The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About44 Polar Star Ct - 210904102005INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Telephone: (970) 328-8755 P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway, Eagle, CO 81631 COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT# 2545-06 BUILDING PERMIT# 17481 OWNER: JOHN AND ANNA MILLS PHONE: 328-4344 MAILING ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 1463, EAGLE CO 81631 APPLICANT: ANDY REPASKY, OR DON HANAN PHONE: 390-3366 OR 376-5881 AR BUILDERS SYSTEM LOCATION: 44 POLAR STAR COURT, EAGLE TAX PARCEL NO. 2109-04-102-005 LICENSED INSTALLER: REX BOSSOW LICENSE NO. 50-06 PHONE: 524-9888 DESIGN ENGINEER: PHONE: SYSTEM SIZED TO ACCOMODATE A 1 BEDROOM RESIDENCE: INSTALLATION GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: 750 GALLON TANK, 380 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA CREDIT VIA EITHER 19 QUICK 4 INFILTRATOR UNITS OR 12 STANDARD HD 10 INFILTRATOR UNITS. INSTALL A CLEANOUT BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE TANK. INSTALL CHAMBERS IN TRENCHES USING SERIAL DITRIBUTION WITH AN INSPECTION PORTAL IN EACH TRENCH. MAINTAIN ALL SETBACKS. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: SLEEVE THE PIPE WITH AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 OR STRONGER WALLED PIPE UNDER DRIVEWAY OR PARKING AREAS. DO NOT INSTALL IN WET WEATHER. • Call Eagle County and the design engineer for final inspection prior to back -filling any portion of the installation or with any questions. • The Building Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the septic system has been inspected and approved. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: Laura Fawcett DATE: July 28, 2006 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: 400 SQUARE FEET ( VIA 20 0-4 INFILTRATORS) INSTALLED 750 GALLON POLY FRALO SEPTIC TANK LOCATED 200 DEGREES NORTH AND 117 FEET 0 INCHES FROM 1ST CLEANOUT FROM THE HOUSE. 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: DATE: 08/18/2006 ul �� - Department of Environmental Health Eagle (970) 328-8755 Fax: (970) 328-8788 El Jebel (970) 704-2700 TOLL FREE: 800-225-6136 EAGLE COUNTY P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle, CO 81631 www.eaglecounty.us APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT ISDS Permit # , _L,k__, Building Permit # 17 4-?/ MW Pp 4;'r 3j "( INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED (SITE PLAN MUST BE INCLUDED) FEE SCHEDULE APPLICATION FEE $350.00 This fee includes the ISDS Permit, Site Evaluation (Percolation Test, or Soil Profile Observation) and Final Inspection. Additional fees may be charged if a re -inspection is necessary, or a pre -construction site visit or consultation is needed. The re -inspection fee is $55.00. The pre -construction site visit fee is $85.00. Make all remittance payable to: Eagle County Treasurer. Property Owner: , rJ L,44 AIL[ S Phone: , -� LI3 `y' Mailing Address: De, Applicant/Contact Person: -:x6cc— o F/(-P 3 �v Phone: arO - 33 (P Licensed Systems Contractor:�ai >Bsa�� GXel� License # 3-d --Q Company/DBA: p�j G.gU T/d� Phone: 151)1(_ Mailing Address: (,_4X �'v�eD�ra� ��; �� /�4eesd 4 Co 1163% Permit Application is for: New Installation F X < Alteration r Repair Location of Proposed Individual Sewage Disposal System: Legal Description: B lxrzL6"* l . 66- r Ss— I &1< 66 Tax Parcel Number: �� _ 0 _ lOa- - OOS- Lot Size: Assessor's Link: www.eaalecounty.us/patiel Physical Address: /001_,R S i-ole Cf. Building Type: y Residential/Single Family Number of Bedrooms: / F- Residential/Multi Family Number of Bedrooms:--��------ r Commercial/Industrial* Type of Use: *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer Type of Water Supply: r Private Well (- Spring r Surface Public If Public Name o.Supplier Applicant Signature Office Use Only Amount Paid: �� (1 Receipt#: ` l Check#: 6aDate: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH (970) 328-8755 FAX: (970) 328-8788 TOLL FREE:800-225-6136 www.eaglecounty.us EAGLE COUNTY August 18, 2006 Mr. & Mrs. Mills P.O. Box 1463 Eagle, CO 81631 RAYMOND P. MERRY, REHS Director RE: Final approval of Individual Sewage Disposal System ISDS Permit #: 2545-06; Tax parcel #:2109-041-02-005; Property location: 44 Polar Star Ct. Eagle Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mills, This letter is to inform you that the above -referenced ISDS Permit has been inspected and finalized. Your septic system has been sized to accommodate 1 bedroom unit above the garage. Enclosed is a copy to retain for your records. Additional information about the maintenance of your septic system as well as information about private wells can be accessed through web site links provided on the Environmental Health Department's home page at http://www.eaglecogpty.us/envHealth/ Be aware that changes in the use of your property or alterations of your building may require commensurate changes to, or relocation of, your septic system. Landscape features, trees with tap roots, irrigation systems and parking areas above the drain field can cause premature system failure. It is equally important that you notice and immediately repair dripping faucets and hissing toilets as this will certainly cause the system to fail. By following a few simple guidelines, like avoiding grease or other additives down the drain and making sure your septic tank is on a pumping schedule, your system has been designed to last for many years. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact us at (970) 328-8755. Sincerely, Terri Vroman Administrative Technician IV cc: ISDS permit folder Eagle County Building Department Chrono efile Encl: Final ISDS Permit Copy of septic pictures 500 Broadway, P.O. Box 179, Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179 ISDS Permit # L Inspector Date ISDS Final Inspection Completeness Form Tank is % 5 0 gallons. Tank material L-' a CC-1.,;� � r .