ti `I �D 7 Fa
GTE
�. OA aK ,n��1��fv� z
VA 17R;4A ltralfa,
1844-99 Tax# 2189-233-01-003
Lot #8, Coulter Creek GONZALEZ
JOB- NAME 0900 Forest Drive BRINGAS
El Jebel
JOB NO. P ' / �-
z
U
r
6 vo_ o Sd �r 13 Li t5 1144
EAGLE -COUNTY ENV. HEALTH
P . 0 . BOX 17 9 SHEET No. of
EAGLE, CO 81631 CALCULATED BY DATE
CHECKED BY DATE
,OV7
PRod1CT204, is�cr 5huo� �S, IPktliq �m ec. 6i Won 0,/7, To da. MK7DLLMH A*M5- W