� , � Q le Tank (1) is located 117 ft. and aC6 degrees from Tank (2) is located ft. and degrees from Tank set level. Tank lids within 8" of finished grade. /Size of field �ft 6% units � lineal ft. Technology Cam- C�� i U, i'4,}`11 0) y Cleanout is installed in between tank and house and one eve 100ft? Q � � t 2 , ,A L A 3 ` / every �. s � 1 / "T" that. goes down 14 inches in the inlet and outlet of the tank. Effl uent filter on outlet- Yes or No Inlet and outlet is sealed with tar tape, rubber gasket, etc. i./ Tank has two compartments with the larger compartment closest to the house. Measure distance and relative direction to field. Depth of field 3 ft. Soil interface raked. Inspection portals within each trench. Proper distance to setbacks. --je/Chambers properly installed as per manufacturers sp ecifications. (Chambers latched, end plates properly installed, rocks removed from trenches, etc.) Splash plate(s) installed at trench inlets. Type of pipe used for building sewer lineL01)3� YP P�P $ ach field Other Inspection meets requirements. t Copy form to installer's file if recommendations for improvement were suggested. ACTION TAKEN. l c k V Setbacks: Well Potable House Property Lake Dry Tank Drain Field Water Lines line Stream Gulch Field 100 25 20 10 50 25 10 Tank 50 10 5 10 50 10 * 1n -F 7-� Z Subsurface Exploration Program Geotechnical Recommendations Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado Prepared for: Mr. Don Hanan AR Builders P.O. Box 610 Gypsum, Colorado 81647 Job Number 06-6037 AL - ENGINEERING CONSULTRNTS,INC July 5, 2006 41 Inverness Drive East, Englewood, CO 80112-5412 Phone (303) 289-1989 Fax (303) 289-1686 www.groundeng.com Office Locations. Englewood • Commerce City Loveland Granby • Gypsum Table of Contents Page Purpose and Scope of Study....................................................................................... 1 Proposed Construction.................................................................................................. 1 SiteConditions............................................................................................................ 1 GeologicalHazards......................................................................................................... 2 SubsurfaceExploration............................................................................................... 2 LaboratoryTesting....................................................................................................... 3 SubsurfaceConditions.................................................................................................... 3 Foundation and Floor System Considerations............................................................... 3 AdditionFoundations...................................................................................................... 4 FloorSystems................................................................................................................. 7 WaterSoluble Sulfates.................................................................................................... 9 ProjectEarthworks......................................................................................................... 9 Excavation Considerations............................................................................................ 11 SurfaceDrainage.........................................................................................................12 Subsurface Moisture Infiltration and Drainage............................................................... 14 Closure.......................................................................................................................15 TestPit Location.............................................................................................. Figure 1 Logof Test Pit.................................................................................................. Figure 2 Legendand Notes............................................................................................ Figure 3 BearingCapacity Chart........................................................................................ Figure 4 Summary of Soils Tests.................................................................................... Table 1 c Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program to provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed addition to the single-family residence at 44 Polar Star Court in Eagle, Colorado. Our work was performed in general accordance with GROUND's Proposal Number 0606-1024, dated June 22, 2006. A subsurface exploration program was conducted in order to obtain information regarding the subsurface conditions. Material samples obtained during the subsurface exploration were tested in the laboratory to provide data on the classification and engineering characteristics of the on -site soils. The results of the subsurface exploration program and laboratory tests are presented herein. This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained and to present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that the proposed addition will be of wood -framed construction with no basement level_ Site grading will be minimal and structure loads are anticipated to be light, typical of single-family construction. If proposed construction or loadings are different than as described, we should be contacted to re-evaluate the recommendations in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The site was occupied by the existing residence and a detached garage structure to the northeast of the house. At the time of our visit footing excavations for the addition had been started. Additionally, existing shallow foundations were noted within the footprint of proposed addition where, we understand, an attached garage structure had been demolished. We understand that present plans call for these existing footings to be used for support of the addition. We recommend that a Structural Engineer be consulted in this regard. The site was nearly flat -lying with a northward slope at a gradient of about 1 to 2 percent. Relative elevation change across the site was on the order of 3 to 5 feet. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 1 a Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado GEOLOGIC SETTING AND HAZARDS Published geologic maps and reports, (e.g., Lidke, D.J., 2002, Geologic Map of the Eagle Quadrangle, Eagle County, Colorado, U.S.G.S. Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 2361) indicate that the subject site is underlain by middle Pleistocene to relatively recent alluvial (stream -laid) and colluvial (slope wash) soils. The native clays encountered in the test pit (See subsequent sections of this report.) are interpreted to be colluvial deposits. Lidke (2002) notes that the fine grained soils in the area, generally similar to those encountered on -site may be susceptible to hydro -compaction as well as subsidence due to piping. The site also is vulnerable to the development of sinkholes from dissolution of water-soluble minerals in the bedrock underlying the site at depth. The geologic conditions giving rise to these risks, however, are common in the Eagle area, and the performance of the subject residence and nearby structures to date is a significant indicator of the local magnitude of these risks. The potential for piping, hydro - compaction and/or sinkhole development, although apparently low, cannot be discounted entirely. The construction of an addition to the residence, does not significantly increase that risk. Effective surface drainage generally reduces the likelihood that any of these hazards will be manifested, but cannot eliminate it. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Subsurface exploration for the project was conducted in June, 2006. A single test pit was excavated at the time of our subsurface exploration. The test pit was excavated with a small track hoe to a depth of approximately 9 feet below the existing grade. Samples were collected from the test pit for subsequent review and laboratory testing. A GROUND engineer directed subsurface exploration, logged the test pit in the field, and prepared the samples for transport to our laboratory. The test pit was backfilled upon completion. Small disturbed samples and hand drive samples of the subsurface materials were retrieved. Depths at which the samples were obtained are shown on the test pit log. The approximate location of the test pit is shown on Figure 1. Log of the exploratory test pit is presented on Figure 2. Explanatory notes and a legend are provided on Figure 3. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 2 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado LABORATORY TESTING Samples retrieved from the test hole were examined and visually classified in the laboratory by the project engineer. Laboratory testing of soil samples obtained from the subject site included standard property tests, such as natural moisture contents, grain size analysis, and liquid and plastic limits. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM protocols. Data from the laboratory -testing program are summarized in Table 1. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface conditions encountered in the test hole generally consisted of a thin veneer of poorly developed topsoil underlain by approximately 4 feet of silty to clayey fill which was underlain by native clays to the depth explored. Beneath the fill, a relic topsoil horizon, developed on the native clays was evident. Fill consisted of clayey silts and silty clays with scattered gravels. They were slightly moist, low plastic to medium plastic, slightly moist, and pale brown in color. Native Clays were silty with scattered gravels. They were slightly moist to moist, low plastic to medium plastic, and pale brown to brown in color. Groundwater was not encountered in the test pit to the depth explored — approximately 9 feet — at the time of subsurface exploration. Groundwater levels can fluctuate, however, in response to annual and longer -term cycles of precipitation, irrigation, surface drainage and land use, and the development and drainage of transient, perched water conditions. FOUNDATION AND FLOOR SYSTEM CONSIDERATIONS The fill and native soils encountered in the test holes, and similar materials placed as properly compacted fill, are suitable to support the proposed addition on a shallow foundation system. Theoretical, post -construction vertical movements of the addition are estimated to be on the order of 1 to 1'/s inches, if the structure is supported directly on the site soils, with differential movements across the addition of similar magnitude. A slab -on -grade concrete floor bearing on the local soils also will be subject to similar movements. GROUND understands that the existing structure was constructed in the early 1980's, on a shallow foundation and slab -on -grade floor, and has performed well to date. Therefore, if the Owner is willing to assume the risk of supporting the addition on job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 3 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado shallow foundations, the recommendations provided below will tend to reduce foundation movements, make them more uniform and reduce potential distress that can result from settlement of foundation materials. A deep foundation such as drilled piers, together with a structural floor similarly supported would result in the least risk of post - construction movements of the addition, but we do not anticipate that such systems would be feasible economically for this project. Geotechnical recommendations for a deep foundation system can be provided upon request, however. ADDITION FOUNDATIONS The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. The construction details should be considered when preparing project documents. The precautions and recommendations provided below will not prevent movement of the footings if the underlying materials are subjected to alternate wetting and drying cycles. However, the recommended measures will tend to make the movement more uniform, and reduce resultant damage if such movement occurs. Differential, post -construction movements between the addition and the existing structure likely will take place. In addition to structural isolation of the addition, as recommended below, the Owner should be aware that dry wall and wall finishes, etc., spanning the joint between the addition and the existing house may be damaged by the differential movement. GROUND understands that the design includes utilizing the existing footings from the demolished garage with the new footings to support the proposed addition. It is likely that settlement will be differential between the new footings and the existing footings. The Structural Engineer should assess the existing (former garage) foundations in light of these recommendations, if they are used to support the addition. Structural design should allow for differential movement. 1) As a minimum, footings should bear on at least 1 foot of properly moisture - conditioned and compacted fill soils. The existing soils should be excavated and/or scarified from beneath the addition's footprint to a depth of 1 foot or more below the lowest foundation element, thoroughly mixed, moisture conditioned and replaced as properly compacted fill. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 4 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado The above should be considered a minimum depth of earthworks beneath the footings. A Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to observe the excavations. If soft or loose materials are exposed, or materials otherwise likely to be vulnerable to unusual settlements, additional excavation and re -compaction may be necessary. 2) Footing excavation bottoms may expose loose, organic or otherwise deleterious materials, including debris. Firm materials may be disturbed by the excavation process. All such unsuitable materials should be excavated and replaced with properly compacted fill or the foundation deepened. 3) Footings bearing on 1 foot or more of properly compacted backfill may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure (Q) of 1,200 psf under drained conditions. This value may be increased by for transient loads such as wind or seismic loading. Based on this allowable bearing capacity, we anticipate post -construction settlements on the order of 1 inch from direct compression under foundation loads. For other estimated settlements of this type, allowable bearing pressure values can be obtained from Figure 4. The recommended allowable bearing pressure was based on an assumption of drained conditions. If foundation materials become wet, the effective bearing capacity will be reduced and larger post -construction movements than those estimated above may result. 4) Due to the potential for differential settlement between the addition and the existing structure, the addition should be structurally isolated from the existing residence. 5) Spread footings should have a minimum footing dimension of 14 or more inches. Actual footing dimensions, however, should be determined by the Structural Engineer, based on the design loads. 6) Footings should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Footings should be placed at a bearing elevation 3.5 or more feet below the lowest adjacent exterior finish grades. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 5 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado 7) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span an unsupported length of at least 10 feet. 8) Compacted fill placed against the sides of the footings should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction in accordance with the recommendations in the Project Earthworks section of this report. 9) Care should be taken when excavating the foundation to avoid disturbing the supporting materials. Hand excavation or careful backhoe soil removal may be required in excavating the last few inches. 10) The Contractor should take care while making foundation excavations not to compromise the bearing or lateral support for the foundations of the adjacent, existing building or other structures. 11) In order to reduce differential settlements between footings or along continuous footings, footing loads should be as uniform as possible. Differentially loaded footings will settle differentially. Similarly, differential fill thickness beneath footings will result in increased differential settlements. 12) The lateral resistance of spread footings will be developed by sliding resistance of the footing bottoms on the foundation materials. Sliding friction at the bottom of the footings may be taken as 0.33 times the vertical dead load. 13) Care should be taken when excavating the foundation to avoid disturbing the supporting materials. Hand excavation or careful backhoe soil removal may be required in excavating the last few inches. 14) Foundation soils may be disturbed or deform excessively under the wheel loads of heavy construction vehicles as the excavations approach footing levels. Construction equipment should be as light as possible to limit development of this condition. The use of track -mounted vehicles is recommended since they exert lower contact pressures. The movement of vehicles over proposed foundation areas should be restricted. 15) All footing areas should be compacted with a vibratory plate compactor prior to placement of concrete. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 6 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado A Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to observe all footing excavations prior to placement of concrete. FLOOR SYSTEM The native site soils encountered in the test pit (exclusive of topsoil) and similar materials placed as properly compacted fill, are suitable, in general, to support a lightly to moderately loaded slab -on -grade concrete floor, assuming that the magnitudes of potential post -construction movements outlined in the Foundations and Floor System Considerations section of this report are acceptable. Slab movements are directly related to the increases in moisture contents to the underlying soils after construction is completed. The precautions and recommendations itemized above will not prevent the movement of floor slabs if the underlying expansive materials are subjected to wetting. However, these steps will reduce the damage if such movement occurs. 1) In order to reduce post -construction slab movements, GROUND recommends construction of a prism of properly moisture -density conditioned fill soils at least 1 foot in thickness beneath the proposed slab. The fill materials should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations in the Project Earthworks section of this report. 2) A Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to observe the prepared surface on which the floor slab will be cast prior to placement of reinforcement. Exposed loose, soft or otherwise unsuitable materials should be excavated and replaced with properly compacted fill. Placement of fill should be performed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Project Earthworks section of this report. 3) Floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with slip joints, which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Joints should be observed periodically, particularly during the first several years after construction. Slab movement can cause previously free -slipping joints to bind. Measures should be taken to assure that slab isolation is maintained in order to reduce the likelihood of damage to walls and other interior improvements. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 7 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado 4) Interior partitions resting on floor slabs should be provided with slip joints so that if the slabs move, the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important for wallboards and doorframes. Slip joints, which will allow at least 2 or more inches of vertical movement, should be considered. If slip joints are placed at the tops of walls, in the event that the floor slabs move, it is likely that the wall will show signs of distress, especially where the floors and interior walls meet the exterior wall 5) On -grade concrete slabs should be properly cured and provided with joints to control random shrinkage cracking which results from concrete curing. GROUND recommends that slab control joints be spaced no more than 10 feet on center. Recommendations are based on geotechnical considerations. Joint layout based on the slab design may require additional or deeper joints. 6) Floor slabs should be adequately reinforced. Recommendations based on structural considerations for slab thickness, jointing, and steel reinforcement in floor slabs should be developed by the Structural Engineer. Placement of slab reinforcement continuously through the control joint alignments will tend to increase the effective size of concrete panels and reduce the effectiveness of control joints. 7) All plumbing lines should be carefully tested before operation. Where plumbing lines enter through the floor, a positive bond break should be provided. Flexible connections allowing 2 or more inches of vertical movement or more should be provided for slab -bearing mechanical equipment, based on the fill prism section selected. 8) Moisture can be introduced into a slab subgrade during construction and additional moisture will be released from the slab concrete as it cures. GROUND recommends placement of a properly compacted layer of free -draining gravel, 4 or more inches in thickness, beneath the slabs. This layer will help distribute floor slab loadings, ease construction, reduce capillary moisture rise and aid in drainage. The free -draining gravel should contain less than 5 percent material passing the No. 200 Sieve, more than 50 percent retained on the No. 4 Sieve, and a maximum particle size of 2 inches. The capillary break and the drainage space provided by the gravel layer also may reduce the potential for excessive water vapor fluxes from the slab after Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 8 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado construction as mix water is released from the concrete. A vapor barrier beneath a building floor slab can be beneficial with regard to reducing exterior moisture moving into the building, but can retard downward drainage of construction moisture. Uneven moisture release can result in slab curling. Elevated vapor fluxes can be detrimental to the adhesion and performance of many floor coverings and may exceed various flooring manufacturers' usage criteria. Therefore, in light of the several, potentially conflicting effects of the use vapor - barriers, the Owner and the Architect and/or Flooring Contractor should weigh the performance of the slab, the proposed use of the addition, and appropriate flooring products in light of the intended building use, etc., during the floor system design process and the selection of flooring materials. Use of a plastic vapor - barrier membrane may be appropriate for some buildings and not for others. WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATES The concentration of water-soluble sulfates measured on a selected sample obtained from the test hole was less than 0.01 percent by weight. (See Table 1.) Such concentrations of water-soluble sulfates represent a negligible degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to these materials. Degrees of attack are based on the scale of 'negligible,' 'moderate,' 'severe' and 'very severe' as described in the "Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures," published by the Portland Cement Association. Based on this data GROUND, makes no recommendation for use of a special, sulfate - resistant cement in project concrete. PROJECT EARTHWORKS No grading plans were available for our review at the time of preparation of this report. Placement of fill material should be performed in accordance with the recommendations in this section. Maximum elevation difference across the site was on the order of 3 to 5 feet. Therefore, we anticipate minimal cuts and fills, on the order of 1 to 2 feet in depth, to construct the structure pad. Additional excavation and fill placement will be required beneath the buildings to implement the recommendations in the Addition Foundation and Floor System sections of this report. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 9 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado Areas of previously placed fill soils were noted in the entire proposed footprint. These uncontrolled fills should be excavated in their entirety and replaced with properly moisture - conditioned and compacted fill. Prior to earthwork construction, vegetation, topsoil and other deleterious materials should be removed and disposed of off -site. Topsoil should not be incorporated into common fill placed on the site. Instead, topsoils should be stockpiled during initial grading operations for placement in areas to be landscaped or for other approved uses. Site grading should be planned carefully to provide positive surface drainage away from the addition, and all pavements, utility alignments, and flatwork. Surface diversion features should be provided around paved areas to prevent surface runoff from flowing across the paved surfaces. Site soils free of deleterious materials are, in general, suitable for placement as compacted fill. Cobbles, boulders or rock fragments coarser than 6 inches in maximum dimension should not be incorporated into project fills below the structure. Care should be taken, however, with regard to achieving and maintaining proper moisture contents during placement and compaction. We anticipate that some on -site soils may exhibit significant pumping, rutting, and deflection at moisture contents near optimum and above. Some site soils classify as low plastic silts. In our experience, achieving and maintaining compaction in such soils can be very difficult. The Contractor should be prepared to handle soils of this type, including the use of chemical stabilization, if necessary. If it is necessary to import material to the site as common fill, the imported soils should be free of topsoils, organic material, claystone and other deleterious materials. Imported material should have less than 35 percent passing the No. 200 Sieve and should have a plasticity index of less than 20. Select, granular materials imported for use as structural fill should meet the criteria for CDOT Class 1 Structure Backfill. On -site or imported granular soils that classify as GP, GW, GM, GC, SP, SW, SM or SC in accordance with the USCS classification system (granular materials) should be compacted to 95 or more percent of the maximum modified Proctor dry density at moisture contents within 2 percent of optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557. On -site soils that classify as CL, CH, ML or MH should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum standard Proctor density at moisture contents from 1 percent Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 10 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado below to 3 percent above the optimum as determined by ASTM D698. If surfaces to receive fill expose loose, wet, soft or otherwise deleterious material, additional material should be excavated or other measures taken, to establish a firm platform for filling. Fill materials should be thoroughly mixed to achieve a uniform moisture content, placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and properly compacted as recommended above. No fill materials should be placed, worked, rolled while they are frozen, thawing, or during poor/inclement weather conditions. The Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to observe the exposed excavation surface prior to placement of fill, and observe earthwork operations and test the soils. Permanent site slopes supported by on -site soils up to 6 feet in height should be constructed no steeper than 2'/2:1 (horizontal : vertical). Minor raveling or surficial sloughing should be anticipated on slopes cut at this angle until vegetation is well re- established. Surface drainage should be designed to direct water away from slope faces. EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS The test pit for subsurface exploration was advanced to the depth indicated on the test pit log by means of small excavator. We anticipate no unusual excavation difficulties for the proposed construction in these materials with conventional, heavy-duty excavating equipment in good working condition. However, in the subject geologic setting, the Contractor should be prepared to excavate, handle and process cobbles and boulders. Groundwater was not encountered during subsurface exploration, at the depths of up to approximately 9 feet below the existing grades. Therefore, groundwater is not anticipated to be a significant factor during construction of this project. However, if seepage or groundwater is encountered in project excavations, the Geotechnical Engineer should evaluate the conditions and provide additional recommendations, as appropriate. We recommend that temporary, un-shored excavation slopes up to 10 feet in height be cut no steeper than 1'/2:1 (horizontal : vertical) in the native soils in the absence of seepage. Some surficial sloughing may occur on slope faces cut at this angle. Local conditions encountered during construction, such as loose, dry sand, or soft or wet materials, or seepage will require flatter slopes. Stockpiling of materials should not be Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 11 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado permitted closer to the tops of temporary slopes than 5 feet or a distance equal to the depth of the excavation, which ever is greater. Should site constraints prohibit the use of the recommended slope angles, then temporary shoring should be used. Actual shoring system(s) should be designed for the Contractor by a registered engineer. Good surface drainage should be provided around temporary excavation slopes to direct surface runoff away from the slope faces. A properly designed drainage swale should be provided at the top of the excavations. In no case should water be allowed to pond at the site. Slopes should also be protected against erosion. Erosion along the slopes will result in sloughing and could lead to a slope failure. Excavations in which personnel will be working must comply with all OSHA Standards and Regulations particularly CFR 29 Part 1926, OSHA Standards -Excavations, adopted March 5, 1990. The Contractor's "responsible person" should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the Contractor's safety procedures. GROUND has provided the information above solely as a service to the Client and is not assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the Contractor's activities. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after improvements to the residence have been completed. If the drainage measures below are not implemented effectively, the movement estimates provided in this report could be exceeded. 1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Positive surface drainage measures should be provided and maintained to reduce water infiltration into foundation soils. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the addition 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 landscaped areas and 3 inches in the first 10 feet in areas where hardscaping covers the ground adjacent to the structure. (It may be necessary to incorporate ramps or other measures into project design to implement this recommendation while complying with access requirements.) In no case should water be allowed Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 12 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado to pond near or adjacent to foundation elements. Ponding will lead to increased infiltration and post -construction building movements. Drainage measures also should be included in project design to direct water away from sidewalks and other hardscaping as well as utility trench alignments which are likely to be adversely affected by moisture -volume changes in the underlying soils or flow of infiltrating water. Routine maintenance of site drainage should undertaken throughout the design life of the project. 3) The ground surface near foundation elements should be able to convey water away readily. Drainage should be designed such that it does not adversely affect structures located down gradient. Ground coverings that direct water downward rather than away from the addition should not be used to cover the ground surface near the foundations or other improvements sensitive to post -construction soil movements. Cobbles or other materials that tend to act as baffles and restrict surface flow should not be used. Correspondingly, near other project improvements such as hardscaping, where the ground surface does not convey water away readily additional post - construction movements and distress should be anticipated. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the perimeters of the structure foundations, or be provided with positive conveyance off -site for collected waters. Downspouts should not discharge into a building underdrain system. 5) Landscaping which requires watering should be located 3 or more feet from the addition perimeter. Irrigation sprinkler heads should be deployed so that applied water is not introduced into foundation soils. Landscape irrigation should be limited to the minimum quantities necessary to sustain healthy plant growth. Use of drip irrigation systems can be beneficial for reducing over -spray beyond planters. Drip irrigation also can be beneficial for reducing the amounts of water introduced to building foundation soils, but only if the total volumes of applied water are controlled with regard to limiting that introduction. Controlling rates of moisture increase beneath the foundations and floors should take higher priority than minimizing landscape plant losses. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 13 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado Where plantings are desired within 3 feet of the structure, GROUND recommends that the plants be placed in water -tight planters, constructed either in -ground or above -grade, to reduce moisture infiltration in the surrounding subgrade soils. Planters should be provided with positive drainage and landscape underdrains. 6) We do not recommend the use of plastic membranes to cover the ground surface near the building without careful consideration of other components of project drainage. Plastic membranes can be beneficial to directing surface waters away from the building and toward drainage structures. However, they effectively preclude evaporation or transpiration of shallow soil moisture. Therefore, soil moisture tends to increase beneath a continuous membrane. Where plastic membranes are used, additional shallow, subsurface drains likely are appropriate. 7) The site should be observed periodically after construction for indications of ineffective drainage, settlement, ponding, erosion, damaged irrigation lines, etc., so that repairs can be effected. Necessary repairs/restoration should be implemented as soon as possible. Where localized infiltration is allowed to continue, the risk of local settlements or heave will be significantly increased. SUBSURFACE MOISTURE INFILTRATION AND DRAINAGE Typical practice for the combination of soil and foundation system proposed for this project includes the installation of a perimeter underdrain. If properly constructed, a perimeter underdrain system can result in a reduction of moisture infiltration of the subsurface soils. However, an underdrain not properly functioning can induce settlement or heave of the subsurface soils and may result in structure/floor slab distress. The site soils are relatively stable with regard to moisture content — volume relationships at their existing moisture contents. Other than the anticipated, post -placement settlement of fills, post -construction soil movements from consolidation will result primarily from the introduction of water into the soils underlying the proposed structure, hardscaping and pavements. Based on the site surface and subsurface conditions encountered in this study, we do not anticipate a rise in the local water table sufficient to cause adverse wetting of the soils supporting shallow foundations. Therefore, wetting of the soils likely will result from infiltrating surface waters (precipitation, irrigation, etc.), Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 14 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado flow along constructed pathways such as bedding in utility pipe trenches. Project design should incorporate measures to prevent water from wetting the project soils. Surface drainage gradients, pavements, flatwork, piping, drainage structures, etc., should be maintained during and after construction to prevent infiltration. It is the responsibility of the design team and Ownership as well as the construction and maintenance Contractor(s) within their respective disciplines and in accordance with their familiarity with the site conditions to evaluate the possible sources of water that could affect the project area and provide design and/or construction measures that address the conditions so that moisture is directed away from the foundations and supporting materials prior to being allowed to infiltrate the subsurface, both during and after construction. Wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during and after construction as well as throughout the life of the facility. Permitting increases/variations in moisture to the supporting soils may result in a decrease in bearing capacity and an increase in total and/or differential movements. If an underdrain is incorporated into project design, the underdrain system should consist of perforated PVC collection pipe at least 4 inches in diameter, non -perforated PVC discharge pipe also at least 4 inches in diameter, free -draining gravel, and filter fabric. The free -draining gravel should contain less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 Sieve and more than 50 percent retained on the No. 4 Sieve, and have a maximum particle size of 2 inches. Each collection pipe should be surrounded on the sides and top with 6 or more inches of free -draining gravel. The gravel surrounding the drain pipe should be wrapped with filter fabric to reduce the migration of fines into the drain system. A typical, cross-section detail of the anticipated underdrain can be provided upon request. The actual layout, outlets, and locations should be designed by the Civil Engineer. A Geotechnical or Civil Engineer should be retained to observe installation of the underdrain system. The underdrain system should be tested by the Contractor after installation and backfilling over the system to verify that it functions properly. CLOSURE Geotechnical Review The poor performance of foundations and subsurface structures has been directly attributed to inadequate geotechnical review and earthwork quality control. Therefore, project plans and specifications should be reviewed by the Job No. 66-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 15 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado Geotechnical Engineer to evaluate whether they comply with the intent of the recommendations in this report. This review should be reported in writing. The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are highly contingent upon observation and testing of project earthworks by representatives of GROUND. If another geotechnical consultant is selected to provide construction observation and quality control, then that consultant must assume all responsibility for the geotechnical aspects of the project by concurring in writing with the recommendations in this report, or by providing alternative recommendations. Limitations This report has been prepared for AR Builders, as it pertains the design of the subject single-family residence addition project as described herein. It may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. In addition, GROUND has assumed that project construction will commence by Winter, 2006 - 2007. Changes in project plans or schedule should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer, in order that the geotechnical recommendations may be re-evaluated and, as necessary, modified. The geotechnical conclusions and recommendations in this report relied upon subsurface exploration at the location shown on Figure 1. Subsurface conditions were interpolated between and extrapolated beyond these locations. Findings were dependent on the limited amount of direct evidence obtained at the time of this geotechnical evaluation. Our recommendations were developed for site conditions as described above. Actual conditions exposed during construction may be anticipated to differ, somewhat, from those encountered during site exploration. If during construction, surface, soil, bedrock, or groundwater conditions appear to be at variance with those described herein, the Geotechnical Engineer should be advised at once, so that re- evaluation of the recommendations may be made in a timely manner. In addition, a Contractor who relies upon this report for development of his scope of work or cost estimates may consider the geotechnical information in this report to be inadequate for his purposes or find the geotechnical conditions described herein to be at variance with his experience in the greater project area. In such cases, the Contractor should obtain the additional geotechnical information that he considers necessary to develop his workscope and cost estimates with sufficient precision. This report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practice in the Eagle County, Colorado, area, at the date of preparation. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering consultants, Inc. Page 16 Subsurface Exploration Program Mills Residence Addition Eagle, Colorado GROUND makes no other warranties, either express or implied, as to the professional data, opinions or recommendations contained herein. Sincerely, GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Michael J. Quinn, P.E. Reviewed by James B. Kowalsky, P.E. Job No. 06-6037 GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 17 I l \ CO \ \ a Y EXISTING RESIDENCE TA IPROPOSED ! ADDITION i ��_ I I i GARAGE 1 i i �RouHn ENGINEERING CO NSULTRNTS LOCATION OF TEST PIT JOB NO. 06-6037 DRAWN BY: HS Indicates test pit number FIGURE: 1 APPROVED BY: Mo and approximate location. (Not to Scale) CADFlLE NAME: 6037SITE.DWG Test Pit 1 0 o 10 GROUND ENGINEERING CONSULTRPNITS LOG OF TEST PIT JOB NO. 06-6037 DRAWN BY: NS FIGURE: 2 APPROVED BY: MQ LCADFILE NAME: 6037LOG.DWG LEGEND: Topsoil Fill: Fine to median grained with scattered gravels; generally silty, low plastic to medium plastic, slightly moist, and pale brown in color. Clay: Generally fine to median grained with scattered gravels; generally silty, low plastic to medium plastic, slightly % moist to moist, and pale brown to brown in color. Drive sample, 2-inch I.D. California liner sample NOTES: 1) Test pit was excavated on 06/26/06 with rubber tire back hoe. 2) Location of the test pit was measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3) Elevations of the test pit was not measured and the log of the test pit is drawn to depth. 4) The test pit location and elevation should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5) The lines between materials shown on the test pit togrepresent the approximate boundaries between material types and the transitions may be gradual. 6) Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. Groundwater levels can fluctuate seasonally and in response to landscape irrigation. CR�U�1[n ENGINEERING C®NSULTSINTS The material descriptions on this legend are for general LEGEND AND NOTES classification purposes only. See the full text of this report for descriptions of the site materials and related JOB NO. 06-6037 DRAWN BY: HS recommendations. FIGURE: 3 APPROVED BY: MQ CADrILE NAME: 6037LEG.DWG Q x 2.0 Q x 1.5 N ii �U CO Q (B c Q x 1.0 �L M� W W 3. 0 Q Q x 0.5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Estimated Settlement (inches) Q = 1,200 psf Note: Design should be controlled by settlement. Estimated settlement values indicated above are based on drained conditions. If foundation materials become wet, the allowable bearing capacity will be reduced and result in larger estimated settlement. This relationship is based on footing widths of 1 to 4 feet. If the footing width is to be greater than 4 feet, we should be notified to reevaluate these recommendations. 4T w J m a b cn �. Um w 0 s 41 d � w N N o� n rn b Q. c n`� a a � _ y eJ 0 ` O C � (ON -.. za z�v� u a y a m ++ o' 1Ak -4 cri C) 0 0 0 3- 3 hL- — -n PROJECT INIU-5 'F-)y- c 5 s', fit? k & lr I 444 G'w'',utx, PROJECT `// ?t"&k 5t&rL 01 project description date task/action follow-up start date completion date 4l lJ( r v Yt wN. ! L � t l r n. C v -v O l t. es _-e +n s ZC t r t.. _ S Y'(J r fro c p P_ J% k U Li 6 A, 21 i✓lwC. Cnn. Ill �t' S t � t 2Ai t?- o t.0 6S I ",r Rt3CrS (N j �c�lect is M cT! !G 6"', r S( twS}c IC7 !t c 1w - S p� t�yyN�� 5C L7 Q llL 0 O Wh�Gj^ a C C o je c,je- - , " 11 C' PC$ fh O �1h t\1rw ;51 L1 �� ZGC� PROJECT CONTACTS r" r E� G`' t:1 documents enclosed ;s w name phone/fax e-mail JIB q7b-3,;2k-�s�y P-0. aox MO tap-�zr� �2Ccu, � f t "< 1 ' 9.a- notes ciamp PERMIT # 295 OWNER: LOCATION: • • .. Subdivision....�.,. - __ - INSTALLER: Owner SIZE OF TANK: 1,000 gallons DWELLING: Residential - 4 bedrooms x 250 sq.ft. PERC RATE: one inch/30 minutes (1,000 sq.ft.) 1,000 sq.ft. of drainage field Finalized: September 1978 By: Erik Edeen ,;�i--r:4-vC4(-0s- -n\\